Karl Barth on revelation 1

Karl Barth Part 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2jbc03ujLk

 

This section can be read online at;

It ought not to surprise us that Karl Barth would with his theology find the Liberalism prevalent at the end of the 19th Century and the beginning of the 20th century and into the middle of the 20th century lacking God.  Why do I say this? I think history attests to two world wars with atrocities done to many nations. 3% of the world population died.  Check it on a Wiki…

Harnack, although he was a top scholar of his day and his work is still useful, he and the school that he belonged to walked away from the path that puts God at the centre.  Theology became Man-centric this allowed a new meta-narrative to be written with the ‘Pure race’.  The demonising of other cultures such as on a big scale (attempted genocide) Judaism but also homosexuals, Jehovah Witnesses, Gypsies, political prisoners.  From Barth’s point of view the German national Church gave in to the idealisms of the Nazis… In other words, the Theology of the 19th Century must have gone down the wrong road for this to happen.  Karl Barth’s The Humanity of God is well worth reading, that is if you can get a copy.  With this background Barth and those of the Confessing Church heard this clarion call and the sinking boat needed to be turned around.  It was people like Karl Barth that helped to change the direction of Western culture.  Let us not forget that our freedoms in the West should not be taken for granted.  Even though I don’t always like secularism for certain reasons, it could be a lot worse.

Barth’s Commentary on Romans basically ripped this old liberalism in two. Barth’s concept of revelation is very sharp… It had to be sharp to redress this balance.  This version of the Romans Commentary is a revised one in English.  The 1918 version is said to have been even sharper.

Comments

Post a Comment

Yes

Popular posts from this blog

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1-5

Image
Last time we began to look at the opening of Genesis chapter 1. We learned that the elements which I believe came from nothing (ex nihilo), were the building blocks for the Lords big project of creation. These building blocks of matter are mentioned in many myths and legends from Egypt to Babylon. However, the Genesis account is a complete contrast to all of these other myths. Moses wrote in such a way that his account is completely different. A lot of scholars following Julius Wellhausen put the ideas from the Babylonia and near vicinities.  commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2006-01-14_Surface_waves.jpg  (I like the above picture as a representation for chaos.  Although in the primeval period there was no light though. :)) I completely disagree. Israel ended up in a captivity twice. Once as a family and then as a nation; Egypt and Babylon. Genesis was written in the first phase and looks back to when Abraham was even in Egypt. At this early juncture according to the text a lot of the
Read more

When God began creating...

Image
  When we look at our own life, our beginnings can influence what our end can also be. We all ask questions of where we have come from and where we are going.   Although these can be scientific questions, they can also be existential, moral, and spiritual questions. I found Rabbi Sacks really important on my understanding of Genesis one and two.   Some of the reflections I came to were heavily influenced by his thinking.   In Genesis one and two we can already see God’s love for his creation.   The way rabbi Sacks brought this out in his Covenant and conversation from my point of view is fantastic.   I really enjoyed reading it because it is not dry such as the higher criticism of J, E , and P… and taking the razor to the text that ought not to have ever have been done.  Taken from wikipedia I am also aware of the ancients who also attempted to interpret Genesis allegorically, philosophically, scientifically. These ways I just mentioned are ways that Josephus talked about. All these wa
Read more