Wow.
I’ve never heard Mark Driscoll speak before, but this is pretty legit. He’s raw, but I think extremely honest about the plight of the 20 something male living in this consumeristic amusement park known as America.
Barth…what about the H?
Those poor Neo-Orthodox theologians. The liberals thought they were conservative -nay- fundie, and the evangelicals thought they were liberal. Barth, being the poster child of the response to rampant Classical Liberalism in Europe during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, was truly a man without a home. His views on revelation irked protestants and liberals alike, alienating him from the former by his less than inspired views on Scripture (which merely becomes the Word of God) and the latter by his utter disdain for any natural revelation (Nein!). It seems as if his views on the subject, which stem from his foundational, essentially properly basic belief in the utter transcendence of God, were elevated to an unhealthy level. Now, I’m not a Barth scholar by any stretch, and I am just now beginning to read some of his stuff (crazy dialectics abound!) but it seems as if his preoccupation with the revelation of God through the Son leaves him little time to consider the Holy Spirit as far as the third person of the trinity is involved in revelation. It’s almost as if he treats the Holy Spirit like that uncle at the reunion that everyone tries to avoid. He sees him, and acknowledges the role of the Spirit in illuminating the Word of God, but doesn’t really acknowledge him at length. Did he consider the presence of the Holy Spirit in creation as being unavailable to us because of said transcendence, like waves of light that are invisible to the human eye? Perhaps some of you who are more knowledgeable in all that is Neo-Orthodoxy could shine some light on the subject. Like I said, I am no Barthian scholar by any stretch, this is just my first impression of him and his views on revelation.
