tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2818703174963694504.post2202427245929926202..comments2024-03-09T04:00:18.309-06:00Comments on Know Thyself: Barth I.1 §7.2-3Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2818703174963694504.post-4256325495751540782011-03-24T15:36:11.015-05:002011-03-24T15:36:11.015-05:00Barth Student,
I agree, at least conceptually wit...Barth Student, <br />I agree, at least conceptually with Barth that a confrontation with the Word of God can be a truly objective experience in which a person is removed from their subjective state. Yet, the Word of God, as an event, cannot then be captured, that event cannot be recorded so to speak as the "Word of God." <br /><br />Therefore, when Barth says that the scientific nature of dogmatics lies in its "special objectivity," this seams like a meaningless statement to me. If he is trying to bolster the "objectivity" of dogmatics as a science, this objectivity created by the event of the Word of God cannot be captured and then used in the process of dogmatics. Why claim "objectivity" for dogmatics when this objectivity is only available in the concrete and specific encounter with the Word of God. <br /><br />So, to me, it appears as if an encounter with the Word of God can be an objective experience, that objectivity disappears when one is no longer in the midst of this event. So, in the task of dogmatics, the measuring of church proclamation by the Word of God, this objectivity is no longer present. <br /><br />In all, Barth's claim of objectivity or science with regard to the work of dogmatics does not seem like a real possibility to me.Keith Reichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2818703174963694504.post-27816169351196374442011-03-24T12:59:43.112-05:002011-03-24T12:59:43.112-05:00Keith,
Thank you for your summary of the two sect...Keith, <br />Thank you for your summary of the two sections. <br /><br />On the issue of Barth’s language, he did use words like subject and object a little differently than we do today, I think, as you point out about his use of the word, scientific.<br /> <br />But I wonder at your second point regarding the possibility of pure objectivity. I think Barth would agree with you that our inherent human capabilities certainly make pure objectivity impossible, that pure objectivity is not a human capability. However, I believe he would reply to you that when we are met by the Word of God revealed to us as we hear proclamation or study the Scripture or analyze some church doctrine, then we are allowed to escape the limitations of our own perspective, our point of view. This confrontation of us by the Other, which allows us to experience knowledge that would otherwise elude us, is an integral part of Barth’s dogmatics as far as I understand him. I do not have the volume with me now but will try to provide you with a quote that illustrates what I am saying when I return home. <br /><br />StudentBarth Studentnoreply@blogger.com