What do you think?
Rate this book
Dogmatics in Outline
Barth stands before us as the greatest theologian of the twentieth century, yet the massive corpus of work which he left behind, the multi volume Church Dogmatics, can seem daunting and formidable to readers today. Fortunately his Dogmatics in Outline first published in English in 1949, contains in brilliantly concentrated form even in shorthand, the essential tenets of his thinking. Built around the assertions made in the Apostles Creed the book consists of a series of reflections on the foundation stones of Christian doctrine. Because Dogmatics in Outline derives from very particular circumstances namely the lectures Barth gave in war-shattered Germany in 1946, it has an urgency and a compassion which lend the text a powerful simplicity. Despite its brevity the book makes a tremendous impact, which in this new edition will now be felt by a fresh generation of readers.
155 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1947
145 people are currently reading
1935 people want to read
About the author
Karl Barth
446 books257 followersProtestant theologian Karl Barth, a Swiss, advocated a return to the principles of the Reformation and the teachings of the Bible; his published works include
Church Dogmatics
from 1932.
Critics hold Karl Barth among the most important Christian thinkers of the 20th century; Pope Pius XII described him as the most important since Saint Thomas Aquinas. Beginning with his experience as a pastor, he rejected his typical predominant liberal, especially German training of 19th century.
Instead, he embarked on a new path, initially called dialectical, due to its stress on the paradoxical nature of divine truth—for instance, God is both grace and judgment), but more accurately called a of the Word. Critics referred to this father of new orthodoxy, a pejorative term that he emphatically rejected. His thought emphasized the sovereignty of God, particularly through his innovative doctrine of election. His enormously influenced throughout Europe and America.
Critics hold Karl Barth among the most important Christian thinkers of the 20th century; Pope Pius XII described him as the most important since Saint Thomas Aquinas. Beginning with his experience as a pastor, he rejected his typical predominant liberal, especially German training of 19th century.
Instead, he embarked on a new path, initially called dialectical, due to its stress on the paradoxical nature of divine truth—for instance, God is both grace and judgment), but more accurately called a of the Word. Critics referred to this father of new orthodoxy, a pejorative term that he emphatically rejected. His thought emphasized the sovereignty of God, particularly through his innovative doctrine of election. His enormously influenced throughout Europe and America.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 111 reviews
March 1, 2016
This is a classic work by one of the great theologians of the 20th century. Well, the "classic" work is the Dogmatics but honestly, who has time to read that monster? Professional theologians maybe? What Barth offers here is a densely packed journey through the Apostles creed. It is dense - I found myself wanting to underline so much it may have been easier to underline the stuff I didn't find as intriguing. As I read, I was reminded of the importance of allowing God to define who God is through revelation, rather than our vain attempts at reaching God through our own minds. Further, as Barth emphasized the complete otherness of God, I was reminded how amazing the incarnation actually is.
Most of all, it was jarring to read this book during the rise of Trump, with so many Christians in America seemingly exchanging the morals they've expected in leaders (at least, that's what I've been hearing for my entire life) for a guy they think can win. Why worry about being like Jesus, or even allowing Jesus to be front and center when we speak about God when we've got elections to win? Barth lived through the Nazi era and makes reference to Hitler and the sell-out "German Christians" at times. I do not think a Hitler is rising in America by any means. Yet the theme of a country that sees itself as Christian but seems to care little for the God revealed in Jesus, or to put it another way, the temptation to put nation above God, shows up often in history. We may be living through one such time.
For that, and simply for the fact Barth is fantastic, any and all pastors and Christians could benefit from this book.
Most of all, it was jarring to read this book during the rise of Trump, with so many Christians in America seemingly exchanging the morals they've expected in leaders (at least, that's what I've been hearing for my entire life) for a guy they think can win. Why worry about being like Jesus, or even allowing Jesus to be front and center when we speak about God when we've got elections to win? Barth lived through the Nazi era and makes reference to Hitler and the sell-out "German Christians" at times. I do not think a Hitler is rising in America by any means. Yet the theme of a country that sees itself as Christian but seems to care little for the God revealed in Jesus, or to put it another way, the temptation to put nation above God, shows up often in history. We may be living through one such time.
For that, and simply for the fact Barth is fantastic, any and all pastors and Christians could benefit from this book.
January 5, 2022
This book is a collection of lectures given by Barth as a course on basic principles of the Christian faith. Each chapter is a short but dense discussion of the Apostle's Creed. It is a difficult read at times because of how precise Barth wants to be about each phrase in the credo. This is also what makes it a joy at times, because of how relentless Barth is in trying to be as specific as possible. Every few pages he dismisses dozens of common errors and points towards some very beautiful truths. I would find it hard to dip into another of his books soon but it was a good start for me.
May 30, 2009
It's been about a year since I first started and I have finally finished Barth's Dogmatics in Outline. That makes the book sound really long, but in fact it is quite short, especially when you compare it to Barth's 13-volume Church Dogmatics. Still I took a year to read it in three different installments for a series of theology classes.
I'm going to go ahead and give this book the coveted 5 star rating, even while saying that most people probably won't want to read it. Barth's wording is dense, and his thinking and terminology is so outside-the-box that it often took me re-reading the same paragraph 2-3 times just to begin to grasp what he was getting at. But when I did I was frequently blown away. He has such a fresh approach to Christian theology. It's quite Biblical, and even brings a lot of correction to where modern theologies have deviated from Biblical intent, yet it often feels like hearing the Biblical truth for the first time. And for someone who is obviously a very intellectual thinker, Barth occasionally uses imagery that is disarmingly simple and arresting in its impact. I can see now why there are so many Barth students and fans out there. As I read I found myself constantly wanting to stop and tell my wife about some new insight I was getting from my reading.
I can't say that I agree with Barth's approach to everything Christian, but this particular book was a great help to me and very enlightening. Would I have made it through without it being assigned for homework? I'm not sure. I can be a bit of a wuss when it comes to reading material this rigorous. But I like to think the payoff would have encouraged me to keep reading, just like it did when I was doing it for homework.
In the end, I have to acknowledge that this book does indeed deserve the 5-star "amazing" rating. Short, powerful, worldview-changing, and coming from perhaps one of the most important thinkers and certainly most important theologians, of the 20th century.
I'm going to go ahead and give this book the coveted 5 star rating, even while saying that most people probably won't want to read it. Barth's wording is dense, and his thinking and terminology is so outside-the-box that it often took me re-reading the same paragraph 2-3 times just to begin to grasp what he was getting at. But when I did I was frequently blown away. He has such a fresh approach to Christian theology. It's quite Biblical, and even brings a lot of correction to where modern theologies have deviated from Biblical intent, yet it often feels like hearing the Biblical truth for the first time. And for someone who is obviously a very intellectual thinker, Barth occasionally uses imagery that is disarmingly simple and arresting in its impact. I can see now why there are so many Barth students and fans out there. As I read I found myself constantly wanting to stop and tell my wife about some new insight I was getting from my reading.
I can't say that I agree with Barth's approach to everything Christian, but this particular book was a great help to me and very enlightening. Would I have made it through without it being assigned for homework? I'm not sure. I can be a bit of a wuss when it comes to reading material this rigorous. But I like to think the payoff would have encouraged me to keep reading, just like it did when I was doing it for homework.
In the end, I have to acknowledge that this book does indeed deserve the 5-star "amazing" rating. Short, powerful, worldview-changing, and coming from perhaps one of the most important thinkers and certainly most important theologians, of the 20th century.
May 19, 2019
I read his *Humanity of God* earlier this year, and surprisingly enjoyed it. So, I decided here to read his brief theology here. I’m glad I did. It was difficult to get through at times, but worth it. Unexpectedly biblical, God-honoring, Christ-centered, and even theologically conservative.
I say “surprisingly” and “unexpectedly” above because Barth is usually known for his Neo-orthodox views, and I’ve heard many inside the Reformed camp (which I happily settle in) rightly critique this. So, I always thought Barth was quite liberal in his theology. But this is quiet from the case. Anyone who might think that is the case, I encourage you to read this book. This man cares about the gospel of Christ, and even is defending it throughout in a conservative way. Moreover, at least in his work, none of his subversive Neo-orthodox views arose.
Barth’s density of thought is unique. He’s a creative thinker and theologian, while reading him he reminds me of C.S. Lewis with his ability to creatively think, apply, and wonder (although to be clear Lewis, in my opinion, is much cleverer). And I really appreciate it. It’s hard to read, even harder than Lewis, but maybe there just was something in the Christian water in the mid-20th century? You read modern guys, even modern theologians, and they just didn’t write nor think like Lewis and here like Barth. There was a depth, a creativity, that we’re missing.
Nevertheless, it wasn’t perfect. I wish he emphasized somethings more than he did, and thought he went off tangents at times. But overall, a good concise theology.
For those wondering, this book is an exposition of the Apostles’ Creed, so it isn’t a typically set up Systematic Theology. He takes the Creed phrase by phrase and explains it—again, in his Lewis-like creative way.
