Evangelical Theology Confusion

[Major1]

In other words religious philosophy in the language of man?

Yes. It answers a question with another question and the truth remains elusive.

 

[Major1]

It was a rather strange relationship, that placed strain on his marriage, but I don't believe there is ground for calling it an adulterous affair, if there is evidence he had a sexual relationship please link to it, because that article gives none.

"Rather strange relationship"???? I was not there but from what I have read it was more than an "emotional" affair.

I am one who believes that even if it was merely emotional adultery, it caused his brothers and others to question his own relationship to a holy God who condemns such an action.

1 Thess. 5:22 clearly says ……………...
"Abstain from all appearance of evil."

Husbands of much lesser stature have recognized that when such a relationship sabotages the very integrity of one’s marriage and becomes a burden to the family, it may suggest a duty to sacrifice one’s desires for the sake of one’s vows.

 

[timothyu]

Yes. It answers a question with another question and the truth remains elusive.

God on the other hand keeps telling it like it is and no one listens

 

[Major1]

God on the other hand keeps telling it like it is and no one listens

Absolutly correct!

God tells us exactly what is acceptable and correct and proper and then men go and twist that and change it into what is acceptable to them.

 

[Major1]

It was a rather strange relationship, that placed strain on his marriage, but I don't believe there is ground for calling it an adulterous affair, if there is evidence he had a sexual relationship please link to it, because that article gives none.

There seems to be several...………..

Do Revelations of Karl Barth’s Persistent Adultery Taint his Theological Contributions? | BCNN1 - Black Christian News Network

What to Make of Karl Barth’s Steadfast Adultery

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: The Sins of Karl Barth

Was Karl Barth Unfaithful to His Wife Nelly, His ‘Life-Partner’? | The Wartburg Watch 2019

 

[timothyu]

God tells us exactly what is acceptable and correct and proper and then men go and twist that and change it into what is acceptable to them.

Compliments of the Tree of Knowledge university that teaches definitions can be manipulated to suit the situation. No wonder it got a bad rating.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I for one can not agree with you.

Schaeffer’s apologetic was midway between evidentialism and presuppositional apologetics; he called his approach “taking the roof off.” His goal was to have people look at the logical conclusions of their belief systems. He also recognized the importance of speaking the language of non-Christians in order to engage with them and help them examine their own thoughts and beliefs. Rather than separate from culture, he believed Christians should understand the culture and genuinely love others through communicating the truth in a way that would be received.

I've read almost everything Francis Schaeffer wrote, and while he did have some good things to say, he was way out in the outfield on some other things. What you say above is true, but I'd in the end have to say he was not a careful historian but a popularizer of a brand of evangelicalism. It was good that he promoted thought. It's just that his writings were not the last word on what he wrote about.

Francis Schaeffer is also known for his political activism, particularly as related to his opposition to abortion. In line with his concept of the unity of truth, his teaching that our beliefs are to impact our lives, and his firm conviction of the dignity of all human life, he spoke out against abortion and co-authored Whatever Happened to the Human Race with pediatric surgeon C. Everett Koop, who later became Surgeon General .

His pro-life activism came later, and was a result of his stay at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester MN being treated for cancer. Mayo Clinic uses two hospitals, St. Mary's and Methodist. He noticed the difference between the two hospitals and then chose to stay at St. Mary's, the Catholic hospital. It crystalized something for him and ignited a fire in him. His obituary called him a pro-life activist, and it's great that he came to that position. But he caught that conviction while in a Catholic hospital, which he chose deliberately because each room had a crucifix in it rather than the vague nothingness of Methodist Hospital where they did abortions and called it health care.

 

[dms1972]

"Rather strange relationship"???? I was not there but from what I have read it was more than an "emotional" affair.

I am one who believes that even if it was merely emotional adultery, it caused his brothers and others to question his own relationship to a holy God who condemns such an action.

1 Thess. 5:22 clearly says ……………...
"Abstain from all appearance of evil."

Husbands of much lesser stature have recognized that when such a relationship sabotages the very integrity of one’s marriage and becomes a burden to the family, it may suggest a duty to sacrifice one’s desires for the sake of one’s vows.

We are also told not to judge by appearances.

I haven't read his letters either, neither was I there, I am interested primarily in his theology. The situation is more complex than simply drawing on someone for emotional support, she was it seems indispensable to him in his academic work, and I suspect Barth gave his theological work a higher priority than his marriage. Now he is entitled to an assistant as a professor, and in any job like that if you have someone who can grasp your theological ponderings that's a plus.

 

[dms1972]

There seems to be several...………..

