Fear and Trembling

1. Introduction

Fear and Trembling is a philosophical‑theological treatise that stages, rather than resolves, the problem of religious faith. Focusing almost exclusively on the Genesis story of Abraham’s near‑sacrifice of Isaac, it asks how Abraham can be praised as the “father of faith” when, judged by ordinary moral standards, he appears as a would‑be child‑murderer.

The work is written under the pseudonym Johannes de silentio, who repeatedly insists that he himself does not possess Abraham’s faith and cannot fully understand it. This stance frames the book as an exploration of faith’s difficulty and opacity rather than a direct exposition of doctrine. The text circles around several interconnected themes:

• the possibility of a “teleological suspension of the ethical,” in which a higher divine purpose might override universal moral norms;
• the contrast between the tragic hero (who sacrifices for the universal ethical order) and the knight of faith (who stands as an individual in absolute relation to God);
• the idea of faith as an inward, passionate relation to the paradox or absurd, beyond the scope of rational justification;
• the status of the single individual in relation to the universal ethical and social order.

Rather than offering systematic arguments, Fear and Trembling combines biblical meditation, literary vignettes, and conceptual “problems” (problema) to probe what it would mean genuinely to “work out one’s salvation with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12). The book has been read as a critique of easy religious complacency, an attack on speculative philosophy (especially Hegelianism), and a foundational text for existential thought, but its pseudonymous and indirect style continues to generate divergent interpretations.

2. Historical and Intellectual Context

Fear and Trembling emerged from the specific religious, cultural, and philosophical environment of 1830s–1840s Denmark, as well as broader European debates after Hegel.

Danish Lutheran “Christendom”

Nineteenth‑century Denmark was marked by a state‑church Lutheranism in which baptism, confirmation, and church attendance were largely social institutions. Many interpreters argue that Kierkegaard saw this as “Christendom”: a cultural Christianity that presupposed faith as a near‑automatic possession. Against this backdrop, Fear and Trembling highlights the strenuous, anxiety‑laden character of genuine faith.

Post‑Hegelian Philosophy

The work responds implicitly and explicitly to Hegelian philosophy, which was influential in Danish academic theology and philosophy.

Some scholars view the book as a direct counter to Danish Hegelians (e.g., Martensen, Heiberg); others see it as more broadly aimed at any rationalist attempt to domesticate biblical faith.

Romanticism and the Individual

Kierkegaard was also shaped by Romantic emphases on individuality, passion, and inwardness. However, whereas Romanticism often celebrated aesthetic genius, Fear and Trembling concentrates on the religious “single individual” whose relation to God may place them at odds with social norms.

Contemporary Theology and Pietism

Within theology, there were debates between more rational‑dogmatic and more experiential‑pietist currents. Readers have situated Fear and Trembling partly within a Lutheran‑pietist stress on personal appropriation of faith, while noting that Kierkegaard’s emphasis on paradox, dread, and Abraham’s extremity goes beyond typical pietist themes.

In this complex context, the work both participates in and resists prevailing currents: it engages Lutheran vocabulary, Romantic individualism, and Hegelian categories but reconfigures them to underscore the radical, unsettling character of faith.

3. Author, Pseudonym, and Composition

Kierkegaard and Johannes de silentio

Fear and Trembling was written by Søren Kierkegaard but published under the pseudonym Johannes de silentio. Kierkegaard routinely used pseudonyms to present distinct existential and philosophical perspectives without straightforwardly identifying them with his own voice.

Johannes de silentio is characterized as:

• a reflective, ironic observer rather than a believer of Abraham’s stature;
• someone fascinated by faith’s greatness yet convinced he cannot achieve it;
• committed to “silence” regarding any claim to possess such faith.

Many commentators interpret this as a device of “indirect communication”: Kierkegaard distances himself authorially so that readers must work out their own relation to the issues rather than receive doctrinal instruction.

Composition and Publication

Fear and Trembling was composed in spring–summer 1843 and published on 16 October 1843 in Copenhagen by C.A. Reitzel, during Kierkegaard’s early, intensely productive period.

