Moltmann vs. Pannenberg

Theology of Hope There is basically no limit to the amount of perspectives and theories about theology in general and drilling down to Christianity does not change this. One particular subset of Christian theology is the theology of hope. This report will focus on two of the greater minds that have debated this topic through literature, those being Moltmann and Pannenberg. Both of these people have weighed in significantly on the theology of hope and there will be a compare and contrast of their viewpoints in this report.

While the two authors are noticeably different in some respects, they are also similar in other ways. When speaking directly about the theology of hope, Jurgen Moltmann was very direct about the topic. Within its pages, he stated that hope is the "central category of Biblical faith." He also notes that it is not a "private" hope but instead should be typified by people moving out amongst the masses and helping those in poverty or other distress.

Indeed, Moltmann says that "social action is grounded in Christian hope." The other heavyweight in the theology of hope discussion is Pannenberg. Pannenberg's main viewpoint is not all that dissimilar from Moltmann but there are some notable differences. Pannenberg is asserted to believe that there are six major foci within this theology. Those six dimensions are methodology, God, creation, humanity, Christology, ecclesiology and eschatology with the more prominent overall themes being eschatology and rationality (Guastad, 2006; Grenz & Olson, 1996).

One source available on the Internet puts a fine point on the differences and similarities of these two great theology minds. Indeed, the source has the same general statement as is noted in the thesis statement of this report when it is noted that the two scholars are "similar, yet distinct." One major difference between the two that is noted says that the future is more important than the present. However, there is some divergence after that.

Pannenberg's could be classified as "coherent, didactic, apologetic and systematic theology." Similarly, they are different in areas such as the Trinity, the final judgment, eschatology and so forth. What makes Moltmann different includes the fact that there is tension between the cross and the resurrection. He saw it as a "God's insurrection against the powers of this world that marginalize, enslave and ultimately destroy humanity." They are also similar to each other in that neither believes in the doctrine of inspiration. They also do not believe in inerrancy (Diglotting, 2012).

Regarding the resurrection, the main point that separates the two men's line of thinking is what the resurrection meant in terms of history and the Christian faith. Pannenberg speaks to the "likelihood" of the resurrection occurring and that it is just another basic event in the history of Christ and his existence. However, while Moltmann says much the same thing as Moltmann regarding the death of Christ, the resurrection of Christ is considered in an entirely different prism than his death.

To put it as he did, the death of Christ is a "historical fact" but the resurrection was "apocalyptic." He expanded by saying that "anyone who describes Christ's resurrection as 'historical', in just the same way as his death on the cross, is overlooking the new creation with which the resurrection begins, and is falling short of the eschatological hope." (Diglotting, 2012). Another divergence between the two is millennialism. Moltmann takes the millennium seriously while Pannenberg talks about it only briefly.

Finally, both Moltmann and Pannenberg are unquestionable in their belief of Hell as existing. However, they also speak directly about how God could condemn the very people that he created in his image and, in a way, hate himself. However, Pannenberg and Moltmann offer similar explanations to this idea.

Pannenberg says this when he states the "reach of Christ's sacrifice extends to all, none are outside God's offer." On the other hand, Moltmann says that "In the Divine judgment all sinners, the wicked and the violent, the murders and the children of Satan, the Devil and fallen angels will be liberated and saved from their deadly perdition through transformation into their true, created being, because God remains true to himself, and does not give up what he has once created and affirmed or allow it to be lost." (Dual Ravens, 2014) Conclusion In the end, it is clear that Moltmann and Pannenberg have some stark similarities in what they feel and why they feel it.

At one point, Moltmann referred to Pannenberg as both his "friend" but also his "opponent." Moltmann also noted that he himself spoke from the perspective of "promise" while he felt that Pannenberg spoke of "anticipation." As with most pairs of noted or even less prominent theologians that are compared side by side, there are some marked differences that are fairly easy to pick apart and identify. Indeed, there is only so.