Two books have recently appeared on the relationship between Barth and evangelicals. One is Engaging with Barth, featuring a piece by Moore College's own Mark Thompson. Another is Karl Barth and Evangelical Theology. Oliver Crisp and Henri Blocher appear in both volumes!
In both books, fair and critical engagement - sometimes sternly critical - is the theme. This is quite an interesting turn: a generation ago, 'Barthian' was a swear word in some evangelical circles. Hopefully, now that this is no longer the case, we can do without the label and enjoy some fruitful reading of Barth's work, without signing off on everything he says.
In KB&ET, Kevin Vanhoozer's essay 'A Person of the Book? Barth on Biblical Authority and Interpretation' is a particular stand out, not least for the history of Barth-reception among evangelicals. He explores the frequently expressed accusation that Barth views Scripture as a book that becomes rather than is already God's word. Using terms drawn from Speech-Act Theory to show how the Bible both is and becomes God's Word, he concludes:
...evangelicals and Barth can agree, at the very least, that the Bible is a central ingredient in the economy of God's self-communication. As to ontology, Scripture is divine-human communicative action: the Bible has its being in its locutions and illocutions, yet the Bible becomes what it is when the illuminating Spirit ministers those locutions and illocutions in order to bring about the divinely intended perlocutionary effects. p. 59
3 comments:
While I love the direction of claiming Scripture as both Being and becoming the word of God, I am not sure Kevin Vanhoozer use of Speech Act Theory works here. Vanhoozer makes the mistake with Speech Act Theory
of confusing the action of the speaker with words doing the action. In speech act theory the speaker/writer does the action not the words. So according to the theory the writers of the text like Paul are "doing things with words" and not the words themselves. To argue as Vanhoozer does, a more nuanced approach is needed.
Of the two books, "Engaging with Barth" is the best in my opition, notwithastanding Vanhoozer's excellent contrubution to "Karl Barth and Evangelical Theology".
Vanhoozer's essay certainly, in my opinion, was the standout in KB & ET. Though, I didn't mind MD Thompson's "Nein" to KB in Engaging.
Post a Comment