Relation to Other Pseudonymous Works

Scholars often read Fear and Trembling alongside:

• Either/Or (aesthetic vs. ethical life;
• Repetition (another exploration of loss, recollection, and hope).

One influential line of interpretation sees these works as forming a loose constellation around the transition from aesthetic to ethical to religious existence, with Fear and Trembling emphasizing the specifically religious dimension.

The surviving manuscripts and the critical Danish edition (Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter, vol. 4) allow detailed reconstruction of Kierkegaard’s drafting process, although there is limited evidence about external influences on the immediate composition beyond his general engagement with contemporary theology, philosophy, and his personal experiences.

4. Biblical Background: Abraham and Isaac

Fear and Trembling revolves around the story traditionally known as the Binding of Isaac (Akedah), narrated in Genesis 22:1–19. Understanding this biblical background is crucial for grasping the work’s arguments.

The Genesis Narrative

In the canonical account:

1. God commands Abraham to take his son Isaac, “your son, your only son, whom you love,” to the land of Moriah and offer him as a burnt offering.
2. Abraham rises early, travels with Isaac and two servants, and ascends the mountain with Isaac alone.
3. Isaac notices the fire and wood but asks, “Where is the lamb for a burnt offering?”
4. Abraham replies that “God himself will provide the lamb.”
5. Abraham builds the altar, binds Isaac, and raises the knife.
6. An angel of the Lord calls out, stopping Abraham and declaring that now it is known he “fears God.”
7. A ram caught in a thicket is offered in Isaac’s stead; Abraham receives promises of blessing and descendants.

"

“Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God.”

— Genesis 22:12 (NRSV)

Traditional Jewish and Christian Readings

Interpretations within Jewish and Christian traditions vary:

Some rabbinic and later Jewish commentaries probe Abraham’s dialogue—or lack thereof—with God; Christian exegesis often highlights Paul’s and the Letter to the Hebrews’ depiction of Abraham “reasoning” that God could raise Isaac from the dead (Hebrews 11:19).

The Pauline and Hebraic Influence

The New Testament significantly shapes Kierkegaard’s reception of Abraham. Hebrews presents Abraham as a paradigm of faith acting against appearances, while Philippians 2:12 supplies the phrase “fear and trembling.” Fear and Trembling re‑approaches Genesis 22 through these lenses but emphasizes the existential horror and ethical scandal of the command to sacrifice Isaac, in contrast to more harmonizing devotional treatments.

5. Structure and Organization of the Work

Fear and Trembling has a carefully layered structure that combines literary and argumentative parts. Different sections serve to “attune,” praise, problematize, and conceptually analyze Abraham’s story.

Overall Layout

Literary vs. Conceptual Sections

Interpreters commonly distinguish between:

• Poetic/affective sections (Attunement, Praise of Abraham) that aim to shape the reader’s emotional and imaginative response.
• Reflective/analytic sections (Preliminary Expectoration, Problema I–III) that thematize key notions such as ethical, single individual, and faith.

This alternation is often seen as part of Kierkegaard’s indirect communication: the reader is first moved, then confronted with conceptual difficulties, and never given a final synthesis.

The Three Problemas

Though closely related, the three problema each pose a distinct question:

1. Problema I: Is there a teleological suspension of the ethical?
2. Problema II: Is there an absolute duty to God?
3. Problema III: Was Abraham’s concealment ethically defensible?

This structure allows the book to examine Abraham’s deed from multiple angles—ethical, theological, and communicative—without collapsing them into a single perspective.

6. Johannes de silentio’s Perspective

Johannes de silentio is both narrator and commentator. His self‑presentation crucially shapes how Fear and Trembling approaches faith.

Self‑Confessed Outsider to Faith

Johannes repeatedly claims that he does not have faith like Abraham’s. He describes himself as someone who can understand the tragic hero but not the knight of faith, and who is better suited to reflection than to belief. This stance:

• underlines the distance between ordinary understanding and Abrahamic faith;
• guards against the impression that the book expounds faith from the inside;
• invites readers to share his perplexity rather than adopt a ready‑made solution.

