tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post113399455251093457..comments2024-03-25T13:40:30.747-04:00Comments on Faith and Theology: Church Dogmatics: some personal choicesBen Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-63402952234212418232007-04-08T00:59:00.000-04:002007-04-08T00:59:00.000-04:00Ben,i appreciate your zeal for barth, but i too ha...Ben,<BR/><BR/>i appreciate your zeal for barth, but i too have found his view of angels/demons/satan to be arguably the most problematic of his views.<BR/><BR/>Let me admit that i have much work to do in order to fully grasp barth, so if my issue is lack of understanding of what he's really getting at, let me know. Caveat aside, lets dig in.<BR/><BR/>It seems to me that Barth doesn't allow "the strange world of the bible" to reframe his views of A/D/S. Rather, being a child of modernism, he demytholigizes them. This problem would seem to preclude Bultmann from doing a much better job, at least to me.<BR/><BR/>What surprises me most about this is that arguably the central motif in the four Gospels is Jesus' "showdown" with demons and Satan. This is especially the case in the Synoptics. <BR/><BR/>It seems to me that Barth is inconsistenet here, b/c Jesus, the Word of God, believed in the ontic reality of demons. It seems that Barth here leaves his commitment to a Christological hermeneutic, unable to completely break with his modern roots and liberal theological past. <BR/><BR/>This is also one my main struggles with Barth followers, like T.F. Torrance (who, being a scientist, also seemed to struggle with the NT "premodern" understanding of the spirit world). I love his theology in so many ways. but his views here drive me crazy, b/c it seems that they don't faithfully apply their hermeneutic consistently. <BR/><BR/>We are all guilty of this at some level, but is easier to spot others do it in areas you think are important.<BR/><BR/>One last point. Another (possible) reason why Barth and Torrance dismiss the wealth of biblical data is that their background seems to be that of the reformed tradition. Barth especially seemed fond of Calvin to me in some ways. I wonder if they both carry the reformed doctrine of sovereignty around in their heads, which would strongly inhibit the motif of a genuine spiritual conflict taking place. All this to say that maybe the question isn't what our hermeneutic should be (Christological), but what baggage do we bring (Reformed preunderstanding of God the Father) that move us away from certain areas of scripture (Spiritual warfare), and how can we overcome it?<BR/><BR/>Blessings for your Easter Ben.<BR/><BR/>derekAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com