God’s simple multiplicity: an inquiry into Karl Barth’s account of God’s one being and his many perfections

Object Type: Asset
In Folder: MTh theses

Expand to show object metadata

God’s simple multiplicity: an inquiry into Karl Barth’s account of God’s one being and his many perfections

Dublin Core Metadata

title: God’s simple multiplicity: an inquiry into Karl Barth’s account of God’s one being and his many perfections

creator: Underwood, Ben

subject: Barth, Karl (1886-1968)

description: Abstract reads :"This thesis analyses and evaluates Karl Barth’s endeavour to reformulate the traditional account of the relation of the essence and attributes of God in line with his principle that God is who he is in the act of his revelation. We inquire whether his diagnosis of problems in the tradition represented in Protestant Orthodoxy is accurate and to what extent Barth’s account amounts to a substantial and consistent reformulation of the tradition. To answer this we examine the doctrine of Amandus Polanus, who isa central representative of Protestant Orthodoxy in Barth’s work. We also examine Isaac Dorner’s doctrine of God, for Barth approves his approach to the attributes. We then examine Barth’s treatment of God’s being and perfections in §§28-30, analysing his approach, his criticism of the tradition and his development of his reformulated account, and comparing and contrasting it with what we find in Polanus and Dorner. Regarding Barth’s criticism of the tradition, we argue that Barth misreads certain statements in the Protestant Orthodox upon which his critique relies and overlooks the role divine perfection plays in the tradition. We conclude that this greatly weakens his case for the necessity of reform. Regarding the role played by Dorner in the development of Barth’s account, we argue that Barth takes up many of Dorner’s arguments against the tradition, and especially shares Dorner’s conviction that revelation discloses objective divine attributes. Yet we argue that Barth develops this line of thought in his own way, not departing from the tradition as far as Dorner does. Regarding the role played by Polanus and the tradition he represents, we argue that they are both friend and foe for Barth, although his criticism is more prominent than his appreciation. In 29 Barth criticises Protestant Orthodoxy for an overemphasis on divine unity, but in §30 he criticises it for an insufficiently integrated exposition of the attributes.We argue that Barth’s basic discontent with Protestant Orthodoxy lies in his conviction that revelation conveys a positive knowledge of God, not merely what God is nowhere that Barth’s principle that God is who he is in the act of his revelation provides a source of coherent development for his account. It reformulates and reorganises the traditional doctrine of the divine essence and attributes. The interaction between the Protestant Orthodox tradition and Barth’s revelation principle provides Barth’s account of the being and attributes of God with an underlying logic that gives it substance and consistency and distinguishes it from both the conceptualism of Protestant Orthodoxy and the realism of Dorner.IntroductionPart one — Conceptualism and realismPart two — Against ‘semi-nominalismPart three—Barth’s developed account of the perfectionsConclusionA thesis submitted in fulfilment for the degree of Master of Theology, Moore Theological College.

publisher: Ben Underwood ; Moore Theological College

date: 2022-08-01

type: Text

language: English

rights: In copyright - educational use only.This item may be used for the purposes of research and study. Please acknowledge that it is held by Ben Underwood and Moore Theological College.This digital item is accessible online to all.

rights:

format: text

Expand ▼