The Ambiguity of Capacity: A Rejoinder to Trevor Hart

  • Andrews S
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This brief rejoinder challenges Trevor Hart’s suggestion that Karl Barth may have misunderstood Emil Brunner’s notion of ‘a point of contact’, and rejects the claim that Barth’s own theology requires a positing of human ‘capacity’, defined in a passive sense. The essay begins by sketching the broader context of the Barth-Brunner debate, which makes the proposal of mutual misunderstanding between the two less likely. The second section explores Hart’s concept of ‘capacity’, and seeks to show that this is incompatible with Barth’s theology. An exposition of Barth’s doctrine of the incarnation forms the third part of the essay, and is an attempt to demonstrate that what stood at the heart of the debate from Barth’s point of view was divine freedom. Then the rejoinder concludes with a rarely cited account of Barth’s attempt at personal reconciliation with Brunner.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Andrews, S. (1994). The Ambiguity of Capacity: A Rejoinder to Trevor Hart. Tyndale Bulletin, 45(1). https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.30426

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free