Karl Barth

Karl Barth
Born (1886-05-10)May 10, 1886
Basel, Switzerland
Died December 10, 1968(1968-12-10) (aged 82)
Basel, Switzerland
Occupation Theologian, author
Notable work The Epistle to the Romans
Church Dogmatics
Spouse(s) Nelly Hoffmann (1893-1976)
Children Franziska, Markus, Christoph, Matthias and Hans Jakob
Theological work
Tradition or movement Reformed
Neo-Orthodoxy
Notable ideas Dialectical theology
analogia fidei

Karl Barth (/bɑːrt/;[1] German: [baʀt]; May 10, 1886 – December 10, 1968) was a Swiss Reformed theologian who is often regarded as the greatest Protestant theologian of the twentieth century.[2][3] His influence expanded well beyond the academic realm to mainstream culture, leading him to be featured on the cover of Time on April 20, 1962.[4]

Beginning with his experience as a pastor, Barth rejected his training in the predominant liberal theology typical of 19th-century European Protestantism. He also rejected more conservative forms of Christianity.[5][6] Instead he embarked on a new theological path initially called dialectical theology due to its stress on the paradoxical nature of divine truth (e.g., God's relationship to humanity embodies both grace and judgment).[7] Many critics have referred to Barth as the father of neo-orthodoxy[5] – a term that Barth emphatically rejected.[8] A more charitable description of his work might be "a theology of the Word."[9][10] Barth's work had a profound impact on twentieth century theology and figures such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer – who like Barth became a leader in the Confessing Church – Thomas F. Torrance, Reinhold Niebuhr, Jacques Ellul, Stanley Hauerwas, Hans Kung, Jürgen Moltmann, and novelists such as John Updike and Miklós Szentkuthy.

Barth's unease with the dominant theology which characterized Europe led him to become a leader in the Confessing Church in Germany, which actively opposed Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime.[11] In particular, Barth and other members of the movement vigorously attempted to prevent the Nazis from taking over the existing church and establishing a state church controlled by the regime. This culminated in Barth's authorship of the Barmen Declaration, which fiercely criticized Christians who supported the Nazis.[12]

One of the most prolific and influential theologians of the twentieth century,[13] Barth emphasized the sovereignty of God, particularly through his reinterpretation of the Calvinistic doctrine of election, the sinfulness of humanity, and the "infinite qualitative distinction between God and mankind". His most famous works are his The Epistle to the Romans, which marked a clear break from his earlier thinking, and his massive thirteen-volume work Church Dogmatics, one of the largest works of systematic theology ever written.[14]

Early life and education

Karl Barth was born on May 10, 1886, in Basel, Switzerland, to Johann Friedrich "Fritz" Barth and Anna Katharina (Sartorius) Barth. Fritz Barth was a theology professor and pastor who would greatly influence his son's life. In particular, Fritz Barth was fascinated by philosophy, especially the implications of Friedrich Nietzsche's theories on free will. Barth spent his childhood years in Bern. From 1911 to 1921 he served as a Reformed pastor in the village of Safenwil in the canton of Aargau. In 1913 he married Nelly Hoffmann, a talented violinist. They had a daughter and four sons, one of whom was the New Testament scholar Markus Barth (October 6, 1915 – July 1, 1994). Later he was professor of theology in Göttingen (1921–1925), Münster (1925–1930) and Bonn (1930–1935) (Germany). While serving at Göttingen he met Charlotte von Kirschbaum, who became his long-time secretary and assistant; she played a large role in the writing of his epic, the Church Dogmatics.[15] He had to leave Germany in 1935 after he refused to swear allegiance to Adolf Hitler and went back to Switzerland and became a professor in Basel (1935–1962).

Barth was originally trained in German Protestant Liberalism under such teachers as Wilhelm Herrmann, but he reacted against this theology at the time of the First World War. His reaction was fed by several factors, including his commitment to the German and Swiss Religious Socialist movement surrounding men such as Hermann Kutter, the influence of the biblical realism movement surrounding men such as Christoph Blumhardt and Søren Kierkegaard, and the effect of the skeptical philosophy of Franz Overbeck.

