Download Karl Barth: Theologian Of Freedom (Making of Modern Theology) ePub

This is a review of the Kindle edition.

This is a fantastic collection. I have been interested in Barth for about the past three years, and in that time I have never found a selection of texts that is as useful as this one. Barth is a difficult theologian to grasp, especially because of the differing stages in his theological development, but this volume bridges those gaps as well as highlights the wide range of subjects on which Barth wrote. Pieces on East-West tension, nuclear war, Mozart, and the Barmen Declaration are included in this volume side by side with ample selections from the Dogmatics, which are the fullest expression of Barth's mature thought. Clifford Green's general introduction (which is scholarly, but still down-to-earth) and his contextualizing each selection makes tracking Barth's growth as a theologian doable, which is an admirable feat to accomplish in such a small space. It also brings together in one place a variety texts that would be nearly impossible to gather on your own outside of an academic institution. The selections from the Dogmatics are generous and (to me) well selected, comprising about a hundred pages drawn from the whole of the massive work. If you are looking for a starting point with Barth's theology, this is a respectable door into the complex, vibrant world of Karl Barth - who is (in my mind) the true 20th century heir of the Reformed tradition.

As far as reviewing the theology itself, I cannot hope to offer criticism - Barth blows me away every time I read him, putting into words that of which I have only ever had dim notions. He is the one theologian to which I continually return at different stages in my life, and I always find new insights, deeper levels of meaning, and more personal resonance. Contemporary writer Marilynne Robinson observed that "great theology is always a kind of giant and intricate poetry, like epic or saga." Though she was referring to the writings of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, I think she would extend the same compliment to Barth, and I can think of no better summary of his work.

Rating for this edition of Barth: four stars. All in all, it is a reasonable price for Kindle, and the formatting is not too obnoxious, but better linking to the endnotes would have been nice, as well as better font formatting. I also really would have liked to see the essay "The Strange New World of the Bible" included in this collection - it is a personal favorite. The print edition would receive five stars from me.

This has articles from many of Barth's central works. Green did a very good job. I would never be able to plow through CD, let alone all Barth's works. Primary documents are very important to me, as is understanding the author's context, so I appreciate Green's short introductions to each chapter and the introduction to the book.

This is a way to get into the thinking of some of the German theologians of the 19th and 20th century. Now I see where some of our crazy ideas in Christianity in U.S. are coming from.

Excellent review of a great theologian. Great book to get if you have little or no knowledge of Barth, need to read this before you read stuff Barth wrote.

The book is and the delivery was good as I had expected and wished.

Karl Barth (1886-1968) was a Swiss Reformed theologian, who was (arguably) the greatest Protestant theologian of the twentieth century. His many books include Church Dogmatics,The Epistle to the Romans,Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century,The Word of God and the Word of Man,Evangelical Theology: An Introduction,The Humanity Of God,Final Testimonies, and many more.

The other volumes in this series are: Friedrich Schleiermacher,Soren Kierkegaard,Teilhard De Chardin,Emil Brunner,Rudolf Bultmann,Dietrich Bonhoeffer,Martin Buber,Charles Hartshorne,Reinhold Niebuhr,H. Richard Niebuhr,Paul Tillich,Hans Kung,Wolfhart Pannenberg,Carl F. H. Henry,Gerhard Von Rad,Ian T. Ramsey ,Anders Nygren.

The Preface to this 1972 book states, “It is not possible to survey the entire ‘Church Dogmatics’ in one small volume. Therefore, after an analysis of Barth’s early development major attention is accorded to the doctrine of revelation, which bears upon everything else Barth writes… Throughout, it is my intention to interpret Barth fairly. Numerous quotations are used in order to provide the reader with something of the flavor of Barth’s method and style… My hope is that this work will whet the reader’s appetite to the extent that he will read Barth on his own.”

The author explains, “Barth’s theological reorientation was a gradual one. It is erroneous to single out one event as the cause of the new theological direction he was to pursue… One must also recall that for Barth the prevailing school of theological liberalism lost much of its luster when ninety-three German intellectuals, including some of Barth’s former theological teachers, signed a manifesto in August, 1914, supporting the Kaiser and the German war policy. Gradually but surely it became evident to Barth … that liberal theology had been weighed in the balance and found wanting.” (Pg. 20-21)

He notes, “Barth acknowledges the rightful place of the modern historical-critical method of biblical interpretation. However, he affirms that the traditional Protestant doctrine of inspiration operated on a deeper level in seeking to apprehend the true meaning of the text. Thus Barth broke with the concentration on the philological and historical; study of the biblical text which characterized the commentaries of modern liberalism. His concern was ‘to see through and beyond history into the spirit of the Bible, which is the Eternal Spirit.’” (Pg. 22)

He observes, “Barth regards his starting with the Word of God as a radical departure from the liberal tradition in which he was schooled. There theology began with the investigation of the Christian’s piety. Because for Barth, theology must begin with the Word of God, the proper subject of theology is this Word, and not the faith of the believer, as Barth had once held. The Word of God is not, as liberalism maintained, contained in the faith of the believer, but faith is grounded and upheld in the Word of God. This does not mean that Barth denied the correlation between the Word of God and faith. Rather, he proposes to reestablish and preserve this correlation by accentuating the priority of God and his Word over man’s faith.” (Pg. 34)

