----- 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)