Kierkegaard’s influence on Barth’s early theology is evident in The Epistle to the Romans. The early Barth read at least three volumes of Kierkegaard’s works: Practice in Christianity, The Moment, and an Anthology from his journals and diaries. Almost all key terms from Kierkegaard which had an important role in The Epistle to the Romans can be found in Practice in Christianity. The concept of the indirect communication, the paradox, and the moment of Practice in Christianity, in particular, confirmed and sharpened Barth’s ideas on contemporary Christianity and the Christian life.[16]

The most important catalyst, however, was Barth's reaction to the support that most of his liberal teachers voiced for German war aims. The 1914 "Manifesto of the Ninety-Three German Intellectuals to the Civilized World"[17] carried the signature of his former teacher Adolf von Harnack. Barth believed that his teachers had been misled by a theology which tied God too closely to the finest, deepest expressions and experiences of cultured human beings, into claiming divine support for a war which they believed was waged in support of that culture – the initial experience of which appeared to increase people's love of and commitment to that culture. Much of Barth's early theology can be seen as a reaction to the theology of Friedrich Schleiermacher.[18]

The Epistle to the Romans

Barth first began his commentary The Epistle to the Romans (Ger. Der Römerbrief) in the summer of 1916 while he was still a pastor in Safenwil, with the first edition appearing in December 1918 (but with a publication date of 1919). On the strength of the first edition of the commentary, Barth was invited to teach at the University of Göttingen. Barth decided around October 1920 that he was dissatisfied with the first edition and heavily revised it the following eleven months, finishing the second edition around September 1921.[19] Particularly in the thoroughly re-written second edition of 1922, Barth argued that the God who is revealed in the cross of Jesus challenges and overthrows any attempt to ally God with human cultures, achievements, or possessions. The book's popularity led to its republication and reprinting in several languages.

In the decade following the First World War, Barth was linked with a number of other theologians – actually very diverse in outlook – who had reacted against their teachers' liberalism, in a movement known as "Dialectical Theology" (Ger. Dialektische Theologie). The members of the movement included Rudolf Bultmann, Eduard Thurneysen, Eberhard Grisebach, Emil Brunner, and Friedrich Gogarten.[20]

Barmen Declaration

In 1934, as the Protestant Church attempted to come to terms with the Third Reich, Barth was largely responsible for the writing of the Barmen declaration (Ger. Barmer Erklärung). This declaration rejected the influence of Nazism on German Christianity by arguing that the Church's allegiance to the God of Jesus Christ should give it the impetus and resources to resist the influence of other lords, such as the German Führer, Adolf Hitler.[21] Barth mailed this declaration to Hitler personally. This was one of the founding documents of the Confessing Church and Barth was elected a member of its leadership council, the Bruderrat.

He was forced to resign from his professorship at the University of Bonn in 1935 for refusing to swear an oath to Hitler. Barth then returned to his native Switzerland, where he assumed a chair in systematic theology at the University of Basel. In the course of his appointment he was required to answer a routine question asked of all Swiss civil servants: whether he supported the national defense. His answer was, "Yes, especially on the northern border!" The newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung carried his 1936 criticism of Martin Heidegger for his support of the Nazis.[22] In 1938 he wrote a letter to a Czech colleague Josef Hromádka in which he declared that soldiers who fought against the Third Reich were serving a Christian cause.

Church Dogmatics

Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics

Barth's theology found its most sustained and compelling expression in his thirteen-volume magnum opus, the Church Dogmatics (Ger. "Kirchliche Dogmatik"). Widely regarded as an important theological work, the Church Dogmatics represents the pinnacle of Barth's achievement as a theologian. Church Dogmatics runs to over six million words and 8,000 pages (in English; over 9,000 in German) – one of the longest works of systematic theology ever written.[23][24][25]

The Church Dogmatics address four major doctrines: Revelation, God, Creation, and Atonement or Reconciliation. Barth had initially also intended to complete his dogmatics by addressing the doctrines of redemption and eschatology, but decided not to complete the project in the later years of his life.[26]

