Kierkegaard Inauthenticity
Struggling with the existential predicament of choice and commitment, Kierkegaard grew increasingly interested in what it means to be a Christian. (Soccio, 2013, p. 400)
Now let us stop here for a moment. Take a step back and look at it with intent. Kierkegaard, (regardless on if he was a Christian or not) was intrigued by the fact of Christianity itself as a whole. He looked into it with further detail and became convinced that institutionalized Christianity suffered from the same inauthenticity as other institutions. (Soccio, 2013, p. 400)
Now let's look at that word "Inauthenticity" along with its contrast "Authenticity". Inauthenticity results when the nature and needs of the individual are ignored, denied, obscured, or made less important …show more content…
Being authentic is the best way to show who you are and if you are being inauthentic, you are pretty much lying to yourself and to others. But the way I see it, Soren knew this, and he made it his goal to expose those who were being inauthentic. Namely those in the Danish church and those of Christendom. He came out with three books attacking them and their inauthenticity. He even went as far as to attack their Bishop after he died because he too was living falsely according to Soren. Which is why Soren strongly did not like false Christianity. And he made it his goal to expose it. Which is why I believe that if he had that kind of strong desire, and strong wit to want to expose not only that church, but any and all who taught falsely. So do I believe that Kierkegaard was a Christian? I have to say that I do. Only because he wouldn't have gone all that he went through just because he wanted to, or that he felt that it was his moral duty to. He did it because he morally felt that it was not right to teach inauthentically or falsely. But to teach with truth and integrity. And I believe that in some ways we should learn from him. Even though there was multiple times where he was hated by those who he was coming against, he still stayed strong and stuck to what he felt was wrong, and wanted to correct
Now let us stop here for a moment. Take a step back and look at it with intent. Kierkegaard, (regardless on if he was a Christian or not) was intrigued by the fact of Christianity itself as a whole. He looked into it with further detail and became convinced that institutionalized Christianity suffered from the same inauthenticity as other institutions. (Soccio, 2013, p. 400)
Now let's look at that word "Inauthenticity" along with its contrast "Authenticity". Inauthenticity results when the nature and needs of the individual are ignored, denied, obscured, or made less important …show more content…
Being authentic is the best way to show who you are and if you are being inauthentic, you are pretty much lying to yourself and to others. But the way I see it, Soren knew this, and he made it his goal to expose those who were being inauthentic. Namely those in the Danish church and those of Christendom. He came out with three books attacking them and their inauthenticity. He even went as far as to attack their Bishop after he died because he too was living falsely according to Soren. Which is why Soren strongly did not like false Christianity. And he made it his goal to expose it. Which is why I believe that if he had that kind of strong desire, and strong wit to want to expose not only that church, but any and all who taught falsely. So do I believe that Kierkegaard was a Christian? I have to say that I do. Only because he wouldn't have gone all that he went through just because he wanted to, or that he felt that it was his moral duty to. He did it because he morally felt that it was not right to teach inauthentically or falsely. But to teach with truth and integrity. And I believe that in some ways we should learn from him. Even though there was multiple times where he was hated by those who he was coming against, he still stayed strong and stuck to what he felt was wrong, and wanted to correct