To clarify, does Barth take the Bible to be infallible, or is it only infallible when understood correctly ("when God acts through it")? Can't God act through anything, making it the on the same level of the Bible when understood correctly / when God uses it to His will (secular philosophy on Love for example, if it is used by God)?
Hi Jonathan, yes--very good point (I think Katherine Sonderegger makes this same point in her essay in the Wiley Blackwell Companion to Barth, ch. 6. Barth speaks of Scripture as a fallible witness to the Word...yet this is God's chosen ("sanctified" per John Webster) instrument for the mediation of revelation, so it stands as a unique witness (and therefore, in practice, essentially "infallible")? Here your pursuit of Barth's vagueness is right on. ~Kevin
I really appreciate this video because all of the top results for Barth on UA-cam explain almost nothing about what the man believed.
Haha--thanks, Andrew. I'd like to do a whole series on Barth if I ever get the time. I wish you the best in your theological quest. ~kevin
Wonderful, informative and lucid, many thanks.
Really nice class. Thanks for your work!
I need more!
To clarify, does Barth take the Bible to be infallible, or is it only infallible when understood correctly ("when God acts through it")? Can't God act through anything, making it the on the same level of the Bible when understood correctly / when God uses it to His will (secular philosophy on Love for example, if it is used by God)?
Hi Jonathan, yes--very good point (I think Katherine Sonderegger makes this same point in her essay in the Wiley Blackwell Companion to Barth, ch. 6. Barth speaks of Scripture as a fallible witness to the Word...yet this is God's chosen ("sanctified" per John Webster) instrument for the mediation of revelation, so it stands as a unique witness (and therefore, in practice, essentially "infallible")? Here your pursuit of Barth's vagueness is right on. ~Kevin