He states, “Barth contends that it is precisely because the beginning and end of the process of understanding are present in faith that theology is possible. The success or failure of faith’s attempt to reach more complete understanding in no way threatens its existence. For theology exists neither to lead one to faith nor to free from doubt. Nor does it try to storm the heavens or require a sacrifice of one’s intellect. The theologian can do his task in the recognition that all human knowledge of God, including that contained within the Confession of the church, is dependent for its validation upon the revelation of God.” (Pg. 39-40)

He points out, “The decisive event of the thirties which influenced the course of Barth’s life was Hitler’s installation as Chancellor of Germany early in 1933… Barth and [Eduard] Thurneysen established a theological journal… [which] voice their vehement opposition to Hitler and the ‘German Christians.’ … [Barth] became the leading theological spokesman of the Confessing Church which opposed the German Christians and Hitler… Barth write the draft which later was accepted and disseminated as the Barmen Confession… Increasingly Barth became persona non grata in the eyes of the Nazi officials. He refused to begin his classes in Bonn with the customary ‘Heil Hitler!’---and he would not swear unconditional allegiance to the Führer. As a result, he was dismissed from his teaching post and expelled from Germany. He was called immediately to become the professor of theology at the University at Basel [Switzerland] where he began teaching.” (Pg. 42-43)

He notes, “Although Barth’s references to the Word of God are innumerable, he does not supply us with any one simple definition thereof. His reticence at this point is understandable, if we remember that the Word of God is synonymous with God’s self-revelation. But the biblical God who reveals himself is never an object, thing, or datum under human control… Thus every definition of the Word of God must acknowledge … that God and his Word can be known by man only as God in his grace reveals himself.” (Pg. 54)

He further explains Barth’s position, “we must begin with the concrete revelation of God in Jesus Christ as the manner in which God is free for man. We are forbidden to begin with the question, ‘Is there a God?’ ‘Is revelation possible?’ or ‘What are the human conditions which need to be fulfilled if God is to reveal itself?’ This is to begin anthropologically rather than christologically; it allows man to determine the conditions under which God will reveal himself. Barth reverses the customary procedure of much recent Protestant theology by beginning with the actuality and reality of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ.” (Pg. 69-70)

He points out that “Barth’s doctrine of revelation … rules out the possibility of arriving at a true knowledge of God which bypasses God’s redemptive activity. It is therefore illegitimate to speak as does natural theology, of a true knowledge of God the Creator which is divorced from a knowledge of God as the redeemer. A second major reason why Barth opposes natural theology is that it cannot be justified on the basis of the biblical evidence… A third argument … [is that] Barth emphasizes that the Bible views man as a sinner estranged from God and under divine judgment… the Christian theologian must turn his back on natural theology is based on the fact that Jesus Christ is the one through which men are reconciled to God… Only be participating through faith in Jesus Christ as he is made known to us through his Spirit can man know God aright… Since man and his relationship to God is to be seen in the light of Jesus Christ, the attempt of natural theology to speak of man independently of him always represents a gross distortion.” (Pg. 89-90)

He suggests, “the logic of Barth’s entire doctrine of election have let numerous critics to charge Barth with teaching universal salvation. Barth is quite sensitive to this charge. However, he maintains that it does not fall within men’s prerogative to determine the scope of God’s election. In deference to the freedom of God’s grace, we are precluded from denying the possibility of universal salvation in principle. In short, man cannot set limits to God’s gracious activity. In the meantime, however, Barth’s conception of the mission of the church and the Christian is clear: the gospel must be proclaimed that God’s will is always to increase the number of the elect.” (Pg. 109-110)

He states, “Barth like many other contemporary theologians interprets the story of Adam’s fall as a saga which point to the experience of every man… Nevertheless with the Bible one can say that Adam is the exemplar and representative of all men. This means he did what all men do. The original sin of man is the first sin. For this and for his rebellion against God, each man is held accountable.” (Pg. 127)

He notes, “It is to Barth’s credit that his ‘Church Dogmatics’ helped to reestablish the significance of theology in the life of the church. At the beginning of this century, systematic theology was in a sad state of decline … Barth’s insistence that theology should be the servant, facilitating the witness, teaching and preaching of the church, encouraged many pastors and theologians in their respective ministries. In addition, Barth pursued the theological task with such creativity and energy that he helped make it possible for theology to resume its legitimate place within the academic community as a scientific discipline.” (Pg. 145-146)

He ends the book, “In conclusion, it can be affirmed that the final impact of Barth’s theology may well lie in the impetus he has given the church to confirm herself first and last with the significance of him who is the center of her faith, namely, Jesus Christ. In a sense Barth has simply taken seriously the revelation of God in Jesus Christ which the church everywhere and at all times has acknowledged to be the center of her life and faith. In having caused us to listen anew to him who is the ‘same yesterday, today, and forever,’ Barth may have made his most lasting contribution.” (Pg. 155)

This is a very helpful perspective on Barth’s work, that will be of great interest to those beginning to study him.