Disruptive Grace: Studies in the Theology of Karl Barth

Abstract

accomplished only if it is embodied in the here and now by communities living out salvation. When modern people ask "Where is God? Why doesn't he break his silence? Where is salvation to be found?" we can only point to concrete communities of people gathered by God in all their radical contingency and say "Look." Some of Lohfink's exegetical conclusions may be disputed, but I find the overall argument wholly convincing. This book has become my one volume I would take to ecclesiology desert island, though to categorize it as "ecclesiology" is to diminish its importance. It is, as the subtitle suggests, nothing less than a "theology of the people of God," and I hope that the breadth of its vision will encourage others to transgress the boundaries of their subspecialties.

The Grace of God and the Equality of Human Persons

“…16 For Luther this doctrine had meant that grace came to faith in three basic modes: once for all, again and again, and more and more-in that order of significance, through Word and sacrament. 17 Although righteousness is being infused gradually, it also comes to us whole and entire by grace, again and again, bringing daily forgiveness, daily assurance, and above all, daily partici-pation in Christ, so that through faith we are always completely "one with him, having the same righteousness as he. 18 The image of "continuation and perpetual operation" espoused by Luther is important because it implies that grace does not stand at the beginning of Christian faith alone, but that it accompanies Christian faith in every moment of its career, giving it substance, and nerve and shape.…”

«Mitt rike er ikke av denne verden»

“…Den konkrete og aktuelle betydning av nådens provokasjon er tydelig fastholdt også i disse to lignelsene. Tolleren var i kraft av sin syndserkjennelse rettferdig allerede på hjemveien (Luk 18,14). Og lignelsen om den fortapte sønn ender med farens oppfordring til storebror: Kom og vaer med i feiringen av lillebrors hjemkomst!…”

Religion and Modern Thought. By Victoria S. Harrison

“…Difficulties with the three‐part scheme are compounded by assigning Karl Barth to the second position. This seems problematic, given the pervasive dialectical and analogical characteristics of his theology, as clarified by the most reliable research and interpretation (see McCormack, 1995, 2008; Hunsinger, 2000, especially Chapters 3, 9 and 13). The lack of deeper engagement with Barth correlates with the way the book gravitates more towards summary history of ideas and associated arguments rather than towards theology.…”