I got introduced to Barth's work and especially this book by Andrew Root and his #4 in "Ministry in a Secular Age" series. I can see why Barth is considered as one of the most (if not the most) influential theologians of 20th century. Pressed by terrible realities of post-war Europe, Spanish flu and first ever total disenchantment caused by horor of destruction and war, division between liberal and pietist theologians, he goes back to what he (like Luther) considers to be the heart of the message of the Gospel - salvation by God's grace and brings it to attention of theological community and Church in general. This commentary is unique in a sense that it is neither historical nor exegetical interpretation. Barth doesn't even try to explain the context of writing the epistle. Instead, he reads the epistle as if it was written to 20th century Europe, both European church (the Jews) and public (the gentiles). Barth presents God as "wholly other" from humans. There is nothing a human can do to reach God. Religion is the best human effort, but it still falls short of bridging the gap between God and men. That is why God bridged the gap by becoming a man. Here Barth draws something from Eastern Orthodox view of incarnation and mystical union of man with God through incarnation of Christ. As such, the Kingdom of Europe is not the Kingdome of God. Instead, the Kingdom of God is totally different from anything humans can do, understand, or even begin to imagine (“What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived”). Barth draws heavily from the works of Luther, Calvin and Kierkegaard. He doesn't show much respect for (mostly liberal) theology of his time, though he praises Blumhardts for their work and ministry and his friend Eduard Thurneysen. He mentions other influences, like Plato, Kant, Dostoevsky, Nietzsche and Heinrich Barth, his brother, professor of philosophy. He explains why both liberal and conservative (pietist) theologians of his time are two sides of the same coin, since they both fallen into the same trap of creating a human-centered religion. Being a Calvinist, he builds upon the doctrine of (double) predestination, but his view is substantially different from Calvin's. Only the name of the doctrine is the same - since for Barth double predestination means that Jesus is both the God who elects and the elected man. God does not elect some people and reject others. Instead, God chooses Jesus and rejects the sin. In that sense, every one of us is both the elected (in Christ) and rejected (in flesh). He identifies the Jews of Paul's time to 20th century Church and gentiles of the 1st century to (mostly) social-democrats of his time. He argues that neither have the advantage, since all have sinned and all are separated from God. Even though there is no advantage of being part of the Church, it's still necessary to be part of the Church. He argues that the Church is at the same time the visible, earthly and carnal church of Esau, and invisible, spiritual and heavenly church of Jacob. He argues that 7000 who did not bow their knees to Baal are not 7000 individuals that Elijah somehow missed. They represent the entirety of God's people "in their quality as objects of election amidst rejection". This dialectical discourse goes even further. He argues that Abraham became justified before becoming religious but received circumcision (become religious) as a sign of righteousness. Even though religion is ultimately enmity to God, we have no other option but to become religious as a response to God's free gift of righteousness. Becoming religious, we ultimately become enemies of God, but Jesus died precisely for the enemies, so we become qualified to receive salvation. Ultimately, the only way to work out our salvation is, as Paul wrote in Philippians and Kierkegaard elaborated in his philosophical work, through fear and trembling. This work is really a masterpiece that reshaped theology of 20th century and could make even stronger impact on theology and ministry of 21st century. I am sure that I will be getting back to it again and again with the questions that reality brings.
This really makes me want to move this to the front of my to-read list.
Sign in to leave a comment.