Thank you for this! It is definitely a good help for us to understand through clear distinctions how the Van Tillian view on Natural Theology ought to be viewed properly in contrast to the Barthian view. Both have been a challenging take for me in my study of Natural Theology in the Reformed faith. While I myself am a Van Tillian for the most part, I still hold Aquinas in high regard for his rigorous, scholastic manner of explicating the Christian worldview. It is powerful enough in the logical sense to help people see their beliefs better. While it will never be complete compared to the witness of the Holy Scriptures, it sure is beneficial for every Christian who seeks to provide an explanation for their faith. Great job as always, Reformed Forum! God bless all of you and this ministry of yours. Soli Deo gloria!
Thank you guys for putting this quality of discussion for anyone outside a seminary to hear. Anybody know of other channels that engage in these topics at a similar depth?
Barth isn't saying that there is no knowledge outside of the Bible. He is saying that the person of Jesus Christ is the lens that we see everything through. Jesus Christ is not an idea but a person..( see Bonhoeffer's work on Christology). The Son's eternal relationship with His Father is the molten core of the New Testament and an essential part of the ground and the grammar of our theology. There is no other way to the Father but the knowledge ( the metanoia) that we have been adopted into the Triune life by the person and work of Jesus Christ . Jesus has invited us to participate in His life with His Father through the Spirit. No mixing of anything else like philosophy or human ideas of what will allow us to participate NEIN !!! Jesus work is total and unilateral....doesn't allow for men to tamper with it.
We approach Jesus Christ as a Kataphysin ( as He is in Himself) and not ideas we might have about Him. Otherwise we repeat the mistake of Arias and all of the later inheritors of his mantle...Newtonian mechanistic deistic dualistic....who have a Schizoid deity...an an angry Zeus like God behind the back of a Promethean Jesus. 🙃 See TF Torrance and C.Baxter Kruger at www.perichoresis.org
Comparing Karl Barth to someone like Cornelius Van Till is like comparing the work of Albert Einstein to the work of a high school student. VanTill did not understand Karl Barth. Why do people refer to him?
There is natural revelation and it is infallible, that said it is impossible for man to make proper use of this natural revelation after the fall. This natural revelation suffices to leave man without excuse, but it does not suffice for man to gain any knowledge of God (Romans 1:19-23).
GOD'S WORD is not His speech....IT is Jesus Christ...the Word of God. The whole Bible points to Jesus Christ as the Word of God. The prologue of John's gospel states this. Jesus Christ is Homoousias To Patri.
![ROSÉ (로제) - number one girl [더 시즌즈-이영지의 레인보우] | KBS 241129 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A9oByH9Ci24/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for this! It is definitely a good help for us to understand through clear distinctions how the Van Tillian view on Natural Theology ought to be viewed properly in contrast to the Barthian view. Both have been a challenging take for me in my study of Natural Theology in the Reformed faith.
While I myself am a Van Tillian for the most part, I still hold Aquinas in high regard for his rigorous, scholastic manner of explicating the Christian worldview. It is powerful enough in the logical sense to help people see their beliefs better. While it will never be complete compared to the witness of the Holy Scriptures, it sure is beneficial for every Christian who seeks to provide an explanation for their faith.
Great job as always, Reformed Forum! God bless all of you and this ministry of yours.
Soli Deo gloria!
Thank you guys for putting this quality of discussion for anyone outside a seminary to hear. Anybody know of other channels that engage in these topics at a similar depth?
Good stuff! The Pastor Emeritus at the OPC I am a member of, was educated at Westminster under Van Till.
Thanks again for sharing this clip.......
Do you like Barth?
Barth isn't saying that there is no knowledge outside of the Bible. He is saying that the person of Jesus Christ is the lens that we see everything through. Jesus Christ is not an idea but a person..( see Bonhoeffer's work on Christology). The Son's eternal relationship with His Father is the molten core of the New Testament and an essential part of the ground and the grammar of our theology. There is no other way to the Father but the knowledge ( the metanoia) that we have been adopted into the Triune life by the person and work of Jesus Christ . Jesus has invited us to participate in His life with His Father through the Spirit. No mixing of anything else like philosophy or human ideas of what will allow us to participate NEIN !!! Jesus work is total and unilateral....doesn't allow for men to tamper with it.
We approach Jesus Christ as a Kataphysin ( as He is in Himself) and not ideas we might have about Him. Otherwise we repeat the mistake of Arias and all of the later inheritors of his mantle...Newtonian mechanistic deistic dualistic....who have a Schizoid deity...an an angry Zeus like God behind the back of a Promethean Jesus. 🙃 See TF Torrance and C.Baxter Kruger at www.perichoresis.org
Comparing Karl Barth to someone like Cornelius Van Till is like comparing the work of Albert Einstein to the work of a high school student. VanTill did not understand Karl Barth. Why do people refer to him?
There is natural revelation and it is infallible, that said it is impossible for man to make proper use of this natural revelation after the fall. This natural revelation suffices to leave man without excuse, but it does not suffice for man to gain any knowledge of God (Romans 1:19-23).
GOD'S WORD is not His speech....IT is Jesus Christ...the Word of God. The whole Bible points to Jesus Christ as the Word of God. The prologue of John's gospel states this. Jesus Christ is Homoousias To Patri.