• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Introduction to the Theology of Karl Barth This page intentionally left blank Introduction to the Theology of Karl Barth Geoffrey W. Bromiley T&T CLARK EDINBURGH iii Copyright © Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979 Originally published in the USA by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 255 Jefferson Ave, S.E., Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503 This edition published under licence from Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. by T&T CLARK LTD 59 GEORGE STREET EDINBURGH EH2 2LQ SCOTLAND All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of T&T Clark Ltd. First published 1979 Latest impression 2001 ISBN 0 567 29054 9 British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Printed and bound in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press, Wiltshire iv For Ruth and Timothy V This page intentionally left blank Contents Introduction ix The Doctrine of the Word of God Chapter I The Word of God and Dogmatics 3 Chapter II The Revelation of God 13 A. The Triune God 13 B. The Incarnation 21 C. The Outpouring of the Spirit 27 Chapter III Holy Scripture 34 Chapter IV The Proclamation of the Church 45 The Doctrine of God Chapter V The Knowledge of God 5 7 Chapter VI The Reality of God 69 Chapter VII The Election of God 84 Chapter VIII The Command of God 99 The Doctrine of Creation Chapter IX Creation 109 Chapter X The Creature 122 Chapter XI The Creator and His Creature 141 Chapter XII The Ethics of Creation 156 vii viii / Contents The Doctrine of Reconciliation Chapter XIII The Problems of the Doctrine of Reconciliation 175 Chapter XIV The Son of God 180 Chapter XV The Son of Man 197 Chapter XVI The God-Man 218 Appendix Holy Baptism 239 Conclusion 245 Indexes 251 I. Scripture References 251 II. Proper Names 252 Introduction N introduction to Karl Barth's theology could take many different Aforms. One obvious possibility would be to focus on the back- ground against which this theology arose and the historical forces which helped to produce it. Again, primary attention might be given to the relation between the theology and the theologian who engen- dered it. Or again, one might study the inner development within the theology itself. Among other options one might list a concentration on major concerns, an enquiry into the interaction with contemporary movements, or more specifically, an investigation of its influence on theological thinking. These are valid approaches but the present introduction will not take any of them. Instead, it will attempt a simple presentation of what Barth is teaching and suggest some possible lines of evaluation. For this purpose, out of the great bulk of Barth's theological writings, only the twelve part-volumes of Church Dogmatics will be used. The aim is to give a direct summary of the material as Barth himself de- vised, organized, and presented it. Secondary sources will be ignored, not because they are valueless, but in order that nothing apart from the person of the introducer may stand between that which is intro- duced and those to whom the introduction is made. Is this type of introduction necessary? One might argue that Barth already offers the best introduction to himself in his own vol- umes. Why not simply read these? The point is well taken, for first- hand evidence is always the best evidence. Nevertheless, the ordinary student of theology runs into an immediate obstacle here. The huge white volumes—the so-called white elephant—of the original Dog- matics, and the more modest but no less daunting black ones of the ix x / Introduction English translation, demand far more time and effort than can usually be afforded when much else has to be read and done in learning theology. A few of the more interested and motivated might choose this better course. The many, however, will have little chance of gain- ing an adequate knowledge of Barth if they have to rely on their own firsthand reading. All the same, might it not be better to use selected or sample readings for the purposes of introduction? Surely any student can read at least one volume of the Dogmatics and thereby acquire some understanding of Barth's essential message and method. Or perhaps even a series of representative extracts from the Dogmatics might open up the whole series in its systematic development. Barth's own Dogmatics in Outline could also serve as a supplementary guide in effecting the introduction. These proposals have obvious merit. The present introduction is not designed to exclude or replace them. It is self-evident that there should be some accompanying engagement with the primary text in one form or another. Readers of this study would be well-advised to read through one or more of the part-volumes and to read extracts, as they are able, from the others. At the same time, merely to read a single part-volume, or to study individual passages in detachment from their context, hardly affords a proper grasp of Barth's theology, and unfortunately Dogmatics in Outline is a little too compressed to meet the need. Why is it that the selective approach is not adequate? The reason lies in Barth's theological method. Barth does not simply deal with an individual doctrine in its proper sequence and then move on to the next. For him, God himself, not the doctrines, constitutes the theme of theology. Hence all the doctrines are closely interwoven. The in- dividual teachings are constantly seen in new contexts and from dif- ferent angles as the series continues. What does Barth teach about justification? It is not enough merely to read the appropriate section in IV, 1. Barth has already said something very significant about the matter under the heading of the divine command in 11,2 and he will have more to say in IV,2. What about the atonement? It, too, is a theme in 11,2 before IV is ever reached, just as election belongs again to the context and content of reconciliation. What about incarnation? A first approach is made is 1,2, but this can hardly be regarded as sufficient unless it is supplemented by the discussion in IV, 1 and the detailed presentation in IV,2. Sometimes, of course, the interweaving of themes does not bring out anything very new, except at the biblical and historical level. In other instances, however, what is said later may entail important mod- Introduction I xi ifications of earlier statements. Barth sharply rejects natural theology in 1,1 and 2 and 11,1, but sheds new light on this rejection by what he says about other truths in IV,3. The initial emphasis on the divine transcendence must be qualified or explained by the divine spatiality in 11,1 and the humanity of God at a later stage. To read a given volume or a selection from different volumes in isolation from all the rest, is to run the risk of considerable misunderstanding, or at least misplacement of emphasis in relation to the theology as a whole. Ide- ally, no one should say anything about any of Barth's doctrines with- out first reading through the whole series at least once, and preferably more than once. This is not a rule that applies only to Barth; it is a principle of all good hermeneutics. Conceding this, are there not enough secondary studies already available to fill the gap? At this point we run into a difficulty. Second- ary studies abound. Some of them are valuable and certainly ought to be used, and almost all of them are stimulating and ought to be consulted if time permits. Nevertheless, they do not entirely meet the need of the average reader for several different reasons. The first and obvious reason is that they do not provide the simple and straightforward introduction which is attempted in this volume. Instead they offer other (and useful) introductory material or, presup- posing some knowledge of the text, they enter into learned discus- sions, criticisms, and developments which are of little profit to those without the initial information. Nor is this the end of the story. Many of the studies which pre- suppose a knowledge of the text show no great evidence of a full acquaintance with it. A simple test will often make this clear. Is the writer trying to group Barth's theology under some master concept such as grace or covenant or history? Even a casual knowledge of the Dogmatics should quickly make plain that this is one of the things that Barth specifically wants to avoid, since God is the theme of theology and is not to be confused with anything else. It is for this material reason, and not just on methodological grounds, that Barth does not systematize. Nor does Barth do unconsciously what he does not intend to do. A broader reading of the Dogmatics clearly indicates that no single doctrine dominates the whole. Attention focuses on this or that theme from time to time, but the main spotlight remains constantly and consistently on God. Even Christ's centrality is meant to point to (and not away from) the centrality of the triune God. Hence secondary works which try to systematize the Dogmatics must obviously be treated with caution. Readers who have no comprehensive view, however, are in a poor position to discern or correct the distortions and false judgments which characterize so many of the secondary discussions.

Load more

  268

Copy Link