The Infinite Qualitative Difference and the Difference It Makes: A Recurring Theme in Barth’s Dogmatics
This article argues that the term “incommensurable” is a key indicator of Barth’s position that the difference between God and the world is a “pure difference” and therefore not a difference of any “kind” nor even a difference of “infinitely greater degree,” as possibly implied by the Fourth Lateran...
| Subtitles: | Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of the Toronto School of Theology, [Part 1] |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
School
[2020]
|
| In: |
Toronto journal of theology
Year: 2020, Volume: 36, Issue: 2, Pages: 183-193 |
| IxTheo Classification: | KDD Protestant Church NAB Fundamental theology NBC Doctrine of God |
| Further subjects: | B
Apocalyptic
B qualitative difference B Language B Negation B Metaphor |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | This article argues that the term “incommensurable” is a key indicator of Barth’s position that the difference between God and the world is a “pure difference” and therefore not a difference of any “kind” nor even a difference of “infinitely greater degree,” as possibly implied by the Fourth Lateran Council. Although this term is used prominently in his second Romans commentary, where it underscores the companion idea that God is “wholly other,” it also recurs at important points in Church Dogmatics, where it is more often presupposed than openly stated. The “Pure Difference Thesis” not only clarifies why Barth’s rejection of the analogia entis is logically necessary for him but also why he argues that any and all activity of God in the world is purely miraculous, as well as beyond ordinary human comprehension. A few examples of how the Pure Difference Thesis comes to bear in Barth’s theology are given: truth claims about God involve an extrinsic analogy of attribution as grounded entirely in the miracle of grace; sanctification in Christ cannot possibly be a matter of progressing by degrees; dialectical theology becomes a drastic matter of Aufhebung (negation and negation of the negation); and Christ’s atoning work on the cross is depicted in essentially “apocalyptic” terms. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1918-6371 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Toronto journal of theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.3138/tjt-2020-0106 |