Listening to this while working my blue collar job makes me realize why all my least favorite theology teachers adored barth and my favorite professors never mentioned him. While i can appreciate him, comparing him to Aquinas or Agustín is like conparing the beatles to the archies
He bounced around like a college quarterback looking 👀 for the best NIL deal lol He was at Berlin and Tübingen, also Marburg, Marburg is one of the central places his theology really developed. He studied under Wilhelm Herrmann. Herrmanns approach to christology and dialectic theology is seen through out Barth’s work.
I would have to agree, I think he is far too rigid when it comes to his view of natural theology, for Barth he didn’t think we could know God by reason or nature alone, his lens was totally on the self revelation of Christ. But I think in doing so he misses the forest for the trees 😉
This is one of the best videos on Barth I’ve seen. It’s refreshing to see someone portray him fairly!
Too kind, thank you 🙏🏼
Very enjoyable and helpful thank you
Thanks so much Rob!
Listening to this while working my blue collar job makes me realize why all my least favorite theology teachers adored barth and my favorite professors never mentioned him. While i can appreciate him, comparing him to Aquinas or Agustín is like conparing the beatles to the archies
I get that, I too prefer Aquinas and Augustine to Barth.
Very interesting video!
Thanks Pedro! Great name by the way 😉 (my father and laws name)
What universities did he study within: Berlin, Heidelburg, Tubugin ?
He bounced around like a college quarterback looking 👀 for the best NIL deal lol
He was at Berlin and Tübingen, also Marburg, Marburg is one of the central places his theology really developed. He studied under Wilhelm Herrmann.
Herrmanns approach to christology and dialectic theology is seen through out Barth’s work.
I love Barth his view on election is the best!! Thx great video👍
great summary, but wouldve preferred photos of him rather than the disturbing AI image
Thanks for watching.
I do like many of Barth’s ideas but his rejection of natural theology seems contradictory to Romans 1:20, no? Am I misunderstanding something?
I would have to agree, I think he is far too rigid when it comes to his view of natural theology, for Barth he didn’t think we could know God by reason or nature alone, his lens was totally on the self revelation of Christ. But I think in doing so he misses the forest for the trees 😉