Later life and death

Photo of Karl Barth on jacket of one of his books

After the end of the Second World War, Barth became an important voice in support both of German penitence and of reconciliation with churches abroad. Together with Hans-Joachim Iwand, he authored the Darmstadt Statement in 1947 – a more concrete statement of German guilt and responsibility for the Third Reich and Second World War than the 1945 Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt. In it, he made the point that the Church's willingness to side with anti-socialist and conservative forces had led to its susceptibility for National Socialist ideology. In the context of the developing Cold War, that controversial statement was rejected by anti-Communists in the West who supported the CDU course of re-militarization, as well as by East German dissidents who believed that it did not sufficiently depict the dangers of Communism. He was elected a Foreign Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1950.[27] In the 1950s, Barth sympathized with the peace movement and opposed German rearmament.

Karl Barth in 1956

Barth wrote a 1960 article for The Christian Century regarding the "East-West question" in which he denied any inclination toward Eastern communism and stated he did not wish to live under Communism or wish anyone to be forced to do so; he acknowledged a fundamental disagreement with most of those around him, writing: "I do not comprehend how either politics or Christianity require [sic] or even permit such a disinclination to lead to the conclusions which the West has drawn with increasing sharpness in the past 15 years. I regard anticommunism as a matter of principle an evil even greater than communism itself."[28]

In 1962, Barth visited the United States and lectured at Princeton Theological Seminary, the University of Chicago, the Union Theological Seminary and the San Francisco Theological Seminary. He was invited to be a guest at the Second Vatican Council, after which he wrote a small volume, Ad Limina Apostolorum [At the Threshold of the Apostles].[29]

Barth was featured on the cover of the April 20, 1962 issue of Time magazine, an indication that his influence had reached out of academic and ecclesiastical circles and into mainstream American religious culture.[30]

Barth died on December 10, 1968 at his home in Basel, Switzerland. The evening before his death, he had encouraged his lifelong friend Eduard Thurneysen that he should not be downhearted, "For things are ruled, not just in Moscow or in Washington or in Peking, but things are ruled – even here on earth—entirely from above, from heaven above.”[31]

Theology

Trinitarian focus

One major objective of Barth is to recover the doctrine of the Trinity in theology from its putative loss in liberalism.[32] His argument follows from the idea that God is the object of God's own self-knowledge, and revelation in the Bible means the self-unveiling to humanity of the God who cannot be discovered by humanity simply through its own intuition.[33]

Election

One of the most influential and controversial features of Barth's Dogmatics was his doctrine of election (Church Dogmatics II/2). Barth's theology entails a rejection of the idea that God chose each person to either be saved or damned based on purposes of the Divine will, and it was impossible to know why God chose some and not others.[34]

Barth's doctrine of election involves a firm rejection of the notion of an eternal, hidden decree.[35] In keeping with his Christo-centric methodology, Barth argues that to ascribe the salvation or damnation of humanity to an abstract absolute decree is to make some part of God more final and definitive than God's saving act in Jesus Christ. God's absolute decree, if one may speak of such a thing, is God's gracious decision to be for humanity in the person of Jesus Christ. Drawing from the earlier Reformed tradition, Barth retains the notion of double predestination but makes Jesus himself the object of both divine election and reprobation simultaneously; Jesus embodies both God's election of humanity and God's rejection of human sin.[36] While some regard this revision of the doctrine of election as an improvement[37] on the Augustinian-Calvinist doctrine of the predestination of individuals, critics, namely Brunner,[38] have charged that Barth's view amounts to a soft universalism, thereby departing from Augustinian-Calvinism.

Barth’s doctrine of objective atonement develops as he distances himself from Anselm of Canterbury’s doctrine of the atonement.[39] In The Epistle to the Romans, Barth endorses Anselm’s idea that God who is robbed of his honor must punish those who robbed him. In Church Dogmatics I/2, Barth advocates divine freedom in the incarnation with the support of Anselm’s Cur Deus Homo. Barth holds that Anselm’s doctrine of the atonement preserves both God’s freedom and the necessity of Christ’s incarnation. The positive endorsement of Anselmian motives in Cur Deus Homo continues in Church Dogmatics II/1. Barth maintains with Anselm that the sin of humanity cannot be removed by the merciful act of divine forgiveness alone. In Church Dogmatics IV/1, however, Barth’s doctrine of the atonement diverges from that of Anselm.[40] By over-christologizing the doctrine, Barth completes his formulation of objective atonement. He finalizes the necessity of God’s mercy at the place where Anselm firmly establishes the dignity and freedom of the will of God.[41] In Barth’s view, God’s mercy is identified with God’s righteousness in a distinctive way where God’s mercy always takes the initiative. The change in Barth’s reception of Anselm’s doctrine of the atonement shows that Barth’s doctrine entails support for universalism.[42]

