What do you think?
Rate this book
Church Dogmatics #4.3.1
Church Dogmatics 4.3.1
Described by Pope Pius XII as the most important theologian since Thomas Aquinas, the Swiss pastor and theologian, Karl Barth, continues to be a major influence on students, scholars and preachers today. Barth s theology found its expression mainly through his closely reasoned fourteen-part magnum opus, Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. Having taken over 30 years to write, the Church Dogmatics is regarded as one of the most important theological works of all time, and represents the pinnacle of Barth s achievement as a theologian.
- GenresTheology
478 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1961
2 people are currently reading
55 people want to read
About the author
Karl Barth
463 books264 followersProtestant theologian Karl Barth, a Swiss, advocated a return to the principles of the Reformation and the teachings of the Bible; his published works include
Church Dogmatics
from 1932.
Critics hold Karl Barth among the most important Christian thinkers of the 20th century; Pope Pius XII described him as the most important since Saint Thomas Aquinas. Beginning with his experience as a pastor, he rejected his typical predominant liberal, especially German training of 19th century.
Instead, he embarked on a new path, initially called dialectical, due to its stress on the paradoxical nature of divine truth—for instance, God is both grace and judgment), but more accurately called a of the Word. Critics referred to this father of new orthodoxy, a pejorative term that he emphatically rejected. His thought emphasized the sovereignty of God, particularly through his innovative doctrine of election. His enormously influenced throughout Europe and America.
Critics hold Karl Barth among the most important Christian thinkers of the 20th century; Pope Pius XII described him as the most important since Saint Thomas Aquinas. Beginning with his experience as a pastor, he rejected his typical predominant liberal, especially German training of 19th century.
Instead, he embarked on a new path, initially called dialectical, due to its stress on the paradoxical nature of divine truth—for instance, God is both grace and judgment), but more accurately called a of the Word. Critics referred to this father of new orthodoxy, a pejorative term that he emphatically rejected. His thought emphasized the sovereignty of God, particularly through his innovative doctrine of election. His enormously influenced throughout Europe and America.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
December 13, 2021
Reading this for the first time primarily as dissertation research meant I came to the text with a specific lens but as usual Barth’s thinking and writing both transcend and challenge whatever we bring to it. I particularly enjoyed the final section on the Promise of the Spirit and Barth’s detailed reflection on the resurrection and the theme of Jesus’ coming again, a timely read during Advent.
June 3, 2012
This volume is stronger than the first two in the Doctrine of Reconciliation. While some of my gripes from those are still carried over here (Barth's theology continues to be more pedestrian than it had been in previous volumes though, again, less so than in the last two), this volume also serves as a fantastic encapsulation of the series as a whole. Barth's elliptical style is on full display here as he returns to themes he'd previously developed in the series and examines them from new angles or places them alongside a fresh context.
As I continue in the series, my admiration for Barth's structure only continues to grow. Theology aside, it's truly one of the most remarkable accomplishments of the series. His ability to weave in old themes without ever becoming repetitive is unparalleled and gives the series an aesthetic quality rarely found in works like this.
In addition, I believe it also makes for better theology. Where a traditional systematic approach examines a topic and then, for the most part, moves on, Barth's method of returning to old ideas and reviving them from new angles better demonstrates the complexity of true theology. It's ironic that one of the major weaknesses of systematic theology is its tendency to systematize. It presents its topic in a manner that is far more linear and neat than what one finds in Scripture. While it's a necessary evil that comes with the field, Barth's approach does a tremendous amount to alleviate the problem. A pity his successors seemed to have learned so little from his structure.
I'd be remiss if I spent this entire review on structure, so let me briefly address a couple of things that struck me from the content. First, Barth's subsection on Christ the Victor is extremely strong and well developed. He's right to show that Jesus' battle is offensive and not defensive. This section also demonstrates Barth's ability (as seen throughout the series) to handle the complexities of the relationship between God and man. He shows how we initially stand as Christ's enemies, thus making us, at least in part, the targets of his offensive. Yet through that very offensive we are reconciled to God and are therefore no longer his enemies. I can't do justice to the argument here but suffice to say it's some of Barth's best work.
The section at the end of the book, where Barth once again discusses damnation and the possibility of universal salvation, ought to show once and for all how simplistically he is viewed by his evangelical critics. Too often Barth is accused of being a universalist plan and simple. But the truth is far more complicated than that. He states clearly that humanity is under the threat of eternal damnation. However, he also states that God is capable of removing that threat and we ought to hope and pray that he does so. Whether one agrees with Barth or not is outside the point. His critics ought to do him the courtesy of understanding the argument they're disagreeing with. I've read too many evangelical critiques (i.e. Norman Geisler) that simply fail to do so. To put it bluntly, if you can't comprehend a nuanced, complex argument and interact with it accordingly, then you really have no business writing theology let alone critiquing the work done by others.
As I continue in the series, my admiration for Barth's structure only continues to grow. Theology aside, it's truly one of the most remarkable accomplishments of the series. His ability to weave in old themes without ever becoming repetitive is unparalleled and gives the series an aesthetic quality rarely found in works like this.
In addition, I believe it also makes for better theology. Where a traditional systematic approach examines a topic and then, for the most part, moves on, Barth's method of returning to old ideas and reviving them from new angles better demonstrates the complexity of true theology. It's ironic that one of the major weaknesses of systematic theology is its tendency to systematize. It presents its topic in a manner that is far more linear and neat than what one finds in Scripture. While it's a necessary evil that comes with the field, Barth's approach does a tremendous amount to alleviate the problem. A pity his successors seemed to have learned so little from his structure.
I'd be remiss if I spent this entire review on structure, so let me briefly address a couple of things that struck me from the content. First, Barth's subsection on Christ the Victor is extremely strong and well developed. He's right to show that Jesus' battle is offensive and not defensive. This section also demonstrates Barth's ability (as seen throughout the series) to handle the complexities of the relationship between God and man. He shows how we initially stand as Christ's enemies, thus making us, at least in part, the targets of his offensive. Yet through that very offensive we are reconciled to God and are therefore no longer his enemies. I can't do justice to the argument here but suffice to say it's some of Barth's best work.
The section at the end of the book, where Barth once again discusses damnation and the possibility of universal salvation, ought to show once and for all how simplistically he is viewed by his evangelical critics. Too often Barth is accused of being a universalist plan and simple. But the truth is far more complicated than that. He states clearly that humanity is under the threat of eternal damnation. However, he also states that God is capable of removing that threat and we ought to hope and pray that he does so. Whether one agrees with Barth or not is outside the point. His critics ought to do him the courtesy of understanding the argument they're disagreeing with. I've read too many evangelical critiques (i.e. Norman Geisler) that simply fail to do so. To put it bluntly, if you can't comprehend a nuanced, complex argument and interact with it accordingly, then you really have no business writing theology let alone critiquing the work done by others.
March 5, 2017
The sixth volume of Barth's Dogmatics I've read to date. Only seven to go! Lots of good stuff in this one.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews