His critical remarks are exactly what you would expect from someone who elevates a collection of ancient texts as the equivalent of a second or secondary divine incarnation.
Another way to put this is to say that these comments are what you would expect from what I have come to think of as an Islamic doctrine of Scripture, given the similarities to Muslim thinking about the Qur’an.
Anyway, the Gospel Coalition supplements Carson’s comments by providing links to folks that they consider reliable sources of Barth interpretation. Not one of their sources is a first-rate Barth scholar. If you want to get a real look at Barth’s doctrine of Scripture, here are the secondary sources that you need to engage:
- George Hunsinger (ed.), Thy Word is Truth: Barth on Scripture.
- Bruce McCormack’s classic essay entitled “The Being of Holy Scripture is in Becoming: Karl Barth in Conversation with American Evangelical Criticism” in Vincent Bacote et al (eds.), Evangelicals & Scripture: Tradition, Authority and Hermeneutics.
- This essay by David Congdon entitled “The Word as Event: Barth and Bultmann on Scripture.”
[UPDATE: Through the course of conversation across the interwebs and its various platforms, Martin Lloyd-Jones's criticism of Barth emerged once again in the collective consciousness. Therefore, I would point you, gentle reader, to my response to Lloyd-Jones: The Significance of Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones: A Humorous Interlude.}