Indirect Critique and Admiration

Johannes oscillates between admiration for Abraham and critical questioning of contemporary attitudes. He laments what he sees as a cultural tendency to domesticate Abraham’s story into something easily edifying. At the same time, he refrains from directly instructing the reader; instead, he dramatizes the difficulty of taking Abraham seriously as a model.

Limited Authority and Pseudonymous Mask

Because Johannes is a pseudonym, his views are not straightforwardly Kierkegaard’s. Scholars widely argue that Kierkegaard uses Johannes to:

• explore the phenomenology of being scandalized by Abraham’s story;
• demonstrate how faith appears from the standpoint of someone shaped by modern reflection and Hegelian categories;
• underscore that the truth of faith cannot be directly taught, only indirectly communicated.

This perspective explains Johannes’ emphasis on silence: he believes that one who truly had Abraham’s faith would not be able to explain or justify it publicly. His “name,” de silentio, thus signals both his own inability to speak authoritatively about faith and the incommunicable nature of the phenomenon he contemplates.

7. Teleological Suspension of the Ethical

The notion of a “teleological suspension of the ethical” is articulated primarily in Problema I, which asks whether such a suspension is possible and what Abraham’s story implies about it.

The Ethical as Universal

Johannes adopts a broadly Hegelian understanding of the ethical as the sphere of universal moral norms, especially duties toward family and society. From this standpoint, Abraham’s intention to kill Isaac violates a fundamental ethical commandment: a father must love and protect his child.

Suspension for a Higher Telos

Johannes suggests that in Abraham’s case the ethical is “suspended” for the sake of a higher telos (goal or purpose), namely, God’s absolute command. Abraham’s relation to God puts him, as an individual, into a position where obedience to God requires apparent disobedience to the ethical universal.

Interpretive Questions

Commentators differ on how to understand this suspension:

• Some take it as a literal claim: there can be rare cases in which divine command overrides all ethical norms.
• Others see it as emphasizing the paradoxical appearance of faith from the outside, without endorsing actual violation of morality.
• Still others read it as a logical or conceptual suspension: faith occupies a different category than ethics, rather than nullifying ethics.

Debates also concern whether Johannes’ use of Hegelian terminology accurately reflects Hegel, or whether it is a polemical simplification.

Regardless of interpretation, the “teleological suspension of the ethical” names the central tension in Fear and Trembling: Abraham’s act seems ethically indefensible yet is biblically celebrated as exemplary faith.

8. Tragic Hero, Knight of Infinite Resignation, Knight of Faith

Fear and Trembling contrasts three figures to clarify what is distinctive about faith.

Tragic Hero

The tragic hero sacrifices a particular good for the sake of the ethical universal. Examples Johannes cites include Agamemnon (sacrificing Iphigenia), Jephthah (his daughter), and Brutus (his sons).

Key features:

• Their actions can be understood and admired by the community.
• They remain within the ethical sphere, giving up one duty for a higher communal or political duty.
• Their sacrifice can be narrated and justified publicly.

Knight of Infinite Resignation

The knight of infinite resignation performs a purely inward movement. This figure:

• renounces a cherished finite good (e.g., a beloved) for the sake of an eternal standpoint;
• “keeps” the good only in recollection or spiritualized form;
• achieves peace through acceptance of eternal loss.

Johannes describes such a knight with the example of a young man who relinquishes his love because it is impossible, yet inwardly remains faithful to it. This movement is seen as necessary for faith but not yet faith itself.

Knight of Faith

The knight of faith goes beyond infinite resignation. After fully renouncing the finite, this figure:

• believes, “by virtue of the absurd,” that the finite will be restored in actuality;
• returns to ordinary life, appearing outwardly like any other person;
• stands as a single individual in absolute relation to God, beyond public justification.

Abraham is presented as the paradigmatic knight of faith, who both gives up Isaac and believes that he will nevertheless receive him back.

9. Faith, Paradox, and the Absurd

In Fear and Trembling, faith is characterized as an intense, subjective relation to a paradox or absurdity that cannot be grasped by reason or mediated by universal concepts.

Faith as Paradox

Abraham’s situation encapsulates the paradox:

• God promises him descendants through Isaac.
• God commands him to sacrifice Isaac.