Here’s some quotes. Anyone who hasn’t read much Barth (which still includes me!), I encourage you to read these. You’ll get a taste:
- “It is noteworthy that, apart from this first expression ‘I believe,’ the Confession is silent upon the subjective fact of faith…Whoso means to rescue and preserve the subjective element shall lose it; but whoso gives it up for the sake of the objective, shall save it…By my believing I see myself completely filled and determined by this object of my faith. And what interests me is not myself with my faith, but He in whom I believe. And then I learn that by thinking of Him and looking to Him, my interests are also best provided for.” (15-16) (Isn’t that excellent!?)
- “The greatest hindrance to faith is again and again just the pride and anxiety of out human hearts. We would rather to live by grace. Something within us energetically rebels against it. We do not wish to receive graces t best we prefer to give ourselves grace. This swing to and fo between pride and anxiety is main’s life.” (20)
- “He who is called God in Holy Scripture is unsearchable—that is, He has not been discovered by any man. Bu then our talk is of Him and we speak of Him as a familiar entity, who is more familiar and real than any other reality and who is nearer to us than we are to ourselves, it is not because there may have been particularly pious people who were successful in investigating this Being, but because He who was hidden from us has disclosed Himself..the Bible is not a philosophical book, but a history book, the book of God’s mighty acts, in which God becomes knowable by us.” (38).
- “By being the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost in His work in Jesus Christ, God is in the highest. He whose nature and essence consit, whose existence is proved, in His descending into the depths, He the Merciful, who gives Himself up for His creature to the utter depths of the existence of His creature—He is God in the highest. Not inspire of this, not in remarkable paradoxical opposition, bu the highness of God consists in His thus descending. This is His exalted nature, this His free love. Anyone who wants to look up to some other height has not understood the utter otherness in God, he would still be in the tracks of the heathen, who look for God in an endlessness. He is utterly other than we think our gods.” (40)
- “Do you understand what monotheism in Christian faith means? God knows, no the foolish delight in the number ‘one’. It has nothing to do with the number ‘one’, but with this subject in His sheer uniqueness and otherness over against all others, different from all the ridiculous deities whom man invents…Once the true God has been seen, the gods collapse into dust.” (40)
- “The third day a new life of Jesus begins; but at the same time on the third day there begins a new *Aeon*, a new shape of the world, after the old world has been completely done way and settled in the death of Jesus Christ. Easter is the breaking in of a new time and the world in th existence of the man Jesus, who now begins a new life as the conqueror, as the victorious bearer, as the destroyer of the bydden of man’s sins, which has been laid upon HIm. In this altered existence of His the first community saw not only a supernatural continuation of His previous life, but an entirely new life, that of the exalted Jesus Christ, and simultaneously the beginning of a new *world*.” (122)
- “What has occurred once for all, now stands rounded off before us in a whole series of perfects: begotten, conceived, born, suffered, crucified, dead, buried, descended, rose again; and now suddenly a present: ‘He *sitteth* on the right hand of God…’ It is as if we had made the ascent of a mountain and had now reached the summit.” (124)
- “It is the time in which the Christ is united with Christ only in faith and by the Holy Spirit; it is the interim time between His earthly existence and His return in glory; it is the time of the great opportunity, of the task fo the Church towards the world; it is th epitome o mission. As we said, it is the time of GOd’s patience, in which He is waiting for the Church, and, with he Church, for the world.” (128)
- “*Credo ecclesiam* [I believe in the church] means that I believe that the congregation to which I belong, in which I have been called to faith and am responsible for my faith, in which I have my service, the the one, holy, universal Church…IN faith I attest that the concrete congregation to which I belong and for the life of which I am responsible, is appointed to the task of making in this place, in this form, the one, holy, universal Church visible.” (145)
- “The Christian hope, which is the most revolutionary thing we are capable of thinking and beside which all other revolutions are mere blank cartridges, is a disciplined. It points man to his limitations: there you may hold out. This Kingdom of God is *coming*, so you must not begin the flight to th ekingdomof God. Take your place and be in your place as a true *minister verb divini*. You can be a revolutionary, but you can also be a conservative. Where this contrast between revolutionary and conservative is united in one man, where may be at once quite restless and quite at rest, where he may be with other in that way in the congregation, in which the members recognize each other in longing and in humility in the light of the divine humor, he will do what he has to do. In this light all our Church action is allowed and in fact commended. So the Church, waiting and hurrying, goes to meet the coming of the Lord.” (148)
- “God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son. Christians are messengers in Christ’s stead. But here in the congregation it is recognize, it is seen and experienced, what Christ is for man, for all men, in order hat witness may be borne from here.” (149)
Would I recommend the book? Not as the first theology book you’d read, but he’s a thinker! It’s also quite difficult to get through (short chapters, but it’s way easier to even read a 15 page Lewis chapter than a 5 page Barth chapter!), but worth it.
I say “surprisingly” and “unexpectedly” above because Barth is usually known for his Neo-orthodox views, and I’ve heard many inside the Reformed camp (which I happily settle in) rightly critique this. So, I always thought Barth was quite liberal in his theology. But this is quiet from the case. Anyone who might think that is the case, I encourage you to read this book. This man cares about the gospel of Christ, and even is defending it throughout in a conservative way. Moreover, at least in his work, none of his subversive Neo-orthodox views arose.
Barth’s density of thought is unique. He’s a creative thinker and theologian, while reading him he reminds me of C.S. Lewis with his ability to creatively think, apply, and wonder (although to be clear Lewis, in my opinion, is much cleverer). And I really appreciate it. It’s hard to read, even harder than Lewis, but maybe there just was something in the Christian water in the mid-20th century? You read modern guys, even modern theologians, and they just didn’t write nor think like Lewis and here like Barth. There was a depth, a creativity, that we’re missing.
Nevertheless, it wasn’t perfect. I wish he emphasized somethings more than he did, and thought he went off tangents at times. But overall, a good concise theology.
For those wondering, this book is an exposition of the Apostles’ Creed, so it isn’t a typically set up Systematic Theology. He takes the Creed phrase by phrase and explains it—again, in his Lewis-like creative way.
Here’s some quotes. Anyone who hasn’t read much Barth (which still includes me!), I encourage you to read these. You’ll get a taste:
- “It is noteworthy that, apart from this first expression ‘I believe,’ the Confession is silent upon the subjective fact of faith…Whoso means to rescue and preserve the subjective element shall lose it; but whoso gives it up for the sake of the objective, shall save it…By my believing I see myself completely filled and determined by this object of my faith. And what interests me is not myself with my faith, but He in whom I believe. And then I learn that by thinking of Him and looking to Him, my interests are also best provided for.” (15-16) (Isn’t that excellent!?)
- “The greatest hindrance to faith is again and again just the pride and anxiety of out human hearts. We would rather to live by grace. Something within us energetically rebels against it. We do not wish to receive graces t best we prefer to give ourselves grace. This swing to and fo between pride and anxiety is main’s life.” (20)
- “He who is called God in Holy Scripture is unsearchable—that is, He has not been discovered by any man. Bu then our talk is of Him and we speak of Him as a familiar entity, who is more familiar and real than any other reality and who is nearer to us than we are to ourselves, it is not because there may have been particularly pious people who were successful in investigating this Being, but because He who was hidden from us has disclosed Himself..the Bible is not a philosophical book, but a history book, the book of God’s mighty acts, in which God becomes knowable by us.” (38).
