卢卡奇对纳粹统治下德国路德宗的批判
卢卡奇是一位著名的马克思主义哲学家和文学批评家，他在一个犹太家庭长大，但在1911年皈依路德教。然而，他很快就对宗教感到失望，并接受了作为科学和辩证世界观的马克思主义。
他拒绝将上帝作为干预人类历史和现实的超验和个人存在的想法。他还批评了宗教作为一种意识形态的作用，将现有社会秩序神秘化和合法化。然而，他也使用宗教语言和隐喻来表达他对马克思主义作为一个革命和解放运动的看法。他有时把上帝称为人类从异化和压迫中解放出来的历史过程，这个过程是以无产阶级的阶级意识为中介的。他有时也把上帝说成是由分析和批判的辩证法所揭示的现实的整体性。他有时也把上帝说成是在最高形式的艺术和文化中表现出来的绝对精神。
因此，卢卡奇的上帝概念是模糊的、矛盾的。它反映了他在调和他的哲学和美学兴趣与他的政治和伦理承诺之间的斗争。这也反映了他试图为他的马克思主义项目而适当地改造西方文明的宗教遗产。卢卡奇的上帝概念不是一个连贯或系统的学说，而是一种修辞和战略手段，在不同的背景下有不同的目的。
在《历史与阶级意识》一书中对基督教的思想进行了深刻的批判。他认为基督教是一种异化的意识形态，它把人类的社会关系神秘化和物化，把人类的历史和现实归因于上帝的安排和旨意，从而使人类失去了自身的主体性和自由性，放弃了改造世界的责任和能力。他指出基督教是一种与资本主义社会同流合污的思想，它为资本主义社会的不平等和剥削提供了合理化和安慰，它使人民陷入被动和顺从的状态，而不是觉悟和反抗的状态。
卢卡奇首先分析了基督教对人类社会关系的神秘化和物化。他认为基督教把人类社会关系看作是上帝创造的自然秩序，而不是人类自己创造的历史产物。这样，人类就无法认识到社会关系是可以被改变的，而只能接受它们作为不可改变的事实。卢卡奇引用了马克思在《资本论》中对商品拜物教的批判，指出基督教就是一种商品拜物教，它把人与人之间的社会关系转化为人与物之间的关系，把人类活动转化为物质生产，把人类价值转化为交换价值。这样，人类就失去了自己作为主体的地位，而成为了物质生产和交换的奴隶。卢卡奇说：“在这种情况下，人们就不再能够控制自己生活中最重要、最根本、最决定性的因素。相反，这些因素反过来控制着他们。”
卢卡奇接着分析了基督教对人类历史和现实的归因于上帝的安排和旨意。他认为基督教把人类历史看作是上帝预定的计划，而不是人类自己创造的过程。这样，人类就无法认识到历史是可以被改变的，而只能服从于上帝的意志。卢卡奇引用了黑格尔在《法哲学》中对基督教历史观的批判，指出基督教把历史看作是一个超越世界的神话故事，而不是一个内在世界的理性发展。这样，人类就失去了自己作为历史主体的能力，而成为了历史事件的被动观察者或者牺牲品。卢卡奇说：“在这种情况下，人们就不再能够把自己的命运掌握在自己的手中，而只能等待上帝的救赎或者惩罚。”
卢卡奇最后分析了基督教对人类的安慰和合理化的作用。他认为基督教把人类的苦难和不幸看作是上帝的考验和恩赐，而不是社会的不公和压迫。这样，人类就无法认识到自己的利益和权利，而只能忍受和祈祷。卢卡奇引用了尼采在《敌基督者》中对基督教道德的批判，指出基督教把人类的软弱和屈服看作是美德和荣耀，而不是懦弱和耻辱。这样，人类就失去了自己作为自由人的尊严，而成为了上帝的奴仆。卢卡奇说：“在这种情况下，人们就不再能够追求自己的幸福和解放。相反，他们只能满足于自己的痛苦和束缚。”
卢卡奇的批判目的是要揭露基督教思想的虚假和反动，要唤起人民的阶级意识和革命意志，要建立一种新的、真正的、马克思主义的意识形态。他认为只有马克思主义才能真正地解放人类，才能真正地改造世界，才能真正地实现人类的历史主体性和自由性。
Karl Barth and Lukács would have a very interesting and challenging dialogue. They both lived in the same historical period and witnessed the rise and fall of Nazism and Stalinism. They both were influenced by Hegel and Kierkegaard, but in different ways. They both were critical of liberal theology and bourgeois culture, but for different reasons. They both sought to recover the radicality and relevance of Christianity, but with different methods and goals.
Barth was a Swiss Protestant theologian who is widely regarded as one of the most influential of the 20th century. He initiated a radical change in Protestant thought by stressing the “wholly otherness of God” over the anthropocentrism of 19th-century liberal theology. He recovered the centrality of the doctrine of the Trinity within the dynamic and rational structure of Christian dogmatics, and emphasized the Christological nature of revelation and faith. He also opposed German National Socialism and participated in the Confessing Church movement that resisted Hitler’s regime.
Lukács was a Hungarian Marxist philosopher and literary critic who is widely viewed as one of the founders of “Western Marxism”. He developed a profound critique of the phenomenon of “reification” in capitalism and formulated a vision of Marxism as a self-conscious transformation of society. He also engaged with various currents of modern literature and art, and advocated for a “critical realism” that would reflect the dialectical movement of history. He also supported the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 that challenged Soviet domination.
Barth and Lukács would probably agree on some points, such as:
The need to challenge the status quo of modern society and culture that is dominated by instrumental reason, commodification, alienation, and oppression.
The need to affirm the transcendence and sovereignty of "God" over human history and reality, and to reject any idolatrous or ideological appropriation of God’s name or will.
The need to acknowledge the dialectical nature of human existence, which involves both freedom and limitation, grace and sin, faith and doubt, hope and despair.
However, Barth and Lukács would also disagree on many points, such as:
The nature and source of revelation. Barth would insist that revelation is God’s free and gracious act of self-disclosure in Jesus Christ, which cannot be reduced to any human concept or experience. Lukács would argue that revelation is the historical process of human emancipation from alienation and oppression, which is mediated by the class consciousness of the proletariat.
The role and authority of the Bible. Barth would affirm that the Bible is the inspired witness to God’s revelation in Jesus Christ, which has normative value for Christian faith and practice. Lukács would contend that the Bible is a historical document that reflects the social conditions and ideological interests of its authors, which has to be critically analyzed and interpreted.
The meaning and purpose of history. Barth would maintain that history is the arena of God’s providential action, which culminates in the eschatological consummation of God’s kingdom. Lukács would assert that history is the product of human praxis, which aims at the realization of human freedom and justice.
Lukács and Barth would criticize those Christians who colluded with capitalism and Nazism and rationalized it as God’s arrangement in different ways. Lukács would accuse them of being complicit in the reification and oppression of human beings by the capitalist system and the fascist regime. He would argue that they have betrayed the true essence of Christianity, which is to liberate humanity from alienation and injustice. He would call them to join the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat, which is the historical subject of "God"’s revelation and action.
Barth would denounce them of being idolatrous and blasphemous by equating God’s will with human ideologies and interests. He would argue that they have distorted the true message of Christianity, which is to proclaim God’s grace and judgment in Jesus Christ. He would call them to repent and confess their sins, and to follow the example of Jesus, who resisted the temptations of power and violence.
