no, i understand your reasoning and agree to most of it. i merely see Kierkegaard in a different context. yes, the struggle has always been against nihilism but in the "modern" sense (relative to Kierkegaard) it's in the context of truth. Because I believe Kierkegaard does point out the absudity of believing in god or even the trancendental. but i also see at the same time his admiration toward those who are able to see through the absurdity.. -- see is not the right word-- nono.. the ability to leap pass the absurdity. pass logic and moral values as beyond logic, moral and at times "good and evil". yes, abraham is an extreme case. yet, to point out authentic characters are pointing the quintense of a certain sets of trait. Of course one cannot be like abraham but to call oneself an authetic christian one must live in the same spirit of seeing pass absurdity. It's not logical as a tthe time most intellectuals have agreed the non-logical existance of god as the idustrial revolution drove exploitation to extremes.
In essense i believe that Kierkagaard (boy i hate spelling his name -__-) is a theologian who does not do so much as promote christianity but instead points out a role model by which an authentic christian lives. thus he creates the absurd knight of faith toward whom he openly admits his admiration due to the difficult nature of being an authentic christian.
i mean all his examples were very extreme. ranging from the judge to the play-boy
these authentic characters are merely models of "truth"; of definition. people we identify ourself with.
That's what i got from my readings
may be way off- oh well, i have alot to learn
