Sample: Gisle on the Irrefutable Demand

One of the more significant elements in Gisle thought comes within the Pistik. It is what Gisle calls the "irrefutible claim" on existence. Significantly, it comes in two strategic parts in his Pistik, as a transitionary concept between natural faith and law-faith, and between law-faith and true, Christian faith. It's interesting in that Gisle is both Kierkegaardian in certain respect, reasoning out his conclusions partly from subjectivity, and partly from a three-fold taxonomy of faith; and yet he wants to remain firmly rooted in the "whatness" of reality, speaking of the essence of faith in tandem with the existence of faith. As such, in many respects, his "irrefutible demand" is not the same as Kierkegaard's leap to faith: it is something almost innate, a necessary consequence of our createdness, cast within the mold of a classically Lutheran Law-Gospel dynamic. Really, it is most similar to Augustine's famous concept of the restless heart found in his Confessions:

Thou hast formed us for Thyself, and our hearts are restless till they find rest in Thee

Here is a selection from the translation work, subject as always to revision:

§17. The irrefutable demand of true essence.

The untruth in the position in which the natural man thus stands before God reveals itself in the inner discord and disharmony, the dissatisfaction and pain, the unrest, anxiety and despair, which permeates his entire subsistence [Tilværelse]. Its egotistical life is unable to give its heart any true satisfaction. What disturbs its peace is not only the judgment of conscience over its individual actions, but also the feeling of emptiness, untruth, and unsatisfactoriness in the egotistical life-enjoyments [Livsnydelse] and the consciousness of its impermanence as linked to conditions that are not in its own power.[1] And the satisfaction which its selfish life-enjoyment is thus unable to provide cannot then find in its God-consciousness [Gudsbevidsthed] and God-worship [Gudsdyrkelse] determined by egoism.[2] On the contrary, from the deepest foundation [Grund] of God-consciousness itself, there emerges a peculiar reaction against the distorted form in which it appears in reality in the natural man, a reaction which is particularly apparent in his intuition [Anelse] about a destiny, a mysterious power even exalted over the divine in the world, which determines everything that happens with an unchangeable, inexorable consequence of necessity, and in that intuition of a judgment after death, which is the foundation [Grund] of his fear of death [Dødsfrygt].[3] Mainly, this, the natural human condition can only be explained as a testimony to the subsistence [Tilværelse] of a higher self different from its immediate self, which by the all-dominant egoism has been routed back into the dark depths of consciousness and now from there reacts against the untruth of the immediate reality by making itself known in misunderstood feelings and inuitions.[4] But since the subsistence [Tilværelse] of man shows itself to be burdened with such an insoluble inner disharmony between his lower and his higher self, it is thus also judged as untrue. The natural man’s personal existence [Existents] thus points to another, higher form of existence as an irrefutable demand [uafviselig Fordring] of his own true essence [sande Væsen].[5]

[1] 2 Cor. 7:10: ἡ τοῦ κόσμου λύπη the sorrow of the world produces death. Eph. 2:12: ἐλπίδα μὴ ἔχοντες having no hope. Cf. Job 15:20, 24; 18:11; 20:22; Gen. 4:13f.; 2 Sam. 17:23; Mt. 27:5.

[2] Cf. Heb. 9:9: θυσίαι προσφέρονται μὴ δυνάμεναι κατὰ συνείδησιν τελειῶσαι τὸν λατρεύοντα Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience.

[3] Heb. 2:15: φόβῳ θανάτου διὰ παντὸς τοῦ ζῆν ἔνοχοι ἦσαν δουλείας through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives. Cf. Job 18:14: מֶ֣לֶךְ בַּלָּהֽוֹת the king of terrors; Heb. 9:27: ἀπόκειται τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἅπαξ ἀποθανεῖν, μετὰ δὲ τοῦτο κρίσις it is destined for men to die once, and after this comes judgment.

[4] The phrase routed back is trængt tilbage, used of the routing of a military force.

[5] The concept of an irrefutable demand (uafviselig Fordring), also translatable as ‘undeniable claim,’ is often used of a legal demand or demand of duty, often implying a verbal sense, as in a vow (Ordbog). Here, Gisle’s reasoning between higher and lower natures brought to an existential crises that places such a burden on individual is highly Kierkegaardian (note his use of the Danish Existents), recalling his ‘leap of faith’ concept, what he calls “the qualitative transition of the leap from unbeliever to believer” (Concluding Unscientific Postscript, “Introduction”). For both Gisle and Kierkegaard, this moment of internal conflict is necessary in order to become truly Christian (see Concluding Unscientific Postscript, §3). For Gisle, however, the demand meets the true essence (sande Væsen) of the individual, which is true, Christian faith (§52), gripping the heart of the individual, who opens himself up to the power of the truth (§54)—a contrast with Kierkegaard, who believed that “Christianity is the absolute paradox” (CUP, “Crumbs” §3). There are also affinities with Immanuel Kant’s Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason, who reasoned that “the way of thinking” is gradually reformed by “the way of sensing,” where “a single immutable decision” is brought to bear on the radically concupiscent nature to instill a different habitus (6:45, 47-48). Kant believes the human nature to have been created good and then pervaded radically by sin, and Schleiermacher, likewise, speaks of the conflict of sin within the individual as disrupting God-consciousness, sin being an external element that introduces a duality (The Christian Faith, §68-69). Gisle returns to the concept again in §51 before discussing true faith.

§51. Furthermore, the law does not bring man to form such a contrition of the heart.[1] But with this it is also a given that it has not yet found in the law-faith what it missed in its immediate reality. What the law has brought to it is not any new personal existence [Existents], but only a new knowledge [Erkjendelse], which certainly explains his subsistence [Tilværelse], but is still so far from raising himself above [at hæve][2] the unblessed state in which he naturally finds himself that, on the contrary, it deepens and catalyses it. The law teaches him that he is destined for eternal bliss, and also shows him the way to this telos [Maal]; but it teaches him also that the power to walk this road is absolutely lacking, that the way is in reality blocked for him and the telos therefore unopenable. Law-faith is thus not yet true faith—man’s true relationship with God. His entire life under the law can only be a necessary transitional stage in his moral-religious developmental process. It also points to another, higher form of subsistence as an irrefutable demand [uafviselig Fordring] of man’s own innermost essence [inderste Væsen].[3]

[1] Apologia to the Augsburg Confession, III.7; V.34: “The law only accuses and terrifies consciences.”

[2] Used reflexively of a personal state: “refl. to elevate oneself, about person: to obtain a better position, a more favorable position; to make oneself better (in the eyes of others)” (ODS).

[3] See §17n.