메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류
인문학
인문학 일반 역사학 철학 종교학 어문학 기타 인문학
사회과학
사회과학 일반 경영학 관광학 교육학 군사학 문헌정보학 법학 사회학 신문방송학 심리과학 정치외교학 지리학 행정학 경제학 무역학 인류학 기타 사회과학
자연과학
자연과학 일반 물리학 생물학 생활과학 수학·통계학 천문학 지구과학 화학 기타 자연과학
공학
공학 일반 건축공학 기계공학 산업공학 재료·에너지공학 전기전자공학 조선해양공학 화학공학 컴퓨터학 기타공학
의약학
의학 일반 간호학 수의학 약학 한의학 기초의학 임상의학 기타 의약학
농수해양학
농수해양학 일반 농학 수산학 식품과학 임학 축산학 해상운송학 기타 농수해양학
예술체육학
예술 일반 디자인 미술 미용 사진 음악학 의상 체육 공연매체예술 기타 예술체육학
복합학
학제간연구 과학기술학 뇌인지과학 기술정책 기타 복합학

ENG

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국기독교학회 한국기독교신학논총 한국기독교신학논총 제31집
발행연도
2004.1
수록면
283 - 307 (25page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Barth`s theology of nothingness is not only biblical but also pastoral. Robert Scharlemann points out that Barth writes this theme to preach a sermon as a Protestant minister. That is, Barth`s theology is based on his pastoral experience. By reading Barth`s notion of nothingness, one can see that Barth is very dialectical in developing his idea of nothingness in order to defend his Christian faith. In fact, Barth`s dialectical theology was a very significant and effective tool for him to defend his position against liberal theology. Barth speaks confidently of the God of the Bible. Barth`s idea of nothingness is very dialectical and paradoxical. For Barth, nothingness has three types of form: sin, evil and death. Sin is the creature`s own act and guilt. Sin is followed by the suffering of evil and death. In this sense, nothingness is not only a moral threat but also a physical and absolute threat to the creature. According to Barth, after the fall, the creature was helpless to the threat of nothingness. The creature becomes not only its prey but also its instrument. Nothingness breaks the relationship between God and the creature. It not only offends God but also threatens God`s creature. In this sense, nothingness is an alien element among the objects of God`s providence. For Barth, the conquest of nothingness is absolutely God`s own affair because God alone can overcome and resist it. Therefore, God is the only hope of the creature. The way God conquers nothingness is through the incarnation of Jesus Christ. Nothingness is then overcome and removed by Jesus Christ. That is, sin, evil and death are overcome by Jesus. Accordingly, nothingness has lost its objective existence because of Jesus Christ. Barth`s nothingness is also very closely related to evil, Satan, demons, suffering, and theodicy with the sovereignty of God and His self-revelation in Jesus Christ. In dealing with the problem of nothingness, Barth put Christology in the center of his theology. Barth`s statement that God is not responsible for nothingness contradicts his other argument that God`s non-willing is a powerful willing, and therefore, God is the basis and Lord of nothingness which is divine non-willing. His argument that nothingness belongs to God because it is on the left hand of God is inconsistent with his argument that nothingness, as an alien factor in God`s providence, is the enemy of God, so that it has nothing in common with God. This inconsistency is the limitation of Barth`s dialectic theology. Barth`s God is almighty, so that He can control and transcend nothingness. However, Barth`s God excludes the reality of nothingness from His nature. Barth seems to fall under the influence of dualism. Barth tries to overcome dualism by arguing that evil is also in the hand of God even though it is neither willed nor created by God. It is another limitation of Barth`s theology that he, as a neo-orthodox theologian, is unable to attribute the nature of evil to God either directly or positively. Barth`s dialectical theology is to defend the God of justice and his theodicy. In doing so, he cannot avoid expressing the dualistic characteristic of good and evil. We have to praise Barth for giving preachers the courage to proclaim the Word of God with confidence and vigor. We also have to admit that Barth`s theology of nothingness safeguards Christian faith from being trivialized and marginalized by liberal theology. Furthermore, Barth should be praised for providing a middle ground for both liberal and conservative to meet and resolve the differences and conflicts of their theologies.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청
참고문헌이 DBpia에서 서비스 중이라면, [참고문헌 신청]을 통해 등록해보세요

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

칼 바르트와 동시대성의 신학 - 사회비판과 타자에의 배려 -
정승훈 신학연구 2004 .10
칼 바르트의 인간 이해
오영석 신학연구 2000 .12
자연계시에 대한 두 관점, 어거스틴-칼 바르트
조덕영 창조론오픈포럼 2012 .08
에밀 브루너(Emil Brunner)와 칼 바르트(Karl Barth)의 자연신학 논쟁 : 삼위일체론적 계시 이해를 위하여
오승성 한국기독교신학논총 2012 .07
칼 바르트의 경건주의 비판에 대한 비판적 고찰
이성덕 한국기독교신학논총 2003 .04

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0