Faith, on Johannes’ account, is not merely believing that God’s command will somehow harmonize with ethics; it is holding together the mutually excluding propositions that Isaac must be sacrificed and that Isaac will nevertheless be preserved.

"

“By faith Abraham did not renounce Isaac, but by faith Abraham received Isaac.”

— Johannes de silentio, paraphrasing Hebrews in Fear and Trembling

“By Virtue of the Absurd”

Johannes famously says that the knight of faith believes that Isaac will be given back “by virtue of the absurd” (in Kraft des Absurden in many translations). The absurd here denotes:

• something logically impossible or at least inconceivable within human reason;
• yet affirmed in a passionate subjective certainty.

Different interpreters nuance this:

• Some view it as strong logical contradiction, marking faith as beyond rational justification.
• Others read it as “absurd” only from the perspective of finite reason, not in an ultimate sense.
• A further line of interpretation associates it with the paradox of the God‑man in Christian doctrine, though Fear and Trembling itself focuses mainly on Abraham.

Faith vs. Speculation

Johannes contrasts faith with speculative philosophy:

• Speculation seeks to mediate contradictions into a higher rational unity.
• Faith accepts the contradiction as unmediated and lives it out in concrete existence.

Faith is thus portrayed not as assent to propositions derived from evidence but as a lived, risky stance that exposes the individual to “fear and trembling.” Its truth, for Johannes, is inseparable from this existential pathos rather than demonstrable by argument.

10. The Single Individual and the Universal

A central tension in Fear and Trembling is between the single individual (den Enkelte) and the universal, particularly as these relate to ethics and religion.

The Universal Ethical Order

Drawing on Hegelian terminology, Johannes describes the ethical as the universal:

• It comprises shared moral laws, customs, and social roles (family, citizen, etc.).
• The individual’s task, in this framework, is to express the universal in their life.
• Actions are justified by showing their consistency with this universal order.

The Single Individual Before God

Abraham’s story introduces an apparently higher relation:

• Abraham stands as a single individual in absolute relation to God.
• This relation seems to require him to do something contrary to the ethical universal.
• His action cannot be publicly mediated or justified within universal categories.

Johannes uses this contrast to question the view—often attributed to Hegel—that the individual’s highest identity lies in the universal ethical order. In the religious sphere, the single individual’s relation to God may, he suggests, be higher than the universal.

Interpretive Disputes

Scholars disagree on how far this priority of the single individual extends:

• Some read it as a robust claim that religious faith can override moral norms.
• Others argue that Kierkegaard (behind Johannes) ultimately reconciles the single individual with a reinterpreted ethical, especially in later works on love.
• Another approach sees it as an existential emphasis: the ethical itself must be personally appropriated by the individual before God, rather than absorbed uncritically from society.

In Fear and Trembling itself, however, the emphasis falls on the unbridgeable gap between Abraham’s isolated position and the universal language of ethics.

11. Silence, Communication, and Inwardness

Silence and incommunicability are prominent themes, especially in Problema III, which asks whether Abraham was ethically justified in concealing his intention from Sarah, Eliezer, and Isaac.

Abraham’s Silence

In Genesis 22, Abraham does not explain to his family why he is travelling with Isaac or what he intends to do. Johannes draws out this silence:

• Abraham cannot justify his action in ethical language without misrepresenting it.
• Any attempt to explain—“I am going to sacrifice Isaac because God commanded it”—would either horrify his hearers or transform the act into something else (e.g., fanaticism, madness).

Johannes suggests that Abraham is “unable to speak” about what he must do, not because he is hiding a crime but because the content of his faith cannot be translated into universal terms.

Inwardness and Incommunicable Faith

Faith is portrayed as radically inward:

• It is a relation between the single individual and God.
• Its decisive content (e.g., “I will receive Isaac back”) does not rest on publicly shareable reasons.
• The knight of faith appears outwardly ordinary; inwardly, they bear a secret relation to the absolute.

