'Scandalously particular?' Revelation and history in the theologies of Ernst Troeltsch and Paul Tillich

This dissertation examines the respective attempts of Ernst Troeltsch (1865-1923) and Paul Tillich (1886-1965) to show the universal significance of Christian revelation in and for a historically-conscious age. Throughout their careers, both thinkers were preoccupied with the implications of modern historical consciousness for theology. For Troeltsch, history meant historical reflection. Tillich, by contrast, understood history primarily as historical existence.; Their respective interpretations of the meaning of the category of history in turn led to different assessments of its import for the interpretation of Christian revelation. Troeltsch held that the relativity of everything historical makes implausible the claim that Christian revelation is somehow absolutely unique. And by the end of his career, further reflection on the implications of the historical method convinced him to surrender the claim that this revelation is significant for all persons. Christian revelation had, for Troeltsch, become revelatory only for those who inhabit Western culture. His interpretation of revelation proved inappropriate to the self-understanding of the Christian faith.; Tillich maintained that the problems that history poses for theology, namely those of the ambiguity and potential meaninglessness of historical existence, are questions of human existence as such. Through an ontological analysis of the structure of human finitude, he showed how Christian symbols, especially the symbol of Jesus as the Christ, provide meaningful answers to these questions. He argued that Christian revelation should therefore be understood as significant for all persons. However, Tillich's assertion that the revelation of Jesus as the Christ is the complete or final revelation of the divine in the history ultimately undermined the adequacy of his interpretation of revelation to modern historical consciousness.; The respective attempts of Troeltsch and Tillich to interpret Christian revelation were failures. But when viewed together, their failures become productive. Troeltsch's insight into the relativity of everything historical and Tillich's ontology of human existence yield the resources necessary for an interpretation of the meaning of Christian revelation as an event that is simultaneously universally significant and historically relative.