Do Revelations of Karl Barth’s Persistent Adultery Taint his Theological Contributions? | BCNN1 - Black Christian News Network

What to Make of Karl Barth’s Steadfast Adultery

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: The Sins of Karl Barth

Was Karl Barth Unfaithful to His Wife Nelly, His ‘Life-Partner’? | The Wartburg Watch 2019

A dead link and two by the same guy, who had written a book on Barth for evangelicals. The other link begins with "Here are some interesting tidbits..."

Is there anything more that this conjecturing?

 

[dms1972]

Francis Schaeffer is a fundamentalist polemicist. One shouldn't expect him to give a fair analysis of Barth.

Schaeffer is probably not the best place to start, nevertheless I think he should be heard. Polemics has a place in literature and scholarship (as does Irenics). Luther 95 theses was certainly a polemic and there is a lot strong polemical passages in Calvin's writing, far far more polemic than anything Schaeffer ever wrote. Tolstoy wrote polemics against the church, Johnathan Swift wrote polemical / satirical works. Orwell's Animal Farm was a polemical work. The list goes on.

 

[hedrick]

There have been lots of posts, but most don’t seem likely to help the OP.

First, theology is scholarship about the Bible and Christianity. What is it for?

* The Bible is a long, complex book. When you read things in it, in order to make sense of them, you need to see them in the context of the Bible as a whole. One purpose of theology is to give you that context. For example, one of the most famous books on theology among Protestants is John Calvin’s Institutes. He wrote it with specific intention of reviewing the big picture, so as to give people the background they needed to read the Bible.

* Over time, Christians face questions that aren’t directly answered in the Bible. Do we baptize infants? How do we understand someone who is a human being but acts for God? What is the relationship between God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit? The Bible has many things to say about these, but (despite what some claim) no detailed answers. Theology gives us the results of people who have spent their lives thinking about these questions in light of Scripture. Various viewpoints look attractive, but lead to troubling consequences. Studying the history of theology shows you that.

* Another type of question not answered in the Bible are practical questions about things that weren’t there in the 1st Cent. When Christians have the power to control or influence governments, how should they use it? What is the relationship between faith and science? What should be our attitudes towards gays and transgendered people? Again, the Bible has things to say that will guide us, but it doesn’t have direct answers. Over time, Christians have developed approaches based on Scripture to deal with questions like this. It’s good to listen to them, even if you come to different conclusions.

My inclination would be to start with something that tries to give you an overview of the questions raised by theology and the various approaches people have taken. The best I’ve seen is Mcgrath’s book, “Christian Theology: An Introduction.” Barth is an important voice in modern theology. I’m glad you’re going to read him, but I don’t think I’d start with him without getting more of a sense of where he fits into theology as a whole. Barth is also not easy to read, particularly if you don’t understand the other theologians he’s responding do and what his specific viewpoint is. Even though the announced purpose of “evangelical theology” is to describe the purpose of theology, I wouldn’t consider it an appropriate introduction.

 

[Major1]

We are also told not to judge by appearances.

I haven't read his letters either, neither was I there, I am interested primarily in his theology. The situation is more complex than simply drawing on someone for emotional support, she was it seems indispensable to him in his academic work, and I suspect Barth gave his theological work a higher priority than his marriage. Now he is entitled to an assistant as a professor, and in any job like that if you have someone who can grasp your theological ponderings that's a plus.

I have no desire to argue with you over this. Actually I do not care one little bit. I was simply showing you that things in life are usually a little more complicated than they seem to be.

Now "Judging" others opens another door. The Bible’s command that we not judge others does not mean we cannot show discernment. Immediately after Jesus says, “Do not judge,” He says, “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs” (Matthew 7:6).

A little later in the same sermon, He says, “Watch out for false prophets. . . . By their fruit you will recognize them” (verses 15–16). How are we to discern who are the “dogs” and “pigs” and “false prophets” unless we have the ability to make a judgment call on doctrines and deeds? Jesus is giving us permission to tell right from wrong.

When any man has another woman move into his home with his wife, it open the door for judgment because it breaks the command from God in 1 Thess:12 to "Abstain from the APPEARANCES of evil".

Also, the Bible’s command that we not judge others does not mean all actions are equally moral or that truth is relative. The Bible clearly teaches that truth is objective, eternal, and inseparable from God’s character.

It just seems to me that our brother in view here should have been more carful in his life to what he projected to others if he wanted his theology to be accepted without any taint of wrong doing.

It reminds me of Jimmy Swagart. Wonderful preacher/pastor and then there he is with Playboy magazines in his car and phone numbers of women on the front seat. You tend to lose your prestige with those kind of faults.