This has consequences for communication:

Indirect Communication

Johannes’ own manner of writing—paradoxes, lyrical variations, refusal to speak “directly” about faith—is often seen as mirroring this situation. Many interpreters argue that Kierkegaard uses Johannes to practice indirect communication, designed not to impart information about faith but to confront readers with their own position in relation to it.

Thus, silence in Fear and Trembling is not mere withholding; it marks the limit of language when faced with absolute inwardness.

12. Philosophical Method and Anti-Hegelian Polemic

Fear and Trembling employs a distinctive philosophical method that combines literary devices with conceptual analysis and is widely read as a polemical response to Hegelian philosophy.

Indirect, Literary-Phenomenological Method

Rather than constructing systematic arguments, Johannes:

• offers poetic retellings (Attunement) to evoke the inner pathos of Abraham’s situation;
• uses examples and thought‑experiments (tragic heroes, lovers, the merman) to elucidate existential possibilities;
• frames key issues as problema—questions to be pondered rather than definitively resolved.

Many commentators describe this as a phenomenological or existential method: it aims to depict how faith appears to a reflective observer rather than to deduce its nature from first principles.

Critique of Mediation and Speculation

Johannes repeatedly targets the idea that philosophy can “go further” than faith by subsuming it under rational concepts. In his portrayal of Hegelianism:

• contradictions (e.g., faith vs. ethics) are said to be mediated in a higher synthesis;
• the individual is subordinated to the ethical universal;
• religion becomes a lower stage overcome in speculative philosophy.

Johannes contests this by insisting that:

• faith involves a non‑mediated paradox that speculation cannot dissolve;
• Abraham’s situation cannot be integrated into a rational story of ethical progress;
• philosophy approaches faith only from the outside, whereas faith is a matter of lived inwardness.

Accuracy of the Anti-Hegelian Reading

Scholars debate how faithfully Johannes represents Hegel:

Regardless of historical accuracy, Fear and Trembling functions methodologically as an anti‑systematic text: it exposes what, from Johannes’ standpoint, resists systematization—the solitary, trembling believer before God.

13. Ethical and Theological Implications

Fear and Trembling raises far‑reaching ethical and theological questions, particularly concerning divine commands, moral norms, and the nature of faith.

Divine Command and Morality

Johannes’ discussion of the teleological suspension of the ethical and the absolute duty to God suggests that an individual’s relation to God can, at least in Abraham’s case, require actions that contradict standard moral duties.

Theological and ethical interpretations vary:

• Some read the work as advancing a form of divine command theory, where moral obligation is ultimately grounded in God’s will, even when it conflicts with human ethical understanding.
• Others maintain that Johannes is describing the appearance of conflict from the outside, while, from a higher perspective, God would not truly contradict the ethical.
• A further view holds that Fear and Trembling dramatizes a limit case not intended as a general model for ethical life.

These interpretations bear on concerns about fanaticism: could appeals to a private divine command justify immoral acts? Johannes himself acknowledges this danger but insists on Abraham’s biblical singularity.

Theology of Faith and Grace

The work also has implications for theology:

• Faith is portrayed as a gift or “miracle” rather than an achievement of reason.
• The paradox of Isaac restored prefigures, for many Christian readers, themes of resurrection and grace, though the book does not systematically develop Christology.
• The phrase “fear and trembling” underscores the awe and dread surrounding salvation and divine command, in contrast to relaxed cultural Christianity.

Relation to Christian Ethics of Love

Later Kierkegaardian works, such as Works of Love, develop a robust Christian ethics centered on love of neighbor. Interpreters debate:

• whether Fear and Trembling is in tension with this ethic by apparently valorizing an act of violence;
• or whether Abraham’s case is presented as an exceptional narrative that does not undermine the general Christian call to love and non‑violence.

In theological ethics, the text is thus frequently discussed in connection with issues such as martyrdom, obedience, conscience, and the discernment of God’s will.

14. Major Interpretive Debates and Criticisms

Fear and Trembling has generated extensive debate across philosophy, theology, and ethics. Several recurring points of contention can be distinguished.

Ethical Danger and Fanaticism

Critics argue that the notion of a teleological suspension of the ethical risks legitimizing fanatical or immoral actions performed in the name of God. Some ethicists contend that any religious view that allows individuals to override universal moral norms is inherently dangerous.

