A 4 week series based on a paper called “DIGGING UP THE PAST: KARL BARTH AS FOE TO THE EMERGING CHURCH ON THE DOCTRINE OF REVELATION.”
Series Posts
1—Introduction
2—“God Speaks”
3—“God’s Revelation is Jesus Christ”
3—Conclusion
In 2007, Doug Pagitt and Tony Jones co-edited a book called An Emergent Manifesto of Hope. At the time, Tony Jones was the National Coordinator of Emergent Village, a national coordinating organization for the progressive Evangelical “conversation” known as the emerging church. Likewise, Doug Pagitt was one of the founding members of Emergent and editor of the newly-minted Emersion line of books from Baker Publishing Group out of which this title was published. The book was a collection of “voices” within the broader conversation “attempting to sing a song together” (whether or not the harmonies matched) in order to provide context for and explain what exactly was being sung within the emerging church.
One such voice was Chris Erdman who wrote a piece on the venerable theologian Karl Barth.
In this conversation Barth is known as a so-called “Friend of Emergent” who supports the key questions and answers percolating within the Emerging conversation. In his article, “Digging Up the Past: Karl Barth (the Reformed Giant) as Friend to the Emerging Church,” Erdman attempts to establish that Barth is Emergent’s friend and theological ally. Erdman likes Barth because he insisted that “the theological enterprise must never be the sole realm of academic theologians” and because he believed “the theological imperative was never finished.” (238) Similarly, leaders in the emerging church call on the Church as it currently exists to wrench theological work from the hands of the elite and put it firmly into the hands of the people, in order to ensure theological inquiry and development is “never static, never dull, never fixed, always open.” (239) As Erdman insists, “We now, like Barth then, are dissatisfied with the established and entrenched theology that has produced our present crisis. We seek another way; we want to ‘begin all over again,’ to work in a state of ‘constant emergency.’” (240)
The only problem is that the theological work and “other way” born out of that dissatisfaction would be questioned and disputed by Barth himself, rather than supported.
Though the emerging church may find companionship in Barth’s own theological journey, he is much more a foe in the produce of that journey than friend. Upon surveying the theological fruit birthed from two influential emerging church thinkers—Peter Rollins (How (Not) To Speak of God) and Samir Selmanovic (It’s Really All About God)—and digging into the particulars of Barth’s own theology, these posts will reveal how he is an adversary to the emerging church in the key theological discourse on the doctrine of revelation. Rollins understands the revelation of God in two key ways: 1) the hiddenness and hyper-transcendence of God, resulting in a thickly veiled God who isn’t truly knowable; and 2) our inability to say anything directly of God Himself, resulting in speech that never speaks of God but merely our understanding of God. While Selmanovic does believes God is revealed and known to humanity, that revelation and knowledge is not is contained within the “Christian religion.” Consequently, God is trans-religious and is revealed entirely outside the person of Jesus Christ. Barth will counter both theologians by insisting the revelation of God is “clear and certain” and is exclusively in the person of Jesus Christ.
While Barth insists that theology is “nothing but human ‘language about God,’” there is still something to say. And because the theological discipline of dogmatics is the servant of Church proclamation, that “something” should be proclaimed well and in accordance with the Holy Scriptures, for the glory of God and good of the world. In the end, Barth will reveal how what Rollins and Selmanovic are saying is neither in one accord with the Scriptures nor part of the historic Christian faith.













Sounds like an interesting exploration, Jeremy. I’ll be interested to read as you flesh this out.
Thanks steve! I hope i’m fair, yet honest on my assesment! Shlm.