Dogmatics I.2. Section 13.1

My summary/thoughts on Barth's Dogmatics will begin with Dogmatics I.2, as the prolegomena section (first part of I.1) is a bit dry. I will eventually return to that when I feel I have the drive.

This first sentence of this section summarizes (very, very basically) the second half of Dogmatics I.1. "This answer [of the subject of revelation witnessed in Scripture] may be summarized by saying that the revelation attested in Holy Scripture is the revelation of the God who, as the Lord, is the Father from whom it proceeds, the Son who fulfills it objectively (for us), and the Holy Spirit who fulfills it subjectively (in us)." (p.1, CD I.2).
With that as our basis, we begin our Barthian journey.


Barth begins by discussing the nature of the freedom of God's revelation in and for us. Revelation in us is the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, and for us is Christ, which we are directly concerned with in this particular post. So how does one encounter the revelation of God in Christ? He first warns against taking a stance as an interpreter between humanity and deity, acting as a hyper-knowledgeable human capable of stepping back from his/her very humanity to weigh revelation as it affects humans. We cannot judge what conditions must be met before revelation can encounter us - only God knows that. If we use our knowledge to judge what can and can't be revelation we limit how God can/can't speak to us, thereby attempting to hinder God's free nature. Therefore the only stance we can take in examining this is a very human stance allowing God to act on God's freedom in whichever way it happens, "so as to do nothing but reflect the thought and language of revelation." (p.5) Of course, the "whichever way it happens" equates to Scripture, which Barth argues previously is the most complete form of revelation available to us.

Barth states the importance of Scripture as witness, as something other people have attested to because they have seen or heard something. Skipping a boring semantics argument, Barth then discusses that the way Scripture attests of Jesus Christ is simple and true - being a witness, the gospels and Paul only wrote what they witnessed (or, technically, what others witnessed). He points out that Jesus is the only subject to which the New Testament points, and therefore the name of Jesus of Nazareth means something great - it cannot simply be expelled in order to extract principles of good nature, the NT consists of stories about Jesus. The attributes and events thereof can only be assigned to that person, Jesus. Barth briefly (and beautifully) discusses Jesus being the fulfillment of time in the NT because everything before prophesied about him and everything afterwards was a witness to him...therefore what is contained in the gospels as the content of these prophesy and witness statements is its fulfillment.

Barth then dives into two issues of interpreting particular passages in lieu of the whole witness of Jesus Christ. They have both been significant in the early history of the church: Docetism and Ebionitism. The former represents the idea that the Son of God is this man from Nazareth. Barth explains this as finding in Jesus the "fulfillment of the conception of the Son of God" (p.17), placing complete emphasis on the acts of Jesus as only divine. This statement claims that "in [Jesus] alone, for the first time, and fully, [one finds] the Godhead." If you read Paul or John, Docetism falls apart. Ebionitism, on the other hand, is the idea that the man from Nazareth is the Son of God. This idea, that Jesus was just such a great man and somehow was made the Son of God, does not take into account Jesus' divine essence. This reminds me of the distinction Caesar (and other rulers of the time) gave himself, Son of God, basically inferring divinity. He finishes by suggesting that a synthesis of these two ideas does not represent the witness of the NT, but instead "just the name Jesus Christ. By naming Him, they want to let Him who is so named have the final word." (p. 24)
In that sense, Jesus is the objective reality of the revelation of God.

**more to come, friends!