- “By being the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost in His work in Jesus Christ, God is in the highest. He whose nature and essence consit, whose existence is proved, in His descending into the depths, He the Merciful, who gives Himself up for His creature to the utter depths of the existence of His creature—He is God in the highest. Not inspire of this, not in remarkable paradoxical opposition, bu the highness of God consists in His thus descending. This is His exalted nature, this His free love. Anyone who wants to look up to some other height has not understood the utter otherness in God, he would still be in the tracks of the heathen, who look for God in an endlessness. He is utterly other than we think our gods.” (40)
- “Do you understand what monotheism in Christian faith means? God knows, no the foolish delight in the number ‘one’. It has nothing to do with the number ‘one’, but with this subject in His sheer uniqueness and otherness over against all others, different from all the ridiculous deities whom man invents…Once the true God has been seen, the gods collapse into dust.” (40)
- “The third day a new life of Jesus begins; but at the same time on the third day there begins a new *Aeon*, a new shape of the world, after the old world has been completely done way and settled in the death of Jesus Christ. Easter is the breaking in of a new time and the world in th existence of the man Jesus, who now begins a new life as the conqueror, as the victorious bearer, as the destroyer of the bydden of man’s sins, which has been laid upon HIm. In this altered existence of His the first community saw not only a supernatural continuation of His previous life, but an entirely new life, that of the exalted Jesus Christ, and simultaneously the beginning of a new *world*.” (122)
- “What has occurred once for all, now stands rounded off before us in a whole series of perfects: begotten, conceived, born, suffered, crucified, dead, buried, descended, rose again; and now suddenly a present: ‘He *sitteth* on the right hand of God…’ It is as if we had made the ascent of a mountain and had now reached the summit.” (124)
- “It is the time in which the Christ is united with Christ only in faith and by the Holy Spirit; it is the interim time between His earthly existence and His return in glory; it is the time of the great opportunity, of the task fo the Church towards the world; it is th epitome o mission. As we said, it is the time of GOd’s patience, in which He is waiting for the Church, and, with he Church, for the world.” (128)
- “*Credo ecclesiam* [I believe in the church] means that I believe that the congregation to which I belong, in which I have been called to faith and am responsible for my faith, in which I have my service, the the one, holy, universal Church…IN faith I attest that the concrete congregation to which I belong and for the life of which I am responsible, is appointed to the task of making in this place, in this form, the one, holy, universal Church visible.” (145)
- “The Christian hope, which is the most revolutionary thing we are capable of thinking and beside which all other revolutions are mere blank cartridges, is a disciplined. It points man to his limitations: there you may hold out. This Kingdom of God is *coming*, so you must not begin the flight to th ekingdomof God. Take your place and be in your place as a true *minister verb divini*. You can be a revolutionary, but you can also be a conservative. Where this contrast between revolutionary and conservative is united in one man, where may be at once quite restless and quite at rest, where he may be with other in that way in the congregation, in which the members recognize each other in longing and in humility in the light of the divine humor, he will do what he has to do. In this light all our Church action is allowed and in fact commended. So the Church, waiting and hurrying, goes to meet the coming of the Lord.” (148)
- “God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son. Christians are messengers in Christ’s stead. But here in the congregation it is recognize, it is seen and experienced, what Christ is for man, for all men, in order hat witness may be borne from here.” (149)
Would I recommend the book? Not as the first theology book you’d read, but he’s a thinker! It’s also quite difficult to get through (short chapters, but it’s way easier to even read a 15 page Lewis chapter than a 5 page Barth chapter!), but worth it.
December 26, 2024
Dogmatics in Outline is Barth's published lectures summarizing his multi-volume Church Dogmatics and, in his words, "cannot take the place of studying the Dogmatik". This is an exposition of the Apostles' Creed.
I think many in our day (and probably in his too) would find his so-called 'theological fideism' frustrating, i.e. Barth doesn't think its necessary to defend the basis of his theology with arguments or evidences. As one of my seminary classmates quoted Barth as saying, "Apologetics is sin" (although I can't seem to find evidence that he said this).*
Nevertheless, instead of frustrating, I found Barth's whole-hearted trust in the Scriptures very refreshing and it challenged me to look at things in a different light. Like, why do we presuppose our experience and the created world and then argue for God's existence, instead of presupposing God's existence and trembling at the mystery that we exist (Barth, 53-54)?
Barth's Christology is medicinal and his emphasis on God's prevenient grace is powerful.
Although Barth is hard to read, it was rewarding to get through this book.
*Barth — reminding me of Charles Taylor — causes us to reflect on the presuppositions of Christian apologetics and the dangers of making God an abstract concept or idea to be defended (or examined) instead of a Triune Personality ultimately revealed in Jesus Christ.
I think many in our day (and probably in his too) would find his so-called 'theological fideism' frustrating, i.e. Barth doesn't think its necessary to defend the basis of his theology with arguments or evidences. As one of my seminary classmates quoted Barth as saying, "Apologetics is sin" (although I can't seem to find evidence that he said this).*
Nevertheless, instead of frustrating, I found Barth's whole-hearted trust in the Scriptures very refreshing and it challenged me to look at things in a different light. Like, why do we presuppose our experience and the created world and then argue for God's existence, instead of presupposing God's existence and trembling at the mystery that we exist (Barth, 53-54)?
Barth's Christology is medicinal and his emphasis on God's prevenient grace is powerful.
Although Barth is hard to read, it was rewarding to get through this book.
*Barth — reminding me of Charles Taylor — causes us to reflect on the presuppositions of Christian apologetics and the dangers of making God an abstract concept or idea to be defended (or examined) instead of a Triune Personality ultimately revealed in Jesus Christ.
September 18, 2024
Despite its rather scary-sounding name, this is a delightful little summary of Barth's theology. Excellently written. Expressing with fresh piquancy the great truths of Christianity contained in the apostle's creed. There are plenty of areas where I disagree with Barth though few of those really surface in this book, yet despite this, this small book is up there with the best expositions of the major contours of the Christian faith that I have ever read!
What is particularly good is his integration of the biblical story within his Christocentric dogmatics in an elegant manner that very few systematic theologians can manage.
Even better is the fresh application of these great truths to our lives in prose that truly conveys the joy the author knows they should bring: from the wonders of the incarnation; to the eager expectation of the coming judgment where Christ will set all wrongs to right.
If you want a book that is both not very long, and will make you excited about Christianity, this is a great option to start with.
What is particularly good is his integration of the biblical story within his Christocentric dogmatics in an elegant manner that very few systematic theologians can manage.
Even better is the fresh application of these great truths to our lives in prose that truly conveys the joy the author knows they should bring: from the wonders of the incarnation; to the eager expectation of the coming judgment where Christ will set all wrongs to right.
If you want a book that is both not very long, and will make you excited about Christianity, this is a great option to start with.
February 9, 2023
Rating reflects my enjoyment of Barth's prose and theological style, but not quite my alignment with his content. I've tended to read deeply rather than broadly with theology, often due to class assignments. I've read a lot of Rowan Williams and Amos Yong, for example, but I've hardly touched Luther or Aquinas.
This is the most academic text I've read in a while, and it felt good to stretch those muscles. Should probably keep it up. Indebted to Dr Stephenson and Augustine for making academic theology attractive. Their instruction has made texts like these much more approachable for me, albeit still very challenging.
This is the most academic text I've read in a while, and it felt good to stretch those muscles. Should probably keep it up. Indebted to Dr Stephenson and Augustine for making academic theology attractive. Their instruction has made texts like these much more approachable for me, albeit still very challenging.
Read
May 25, 2024Not going to rate this one because I feel like I need to read it a few more times to really understand it. A great introduction to Barth though. (Note to self: don’t read him when you’re tired or nothing will make sense.)
June 12, 2017
Read very slowly over many months. A wonderful little intro to Barth's theology by way of an exposition of the Apostles Creed. Some parts profound and beautiful; others a little esoteric and hard to follow. Regardless, a great little book.
May 27, 2023
This was helpful for me to get an overview and elementary grasp of Barth's theology, though, as Barth says, this can't substitute for the Church Dogmatics: he who doesn't work shall not eat. I could see the rejection of natural theology and the Christocentrism underneath a lot of his material. The latter chapters were just too golden to give it anything less than five stars, especially the one about Pontius Pilate.
December 6, 2020
Do I mess around and read the full Dogmatik???
November 4, 2014
The church as it moves into the modern culture
24 April 2013
Well, first I should suggest that if you don't want to read me rambling on about nothing then you should skip this first paragraph, but then I am probably going to talk more about Barth and theological writing than this book because I read this book quite some time ago and not much of its content ended up sinking into my long term memory (or at least what I can withdrawal). However, it is ANZAC day today so I have the day off work (yay), and as well as writing a rather steamy chapter of my post-modern piece of rubbish, I thought I would also write a few more commentaries on Goodreads (if only to try a boost the number of reviews I have written since I am currently number 4 in Australia, and have dropped down somewhat from number 2).
Karl Barth was a Swiss theologian, a contemporary of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, which meant that he was around during World War II when the German Church faced pressure from the Nazi Regime to conform to their doctrine. This lead to a break within the church and the creation of the Confessing Church which stood against the regime and its atrocities. Remember that many of the hierarchs of the regime were not Christian and were more interested in bringing back ancient German paganism.
Barth's major work is a 13 volume book called Church Dogmatics (which I am unlikely to read) however this work is more of a cut down version that uses the Apostles Creed as a springboard for his discussions. When I did read this book I found that Barth was a very inspiring writer and explore numerous areas of Christianity quite deeply, which is not surprising since he lived during one of the most violent periods of the 20th Century, having seen two world wars and two economic crises. What this period symbolised was a breakdown in the modernist and enlightened ideas of the 18th and 19th century which saw the idea that humanity no longer needed God and that they could create paradise on Earth develop.
This changed with World War I, and I still hold the position that World War I should not be viewed outside of World War II or the events that occurred inbetween, namely because, as I have once again suggested, we see the breakdown of humanistic philosophy. What we see with theologians like Barth, and later with philosophers like Lewis, is Christianity being brought into the modern world. Some suggest that Francis Schaffer is returning to the fundamentalist roots that we see struggling with our own post-modern world, but having read a number of his works, I see that he is also attempting to reconcile Christianity with modernism. Unfortunately, humanity tends to always move faster than Christianity which, while not being a backward looking religion, tends to be less progressive.
These days, within the churches that I attend (and I must admit that they also tend to move slowly, but this is not necessarily a bad thing because what slow movement means is that the congregation considers how they should progress, and simply rushing too fast into the progressive movement can undermine the authenticity of the church) are desires to try to meet the post-modern society where they are at, however they have still not understood the relative nature of post-modernism, in that they are still caught up in objective doctrine, and fail to see the nature of subjectivity and opinion. However, consider this, music in the church is still mostly pop-rock, and while the music may be moving into the style of the 90s, the electronica of the new century is still a long way off.
