Karl Barth's understanding of the Resurrection : analysis, discussion and contrast
The thesis argues that Barth's dogmatic theology provides the appropriate model for theology and the correct context for understanding his treatment of the resurrection: many critiques fail by attacking symptoms, not cause; and the underlying cause - his dogmatic method, while wide-ranging - is affirmed here. This is done without relapsing into uncritical ~Barthian fundamentalism~; indeed, many aspects of his theology of resurrection are subjected to considerable criticism here. Part One of this thesis covers Barth's earlier pilgrimage â from his ~liberal~ era, through his break with liberalism to his fully fledged ~dialectical~ theology. In this context, the resurrection is seen to move from the peripheral, via the realistic (as expression of God's power), to the epistemologically important. In Part Two, Barth's virgin birth/empty tomb parallelism is discussed and shown to lack a biblical basis. His talk of the 'forty days' of the Easter period is seen as suppressing Pauline in favour of Lucan chronology, and his idea of this time as the 'pure presence of God' is problematic. The place of the resurrection in IV/1-4 is analysed and discussed. The Klappert/Pannenberg debate on the interpretation of Â§59 is
Thacker, Anthony
Resurrection
Karl Barth's understanding of the Resurrection : analysis, discussion and contrast. The thesis argues that Barth's dogmatic theology provides the appropriate model for theology and the correct context for understanding his treatment of the resurrection: many critiques fail by attacking symptoms, not cause; and the underlying cause - his dogmatic method, while wide-ranging - is affirmed here. This is done without relapsing into uncritical ~Barthian fundamentalism~; indeed, many aspects of his theology of resurrection are subjected to considerable criticism here. Part One of this thesis covers Barth's earlier pilgrimage â from his ~liberal~ era, through his break with liberalism to his fully fledged ~dialectical~ theology. In this context, the resurrection is seen to move from the peripheral, via the realistic (as expression of God's power), to the epistemologically important. In Part Two, Barth's virgin birth/empty tomb parallelism is discussed and shown to lack a biblical basis. His talk of the 'forty days' of the Easter period is seen as suppressing Pauline in favour of Lucan chronology, and his idea of this time as the 'pure presence of God' is problematic. The place of the resurrection in IV/1-4 is analysed and discussed. The Klappert/Pannenberg debate on the interpretation of Â§59 is
barth resurrection analysis discussion contrast argues barth dogmatic theology provide_appropriate model theology correct context treatment resurrection many critique fail attack symptom cause underlie cause dogmatic method wide_ranging affirm here without uncritical barthian indeed many_aspect theology resurrection subject_considerable criticism here part_one cover barth earlier pilgrimage liberal era break liberalism fully dialectical theology context resurrection see move peripheral via realistic expression god power epistemologically important part_two barth virgin birth tomb parallelism discuss show lack biblical basis talk forty day easter period see suppress pauline favour lucan chronology idea time pure presence_god problematic place resurrection analyse discuss debate interpretation ass