DET

Karl Barth is often credited with starting a revival of the doctrine of the Trinity in systematic theology. This paragraph comprises his first robust account of that doctrine. Already Barth closely associates the doctrine of the Trinity with the possibility of revelation, as well as with specifying the subject of revelation—that is, identifying the God that Christians worship. As Barth puts it, “The content of revelation is God alone, wholly God, God himself” (Diktatsatz). Karl Barth, The Göttingen Dogmatics: Instruction in the Christian Religion This is part 6 of a multi-part series, and you can find the series index here . I begin the audio recordings by reading Barth’s Diktatsatz , so I will begin reproducing that here as well. The bold is mine and indicates where I find emphasis: The content of revelation is God alone , wholly God, God himself. But as God solely and wholly reveals himself , he makes himself know in the three persons of his one essence. He, the ternal Fat...

[The series continues and now concludes the fourth in-person session.  Find the last post here .]   We saw, when we were talking about Luther, that Galatians is all about freedom of conscience. Calvin reads it very much the same way but focuses on the question of culture. For Calvin, you can't impose one culture on another culture. Now, unfortunately, there’s a tradition of interpretation within Protestant readings of Galatians that focuses on the idea of freedom and thinks about it in terms of freedom from the law. It draws a contrast with Judaism where Judaism is supposed to be characterized by servitude to the law and Paul’s vision of Christianity in Galatians is supposed to be characterized by freedom from the law and from Judaism. I think we’re all on the same page at this point about that way of framing things being problematic. But that doesn’t mean Galatians isn’t about freedom. I think it's certainly true that Paul wants to focus on the freedom of Gentile Jesus-fo...

Gentle readers, I come before you today to invite you to join me and some wonderful colleagues for a time of theological reflection on the legacy and continued relevance of Crisis Theology (you’re probably used to me calling it “dialectical theology”) during this advent season. Tripp Fuller has pulled together what is sure to be a wonderful series on this topic. A number of great scholars are contributing besides yours truly— Andrew Root , John Thatamanil , and David Congdon . And, of course, each of us will be talking with Tripp , so you know the conversations will be full of zesty theological goodness! Check out the images below for more information. Click either of them, or this link right here , to surf over and get more information. Tripp runs these courses on a “free will” donation basis—donate what you want and can, even if that’s $0. I hope to “see” you there! ================================== @wtmcmaken.bsky.social Follow @WTravisMcMaken

I’ve never much liked how many people characterize the Reformed theological tradition. Talking about “the 5 points of Calvinism” or “TULIP” might work for some people as a starting point, but it breaks down really quickly – at least if you’re a true inhabitant of the Reformed tradition and not a reactionary (either as a peripheral hanger-on without connection with a historically Reformed church or as a member of a splinter group within that historical family). Other folks talk about the importance of God’s “sovereignty” in Reformed theology. This isn’t wrong, but it’s also very closely connected with the “5 points” business. Together, these approaches set up a picture of God as some kind of all-powerful, supernatural potentate that must be obeyed unless you want to risk dire consequences. I don’t find this image particularly compelling, either on its own merits or as a reading of the Reformed tradition. And, honestly, it makes me think of the line from Jesus Christ Superstar when Je...

It’s been nine months since I last posted (Scott came through with a post in the meantime - thank you, Scott!). Thankfully, that doesn’t mean I’ve been completely intellectually dormant, however. One of the things that absorbed the all-too-limited bandwidth that I have to give to theology in my current stage of life was, perhaps surprisingly, preaching. I did my share of preaching back in seminary, but I haven’t made it a habit since then. However, my family’s home congregation is currently in the midst of pastoral transition and I offered to plug some gaps over the summer. Consequently, I wrote and preached my first sermons in well over a decade. As it happens, Ephesians 1 was presented to me by the lectionary for the first Sunday that I stepped into the pulpit. I’ve always had a soft spot for Ephesians, and how could I pass up the opportunity to preach about election in a Presbyterian church? So, I didn’t pass it up. The sermon was entitled “Choices.” But that passage fro...