 

[Major1]

Compliments of the Tree of Knowledge university that teaches definitions can be manipulated to suit the situation. No wonder it got a bad rating.

I wish I was smart enough to know if you just slapped me in the face, or padded me on the back.

 

[dms1972]

* The Bible is a long, complex book. When you read things in it, in order to make sense of them, you need to see them in the context of the Bible as a whole. One purpose of theology is to give you that context. For example, one of the most famous books on theology among Protestants is John Calvin’s Institutes. He wrote it with specific intention of reviewing the big picture, so as to give people the background they needed to read the Bible.

* Over time, Christians face questions that aren’t directly answered in the Bible. Do we baptize infants? How do we understand someone who is a human being but acts for God? What is the relationship between God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit? The Bible has many things to say about these, but (despite what some claim) no detailed answers. Theology gives us the results of people who have spent their lives thinking about these questions in light of Scripture. Various viewpoints look attractive, but lead to troubling consequences. Studying the history of theology shows you that.

* Another type of question not answered in the Bible are practical questions about things that weren’t there in the 1st Cent. When Christians have the power to control or influence governments, how should they use it? What is the relationship between faith and science? What should be our attitudes towards gays and transgendered people? Again, the Bible has things to say that will guide us, but it doesn’t have direct answers. Over time, Christians have developed approaches based on Scripture to deal with questions like this. It’s good to listen to them, even if you come to different conclusions.

My inclination would be to start with something that tries to give you an overview of the questions raised by theology and the various approaches people have taken. The best I’ve seen is Mc Grath’s book, “Christian Theology: An Introduction.” Barth is an important voice in modern theology. I’m glad you’re going to read him, but I don’t think I’d start with him without getting more of a sense of where he fits into theology as a whole. Barth is also not easy to read, particularly if you don’t understand the other theologians he’s responding do and what his specific viewpoint is. Even though the announced purpose of “evangelical theology” is to describe the purpose of theology, I wouldn’t consider it an appropriate introduction.

I don't know if the OP is still checking the thread, I tried to help out showing how a leading theologian delineates the difference between theology and philosophy. But your summary is simpler.

I agree McGrath's Christian Theology is very good, and hard to go wrong with.​

Barth's context as you wrote is very important, if the OP wants to get into that complex area then David Smart's book on Barth and Bultmann The Divided Mind of Modern Theology is one worth checking out but not one to read at the outset.

 

[dms1972]

I have no desire to argue with you over this. Actually I do not care one little bit. I was simply showing you that things in life are usually a little more complicated than they seem to be.

I understood it was complicated. That's why articles citing tidbits are useless in understanding the relationship. If there had even been one citation from the letters in those articles, but I am not that interested honestly.

But you're right about avoiding giving an appearance of evil. Billy Graham never was in a room with a women without leaving the door open.

 

[timothyu]

What is it for?

Good question if it doesn't relate to the Gospel of the Kingdom and it's King.

 

[Major1]

That's why articles citing tidbits are useless in understanding the relationship.

No argument from me. I do not have a dog in this hunt. It just seemed that there was information available that if it was me...…...would not have been. That is all I was saying.

Here is something else from Charlotte von Kirschbaum - Wikipedia

"The long-standing relationship was not without its difficulties. The relationship caused offense among some of Barth's friends, as well as his mother and brothers. Barth's children suffered from the stress of the relationship between Barth and his wife, and "Lollo", as her friends and Barth called Charlotte, once wrote to Barth's sister Gertrud Lindt in 1935, where she expressed her concern about the precarious situation:

The alienation between Karl and Nelly has reached a degree which could hardly increase. This has certainly become accentuated by my existence."

 

[timothyu]

I wish I was smart enough to know if you just slapped me in the face, or padded me on the back.

Was just commenting on how and why they twist it .

 

[hedrick]

I suspect Barth gave his theological work a higher priority than his marriage.

That's not what was happening. Here are two good articles. The first describes the relationship in more detail, as well as Barth's own understanding of it. The second is an interesting reaction to the implications for our appreciation of his theology. (Incidentally, it's not absolutely certain that there was literal adultery, although that doesn't make it any better.)

A Bright and Bleak Constellation: Karl Barth, Nelly Barth and Charlotte von Kirschbaum

Mark Galli – Evangelicals and Karl Barth's Adultery [Interview]

 

[Major1]

It was a rather strange relationship, that placed strain on his marriage, but I don't believe there is ground for calling it an adulterous affair, if there is evidence he had a sexual relationship please link to it, because that article gives none.

You are probably correct but the information is out there none the less.