Karl Barth on revelation 4

Barth continues 4

There is a divine ‘No’

Although God is always near us, we choose to be far from Him.

 

But God only, God Himself, He is the Answer. And so, the boundary which bars us in and which, nevertheless, points beyond itself, can since the creation of the world be clearly seen through the things that are ‘made by God. By calm, veritable, unprejudiced religious contemplation the divine No’ can be established and apprehended. 1f we do not ourselves hinder it; nothing can prevent our being translated into a most wholesome krisis by that which may be known of God. And indeed, we stand already in this krisis if we would but see clearly. And what is clearly seen to be indisputable reality is the invisibility of God, which is precisely and in strict agreement with the gospel of the resurrection—His everlasting power and divinity.

 

And what does this mean but that we can know nothing of God, that we are not God, that the Lord is to be feared? Herein lies His pre-eminence over all gods; and here is that which marks Him out as God, as Creator, and as Redeemer

(1.16). And so, through all history there runs the line of intersection between time and eternity, between the present and the future world (i. 4). Long ago it was proclaimed (i. 2; always it was visible. The wrath of God needed not to be revealed to those who stood already under His judgement, for they could have known and loved the Judge. So that, when they fail to see and fail to hear, they are without excuse. Having eyes to see and ears to hear they are doing what they are doing. Inexcusable is their godlessness, for the clearly seen works of God speak of His everlasting power and they have already risen up in protest

against the service of the 'No-God", by which God is ranged in the midst of the natural and ‘spiritual and other forces of this world.

 

Inexcusable also is their unrighteousness, for the clearly seen facts bear witness to the everlasting divinity of God and have already risen up in protest against the arrogance of religion, by which men, speaking of God from the welter of their experiences, mean in fact themselves. We have, therefore, encased the truth of God and evoked His wrath. But this was not because no alternative was open to us. God is not far from each one of us: for in him we live,

and move, and have our being (Acts xvii. 27, 28).

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