Salvation

Barth argued that previous perspectives on sin and salvation, influenced by strict Calvinist thinking, sometimes misled Christians into thinking that predestination set up humanity such that the vast majority of human beings were foreseen to disobey and reject God, with damnation coming to them as a matter of fate. Barth's view of salvation is centrally Christological, with his writings stating that in Jesus Christ the reconciliation of all of mankind to God has essentially already taken place and that through Christ man is already elect and justified. Though not an advocate of Christian universalism, strictly speaking, Barth asserted that eternal salvation for everyone, even those that reject God, is a possibility that isn't just an open question but should be hoped for by Christians as a matter of grace; specifically, he wrote, "Even though theological consistency might seem to lead our thoughts and utterances most clearly in this direction, we must not arrogate to ourselves that which can be given and received only as a free gift", just hoping for total reconciliation.[43]

Barth, in the words of a later scholar, went a "significant step beyond traditional theology" in that he argued against more conservative strains of Protestant Christianity in which damnation is seen as an absolute certainty for many or most people. To Barth, Christ's grace is central.[43]

Understanding of Mary

Unlike many Protestant theologians, Barth wrote on the topic of Mariology (the theological study of Mary). Barth's views on the subject agreed with much Roman Catholic dogma but he disagreed with the Catholic veneration of Mary. Aware of the common dogmatic tradition of the early Church, Barth fully accepted the dogma of Mary as the Mother of God, seeing a rejection of that title equivalent to rejecting the doctrine that Christ's human and divine natures are inseparable (contra the Nestorian heresy). Through Mary, Jesus belongs to the human race. Through Jesus, Mary is Mother of God.[44]

Barth, liberals, and fundamentalists

A desk in Karl Barth's old office with a painting of Matthias Grünewald’s crucifixion scene.

Although Barth's theology rejected German Protestant liberalism, his theology has usually not found favour with those at the other end of the theological spectrum: confessionalists and fundamentalists. His doctrine of the Word of God, for instance, holds that Christ is the Word of God, and does not proceed by arguing or proclaiming that the Bible must be uniformly historically and scientifically accurate, and then establishing other theological claims on that foundation.

Some fundamentalist critics have joined liberals in referring to Barth as "neo-orthodox" because,[45] while his theology retains most or all of the tenets of their understanding of Christianity, he is seen as rejecting the belief which is a linchpin of their theological system: biblical inerrancy. Such critics believe the written text must be considered to be historically accurate and verifiable and see Barth's view as a separation of theological truth from historical truth.[46] Barth could respond by saying that the claim that the foundation of theology is biblical inerrancy is to use a foundation other than Jesus Christ, and that our understanding of Scripture's accuracy and worth can only properly emerge from consideration of what it means for it to be a true witness to the incarnate Word, Jesus.

The relationship between Barth, liberalism, and fundamentalism goes far beyond the issue of inerrancy, however. From Barth's perspective, liberalism, as understood in the sense of the 19th century with Friedrich Schleiermacher and Hegel as its leading exponents and not necessarily expressed in any particular political ideology, is the divinization of human thinking. This, to him, inevitably leads one or more philosophical concepts to become the false God, thus attempting to block the true voice of the living God. This, in turn, leads to the captivity of theology by human ideology. In Barth's theology, he emphasizes again and again that human concepts of any kind, breadth or narrowness quite beside the point, can never be considered as identical to God's revelation. In this aspect, Scripture is also written human language, which bears witness to the self-revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Scripture cannot be considered as identical to God's self-revelation, which is properly only Jesus Christ. However, in his freedom and love, God truly reveals himself through human language and concepts, with a view toward their necessity in reaching fallen humanity. Thus Barth claims that Christ is truly presented in Scripture and the preaching of the church, echoing a stand expressed in his native Swiss Reformed Church's Helvetic Confession of the 16th century.

