Journal: Trinity Journal
Volume: TRINJ 25:2 (Fall 2004)
Article: Barth, Barthians, and Evangelicals: Reassessing the Question of the Relation of Holy Scripture and the Word of God
Author: John D. Morrison

---

TrinJ 25:2 (Fall 04) p. 187

Barth, Barthians, and Evangelicals:
Reassessing the Question of the Relation of Holy Scripture
and the Word of God

John D. Morrison

John D. Morrison is Professor of Theological Studies at Liberty University and Seminary in Lynchburg, Virginia.

From the Enlightenment there has arisen the strong tendency in theological circles to bifurcate, to dualistically separate, the text of Holy Scripture from “the Word of God,” which is something reckoned to be necessarily other than all texts as such, whatever “the Word of God” is understood to be. The chasm between text and “Word” grew through the nineteenth century as a result of philosophical developments and, especially, the further development of historical-critical approaches to the study of Scripture. As a result, many developments of twentieth-century theology and its prominent schools of thought (especially in the first half of the century), followed by the “shattered spectrum” of multiplied theologies and the entrenchment of postmodernity, have affirmed the separation of Scripture from some non-contentful, non-discursive, non-historical “Word of God,” which is the transcendent seat of divine truth and authority. Hence religious authority was located anywhere but in the text of Scripture, which was regarded as simply another human religious product resulting from the effect of or “encounter” with divine Truth/Word of God.

Into the midst of this theological fray came Karl Barth, who, because of his prolific, powerful, and consistent christocentric theological writing, came to be known as the greatest theologian of the twentieth century—perhaps the greatest since Calvin. Barth did much to turn European and American theology, for a time, back to serious theological and christological engagement, and to the serious use of Scripture for the theological task.

Yet at the same time Barth’s theology became a center around which diverse discussion swirled. Classical liberals and later neo-liberal and existentialist theologians criticized Barth’s apparent readiness to return to Reformation themes and doctrines. “Orthodox” Protestants varied in the form and focus of their responses, and were at first mostly critical, though usually not without constructive interest and appreciation for the new direction in which Barth was taking Christian theology. Suspicion was

TrinJ 25:2 (Fall 04) p. 188

coupled with regard for Barth’s emphases on the Godness of God, the Trinity, the centrality of Jesus Christ for all Christian thought and theology as truly Christian, human sinfulness, and real redemption through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But among the most repeated points of concern was (and is

visitor : : uid: ()