As for me, in some ways I have probably moved forward a little more than the others, but have no desire to drag or push them up to where I am because as I have suggested before blind progress can be quite destructive. For instance the issue of sex before marriage is something, that if not handled correctly, can be very destructive within the congregation, and as is clear within the Bible, the people are God are not meant to be descending into orgies or prostituting themselves to the world. To me, one should be able to move beyond this obsession that society has with pleasure to a more disciplined and enlightened understanding of the human-God relationship.
24 April 2013
Well, first I should suggest that if you don't want to read me rambling on about nothing then you should skip this first paragraph, but then I am probably going to talk more about Barth and theological writing than this book because I read this book quite some time ago and not much of its content ended up sinking into my long term memory (or at least what I can withdrawal). However, it is ANZAC day today so I have the day off work (yay), and as well as writing a rather steamy chapter of my post-modern piece of rubbish, I thought I would also write a few more commentaries on Goodreads (if only to try a boost the number of reviews I have written since I am currently number 4 in Australia, and have dropped down somewhat from number 2).
Karl Barth was a Swiss theologian, a contemporary of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, which meant that he was around during World War II when the German Church faced pressure from the Nazi Regime to conform to their doctrine. This lead to a break within the church and the creation of the Confessing Church which stood against the regime and its atrocities. Remember that many of the hierarchs of the regime were not Christian and were more interested in bringing back ancient German paganism.
Barth's major work is a 13 volume book called Church Dogmatics (which I am unlikely to read) however this work is more of a cut down version that uses the Apostles Creed as a springboard for his discussions. When I did read this book I found that Barth was a very inspiring writer and explore numerous areas of Christianity quite deeply, which is not surprising since he lived during one of the most violent periods of the 20th Century, having seen two world wars and two economic crises. What this period symbolised was a breakdown in the modernist and enlightened ideas of the 18th and 19th century which saw the idea that humanity no longer needed God and that they could create paradise on Earth develop.
This changed with World War I, and I still hold the position that World War I should not be viewed outside of World War II or the events that occurred inbetween, namely because, as I have once again suggested, we see the breakdown of humanistic philosophy. What we see with theologians like Barth, and later with philosophers like Lewis, is Christianity being brought into the modern world. Some suggest that Francis Schaffer is returning to the fundamentalist roots that we see struggling with our own post-modern world, but having read a number of his works, I see that he is also attempting to reconcile Christianity with modernism. Unfortunately, humanity tends to always move faster than Christianity which, while not being a backward looking religion, tends to be less progressive.
These days, within the churches that I attend (and I must admit that they also tend to move slowly, but this is not necessarily a bad thing because what slow movement means is that the congregation considers how they should progress, and simply rushing too fast into the progressive movement can undermine the authenticity of the church) are desires to try to meet the post-modern society where they are at, however they have still not understood the relative nature of post-modernism, in that they are still caught up in objective doctrine, and fail to see the nature of subjectivity and opinion. However, consider this, music in the church is still mostly pop-rock, and while the music may be moving into the style of the 90s, the electronica of the new century is still a long way off.
As for me, in some ways I have probably moved forward a little more than the others, but have no desire to drag or push them up to where I am because as I have suggested before blind progress can be quite destructive. For instance the issue of sex before marriage is something, that if not handled correctly, can be very destructive within the congregation, and as is clear within the Bible, the people are God are not meant to be descending into orgies or prostituting themselves to the world. To me, one should be able to move beyond this obsession that society has with pleasure to a more disciplined and enlightened understanding of the human-God relationship.
August 17, 2020
An articulate, hopeful reminder of how good God is. Elicited the same reaction as being in nature, which is quite an achievement using only words.
We are under no illusion that anything man can do can ever be an undertaking of supreme wisdom and final art.. Christian dogmatics will always be a thinking, an investigation and an exposition which are relative and liable to error.. Holy Scripture is the document of the basis. (1. The Task)
[God] who is in no way established in us, in no way corresponds to a human disposition and possibility, but who is in every sense established simply in Himself and is real in that way; and who is manifest and made manifest to us men, not because of our seeking and finding, feeling and thinking, but again and again only through Himself. It is this God in the highest who has turned as such to man, given Himself to man, made Himself knowable to him. (5. God in the Highest)
In [Jesus] He has from eternity bound Himself to each, to all. Along the entire line it holds, from the creatureliness of man, through the misery of man, to the glory promised to man. (13. Our Lord)
To have inner ears for the Word of Christ, to become thankful for His work and at the same time responsible for the message about Him and, lastly, to take confidence in men for Christ’s sake—that is the freedom which we obtain, when Christ breathes on us, when He sends us His Holy Spirit. If He no longer lives in a historical or heavenly, a theological or ecclesiastical remoteness from me, if He approaches me and takes possession of me, the result will be that I hear, that I am thankful and responsible and that finally I may hope for myself and for all others; in other words, that I may live in a Christian way. It is a tremendously big thing and by no means a matter of course, to obtain this freedom. We must therefore every day and every hour pray Veni Creator Spiritus in listening to the word of Christ and in thankfulness. That is a closed circle. We do not ‘have’ this freedom; it is again and again given to us by God. (21. I Believe in the Holy Ghost)
The Kingdom of God is coming, so you must not begin the flight to the kingdom of God. Take your place and be in your place as a true minister verbi divini.. So the Church, waiting and hurrying, goes to meet the coming of the Lord. (22. Church: Unity, Holiness, Universality)
November 9, 2014
This is the first book by Karl Barth that I've actually read, so I'm reviewing Dogmatics in Outline avowedly as a novice in Barth's theological world. This probably comes as good news to many review readers, since most people are in my shoes and haven't had a chance or a desire to navigate much of Barth's oceanic work. My review in certain ways then may turn out to be more helpful than a seasoned Barthian, at least in terms of understanding, bewilderment, and delight.
Density
This short book is deceptively dense. Although Barth rarely employs large, unfamiliar words here (aside from a few Latin phrases), much of his writing is dense and complex, both in reference and syntax. He references, oftentimes implicitly, a whole constellation of theologians, world events, and his own major theological motifs. Examples are Schleiermacher, National Socialism, the simultaneous divine Yes and No. I found myself having to reread sections to start to pick up on what he was getting at. Sometimes I felt as if Barth wasn't looking me in the eyes as he spoke. That he was looking past me and passionately commenting on what he saw, and that I, being unable to turn around and see it, could only grasp at what was there.
Sitz im Leben
This book is also shaped by the pressures and exigencies of its time. Barth says as much in the foreword, that "it smacks of a document of our time" (p. 8). It was given amidst the ruins of the University of Bonn soon after World War 2 and you can almost feel this setting as you read. This setting is appropriate—Barth lecturing among the ruins of the past. From what I've read in other places, Barth's whole theological enterprise was a reaction to, and at times a repudiation of, events surrounding him—the failure of liberal Protestant theology, German idealism, natural theology, the World Wars. John Webster says that Barth "was always occasional and often polemical—directed to particular turns in the life and thinking of the church, concerned with clarifying the gospel now." So here again there is the possibility of getting lost without a guide—because his "now" is not our now. If you haven't read anything on Barth, you probably want to before jumping into the deep end. Roger Olson's chapter on Neo-orthodoxy in The Story of Christian Theology and Hans Küng's chapter on Barth in Great Christian Thinkers helped me find my bearings. I also plan to read John Webster's book Barth soon for a more comprehensive overview of this theological titan.
Poignancy
Despite the first two potential hindrances, this is a beautiful and moving book. Barth speaks with passion and poetry and at the same time with a disarming familiarity. He alternates between rigorous professor and reassuring grandfather. Some examples:
Certainly these quotes aren't the substance of the book, but reading these may give you a sense of what kind of feeling permeates the whole.
Importance
The last point I want to bring up about this book is its importance to anyone wanting to get some firsthand exposure to Barth. Many people have said that Barth was the greatest theologian of the 20th century, so it seems smart to me to at least get acquainted with him. However, most of his works are too long, too abstract, or too specific to get a handle on. Dogmatics in Outline is a welcomed change. It's a loose commentary on the Apostles' Creed which actually functions as a springboard into his larger body of work.
On the one hand, Barth warns against substituting Dogmatics in Outline for the massive thirteen volumes of Church Dogmatics:
And yet on the other hand he realizes the entrance it provides into his other works:
It's interesting to note that these two comments on his work, although appearing two pages apart in the book, were actually given by Barth twelve years apart. The first one I quoted (which appears first in the book) is from March 1959. The second one I quoted is from February 1947, only half a year after the lectures were given. Take that how you will. Maybe Barth changed his mind. Still, I'm glad this remains an option today.
