Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “Church Dogmatics 1.2: The Doctrine of the Word of God” as Want to Read:
Church Dogmatics 1.2: The Doctrine of the Word of God
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

Church Dogmatics 1.2: The Doctrine of the Word of God (Church Dogmatics #1.2)

4.44  ·  Rating details ·  59 Ratings  ·  6 Reviews
Described by Pope Pius XII as the most important theologian since Thomas Aquinas, the Swiss pastor and theologian, Karl Barth, continues to be a major influence on students, scholars and preachers today.Barth s theology found its expression mainly through his closely reasoned fourteen-part magnum opus, Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. Having taken over 30 years to write, the Churc ...more
Hardcover, 924 pages
Published November 30th 2000 by Bloomsbury T&T Clark (first published June 1956)
More Details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Church Dogmatics 1.2, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Church Dogmatics 1.2

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30)
Rating details
Sort: Default
|
Filter
Ben De Bono
Feb 26, 2012 rated it it was amazing
Shelves: theology
In Barth's second volume we come to his quite controversial position (at least among Evangelicals) on Scripture. I've heard many claims that Barth doesn't affirm the Bible as the Word of God and that he questions the divine nature of Scripture.

Knowing I was entering controversial territory, I tried to go into this volume with an open mind and not bias myself one way or another. After finishing this volume, I find myself a bit shocked and perplexed that there's any controversy at all. Honestly,
...more
Robert Beveridge
Feb 02, 2009 rated it really liked it
Shelves: ohio-link
Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics I.ii.: The Doctrine of the Word of God (T & T Clark, 1956)

We are almost 1,250 pages into the monstrosity known as Church Dogmatics before Karl Barth actually addresses the topic of dogmatics. It's frustrating, but it's also kind of brilliant, because after 1,250 pages of setup, assuming you've lasted that far, you're really wondering when Barth is going to get down to brass tacks. Rest assured, he does.

It took me thirteen months, on and off, to bull my way throu
...more
Jacob Aitken
Mar 23, 2013 rated it really liked it
This is not a full review, since I am not dealing with sections 15-18. Those are important because of his discussions of asarkos/ensarkos, but since he takes up that theme elsewhere, I won't worry about it.

I don’t think this is one of Barth’s more important contributions, but it is one on which most Evangelicals think he is “the bad guy.” It is in this volume where he more explicitly denies that the text in your hands is the revelation of the Word of God. Rather, it is a witness to that revelati
...more
Mitch Mallary
Jul 12, 2017 rated it it was amazing
Reading Barth is like running a marathon. Sometimes it just feels good to finish. But it always changes your life.
Keat
rated it really liked it
Aug 06, 2011
Wayne Larson
rated it really liked it
Jun 04, 2009
Joel
rated it did not like it
Nov 15, 2014
Adam Gossman
rated it it was amazing
Dec 08, 2016
W. Littlejohn
rated it it was amazing
Jul 11, 2009
Kent Rhodehamel
rated it it was amazing
Dec 13, 2014
Ted Morgan
rated it it was amazing
Dec 30, 2012
Benjamin Tillman Russell
rated it it was amazing
May 07, 2012
Septian
rated it really liked it
Jun 16, 2013
Ian Guy
Jul 07, 2012 marked it as abandonned
Shelves: theology
I found this one too difficult as well.
Charlotte Chung
rated it really liked it
Nov 27, 2016
Ryan Hamilton
rated it liked it
Dec 11, 2012
A.J.
rated it it was amazing
May 04, 2011
S.D. Morrison
rated it it was amazing
May 17, 2017
Wallace Roark
rated it really liked it
Mar 06, 2013
Rev. Chris Breslin
rated it really liked it
Jun 29, 2011
Jeremy
rated it really liked it
Feb 25, 2010
Arnold Mayorga
rated it it was amazing
Dec 17, 2015
Rob Lewis
rated it really liked it
Aug 05, 2015
Wilson
rated it liked it
Oct 24, 2016
Evan Duncan
rated it it was amazing
Oct 22, 2014
Brett
rated it it was amazing
Jan 18, 2013
Robert
rated it really liked it
Dec 18, 2011
Ted Morgan
rated it it was amazing
Dec 30, 2012
Michael
rated it it was amazing
Aug 01, 2011
Len MacRae
rated it really liked it
Mar 14, 2014
« previous 1 next »
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »
134 followers
Karl Barth (pronounced "bart") was a Swiss Reformed theologian whom critics hold to be among the most important Christian thinkers of the 20th century; Pope Pius XII described him as the most important theologian since Thomas Aquinas. Beginning with his experience as a pastor, he rejected his training in the predominant liberal theology typical of 19th-century Protestantism, especially German.

Inst
...more
More about Karl Barth

Other Books in the Series

Church Dogmatics (1 - 10 of 14 books)
  • Church Dogmatics 1.1: The Doctrine of the Word of God
  • Church Dogmatics 2.1: The Doctrine of God
  • Church Dogmatics 2.2: The Doctrine of God
  • Church Dogmatics 3.1: The Doctrine of Creation
  • Church Dogmatics 3.2 The Doctrine of Creation
  • Church Dogmatics 3.3
  • Church Dogmatics 3.4 The Doctrine of Creation: The Command of God the Creator
  • Church Dogmatics 4.1 The Doctrine of Reconciliation
  • Church Dogmatics 4.2 The Doctrine of Reconciliation
  • Church Dogmatics 4.3.1
“There is no such thing as a special biblical hermeneutics. But we have to learn that hermeneutics which is alone and generally valid by means of the Bible as the witness of revelation. We therefore arrive at the suggested rule, not from a general anthropology, but from the Bible, and obviously, as the rule which is alone and generally valid, we must apply it first to the Bible.
The fact that we have to understand and expound the Bible as a human word can now be explained rather more exactly in this way: that we have to listen to what it says to us as a human word. We have to understand it as a human word in the light of what it says.

Under the caption of a truly "historical" understanding of the Bible we cannot allow ourselves to commend an understanding which does not correspond to the rule suggested: a hearing in which attention is paid to the biblical expressions but not to what the words signify, in which what is said is not heard or overheard; an understanding of the biblical words from their immanent linguistic and factual context, instead of from what they say and what we hear them say in this context; an exposition of the biblical words which in the last resort consists only in an exposition of the biblical men in their historical reality. To this we must say that it is not an honest and unreserved understanding of the biblical word as a human word, and it is not therefore an historical understanding of the Bible. In an understanding of this kind the Bible cannot be witness. In this type of understanding, in which it is taken so little seriously, indeed not at all, as a human word, the possibility of its being witness is taken away from the very outset. The philosophy which lies behind this kind of understanding and would force us to accept it as the only true historical understanding is not of course a very profound or respectable one. But even if we value it more highly, or highest of all, and are therefore disposed to place great confidence in its dictates, knowing what is involved in the understanding of the Bible, we can only describe this kind of understanding of the reality of a human word as one which cannot possibly do justice to its object. Necessarily, therefore, we have to reject most decisively the intention of even the most profound and respectable philosophy to subject any human word and especially the biblical word to this understanding. The Bible cannot be read unbiblically. And in this case that means that it cannot be read with such a disregard for its character even as a human word. It cannot be read so unhistorically.

§19.1, pp. 466-467)”
0 likes
“There is a notion that complete impartiality is the most fitting and indeed the normal disposition for true exegesis, because it guarantees a complete absence of prejudice. For a short time, around 1910, this idea threatened to achieve almost canonical status in Protestant theology. But now we can quite calmly describe it as merely comical.” 0 likes
More quotes…