Barth — It’s the Word of God, but not THE Word of God

This is a concept from Barth I struggled with years ago, but now have a level of comfort in understanding: The Bible contains the Word of God. Okay, I lie. I don’t “understand” it. I’m comfortable with it.

Growing up conservative Pentecostal, having the Bible AS the Word of God was an important doctrinal statement. It still is for me. Yet, there is also the realization that the Bible leads us to the WORD of God.

What I’ve come to understand from Barth is that his view of Scripture is not diminished at all by saying the Bible contains the Word of God. Over the years (and I’m a slow learner) I’ve watched people who make statements I didn’t understand at first have a deep respect for the Bible, the Word of God, inspiration, infallibility, etc. I’m more settled in Barth’s view of Scripture. Maybe that’s the word I’m looking to use.

The Word of God, for Barth, is God himself. “The statement that the Bible is the Word of God cannot therefore say that the Word of God is tied to the Bible. On the contrary, what it must say is that the Bible is tied to the Word of God.”

As I said, I’m a slow learner. For most that statement is not a problem. For me, I’m just getting comfortable with it.

Tags:

Date:

February 21, 2011

Up next:

Before:

18 responses to “Barth — It’s the Word of God, but not THE Word of God”

Craig Benno

February 21, 2011 at 3:11 pm

That’s an interesting and honest description of your journey Dan and is where I am at also. My transition began before reading Barth; whom when I did read, encouraged and validated me.

I started questioning the status quo; when I immersed myself into the Psalms and asked myself how can this be God’s direct word; when it is a record of peoples prayers; songs and laments to God.

My understanding of Barth is that Christ is the “Word” and so God’s word centres around, over and in the person of Christ .

1. Dan
  
  February 22, 2011 at 6:40 am
  
  Thanks, Craig. That’s what I’m understanding as well.
  
Mark Stevens

February 22, 2011 at 5:23 am

Scripture becomes the Word of God as he reveals it. Barth has a threefold description of the Word of God: The Word Preached, The Word Written and the Word Revealed.

1. Dan
  
  February 22, 2011 at 6:40 am
  
  Thanks, Mark. I like that description. I need SOOO much help reading Barth! My brain hurts!
  
T.C. R

February 22, 2011 at 3:05 pm

Dan, I just got Evangelical Theology: An Introduction by Barth. My sort of personal introduction to Barth.

1. Dan
  
  February 22, 2011 at 3:06 pm
  
  Thanks! I’ll need to look into that one.
  
What is and isn’t the Word of God – I guess I’m Barthian | Unsettled Christianity

November 29, 2011 at 5:24 pm

[…] Posted on November 29, 2011 by Joel “The statement that the Bible is the Word of God cannot therefore say that the Word of God is tied to the Bible. On the contrary, what it must say is that the Bible is tied to the Word of God.” (ht) […]

Mike Gantt

November 30, 2011 at 5:08 am

The Bible is the jar of manna (Ex 16:33; Heb 9:4).

1. Geoffrey
  
  November 30, 2011 at 12:22 pm
  
  A jar of “What is this”? Really?
  
  1. Mike Gantt
    
    November 30, 2011 at 12:53 pm
    
    A reminder of the sustenance of His word which He provides daily to all those who look to Him.
Geoffrey

November 30, 2011 at 3:26 pm

Mike Gannt, I have to be honest with you. Your 12:53 pm comment is utter and complete gibberish.

1. Mike Gantt
  
  November 30, 2011 at 3:32 pm
  
  Geoffrey, do you really see no metaphorical value in the jar of manna?
  
2. Mike Gantt
  
  November 30, 2011 at 3:32 pm
  
  Or are you simply saying you don’t see how the metaphor applies?
  
  1. Geoffrey
    
    November 30, 2011 at 4:19 pm
    
    Actually, I’m saying what I’m saying. The verbal content of your comment with the time tag of 12:53 pm is gibberish. I didn’t understand it, couldn’t make heads or tails of it, and am still wondering how “manna” – which is literally “what’s this?” in the original Hebrew – is any kind of metaphor for Scripture? Are you saying it falls during the day, but then is rotten the next? Are you saying that the Word of God passes away with time, becomes useless?
    
    Are you suggesting, perhaps, that we are to look upon Scripture (which, as the post states is the word of God but not The Word of God) as that which sustains us? I’m wondering, exactly, what role you think the Holy Spirit, or even the whole of the Divine Trinity in the on-going act of continuous creation, plays in such sustenance?
    
    I find the metaphor, if such it is, useful to an extent, but your invocation of it seems . . . I don’t know what word I’d use. And your attempted explanation of it was just nonsensical verbiage.
  2. Mike Gantt
    
    November 30, 2011 at 4:34 pm
    
    A1: Manna is that which rained down out of heaven from God to be daily bread for man.
    
    A2: The word of God comes down out of heaven to be daily nourishment to our souls.
    
    B1: A portion of manna was put in a jar as remembrance of the heavenly provision of bread.
    
    B2: The Bible is put between covers as a remembrance of the heavenly provision of spiritual sustenance (the word of God).
    
    My thought was no more complicated than this. For a guy who chews on Barth, you ought to find this pretty simple by comparison.
Dan

November 30, 2011 at 4:47 pm

Thanks, guys, for upping my web traffic. 😉

Geoffrey

November 30, 2011 at 8:04 pm

Mike – I don’t “chew on” Barth. I read him. Not always, and not in a while. He is an easy read, actually, compared, say, to Kant or Heidegger.

The ideas you express are cartoons to me. Seriously. I am not saying they might not have meaning for you. They may well serve you, and for that I give thanks. For me, though, the matter is far more complicated. Not least because I fail to see any acknowledgment that the Word of God is not this book you idolize, but the living Christ, the Son of the Father in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. The Bible is a marvelous book. When the Spirit breathes through it, one can hear the whisper of God in its words. At the end of the day, though, it is just a book.

1. Mike Gantt
  
  December 1, 2011 at 4:48 am
  
  Ah, an important point of agreement between us: The purpose of the book is to lead us to Him, not leave us in the book.