Density
This short book is deceptively dense. Although Barth rarely employs large, unfamiliar words here (aside from a few Latin phrases), much of his writing is dense and complex, both in reference and syntax. He references, oftentimes implicitly, a whole constellation of theologians, world events, and his own major theological motifs. Examples are Schleiermacher, National Socialism, the simultaneous divine Yes and No. I found myself having to reread sections to start to pick up on what he was getting at. Sometimes I felt as if Barth wasn't looking me in the eyes as he spoke. That he was looking past me and passionately commenting on what he saw, and that I, being unable to turn around and see it, could only grasp at what was there.
Sitz im Leben
This book is also shaped by the pressures and exigencies of its time. Barth says as much in the foreword, that "it smacks of a document of our time" (p. 8). It was given amidst the ruins of the University of Bonn soon after World War 2 and you can almost feel this setting as you read. This setting is appropriate—Barth lecturing among the ruins of the past. From what I've read in other places, Barth's whole theological enterprise was a reaction to, and at times a repudiation of, events surrounding him—the failure of liberal Protestant theology, German idealism, natural theology, the World Wars. John Webster says that Barth "was always occasional and often polemical—directed to particular turns in the life and thinking of the church, concerned with clarifying the gospel now." So here again there is the possibility of getting lost without a guide—because his "now" is not our now. If you haven't read anything on Barth, you probably want to before jumping into the deep end. Roger Olson's chapter on Neo-orthodoxy in The Story of Christian Theology and Hans Küng's chapter on Barth in Great Christian Thinkers helped me find my bearings. I also plan to read John Webster's book Barth soon for a more comprehensive overview of this theological titan.
Poignancy
Despite the first two potential hindrances, this is a beautiful and moving book. Barth speaks with passion and poetry and at the same time with a disarming familiarity. He alternates between rigorous professor and reassuring grandfather. Some examples:
Once we have realized this, this one God, this subject in His sheer uniqueness and otherness over against all others, different from all the ridiculous deities whom man invents, we can only laugh, and there is a laugh running through the Bible at these figures. (p. 40)
We do not exist in any kind of gloomy uncertainty; we exist through the God who was gracious to us before we existed at all. (p. 71)
Where a mighty matter is involved, we must not come along, crying 'Quiet, quiet, dear little one'. But the strife must be inexorably carried on to a finish. (p. 86)
The Church is not 'of the opinion', it does not have 'views', convictions, enthusiasm. It believes and confesses, that is, it speaks and acts on the basis of the message based on God Himself in Christ. And that is why all Christian teaching, comfort, and exhortation is a fundamental and conclusive comfort. (p. 87)
God has come into our life in its utter unloveliness and frightfulness. (p. 109)
We must not sit among non-Christians like melancholy owls, but in a certainty about our goal, which surpasses all other certainty. (p. 132)
The Church is not a snail that carries its little house on its back and is so well off in it, that only now and then it sticks out its feelers, and then thinks that the 'claim of publicity' has been satisfied. The Church lives by its commission as herald. (p. 147)
Certainly these quotes aren't the substance of the book, but reading these may give you a sense of what kind of feeling permeates the whole.
Importance
The last point I want to bring up about this book is its importance to anyone wanting to get some firsthand exposure to Barth. Many people have said that Barth was the greatest theologian of the 20th century, so it seems smart to me to at least get acquainted with him. However, most of his works are too long, too abstract, or too specific to get a handle on. Dogmatics in Outline is a welcomed change. It's a loose commentary on the Apostles' Creed which actually functions as a springboard into his larger body of work.
On the one hand, Barth warns against substituting Dogmatics in Outline for the massive thirteen volumes of Church Dogmatics:
Everything in this Outline is treated very concisely. Many important problems of dogmatics are mentioned only briefly or not at all. Therefore, reading this book cannot take the place of studying the Dogmatik. At best it can inspire and initiate that study. (p. 6)
And yet on the other hand he realizes the entrance it provides into his other works:
When I finally yielded to the pressure put upon me by the representatives of the Verlag Zollikon, I did so thinking that what I had produced might in this looser form serve to explain things which I had elsewhere expressed more strictly and compactly but, for that very reason perhaps, less noticeably and less accessibly for all. (p. 8)
It's interesting to note that these two comments on his work, although appearing two pages apart in the book, were actually given by Barth twelve years apart. The first one I quoted (which appears first in the book) is from March 1959. The second one I quoted is from February 1947, only half a year after the lectures were given. Take that how you will. Maybe Barth changed his mind. Still, I'm glad this remains an option today.
March 30, 2024
Don’t get me wrong, I like this book. It just wasn’t as *compelling* as other books on religion I’ve read.
“Of course not, it’s a book on dogmatics!” I suppose.
I read this on recommendation from a spiritual mentor who I have come to admire greatly, and who heard that I was going through Bonhoeffer for Lent. He gave this to me to read because Barth and Bonhoeffer were contemporaries, and their work influenced each other.
Barth is dense, verbose, and systematic. He writes wonderfully, but gets bogged down in repetitiveness and recapitulation. That is necessary for thorough writing, especially when you are communicating sensitive truths about the nature and relationship of God to Himself and to His creatures. It gets to be a bit much to read sometimes.
However, chapter 17 on the crucifixion was a treat. His treatment of atonement theory, while not exactly the same as what I ascribe to now, especially after reading Dostoyevsky and Zahnd, is tactful. I appreciate his perspective on sin (though I still prefer Kierkegaard’s definition), and his view on what “hell” is and what it means for us today.
This is a book I may quote from at times, but will likely never re-read in its entirety. I would only recommend this book if you are a fan of Bonhoeffer, a Christian DEEPLY thirsty for some rich (and thorough) theological insight, or you want an honest challenge. (While he is verbose, he is usually very accessible, if you simply ignore the Latin. It was not critical for my understanding of what he was communicating.)
“Of course not, it’s a book on dogmatics!” I suppose.
I read this on recommendation from a spiritual mentor who I have come to admire greatly, and who heard that I was going through Bonhoeffer for Lent. He gave this to me to read because Barth and Bonhoeffer were contemporaries, and their work influenced each other.
Barth is dense, verbose, and systematic. He writes wonderfully, but gets bogged down in repetitiveness and recapitulation. That is necessary for thorough writing, especially when you are communicating sensitive truths about the nature and relationship of God to Himself and to His creatures. It gets to be a bit much to read sometimes.
However, chapter 17 on the crucifixion was a treat. His treatment of atonement theory, while not exactly the same as what I ascribe to now, especially after reading Dostoyevsky and Zahnd, is tactful. I appreciate his perspective on sin (though I still prefer Kierkegaard’s definition), and his view on what “hell” is and what it means for us today.
This is a book I may quote from at times, but will likely never re-read in its entirety. I would only recommend this book if you are a fan of Bonhoeffer, a Christian DEEPLY thirsty for some rich (and thorough) theological insight, or you want an honest challenge. (While he is verbose, he is usually very accessible, if you simply ignore the Latin. It was not critical for my understanding of what he was communicating.)
May 30, 2020
I read this along with many other brothers and sisters as a part of a communal reading put together by Drs. Will Willimon and Stanley Hauerwas, who led is through it on multiple Tuesday mornings in May 2020.
Hauerwas called this book "the most influential theology book of the 20th Century" and I believe it precisely because at first read it seems quite unremarkable. I scroll over it and think "well yes of course!" simply because Barth's thought has been in the water supply for decades. But at a closer look there is some stunning thought in here, encapsulated some of the most pointed, erudite, and memorable phrases I've read in any book of theology.
Now that doesn't mean I agree with everything started here, but even then I can see that even when I think Barth is wrong, he's kind of right. And that's a dialectic that I think he'd be proud to affirm.
Hauerwas called this book "the most influential theology book of the 20th Century" and I believe it precisely because at first read it seems quite unremarkable. I scroll over it and think "well yes of course!" simply because Barth's thought has been in the water supply for decades. But at a closer look there is some stunning thought in here, encapsulated some of the most pointed, erudite, and memorable phrases I've read in any book of theology.
Now that doesn't mean I agree with everything started here, but even then I can see that even when I think Barth is wrong, he's kind of right. And that's a dialectic that I think he'd be proud to affirm.
January 6, 2021
My recommendation for anyone starting out with Systematic Theology (or Theology in general tbh).
December 5, 2023
My first outing with Barth. A good, succinct outline of the Christian faith as put forth by the Apostles' Creed. In some chapters Barth downright preaches, which is great.
May 6, 2019
Not the best read for a morning devotional. Though short in stature, quite dense in content. Encompasses an in-depth look at the Apostle’s Creed. I imagine a second read over the passages I underlined would generate a more formidable experience.
January 23, 2024
"Dogmatics in Outline" is a series of lectures delivered by Karl Barth in 1946. These lectures are an exposition on the Apostle Creed. I found the lectures to be very engaging due to Barth's commanding writing style. This is my first major introduction to the theology of Barth and his exposition of the Apostles Creed reflects the points of emphasis unique to his theology: the existentialism, the freedom of God, and the centrality of Jesus Christ.
Existentialism of Barth
Barth writes with a deep introspection that addresses the existential aspect of Christianity. He sees the desiring and seeking of meaning in humanity that is found only in God (reflecting the ideas of Augustine and Kierkegaard before him).