He opposes any attempts to closely relate theology and philosophy, although Barth consistently insists that he is not "anti-philosophical."[47] His approach in that respect is predominantly Christocentric, and is thus termed "kerygmatic," as opposed to "apologetic".

Influence on Christian ethics

Among many other areas, Barth has also had a profound influence on modern Christian ethics.[48][49][50][51] He has influenced the work of ethicists such as Stanley Hauerwas, John Howard Yoder, Jacques Ellul and Oliver O'Donovan.[48][52][53]

Relationship with Charlotte von Kirschbaum

Charlotte von Kirschbaum was Barth's secretary and theological assistant for more than three decades.[54] When Barth first met her in 1924 he had already been married for 12 years and, in 1929, she moved into the Barth family household, which included his wife Nelly and five children.[54] George Hunsinger summarizes the influence of von Kirschbaum on Barth's work: "As his unique student, critic, researcher, adviser, collaborator, companion, assistant, spokesperson, and confidante, Charlotte von Kirschbaum was indispensable to him. He could not have been what he was, or have done what he did, without her."[55]

The long-standing work relationship was not without its difficulties.[56] It caused offense among some of Barth's friends, as well as his mother.[57] While Nelly supplied the household and the children, von Kirschbaum and Barth shared an academic relationship. The feminist scholar, Suzanne Selinger says "[p]art of any realistic response to the subject of Barth and von Kirschbaum must be anger", because she has been largely unrecognized by Barthian scholars for her work.[58] Barth lauds von Kirschbaum for her assistance in the preface of Church Dogmatics: Volume 3 – The Doctrine of Creation Part 3.[59]

In literature

In John Updike's Roger's Version, Roger Lambert is a professor of religion. Lambert is influenced by the works of Karl Barth. That is the primary reason that he rejects his student's attempt to use computational methods to understand God.

Harry Mulisch's The Discovery of Heaven makes mentions of Barth's Church Dogmatics, as does David Markson's The Last Novel. In the case of Mulisch and Markson, it is the ambitious nature of the Church Dogmatics that seems to be of significance. In the case of Updike, it is the emphasis on the idea of God as "Wholly Other" that is emphasized.

In Marilynne Robinson's Gilead, the preacher John Ames reveres Barth's "Epistle to the Romans" and refers to it as his favorite book other than the Bible.

Whittaker Chambers cites Barth in nearly all his books: Witness (p. 507), Cold Friday (p. 194), and Odyssey of a Friend (pp. 201, 231).

Center for Barth Studies

Princeton Theological Seminary, where Barth lectured in 1962, houses the Center for Barth Studies, which is dedicated to supporting scholarship related to the work of Karl Barth. The center was established in 1997 and sponsors seminars, conferences, and other events. It also holds the Karl Barth Research Collection, which contains nearly all of Barth's works in English and German, several first editions of his works, and an original handwritten manuscript by Barth.[60]

