Category: Philosophy

A Few Quotes from Van Til’s “Christianity & Barthianism”

“In the language of the Bible God is the Origin of heaven and earth. There is no original power which is opposed to Him. Consequently, in His creation we cannot find any expression of a dualistic principle of origin.”

Cornelius Van Til (CVT)
Christianity & Barthianism — p. 231

R2K does not posit a dualistic principle of origin but it does posit a dualistic principle of rule, wherein the rule of Christ is dualistically split between his right-hand rule and his left-hand rule. This expression of a dualistic principle of ruling ends up turning the Christian faith into a form/matter (nature/grace) Aristotelian faith.

_____

“In the language of the Bible God is the Origin of heaven and earth. There is no original power which is opposed to Him. Consequently, in His creation we cannot find any expression of a dualistic principle of origin.”

CVT
Christianity & Barthianism — p. 231

R2K does not posit a dualistic principle of origin but it does posit a dualistic principle of rule, wherein the rule of Christ is dualistically split between his right-hand rule and his left-hand rule. This expression of a dualistic principle of ruling ends up turning the Christian faith into a form/matter (nature/grace) Aristotelian faith. So, while R2K teaches that God alone is the origin of heaven and earth, it negates that teaching by suggesting that God alone is not the direct ruler of heaven and earth. God has placed a demiurge called “Natural Law” between Himself and man in His ruling over man.

“All apostate philosophy is immanentistic.”

CVT
Christianity & Barthianism

All CVT means by this is that philosophy that does not begin and end with the Triune God and His revelation as its transcendent starting point only has the self to start with and because that is true it is immanentistic, which is to say man has a starting point that is not outside of himself but is only in himself. He is his own origin or beginning point of truth.

“The work of his (Barth’s) Christ does not take place directly in history. Barth’s view of Geschichte allows for no transition from wrath to grace.”

CVT

Christianity & Barthianism — p. 224

Geschichte is non-temporal saga history that is not history as we normally understand it. The reason that is does not allow for a transition from wrath to grace is because being non-temporal there is no time and space divine “now” where Tetelestai (It is Finished) is heard.
“All proper human activity is therefore activity within the Kingdom of the Christ.”

CVT
Christianity and Barthianism — p. 228

Van Til would have been waging war against R2K.

“On Barth’s view this simple picture of the Biblical view of sin and its origin by Bavinck, falls away. Barth’s view of revelation as indicating both the fact that God is wholly revealed and wholly hidden leads him to reject the direct confrontation of God and man in history at every point. Barth is particularly outspoken in his rejection of the historicity of the Genesis account of the origin of man and sin.”

CVT
Christianity & Barthianism — p. 217

“If we are to evaluate fairly Barth’s view of Christ, we must ask again where his Christ may be found. One point is plain. It is that according to Barth, Christ cannot be found to be directly identified with anything in history. Christ cannot even be directly identified with Jesus of Nazareth… Moreover, since the revelation of God cannot, according to Barth, be directly identified w/ Jesus of Nazareth, so also the Scriptures cannot be directly identified w/ revelation..”

CVT
Christianity & Barthianism — p. 213

Knowledge of self depends on knowledge of God- and vice versa-first chapter of Calvin’s Institutes. Kierkegaard and Schleiermacher made subjectivity of the individual ultimate, i.e. no objective truth outside of oneself. This obliterates scriptural and natural revelation as objective truth, as now “my truth” and “your truth” are different things depending on how we perceive and deal with the revelation. It is the complete demise of philosophy and theology and logically science, technology, engineering, etc. Of course, people are not consistent with this insane notion, else they would quickly be destroyed.

Returning To Barth’s Geschichte & Historie

(For Barth) Geschichte (as opposed to his Historie) is a moment in which eternity enters time. Wrapped up in that moment is all the theology of Christianity; God, creation, man, evil, the fall, Christ, the incarnation, reconciliation, resurrection, and parousia. Occasionally some element of this complex will touch down in ordinary time and space, as Barth asserts of the resurrection. But that time-and-space happening is never to be identified with the saving event of Geschichte. Barth describes these happenings as ‘pointers’ to the real salvation that comes through the momentary revelatory Geschichte.”

John Frame

A History of Western Philosophy and Theology – p. 381

What is important to keep in mind here is that Barth does not believe in what most people would call the historical reality — the occurrence of the supernatural in time and space – as not true in the sense that all of it historically took place. For example, if you somehow would have had a cell-phone at the resurrection you could not have videoed Jesus resurrection because the resurrection didn’t happen in that sense. That would be the sense of Historie. Barth rejects Historie because it pertains to the supernatural of the Christian faith and the supernatural cannot occur in time and space as Historie.

For Barth it is possible (though not necessary) for Historie to point to Geschichte. Whether Historie points to Geschichte is person variable. As stated above by Frame, (but now put into my own linguistic magic) Geschichte is like the fairy dust that falls off and so emanates from the Historie. It is this Geschichte fairy dust that makes the Historie to be “true” even though it is not true. The Historie can point to the Geschichte the way that a sign on the road can point to a Gas Station (that isn’t really there). However, for Barth, the Geschichte is enough to convert because when the Geschichte is encountered in a personal event moment then the Gas Station becomes true for the person having the Geschichte encounter event. This is what Barth means by the Geshcichte being a pointer. The event that didn’t happen can serve as a pointer to the impact of the event as if it did happen and someone having that Geschichte encounter moment can now be considered a Christian.

All of this is true of the Scriptures as well. The Scriptures are tangled up with Historie and so as Historie they may or may not be true but they are not true as having the objective quality of inerrancy or inspiration. However, the Scripture, as Historie, may serve as a pointer to revelational encounter Geschichte that results in making the Bible true for the reader having said Geschichte encounter.

This is Barth’s Christianity and this is why some categorize Barth with the existentialist “theologians.”

I find this material fascinating because I know of a former CRC Pastor who was a Barthian but who got away with his Barthianism because most of the rest of the CRC were also Barthian, or if they weren’t, weren’t smart enough to know the games that this chap was playing in order to secure his ordination. The funny thing about this story is that this chap was assigned to be my mentor when I entered the CRC. You can imagine the fireworks that took place.