revealed theology Flashcards
who is involved?
barth
Calvin (overall): some natural theology is possible but he is critical of the scope. it cannot show meaningful knowledge of god because of postlapsarian human nature.
calvin on revealed theology
critical about the scope of natural theology- humans could have a relationship with god based on natural theology BUT this overlooks a key factor of the fall. calvin says ‘si integer stetisset adam’, ‘if adam had remained upright’. if the fall had not occured, then natural theology would be COMPLETE in knowing god. thus because of original sin, we are in need of salvation, and we can accept gods offer of salvation.
roman catholic position on revealed theology (faith)
roman catholic position- although the fall did not separate god and humanity completely, it did call an epistemic chasm which may block the natural desire for god through nature.
in the catechism para 29, they said, ‘religious ignorance or indifference; the cares and riches of this world’ and TO OVERCOME THIS, THEY SAID, ‘there is another order of knowledge, the order of DIVINE REVELATION’ para 50
barth on revealed theology
Karl Barth was influenced by Augustine, who claimed that after the Fall our ability to reason become corrupted by original sin. This is a problem for natural theology which wants to make use of reason.
Barth contends it is ignorant to assume humans are capable of grasping the nature, as well as the will of God, stating ‘the finite has no capacity for the infinite’. Whatever humans discover about God through Reasoning is not actually the divine, so to think it is is idolatry. (sensus divinitatus see later) putting earthly things on the level of God.
Augustine suggests due to the fall, humans have inherited an epistemic gap between them and god, and therefore due to original sin, humans are ultimately incapable of knowing god
ignorance of humanity in thinking it has the capability of understanding gods will
Humanity’s belief that it has the ability to know anything of God is the same arrogance that led Adam and Eve to disobey God. Humanity believing that it has the power to figure out right and wrong is what led to the arrogant certainty of the Nazis in their own superiority. This arrogance of natural theology is evidence of a human inability to be humble enough to solely rely on faith.
barths interpretation of romans 1.20
“Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his external power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse”.
suggests paul is warning us how natural theology leads to idolatry.
he points to romans 1.25 when the gentiles, ‘exchanged the truth about god for a lie’. so natural theology cant be trusted
barth brunner debate- barths argument (john 14:6)
Barth argues that the point of contact between humans and god is ultimately from revelation, and thus revelation is necessary to understands gods nature. This is mirrored in John 14:6 when Jesus states, ‘no one comes to the father except through me’, Jesus reiterates the requirement of revelation through the prophets as it suggests natural faculties and reason is simply insufficient to access, and subsequently gain knowledge on the nature god.
barth brunner debate- brunners argument (john 14:4)
Brunner on the other hand, argues that human beings already have intrinsic knowledge on the nature of god, and revelation simply enhances this knowledge. This is also mirrored in John 14:4, ‘and you know the way to the place where i am going’ this suggests an innate point of contact as humans have a general understanding of gods nature and revelation simply enhances this. Furthermore, this would be convincing as this is parallel with the concept gods omnibenevolence, as god would not leave us stranded if we do not have access to divine revelation.
why does barth win? (use augustines view of human nature to necessitate revelation)
Overall, Barths argument seems to be more convincing as it already aligns with the attributes of god and maintains this idea of epistemic distance and our understanding on human nature after the fall. Therefore, we require revelation to accurately and sufficiently gain knowledge of god.