Defenders often reply that:

• Johannes presents Abraham as a unique biblical figure, not a general model;
• the work is descriptive rather than prescriptive, dramatizing a problem rather than endorsing religious violence;
• Kierkegaard’s broader authorship emphasizes love and neighbor‑directed ethics.

Faith vs. Reason

Another debate concerns the book’s stance on reason:

Some philosophers worry that valorizing the absurd and paradox makes rational theological or ethical discourse impossible. Others interpret Johannes as challenging only certain rationalist pretensions (e.g., Hegelian system‑building), not reason per se.

Pseudonymity and Authorial Intent

The use of Johannes de silentio creates interpretive uncertainty:

• One camp treats Johannes’ claims as close to Kierkegaard’s own, reading the work straightforwardly.
• Another emphasizes the literary distance, arguing that Kierkegaard may be critically staging Johannes’ views rather than endorsing them.
• Intermediate positions suggest a complex interplay: Kierkegaard both uses and subtly questions Johannes’ extremity.

This affects how strongly one takes the book’s assertions about divine command, ethics, and the absurd.

Reading of Hegel

Hegel scholars often object that Johannes’ portrayal of Hegelian ethics as submerging the individual in the universal is oversimplified. They point to Hegel’s nuanced accounts of conscience, evil, and the individual’s responsibility.

Some Kierkegaard scholars acknowledge this but argue that Fear and Trembling targets:

• a popularized Hegelianism in Danish theology;
• or a broader intellectual tendency to resolve all tensions into conceptual harmony.

Thus, debates continue over whether the anti‑Hegelian polemic is philosophically fair or primarily rhetorical.

Normativity of Abraham’s Example

Finally, theologians dispute whether Abraham’s example is normative:

• Some read him as a paradigmatic believer whose radical obedience should inspire Christians.
• Others insist that the story expresses a boundary of religious understanding, warning against presuming such direct divine commands.

These disagreements contribute to the text’s enduring controversial status.

15. Legacy and Historical Significance

Although largely unnoticed at its 1843 publication, Fear and Trembling has become one of Kierkegaard’s most influential works, shaping philosophy, theology, and literature.

Influence on Existential Philosophy

In the twentieth century, the book played a major role in the emergence of existentialism:

• Martin Heidegger engaged Kierkegaard’s analysis of anxiety and resoluteness, though he reinterpreted them outside a theistic framework.
• Jean‑Paul Sartre and other atheistic existentialists drew on the emphasis on subjectivity, decision, and responsibility, even as they rejected Kierkegaard’s theism.

While existentialists often downplayed the explicitly biblical focus, they found in Fear and Trembling a powerful articulation of the individual’s confrontation with ultimate choice.

Impact on Theology

In theology, the work contributed to:

• Dialectical theology (e.g., Karl Barth), which emphasized God’s transcendence, the paradox of revelation, and the inadequacy of natural theology.
• Bultmannian and other existential interpretations of faith as decision and existential self‑understanding.
• Ongoing debates about faith and reason, divine command, and the role of paradox in Christian doctrine.

Some theologians have embraced Abraham’s story as a dramatic expression of obedience; others have used it to discuss the dangers of mishearing or misusing claims of revelation.

Role in Ethics and Philosophy of Religion

In contemporary ethics, Fear and Trembling is frequently examined in relation to:

• divine command theory;
• moral particularism and the role of exceptions;
• the ethics of religious obedience and conscientious objection.

In philosophy of religion, it serves as a classic text on:

• the nature of faith as non‑evidential trust;
• the tension between faith and moral autonomy;
• religious experience and the limits of rational justification.

Cultural and Literary Reception

The work has inspired numerous literary and artistic responses, serving as a touchstone for explorations of sacrifice, doubt, and extremity in faith. It remains a staple in university curricula across disciplines, often functioning as students’ first encounter with Kierkegaard.

Overall, Fear and Trembling continues to be a central reference point for discussions of subjectivity, faith, ethics, and the limits of rationality, ensuring its lasting prominence in modern intellectual history.