Apokatastasis and apostolicity: a response to Oliver Crisp on the question of Barth's universalism

Oliver Crisp argues that Karl Barth is incoherent on the question of universal salvation. Making use of a modal distinction between contingent and necessary universalism, Crisp claims that Barth's theology leads to the view that all people must be saved, yet Barth denies this conclusion. Most d...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Congdon, David W. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Cambridge Univ. Press 2014
In: Scottish journal of theology
Year: 2014, Volume: 67, Issue: 4, Pages: 464-480
Further subjects:B Participation
B Divine Freedom
B Historicity
B Universal Salvation
B Worldview
B Mission (international law
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Parallel Edition:Electronic

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1785582224
003 DE-627
005 20220113002645.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220112s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1017/S0036930614000222  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1785582224 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1785582224 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)1044490586  |0 (DE-627)772093474  |0 (DE-576)397700903  |4 aut  |a Congdon, David W. 
109 |a Congdon, David W.  |a Congdon, David 
245 1 0 |a Apokatastasis and apostolicity: a response to Oliver Crisp on the question of Barth's universalism 
264 1 |c 2014 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Oliver Crisp argues that Karl Barth is incoherent on the question of universal salvation. Making use of a modal distinction between contingent and necessary universalism, Crisp claims that Barth's theology leads to the view that all people must be saved, yet Barth denies this conclusion. Most defences of Barth reject the view that his theology logically requires the salvation of all people; they try to defend him by appealing, as Barth himself seems to do at times, to divine freedom. This article argues that, even though his theology does lead necessarily to the conclusion of universal salvation, it is still coherent for him to deny universalism on his own methodological grounds, since the necessity and the denial operate at different levels. Barth has other commitments in his theology than mere logical consistency. To support this claim, I argue that the necessity which belongs to God's reconciling work in Christ coincides with a double contingency: (a) the ‘objective’ contingency of Christ's particular history and (b) the ‘subjective’ contingency with which this reconciliation confronts particular human beings and calls them to participate in the apostolic mission of Jesus. In each case, necessity coincides paradoxically with a kind of contingency, such that, within Barth's theology, we can speak of what Kevin Hector calls ‘contingent necessity’ or what Eberhard Jüngel calls ‘eschatological necessity’. Most debates over universalism focus on the objective side. There the question is whether the necessity of Christ's universally effective work compromises divine freedom. But Barth's concern on this point is whether the necessity is ‘transcendent’ or ‘immanent’, that is, whether it is determined by God or the creature, and since God can indeed will the salvation of all, this poses no problem in principle for affirming universal salvation. Barth's central concern has to do with the issue of ‘subjective’ necessity. Barth denies that theology is ever a matter of describing what is objectively or generally the case regarding God and the world. On the contrary, he situates theology within the existential determination and subjective participation of the one called to bear witness to Jesus Christ. For this reason, he rejects all worldviews, including universalism. The rejection of universalism is the affirmation of apostolicity. 
601 |a Apokatastasis 
601 |a Apostoliker 
650 4 |a Worldview 
650 4 |a Universal Salvation 
650 4 |a Participation 
650 4 |a Mission 
650 4 |a Historicity 
650 4 |a Divine Freedom 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Scottish journal of theology  |d Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press, 1948  |g 67(2014), 4, Seite 464-480  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)342893688  |w (DE-600)2072577-2  |w (DE-576)097935182  |x 1475-3065  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:67  |g year:2014  |g number:4  |g pages:464-480 
776 |i Erscheint auch als  |n elektronische Ausgabe  |w (DE-627)1641330406  |k Electronic 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1017/S0036930614000222  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/scottish-journal-of-theology/article/apokatastasis-and-apostolicity-a-response-to-oliver-crisp-on-the-question-of-barths-universalism/08B8790834EF7C4431EC42C35EB3C9DC  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 67  |j 2014  |e 4  |h 464-480 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4033641092 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1785582224 
LOK |0 005 20220112043315 
LOK |0 008 220112||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-01-05#F487269D7668C520132BB57FF8B98EA61349D596 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
STA 0 0 |a Mission (international law,Mission,Mission,Christianity,World mission 
STB 0 0 |a Mission,Mission,Mission 
STC 0 0 |a Misión,Misión,Misión 
STD 0 0 |a Missione,Missione,Missione 
STE 0 0 |a 宣教,宣教,传教,宣教使命,传教,宣教使命 
STF 0 0 |a 宣教,宣教,傳教,宣教使命,傳教,宣教使命 
STG 0 0 |a Missão,Missão,Missão 
STH 0 0 |a Миссия (международное право),Миссия (мотив),Миссия 
STI 0 0 |a Αποστολή (Διεθνές δίκαιο),Ιεραποστολή (μοτίβο),Ιεραποστολή 
SYE 0 0 |a Diplomatische Mission,Christentum,Christliche Mission,Heidenmission,Weltmission,Missionierung