The Barthian Objection To Natural Theology & Its I

3981 Words16 Pages
Introduction Cast in the background of nineteenth century liberalism, the highly dialectical theology of Karl Barth (1886-1968) may seem necessary to some as a form of corrective approach to the man-centered theology at that time . The rise of Nazism during the inter-war period presented a pressing need to further affirm the role of theology in distinct ethics and the role of scriptures in providing God’s ultimate revelation in Christ. These series of events led to the publishing of the Romerbrief in 1921 and The Barmen Declaration at the Synod of Barmen; which hinted at the Barthian rejection of natural theology . Background of the Debate between Karl Barth and Emil Brunner Coming from a sola gratia position, Barth asserts that it is only through Christ that one attains the knowledge of God. It is due to this position that Barth famously fell out with fellow theologian Emil Brunner (1889-1966) over Brunner’s Nature and Grace. The main point of contention is over Brunner placing natural theology side-by-side with the Word of God, thereby merging both general and special revelation together . For Barth, there is no analogy of being based on human insight, only an analogy of faith based on God’s self-revelation . From Barth’s reply “Nein!” to Brunner’s Nature and Grace, the opposition to natural theology is very much evident. The Barthian viewpoint of developing a systematic natural theology would mean support of the “German Christians” notion; recognizing other forms of divine revelation. With Adolf Hitler claiming that the Nazi’s revelation from God was as ‘equally binding and obligatory’ as the Scriptures, Barth would later claim this Nazi assertion of God’s revelation with the earlier developments: There can be no doubt that not merely a part but the whole had been intended and claimed when it had been demanded that side by side with its attestation in
Open Document