The Barth-Brunner Debate
- Created by: ekenny5
- Created on: 03-03-22 16:24
View mindmap
- The Barth- Brunner Debate
- Barth
- rejected liberal Protestantism. Neo-orthodoxy - rejecting natural theology and a revival of reformed theology.
- 'Church Dogmatics'
- NEIN!
- to Brunner
- human nature is completely corrupted by the Fall
- there are no points of contact in nature which would allow humans to know God
- only God can reveal himself to sinful man
- disagrees with Calvin
- the formal self cannot inform the material self of God's existence
- the material self has no ability to know anything about God since the Fall. the spiritual self cannot inform the material self
- accuses Brunner of not sufficiently taking the corruption of the material self into account
- the material self has no ability to know anything about God since the Fall. the spiritual self cannot inform the material self
- No points of contact
- nature, conscience and guilt do not provide points of contact
- conscience and guilt are only experienced after experiencing God's grace
- Brunner wrongly considered these points of contact, but they're the result of God's mercy and grace
- conscience and guilt are only experienced after experiencing God's grace
- nature, conscience and guilt do not provide points of contact
- Order of Creation
- although we can perceive order in nature, it is not the basis for morality or salvation
- divine laws are entirely different from natural laws
- the order we see in creation is only after it has been revealed to us through faith and in the Bible
- the formal self cannot inform the material self of God's existence
- rejected liberal Protestantism. Neo-orthodoxy - rejecting natural theology and a revival of reformed theology.
- Brunner
- supported neo-orthodoxy but agreed with Aquinas that God can partially be known through creation
- 'Natural Theology' 1946
- God's revelation in nature is a point of contact that enables humans to become aware of God's commands and our sinful state
- this is not sufficient to achieve redemption, which is revealed in the person of Jesus Christ
- natural theology
- imago dei: the image of God is humans was only corrupted in a physical and emotional way after the fall. The spiritual form is uncorrupted
- the material image is almost completely sinful and corrupt
- general revelation: God communicates through nature which reflects his nature. As humans are sinful, we can only know he exists through this. It's a point of contact, no more
- conscience and the experience of guilt make us aware of God's law
- true knowledge: through grace and renewal of the material self, true knowledge of God is only available to those who have faith in Christ
- this knowledge 'far surpasses' general knowledge of God's revelation in nature
- imago dei: the image of God is humans was only corrupted in a physical and emotional way after the fall. The spiritual form is uncorrupted
- supported neo-orthodoxy but agreed with Aquinas that God can partially be known through creation
- Tensions in Calvin's Theory
- if humans are in a state of sin, how can they know and be prompted to be open to God's grace
- we do not ask for grace, God chooses to let himself be known in this way
- Barth
Comments
No comments have yet been made