Karl Barth and the Future of Evangelical Theology

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Martin Sass

Ludwig Feuerbach, one of the critical Young Hegelian intellectuals of the nineteenth century, has become famous for his radical critique of religious belief. In Das Wesen des Christentums (Essence of Christianity) (1841) he develops the idea that God does not exist in reality but as a human projection only, and that the Christian principles of love and solidarity should be applied directly to fellow humans rather than being regarded as an indirect reflection of God’s love. In religion, the believer ‘projects his being into objectivity, and then again makes himself an object of an object, another being than himself’. Religious orientation is an illusion and is unhealthy, as it deprives and alienates the believer from true autonomy, virtue and community, ‘for even love, in itself the deepest, truest emotion, becomes by means of religiousness merely ostensible, illusory, since religious love gives itself to man only for God’s sake, so that it is given only in appearance to man, but in reality to God’ (Feuerbach 1841: 44, 48). In Grundsätze der Philosophie der Zukunft (Principles of the Philosophy of the Future) (1843) he extends his criticism to all forms of metaphysics and religion: ‘True Dialectics is not the Monologue of the sole Thinker, rather the Dialogue between I and Thou’, he writes in paragraph 62 (1846–66 II: 345), criticizing in particular his former teacher Hegel. The philosophy of the future has to be both sensual and communal, equally based on theory and practice and among individuals. In an anonymous encyclopedia article (1847) he defines his position: ‘the principle from which Feuerbach derives everything and towards which he targets everything is "the human being on the ground and foundation of nature"’, a principle which ‘bases truth on sensuous experience and thus replaces previous particular and abstract philosophical and religious principles’ (1964– III: 331). Feuerbach’s sensualism and communalism had great influence on the young Karl Marx’s development of an anthropological humanism, and on his contemporaries in providing a cultural and moral system of reference for humanism outside of religious orientation and rationalistic psychology. In the twentieth century, Feuerbach influenced existential theology (Martin Buber, Karl Barth) as well as existentialist and phenomenological thought.


1970 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. L. Lehmann

Karl Barth has often been compared to Thomas Aquinas. The principal reasons for the comparison have been the systematic power and massive structure of the Kirchliche Dogmatik, with its illuminating interior conversation of the Church with itself, and Barth's searching and vigorous attempt to displace the ontological fulcrum of the Summa Theologiae by a christocentric analysis of God's freedom in revelation to be God for man in the world.


Author(s):  
Kurt Anders Richardson

Kurt Richardson compares similar eschatological perspectives in Barth and in Shi’a Islam. He discusses Barth’s complex understanding of Christ’s parousia as both present and future, and he suggests that there is a parallel understanding in Shi’a Islam, with the first and second occultations of the Twelfth Imam and the expected return of Jesus and the Mahdi at the end of time. Richardson attends to both the synchronic and diachronic dimensions of the God-world relation, in which the synchronic refers to the role of the Mahdi and the risen Christ now, while the diachronic refers to the eschatological expectation of their return. He notices striking parallels between the two formulations, both of which have a cosmos filled with the hidden presence of a saving figure who comes from the future to rectify all things. Considering the personal presence of the hidden holy one in both Barth and Shi’a theology, Richardson suggests that community life in the here and now is determined by presence and expectation.


2018 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 182-192
Author(s):  
Sang Hoon Lee
Keyword(s):  
The Past ◽  

Karl Barth has developed the Boethian concept of eternity as simultaneity by placing the person of Jesus Christ at the center of God’s eternity. Even though it is a momentous achievement, Barth’s conception still stands in need of clarification or modification, for otherwise it might impugn the victory of Jesus Christ unwittingly, since it logically entails a problematic notion of the simultaneity of Jesus’ past, present, and future. It follows that his past of death is never gone but simultaneously present in the divine eternal Now. To avoid this problematic ambivalence, I will suggest that even in God’s eternity there must be the indicator of God’s Now, the flowing “now” from the past to the future. And yet, my suggestion will not depart from the concept of simultaneity in God’s omniscience.


1999 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 407-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerhard Sauter

Early in the year 1968 Karl Barth invited me to a discussion that touched upon, among other topics, my second [habilitation] thesis Zukunft und Verheifiung [Future and Promise], which had appeared three years earlier. In it I had attempted to trace the ground of theology eschatologically in God's word of promise, yet without putting the cart before the horse. Barth dressed his inquiry in a comment accented with self-irony. As I recall, it went as follows: ‘Even I began with eschatology and ascribed to it a decisive role for theology. I gave the future priority—but over the years I was forced to realize that I could not maintain this. The more time passed on, the more I became aware that I could not remain standing where I was. Present and past are equally important for theology if theology allows itself to be oriented by God's time. And theology must not confuse this time with one of the dimensions of the human experience of time’. Itsounded as if beginning with eschatology was something like a sin of youthfulness, possibly even like a theological childhood illness which every more or less normal theologian would grow out of in time.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document