"When man speaks of God, of the divine nature, of the divine essence, or of God simply, then he means the object of the universally present and active longing, the object of man's homesickness and man's hope for a unity, a basis, a meaning to his existence, and the meaning of the world; he means thereby the existence and the nature of a Being who, whether in this or that connection with the realities other than Himself, is to Be regarded as the Supreme Being that determines and dominates all that exists. And if we glance at the history of human desire, human assertion about this Being, the first and strongest impression we receive is that of a human skill in invention, active on all sides and taking the most various routes; but also of human waywardness and human violence with this concept, this idea of God. Hence the picture of an infinite variety of possibilities, the picture of a great uncertainty, of great contradictions. (35)
"He is not a fulfillment, perhaps the last, supreme and best fulfillment, of what man was in course of seeking and finding. But we Christians speak of Him who completely takes the place of everything that elsewhere is usually called 'God', and therefore suppresses and excludes it all, and claims to be alone the truth. Where that is not realized, it is still not realized what is involved when the Christian Church confesses, 'I believe in God'. What is involved is man's meeting with the Reality which he has never of himself sought out or first of all discovered. 'What no eye hath seen nor ear heard, what hath not entered into the heart of any man, God hath given to those who love Him'" (36)
"'Buried' gives to death the character of passing away and decay and to human existence the character of transitoriness and corruptibility. What then is the meaning of man's life? It means hurrying to the grave. Man is hurrying to meet his past. This past, in which there is no more future, will be the final thing: all that we are will have been and will have been corrupted. Perhaps a memory will remain, so long as there are men who like to remember us. But some day they too will die and then this memory too will pass away. There is no great name in human history which will not some day or other have become a forgotten name. That is the meaning of being 'buried'; and that is the judgment on man, that in the grave he drops into forgottenness.
That is God's answer to sin: there is nothing else to be done with sinful man, except to bury him and forget him." (118)
"where the Church is, there it has an aim, the kingdom of God. This goal of the Church is bound to constitute a continuous restlessness for the men in the Church, whose action stands in no relation to the greatness of this goal." (147)
The Freedom of God
"We may venture to describe the reality which the work expounds, the nature and the essence of God, by these two concepts of freedom and love. But we must be careful, lest we tumble back again out of the concrete into the abstract, out of history into the realm of ideas. I would not say that God is freedom or that God is love even though the second pronouncement is a biblical one. We do not know what love is and we do not know what freedom is; but God is love and God is freedom. What freedom is and what love is, we have to learn from Him." (39)
"This power, God, is the power of His free love in Jesus Christ, activated and revealed in Him. We must therefore look once more upon God's work as the essence of all that is possible and real.
What in His grace God is and effects is the essence of all that is called ability, freedom and possibility. God's power is not a characterless power; and therefore all those childish questions, whether God can bring it about that twice two equals five, and the like, are pointless, because behind these questions stands an abstract concept of ability'. A power which could lie would not be a real power. It would be a powerlessness, a power of zero, which believes it can assert and dispose of everything. It has nothing to do with God and therefore nothing to do with real power. God's power is genuine power and so it is over everything." (49)
The Centrality of Jesus Christ
For Christians, Jesus is central to our life and theology. With Barth, however, he writes with a higher degree than most theologians you'll read. For Barth, you cannot say anything abstractly about God. Only concretely can you speak of God, and God has shown who he is concretely and completely in Jesus Christ.
"This power, God, is the power of His free love in Jesus Christ, activated and revealed in Him. We must therefore look once more upon God's work as the essence of all that is possible and real." (49)
"To pronounce the name of Jesus Christ means to acknowledge that we are cared for, that we are not lost. Jesus Christ is man's salvation in all circumstances and in face of all that darkens his life, including the evil that proceeds from himself. There is nothing which is not already made good in this happening, that God became man for our good. Anything that is left can be no more than the discovery of this fact. We do not exist in any kind of gloomy uncertainty; we exist through the God who was gracious to us before we existed at all. " (71)
"Christ, the Servant of God... as well as this one people of Israel, are two realities inseparable from each other, not only at that time but for the whole of history, indeed for all eternity. Israel is nothing apart from Jesus Christ; but we also have to say that Jesus Christ would not be Jesus Christ apart from Israel. So first of all we must look for a moment at this Israel, in order to be able really to look at Jesus Christ." (74)
Reading Barth is a very interesting experience. You can read his passion on the page like you would find in Kierkeagaard, an engaging writing style that is deep, personal, and eloquent. It is good devotional reading that proclaims deep hope in the Gospel.
This is a very accessible work by Barth, maybe not the greatest of introductions for his theology but an engaging work that teaches you Barth's approach to dogmatics that will edify you by his passionate exhortations for the Gospel.
4/5 Accessible work by Barth that displays his deep hope and passion for the Gospel
Existentialism of Barth
Barth writes with a deep introspection that addresses the existential aspect of Christianity. He sees the desiring and seeking of meaning in humanity that is found only in God (reflecting the ideas of Augustine and Kierkegaard before him).
"When man speaks of God, of the divine nature, of the divine essence, or of God simply, then he means the object of the universally present and active longing, the object of man's homesickness and man's hope for a unity, a basis, a meaning to his existence, and the meaning of the world; he means thereby the existence and the nature of a Being who, whether in this or that connection with the realities other than Himself, is to Be regarded as the Supreme Being that determines and dominates all that exists. And if we glance at the history of human desire, human assertion about this Being, the first and strongest impression we receive is that of a human skill in invention, active on all sides and taking the most various routes; but also of human waywardness and human violence with this concept, this idea of God. Hence the picture of an infinite variety of possibilities, the picture of a great uncertainty, of great contradictions. (35)
"He is not a fulfillment, perhaps the last, supreme and best fulfillment, of what man was in course of seeking and finding. But we Christians speak of Him who completely takes the place of everything that elsewhere is usually called 'God', and therefore suppresses and excludes it all, and claims to be alone the truth. Where that is not realized, it is still not realized what is involved when the Christian Church confesses, 'I believe in God'. What is involved is man's meeting with the Reality which he has never of himself sought out or first of all discovered. 'What no eye hath seen nor ear heard, what hath not entered into the heart of any man, God hath given to those who love Him'" (36)
"'Buried' gives to death the character of passing away and decay and to human existence the character of transitoriness and corruptibility. What then is the meaning of man's life? It means hurrying to the grave. Man is hurrying to meet his past. This past, in which there is no more future, will be the final thing: all that we are will have been and will have been corrupted. Perhaps a memory will remain, so long as there are men who like to remember us. But some day they too will die and then this memory too will pass away. There is no great name in human history which will not some day or other have become a forgotten name. That is the meaning of being 'buried'; and that is the judgment on man, that in the grave he drops into forgottenness.
That is God's answer to sin: there is nothing else to be done with sinful man, except to bury him and forget him." (118)
"where the Church is, there it has an aim, the kingdom of God. This goal of the Church is bound to constitute a continuous restlessness for the men in the Church, whose action stands in no relation to the greatness of this goal." (147)
The Freedom of God
"We may venture to describe the reality which the work expounds, the nature and the essence of God, by these two concepts of freedom and love. But we must be careful, lest we tumble back again out of the concrete into the abstract, out of history into the realm of ideas. I would not say that God is freedom or that God is love even though the second pronouncement is a biblical one. We do not know what love is and we do not know what freedom is; but God is love and God is freedom. What freedom is and what love is, we have to learn from Him." (39)
"This power, God, is the power of His free love in Jesus Christ, activated and revealed in Him. We must therefore look once more upon God's work as the essence of all that is possible and real.
What in His grace God is and effects is the essence of all that is called ability, freedom and possibility. God's power is not a characterless power; and therefore all those childish questions, whether God can bring it about that twice two equals five, and the like, are pointless, because behind these questions stands an abstract concept of ability'. A power which could lie would not be a real power. It would be a powerlessness, a power of zero, which believes it can assert and dispose of everything. It has nothing to do with God and therefore nothing to do with real power. God's power is genuine power and so it is over everything." (49)
The Centrality of Jesus Christ
For Christians, Jesus is central to our life and theology. With Barth, however, he writes with a higher degree than most theologians you'll read. For Barth, you cannot say anything abstractly about God. Only concretely can you speak of God, and God has shown who he is concretely and completely in Jesus Christ.
"This power, God, is the power of His free love in Jesus Christ, activated and revealed in Him. We must therefore look once more upon God's work as the essence of all that is possible and real." (49)
"To pronounce the name of Jesus Christ means to acknowledge that we are cared for, that we are not lost. Jesus Christ is man's salvation in all circumstances and in face of all that darkens his life, including the evil that proceeds from himself. There is nothing which is not already made good in this happening, that God became man for our good. Anything that is left can be no more than the discovery of this fact. We do not exist in any kind of gloomy uncertainty; we exist through the God who was gracious to us before we existed at all. " (71)
"Christ, the Servant of God... as well as this one people of Israel, are two realities inseparable from each other, not only at that time but for the whole of history, indeed for all eternity. Israel is nothing apart from Jesus Christ; but we also have to say that Jesus Christ would not be Jesus Christ apart from Israel. So first of all we must look for a moment at this Israel, in order to be able really to look at Jesus Christ." (74)
Reading Barth is a very interesting experience. You can read his passion on the page like you would find in Kierkeagaard, an engaging writing style that is deep, personal, and eloquent. It is good devotional reading that proclaims deep hope in the Gospel.