See also

Writings

The Church Dogmatics in English translation

Audio

References

  1. ↑ "Barth". Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.
  2. ↑ McGrath, Alister E (January 14, 2011), Christian Theology: An Introduction, John Wiley & Sons, pp. 76–, ISBN 978-1-4443-9770-3
  3. ↑ Brown, Stuart; Collinson, Diane; Wilkinson, Robert (September 10, 2012), Biographical Dictionary of Twentieth-Century Philosophers, Taylor & Francis, pp. 52–, ISBN 978-0-415-06043-1
  4. ↑ "Barth in Retirement", Time, May 31, 1963, retrieved 2012-07-15
  5. 1 2 Barbour, Ian (1966), Issues in Science and Religion, Prentice-Hall, pp. 116–19, 229, 292, 422–25, 456, 459
  6. ↑ Lecture on Karl Barth, TCU, retrieved 2013-09-04
  7. ↑ McKim, Donald K (1996). Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms. Westminster John Knox Press. pp. 76–77. ISBN 978-0-664-25511-4.
  8. ↑ Church Dogmatics III/3, xii.
  9. ↑ Thomas Forsyth Torrance (December 1, 2000). Karl Barth: An Introduction to His Early Theology, 1910–1931. T & T Clark. ISBN 978-0-567-08762-1.
  10. ↑ Thomas Forsyth Torrance (1990). Karl Barth, Biblical and Evangelical Theologian. T & T Clark. ISBN 978-0-567-09572-5.
  11. ↑ "Karl Barth - Christian History".
  12. ↑ Barmen Declaration. Ucc.org. Retrieved on 2013-09-04.
  13. ↑ Timothy Gorringe (1999), Karl Barth: Against Hegemony, Oxford University Press, pp. 316–, ISBN 978-0-19-875247-9
  14. ↑ Name (Boston Collaborative Encyclopedia of Western Theology). People.bu.edu. Retrieved on 2012-07-15.
  15. ↑ Church Dogmatics, ed. T. F. Torrance and G. W. Bromiley (1932–67; ET Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1956–75).
  16. ↑ Woo, B. Hoon (2014). "Kierkegaard’s Influence on Karl Barth’s Early Theology". Journal of Christian Philosophy. 18: 197–245.
  17. ↑ Manifesto of the Ninety-Three German Intellectuals, 1914.
  18. ↑ Gignilliat, pp. 38-39.
  19. ↑ Kenneth Oakes, Reading Karl Barth: A Companion to Karl Barth's Epistle to the Romans, Eugene: Cascade, 2011, p. 27.
  20. ↑ Chalamet, Christophe (2004). Dialectical Theologians: Wilhelm Herrmann, Karl Barth and Rudolf Bultmann. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag. pp. 125–30. ISBN 3290173240. Retrieved 19 October 2015.
  21. ↑ Michael Allen (18 December 2012). Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics: An Introduction and Reader. Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 5–. ISBN 978-0-567-48994-4.
  22. ↑ Ian Ward (1992) Law, philosophy, and National Socialism. Bern: Peter Lang. p 117. ISBN 3-261-04536-1.
  23. ↑ The T & T Clark Blog: Church Dogmatics. Tandtclark.typepad.com. Retrieved on 2012-07-15.
  24. ↑ Myers, Ben. (November 27, 2005) Faith and Theology: Church Dogmatics in a week. Faith-theology.com. Retrieved on 2012-07-15.
  25. ↑ Grau, H. G. (1973). "Archived copy". Theology Today. p. 138. doi:10.1177/004057367303000205. Archived from the original on August 21, 2006. Retrieved 2012-05-24.
  26. ↑ Green, Garrett. "Introduction" to On Religion by Karl Barth, Trans. Garrett Green. (London: T&T Clark, 2006) p. 3
  27. ↑ "Book of Members, 1780–2010: Chapter B" (PDF). American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Retrieved 2012-11-17.
  28. ↑ Barth, Karl. "No Angels of Darkness and Light", The Christian Century, January 20, 1960, pp. 72 ff.
  29. ↑ Eberhard Jüngel (1986). Karl Barth, a Theological Legacy. Westminster Press. p. 26. ISBN 978-0-664-24031-8.
  30. ↑ TIME Magazine Cover: Karl Barth – April 20, 1962 – Religion – Christianity. Retrieved on 2012-07-15.
  31. ↑ "Biography | Center for Barth Studies". barth.ptsem.edu. Retrieved 2016-04-23.
  32. ↑ Braatan, 80-81
  33. ↑ Gorringe, 135-36.
  34. ↑ Mangina, 76.
  35. ↑ Chung, 385-86.
  36. ↑ Webster (2000), 93-95.
  37. ↑ Douglas Atchison Campbell (2005). The Quest For Paul's Gospel: A Suggested Strategy. T & T Clark International. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-567-08332-6.
