----- Original Message -----
Sent: February 22, 2005 11:03
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] vessels meet for
masters use
G whizes "God's Word is
uniquely the jurisdiction of postBarthians"
As only a "Protestant" can know it Some good reading on the
rantings of Neo's
Barth was a master of putting new
("MODERN") Heretical meanings into traditional language
Barth, Karl![]()
![]()
(1888-1968) Neo-Orthodox theologian and
heretic.
Barth
used traditional religious terminology to describe his heretical
doctrines (much
like modern Mormons). Underlying this, however,
are concepts like the utter
transcendence of God, the Bible as less
than the voice of the Lord
(i.e., God cannot be contained in human
language),
acceptance of Natural Evolution over the Genesis Creation
Account, the so-called
'Higher Criticism' with it's denial of the historicity
of Scripture, subscription to
Universal Atonement and Universal Salvation,
belief that God would need to correct
His decrees, denial of the
impassibility of God, etc.
Strikingly similar to
contemporary Post Modernism, Barth
viewed
paradox and uncertainty as
theological virtues, esteemed doctrinal
contradiction, and conceived of
God as largely unknowable
!
( Explaining why much of what Barth
wrote is pseudo-intellectual
convoluted gibberish. )
While claiming to be against
theological liberalism, Karl Barth had been
heavily involved in Socialist
politics in his native Switzerland.![]()
Which
political philosophy he
later recanted but is widely believed to have
influenced his
theology.
Like Schleiermacher before
him, Barth is declared by his proponents
to be the "Father of Modern
Protestantism".![]()
Similar to Schleiermacher,
though, he can be best described as a
corrupter of modern protestantism.
( SEE:![]()
Barthian,
Neo-Orthodoxy,
Universal
Atonement, Universal
Salvation,
Universalism,
German
Theology, Theopaschite
Heresy, Post
Modern.
RELATED:![]()
Dialectical
Theology.![]()
CONTRAST:![]()
Limited
Atonment, Election,
Immutability,
Impassibility.![]()
SIMILAR:![]()
Brunner,
Bultmann,
Schleiermacher.
)
It would be impossible to encapsulate the theology of
Barth in any adequate way. I would, in broad terms, characterize the
theology of Karl Barth as part Eastern Mysticism, part
Hinduism, part Greek Gnosticism,
part Platonism, part Aristotalanism and part
Druidism. Was it also part Christian and part Judaism?
But no one deserves to take an undue portion of the blame for Barth�s mad
rantings. He and he alone is guilty of inventing things that had never
been known or taught before in heaven or in earth. One is tempted to
add �under the earth,� but I will not, because that is possibly the very place
from whence Barth fetched them.
Thinking Like a Protestant in the
Humanistic, Evangelical Wilderness
Karl Barth alarmed at Nietzsche like liberalism with its resultant tyranny,
felt compelled along with other 20th century theologians to reinvent orthodoxy
(deemed neo-orthodoxy or new orthodoxy). Unfortunately, Barth and his
colleagues borrowed heavily on the heretical presuppositions of their more
militant liberal brothers, in that they rejected confessional creedal
orthodoxy (like Nietzsche convinced such notions were outmoded). Additionally,
the neo-orthodox roundly reject the inspiration, infallibility and
immutable authority of the Scriptures, derogatorily calling it "the paper
pope." Thus, while holding selected moral lessons of traditional
Christianity, the neo-orthodox are essentially
unitarian-universalists. Notwithstanding, because they have
remolded God into man's image, they remain blaspheming
heretics perhaps more dangerous than their frothing liberal
counterparts in that neo-orthodox tyranny is kinder and gentler replete with a
beguiling smile.
The neo-orthodox have had a profound and deleterious effect on
evangelicals, effectively eroding their ability and will to resist
humanistic thought.When you combine the effects of Hegalian statism,
Nietzsche like elitism, Darwinian dehumanization and Barth's
anesthetizing universalism, you have a full orbed comprehensive
world-life-view which like the builders of the tower of Babel are
seeking to dethrone God and establish man as sovereign. It
should also be plain and painfully clear that evangelicalism
is not only unable to cope with this challenge, but for all intents and
purposes has already been neutralized by adopting some if not all of
humanism's presuppositions.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
In a message dated 2/22/2005 6:02:08 AM Pacific Standard
Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 2/21/2005 9:47:32 PM Pacific Standard
Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
God's Word is uniquely the jurisdiction of
postBarthians, e.g., Word-sensitive scholarly translators suited to the
task of conceptualizing and communicating Gods thoughts humanly in
modern language)