This is a very accessible work by Barth, maybe not the greatest of introductions for his theology but an engaging work that teaches you Barth's approach to dogmatics that will edify you by his passionate exhortations for the Gospel.
4/5 Accessible work by Barth that displays his deep hope and passion for the Gospel
October 10, 2024
Barth? more life barf, haha. 5 stars
December 1, 2014
A few thoughts while reading Barth's text:
1. Leonardo wants you to be present at The Last Supper.
2. Roman Catholicism led me astray.
3. Socrates was right when he said something like, "Life is a preparation for death."
4. The life of Jesus is historical fact and not myth.
5. If one doesn't enjoy life, one can't experience the joy of the resurrection.
6. T.S. Eliot and John Updike make a lot of sense.
7. Kierkegaard isn't the be-all-end-all. There are others.
8. Bergman, Bresson, Malick, Tarkovsky are the Big Four.
9. I need images of Dostoevsky and Kierkegaard as reminders.
10. We live in redeemed time - the kingdom of God is within us.
11. We all share humiliation.
12. Sages - artists, philosophers, and saints - are signposts. I love Wilson, Coltrane, Dostoevsky, Kafka, Genet, M. Robinson, Vollmann, and Beckett for their guidance.
1. Leonardo wants you to be present at The Last Supper.
2. Roman Catholicism led me astray.
3. Socrates was right when he said something like, "Life is a preparation for death."
4. The life of Jesus is historical fact and not myth.
5. If one doesn't enjoy life, one can't experience the joy of the resurrection.
6. T.S. Eliot and John Updike make a lot of sense.
7. Kierkegaard isn't the be-all-end-all. There are others.
8. Bergman, Bresson, Malick, Tarkovsky are the Big Four.
9. I need images of Dostoevsky and Kierkegaard as reminders.
10. We live in redeemed time - the kingdom of God is within us.
11. We all share humiliation.
12. Sages - artists, philosophers, and saints - are signposts. I love Wilson, Coltrane, Dostoevsky, Kafka, Genet, M. Robinson, Vollmann, and Beckett for their guidance.
October 1, 2013
Two stars. I'm sure this book was better than was my reading of it, since Barth is a renowned and respected theologian. But I found this to be a tedious slog through a collection of assertions. Since God is wondrous, I expect books about him to be wondrous as well. That said, a person I read this book with loved it -- I mean, theo-swooning got-goose-bumps loved it. To each their own.
December 22, 2015
The language and density (of thoughts and concepts, not length) made it a slightly more difficult read, however there are many gems in this that stir the heart and awaken the soul to the mystery of our faith. I also loved that it's centered around the Apostles Creed.
July 29, 2020
I’m giving this two stars for now. I may return to this in time. It could be that I didn’t understand it well... it could be the stage of life I’m in right now... but after reading this I felt as though Barth could have turned this 147 page book into a 14 page essay.
June 29, 2014
If you want his Dogmatics condensed into 150 pages, this is the best place. Its really good.
May 11, 2015
I love Karl.
April 12, 2023
"In Jesus Christ man is exalted and appointed to the life for which God has set him free in the death of Jesus Christ. God has so to speak abandoned the sphere of His glory and man may now take this place. That is the Easter message, the goal of reconciliation, man's redemption. It is the goal which was already visible on Good Friday. By God interceding for man—the New Testament writers were not afraid to use the expression 'paying'—man is a ransomed creature. Aπολυτρώ is a legal concept which described the ransoming of a slave. The goal is that man is transferred to another status in the law. He no longer belongs to that which had a right over him, to that realm of curse, death and hell; he is translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son. That means that his position, his condition, his legal status as a sinner is rejected in every form. Man is no longer seriously regarded by God as a sinner. Whatever he may be, whatever there is to be said od him, whatever he has to reproach himself with, God no longer takes him seriously as a sinner. He has died to sin; there on the Cross of Golgotha."
"...The third day a new life of Jesus begins; but at the same time on the third day there begins a new Aeon, a new shape of the world, after the old world has been completely done away and settled in the death of Jesus Christ. Easter is the breaking in of a new time and world in the existence of the man Jesus..."
A fascinating, brief book, where every word of every impassioned speech (structured around The Apostle's Creed) contains a world of implications towards what I understand is a painstaking systematic theology contained within Church Dogmatics. I hadn't heard almost anything about Barth previously despite his prominence as a 20th century theologian. I can't say I've heretofore expressed much interest in modern theological movements, in mainstream evangelicalism, you generally jump straight from the Gospels to the 1500s Reformaton, and mid 1800s to mid 1900s preacher figures like Jonathan Edwards, Billy Sunday, Billy Graham, and especially Charles Spurgeon. There are reasons for this avoidance, as he appears to straddle an interesting line between theological liberalism (forms of universalism, language around sola scriptura mostly talking about being "our witness to God's revelation," an avoidance of legalism) and traditionalism (Trinitarian, obsessively Christologically centric, centers The Great Commission, the 5 solae) in the protestant, even evangelical sense.
For me personally, some of those specific strands of "more liberal" theological thought are appealing, as I've tried to carefully examine my relationship to concepts (and certain definitions of those concepts) ranging from inerrancy to eschatology and many others. Coming to this book is a branch off my searching for better formal sources to edify myself, in many ways in reactions from dissatisfaction and apprehension at the sources my loved ones have drifted towards. Coming from a largely Baptist tradition, it has been long noted we are less systematic theologically, the movement lacks even a catechism, and as such we have less prominent forward facing intellectuals, compared to more Reformed traditions. And so my brother and cousin listen and learn from full 5 Point, incredibly legalistic and conservative Calvinists — people like James White and John Piper, of whom I am not a fan. I have severe hangups with nearly all of the 5 items comprising TULIP as an Arminian, rejection of post Nicene councils notwithstanding, they were on point with the Second Council of Orange'a comments towards predestination.
But you can't criticize if you're not seeking in the same way, and you can't deconstruct your beliefs forever without then trying to build a better foundation. I came to this book, yes, through a podcast I found that I found both edifying and helpful (and that ended too soon). I hope to read more of Barth, along with others, and I hope to maintain a budding interest in patristics as well. I will again express frustration at trying to find resources and people to help me grow in a way consistent with my convictions, especially in a digital space, without them desiring to tear down foundations and suddenly they're a Unitarian. There's a really dichotomy in the world between those that want to break open every tradition and thought (call it modernism, or far less accurately liberalism), and those that want to hold fast to this current attitude of legalistic fundamentalism and intepretarion of God's revelation. I pray to err on the side of grace, whatever comes.
But this is a weekend to rejoice, Christ is risen! For "God is not a God of the dead, but of the living." Worthy is the Lamb who was slain! "He who did not wish to remain hidden," "He who did not wish to be God for Himself alone." He who debased Himself, so that all may be exalted. Thanks be to God for a Good Friday, and a Happy Easter.
"...The third day a new life of Jesus begins; but at the same time on the third day there begins a new Aeon, a new shape of the world, after the old world has been completely done away and settled in the death of Jesus Christ. Easter is the breaking in of a new time and world in the existence of the man Jesus..."
A fascinating, brief book, where every word of every impassioned speech (structured around The Apostle's Creed) contains a world of implications towards what I understand is a painstaking systematic theology contained within Church Dogmatics. I hadn't heard almost anything about Barth previously despite his prominence as a 20th century theologian. I can't say I've heretofore expressed much interest in modern theological movements, in mainstream evangelicalism, you generally jump straight from the Gospels to the 1500s Reformaton, and mid 1800s to mid 1900s preacher figures like Jonathan Edwards, Billy Sunday, Billy Graham, and especially Charles Spurgeon. There are reasons for this avoidance, as he appears to straddle an interesting line between theological liberalism (forms of universalism, language around sola scriptura mostly talking about being "our witness to God's revelation," an avoidance of legalism) and traditionalism (Trinitarian, obsessively Christologically centric, centers The Great Commission, the 5 solae) in the protestant, even evangelical sense.
For me personally, some of those specific strands of "more liberal" theological thought are appealing, as I've tried to carefully examine my relationship to concepts (and certain definitions of those concepts) ranging from inerrancy to eschatology and many others. Coming to this book is a branch off my searching for better formal sources to edify myself, in many ways in reactions from dissatisfaction and apprehension at the sources my loved ones have drifted towards. Coming from a largely Baptist tradition, it has been long noted we are less systematic theologically, the movement lacks even a catechism, and as such we have less prominent forward facing intellectuals, compared to more Reformed traditions. And so my brother and cousin listen and learn from full 5 Point, incredibly legalistic and conservative Calvinists — people like James White and John Piper, of whom I am not a fan. I have severe hangups with nearly all of the 5 items comprising TULIP as an Arminian, rejection of post Nicene councils notwithstanding, they were on point with the Second Council of Orange'a comments towards predestination.