  38. ↑ Brunner, Emil, The Christian Doctrine of God: Dogmatics: Volume 1, (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1950)
  39. ↑ Mikkelsen, Hans Vium (2010). Reconciled Humanity: Karl Barth in Dialogue. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. p. 5. ISBN 0802863639. Retrieved 19 October 2015.
  40. ↑ Bloesch, Donald G. (2001). Jesus is Victor!: Karl Barth's Doctrine of Salvation. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock. pp. 43–50. ISBN 0687202256. Retrieved 19 October 2015.
  41. ↑ Hasel, Frank M. (Autumn 1991). "Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics on the Atonement: Some Translational Problems" (PDF). Andrews University Seminary Studies. 29 (3): 205–211. Retrieved 19 October 2015.
  42. ↑ Woo, B. Hoon (2014). "Karl Barth’s Doctrine of the Atonement and Universalism". Korea Reformed Journal. 32: 243–291.
  43. 1 2 Richard Bauckham, "Universalism: a historical survey", Themelios 4.2 (September 1978): 47–54.
  44. ↑ Louth, Andrew (1977). Mary and the Mystery of the Incarnation: An Essay on the Mother of God in the Theology of Karl Barth. Oxford: Fairacres. pp. 1–24. ISBN 0728300737.
  45. ↑ Roger E. Olson (2004). The Westminster Handbook to Evangelical Theology. Westminster John Knox Press. pp. 43–. ISBN 978-0-664-22464-6.
  46. ↑ This was part of Cornelius Van Til's critique of Barth's doctrine of scripture. Barth, it seems dismissed Biblical passages that didn't agree with his theology. Van Til was one of Barth's earliest (American) conservative critics. See Van Til, Cornelius (May 1954). "Has Karl Barth Become Orthodox?". Westminster Theological Journal. 16: 138ff. Retrieved 2012-11-17.
  47. ↑ Kenneth Oakes, Karl Barth on Theology and Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012, p. 242.
  48. 1 2 Parsons, Michael (1987). "Man Encountered by the Command of God: the Ethics of Karl Barth" (PDF). Vox Evangelica. 17: 48–65. Retrieved 2012-11-17.
  49. ↑ Daniel L. Migliore (August 15, 2010). Commanding Grace: Studies in Karl Barth's Ethics. W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. ISBN 978-0-8028-6570-0.
  50. ↑ Matthew J. Aragon-Bruce. Ethics in Crisis: Interpreting Barth's Ethics (book review) Princeton Seminary Library. Retrieved on 2012-07-15. Archived June 9, 2010, at the Wayback Machine.
  51. ↑ Oxford University Press: The Hastening that Waits: Nigel Biggar. Oup.com. Retrieved on 2012-07-15.
  52. ↑ Journal – The Influence of Karl Barth on Christian Ethics. www.kevintaylor.me (April 7, 2011). Retrieved on 2012-07-15. Archived October 23, 2011, at the Wayback Machine.
  53. ↑ Choi Lim Ming, Andrew (2003). A Study on Jacques Ellul's Dialectical Approach to the Modern and Spiritual World. wordpress.com
  54. 1 2 Suzanne Selinger (1998). Charlotte Von Kirschbaum and Karl Barth: A Study in Biography and the History of Theology. Penn State Press. pp. 1–. ISBN 978-0-271-01864-5.
  55. ↑ George Hunsinger's review of S. Seliger, Charlotte von Kirschbaum and Karl Barth: A Study in Biography and the History of Theology. Archived September 27, 2007, at the Wayback Machine.
  56. ↑ Eberhard Busch (2005). Karl Barths Lebenslauf: Nach seinen Briefen und autobiografischen Texten. Theologischer Verlag Zürich. pp. 177 ff. ISBN 978-3-290-17304-3.
  57. ↑ Eberhard Busch; John Bowden, John (June 21, 2005). Karl Barth: His Life from Letters and Autobiographical Texts. Wipf & Stock. pp. 185–186. ISBN 978-1-59752-169-7.
  58. ↑ S. Seliger, Charlotte von Kirschbaum and Karl Barth; quoted in K. Sonderegger's review.
  59. ↑ Karl Barth (May 8, 2004). Church Dogmatics The Doctrine of Creation, Volume 3, Part 3: The Creator and His Creature. Continuum International Publishing Group. pp. 12–. ISBN 978-0-567-05099-1.
  60. ↑ . Princeton Seminary Library. Retrieved on 2012-07-15.

Sources

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.