So why do Pentecostals like Barth?
Roger Wilkinson [06/24/2015 6:00 PM]
That is a interesting question, I like Karl Barth too…..Did a essay on his life a few years back
Rick Wadholm Jr [06/24/2015 6:01 PM]
Henry Volk [06/24/2015 6:04 PM]
I didn’t discover Barth until I became Lutheran. I just bought a volume of his Dogmatics. I’m eager to start reading it.
Charles Page [06/24/2015 6:25 PM]
as far as COG -I would say that Dr Hollis Gause has generated much interest in Karl Barth.
Charles Page [06/24/2015 6:28 PM]
Pentecostals like “Heilsgeschichte”
Pentecostal Theology [06/24/2015 6:51 PM]
a good response on that by Frank Macchia https://sunestauromai.wordpress.com/2013/10/26/barth-on-pentecostalism/
Pentecostal Theology [06/24/2015 6:53 PM]
another attempt to and yet explore how the theology of Karl Barth might serve Pentecostal ministry and experience http://pentecostalbarthian.blogspot.com/
Pentecostal Theology [06/24/2015 6:57 PM]
Top 3 reasons Why Pentecostals like Barth may be: (1) his open approach on human free will, (2) he’s Trinitarian and (3) he’s so big on God’s love. Pentecostals are also big on love. Charles Page has experienced first hand the Pentecostal first love…
Charles Page [06/24/2015 7:01 PM]
it is real because it is real in my heart!!!! 😉
Pentecostal Theology [06/24/2015 7:03 PM]
Sin may have taken our free will in bondage as Luther explains, but sin can never take the free will human decision to love back when he/she is loved. Hence, the salvific plan of God to love the world thus allowing the creation to freely chose to love back the Creator
Charles Page [06/24/2015 7:06 PM]
Adrian Rogers believed every man has a little light! A Pelagian view of salvation. akin to Charles Finney!
Pentecostal Theology [06/24/2015 7:07 PM]
Some Pentecostals recently have moved from free will to the so-called finished work of Christ. But the love of God is a finished work in Christ. Therefore, there’s no need to move away from free will for the love of God can reach us even within our free will, thou it may be bonded as Luther claims.
Charles Page [06/24/2015 7:09 PM]
ever heard Dean Gause speak on the love of God!
Pentecostal Theology [06/24/2015 7:10 PM]
Charles Finney used the Lord’s Supper in revivalism William DeArteaga http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/charles-finney-and-the-lords-supper/
Barry G. Carpenter [06/24/2015 7:23 PM]
Wow…I don’t know if those who like Barth really know him and Neo-Orthodoxy. Bart is a “slippery” one because he uses protestant/reformed terminology but he changes the meaning. Barth tries to take a mid-ground position by denying liberalism and denying Reformed theology. He begins down his slippery slope by denying inerrancy: “As truly as Jesus died on the cross, as Lazarus died in Jn. 11, as the lame were lame, as the blind were blind, […] so, too, the prophets and apostle as such, even in their office, even in their function as witnesses, even in the act of writing down their witness, were real, historical men as we are, and therefore sinful in their action, and capable and actually guilty of error in their spoken and written word (Barth, 1963 , Church Dogmatics- I/2, 529). He goes so far to say that error in the BIble is necessary to prove grace: “For that reason every time we turn the Word of God into an infallible biblical word of man or the biblical word of man into an infallible Word of God we resist […] the miracle that here fallible men speak the Word of God in fallible human words – and we therefore resist the sovereignty of grace…” (CD- I/2, 529). This places him in the category of “un-orthodox” (to say it say kindly as I kind). His view of Scripture places him outside of orthodox Christianity.