But you can't criticize if you're not seeking in the same way, and you can't deconstruct your beliefs forever without then trying to build a better foundation. I came to this book, yes, through a podcast I found that I found both edifying and helpful (and that ended too soon). I hope to read more of Barth, along with others, and I hope to maintain a budding interest in patristics as well. I will again express frustration at trying to find resources and people to help me grow in a way consistent with my convictions, especially in a digital space, without them desiring to tear down foundations and suddenly they're a Unitarian. There's a really dichotomy in the world between those that want to break open every tradition and thought (call it modernism, or far less accurately liberalism), and those that want to hold fast to this current attitude of legalistic fundamentalism and intepretarion of God's revelation. I pray to err on the side of grace, whatever comes.
But this is a weekend to rejoice, Christ is risen! For "God is not a God of the dead, but of the living." Worthy is the Lamb who was slain! "He who did not wish to remain hidden," "He who did not wish to be God for Himself alone." He who debased Himself, so that all may be exalted. Thanks be to God for a Good Friday, and a Happy Easter.
November 6, 2024
Barth made accessible by restricting his structural focus to the Apostles Creed.
A few morsels:
“A Church that recognises its commission will neither desire nor be able to petrify in any of its functions, to be the Church for its own sake. There is the 'Christ-believing group'; but this group is sent out: 'Go and preach the Gospel!' It does not say 'Go and celebrate services!' Go and edify yourselves with the sermon!' 'Go and celebrate the Sacraments!' 'Go and present yourselves in a liturgy, which perhaps repeats the heavenly liturgy!' 'Go and devise a theology which may gloriously unfold like the Summa of St Thomas!' Of course, there is nothing to forbid all this; there may exist very good cause to do it all; but nothing, nothing at all for its own sake! In it all the one thing must prevail: 'Proclaim the Gospel to every creature!' The Church runs like a herald to deliver the message. It is not a snail that carries its little house on its back and is so well off in it, that only now and then it sticks out its feelers, and then thinks that the 'claim of publicity' has been satisfied. No, the Church lives by its commission as herald; it is la compagnie de Dieu. Where the Church is living, it must ask itself whether it is serving this commission or whether it is a purpose in itself? If the second is the case, then as a rule it begins to smack of the 'sacred', to affect piety, to play the priest and to mumble. Anyone with a keen nose will smell it and find it dreadful! Christianity is not 'sacred'; rather there breathes in it the fresh air of the Spirit. Otherwise it is not Christianity. For it is an out-and-out 'worldly' thing open to all humanity: 'Go into all the world and proclaim the Gospel to every creature.'” 147
“this Passion of Jesus Christ, this unveiling of man's rebellion and of God's wrath, yet also of His mercy, did not take place in heaven or in some remote planet… it took place in our time, in the centre of the world-history in which our human life is played out. So we must not escape from this life. We must not take flight to a better land… nor to any spiritual Cloud-Cuckooland nor to a Christian fairyland. God has come into our life in its utter unloveliness and frightfulness. That the Word became flesh also means that it became temporal, historical. It assumed the form which belongs to the human creature, in which there are such folk as this very Pontius Pilate-the people we belong to and who are also ourselves at any time on a slightly larger scale! It is not necessary to close our eyes to this, for God has not closed His either; He has entered into it all. The Incarnation of the Word is an extremely concrete event, in which a human name may play a part.” 109
A few morsels:
“A Church that recognises its commission will neither desire nor be able to petrify in any of its functions, to be the Church for its own sake. There is the 'Christ-believing group'; but this group is sent out: 'Go and preach the Gospel!' It does not say 'Go and celebrate services!' Go and edify yourselves with the sermon!' 'Go and celebrate the Sacraments!' 'Go and present yourselves in a liturgy, which perhaps repeats the heavenly liturgy!' 'Go and devise a theology which may gloriously unfold like the Summa of St Thomas!' Of course, there is nothing to forbid all this; there may exist very good cause to do it all; but nothing, nothing at all for its own sake! In it all the one thing must prevail: 'Proclaim the Gospel to every creature!' The Church runs like a herald to deliver the message. It is not a snail that carries its little house on its back and is so well off in it, that only now and then it sticks out its feelers, and then thinks that the 'claim of publicity' has been satisfied. No, the Church lives by its commission as herald; it is la compagnie de Dieu. Where the Church is living, it must ask itself whether it is serving this commission or whether it is a purpose in itself? If the second is the case, then as a rule it begins to smack of the 'sacred', to affect piety, to play the priest and to mumble. Anyone with a keen nose will smell it and find it dreadful! Christianity is not 'sacred'; rather there breathes in it the fresh air of the Spirit. Otherwise it is not Christianity. For it is an out-and-out 'worldly' thing open to all humanity: 'Go into all the world and proclaim the Gospel to every creature.'” 147
“this Passion of Jesus Christ, this unveiling of man's rebellion and of God's wrath, yet also of His mercy, did not take place in heaven or in some remote planet… it took place in our time, in the centre of the world-history in which our human life is played out. So we must not escape from this life. We must not take flight to a better land… nor to any spiritual Cloud-Cuckooland nor to a Christian fairyland. God has come into our life in its utter unloveliness and frightfulness. That the Word became flesh also means that it became temporal, historical. It assumed the form which belongs to the human creature, in which there are such folk as this very Pontius Pilate-the people we belong to and who are also ourselves at any time on a slightly larger scale! It is not necessary to close our eyes to this, for God has not closed His either; He has entered into it all. The Incarnation of the Word is an extremely concrete event, in which a human name may play a part.” 109
September 5, 2023
Beautiful prose and striking insight. This book made me feel awe for who God is and deepened my admiration and love for Jesus. I'll be pondering these thoughts for a long time.
Favorite quotes
"In the whole Bible of the Old and New Testaments, not the slightest attempt is ever made to prove God...the Bible speaks of God simply as of One who needs no proof. It speaks of a God who proves Himself on every hand: Here am I, and since I am and live and act it is superfluous that I should be proved."
"Whatever we say of God in such human concepts can never be more than an indication of him; no such concept can really conceive the nature of God... What is called God's goodness and God's holiness cannot be determined by any view that we have of goodness and holiness, but it is determined from what God is. He is the Lord, He is the truth."
"The real mystery of Easter is not that God is glorified in it, but that man is exalted, raised to the right hand of God and permitted to triumph over sin, death, and the devil. When we hold these two things together, then the picture before us is that of an inconceivable exchange, of a... substitution. Man's reconciliation with God takes place through God's putting Himself in man's place, as a sheer act of grace. It is this inconceivable miracle which is our reconciliation."
"Easter is... the proclamation of a victory already won. The war is at an end--even though here and there troops are still shooting, because they have not heard anything yet about the capitulation. The game is won, even though the player can still play a few further moves. Actually he is already mated. The clock has run down, even though the pendulum still swings a few times this way and that. It is in this interim space that we are living; the old is past, behold it has all become new. The Easter message tells us that our enemies, sin, the curse and death, are beaten... we must still reckon with them, but fundamentally we must cease to fear them anymore."
"If you have heard the Easter message, you can no longer run around with a tragic face and lead the humorless existence of a man who has no hope. One thing still holds, and only this one thing is really serious, that Jesus is the Victor."
Favorite quotes
"In the whole Bible of the Old and New Testaments, not the slightest attempt is ever made to prove God...the Bible speaks of God simply as of One who needs no proof. It speaks of a God who proves Himself on every hand: Here am I, and since I am and live and act it is superfluous that I should be proved."
"Whatever we say of God in such human concepts can never be more than an indication of him; no such concept can really conceive the nature of God... What is called God's goodness and God's holiness cannot be determined by any view that we have of goodness and holiness, but it is determined from what God is. He is the Lord, He is the truth."
"The real mystery of Easter is not that God is glorified in it, but that man is exalted, raised to the right hand of God and permitted to triumph over sin, death, and the devil. When we hold these two things together, then the picture before us is that of an inconceivable exchange, of a... substitution. Man's reconciliation with God takes place through God's putting Himself in man's place, as a sheer act of grace. It is this inconceivable miracle which is our reconciliation."
"Easter is... the proclamation of a victory already won. The war is at an end--even though here and there troops are still shooting, because they have not heard anything yet about the capitulation. The game is won, even though the player can still play a few further moves. Actually he is already mated. The clock has run down, even though the pendulum still swings a few times this way and that. It is in this interim space that we are living; the old is past, behold it has all become new. The Easter message tells us that our enemies, sin, the curse and death, are beaten... we must still reckon with them, but fundamentally we must cease to fear them anymore."
"If you have heard the Easter message, you can no longer run around with a tragic face and lead the humorless existence of a man who has no hope. One thing still holds, and only this one thing is really serious, that Jesus is the Victor."
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 111 reviews