Skip to main content

Berkouwer on Bonhoeffer

Berkouwer’s discussion of christology and theodicy refers to insights from theologians of different eras – Paul, Luther, Calvin, Barth, Bonhoeffer, Moltmann (‘A Half Century of Theology’, pp. 254-257).
The lessons he draws from this analysis are profound:
‘ … what is involved is not a theoretical answer to the enigma of evil … but an answer of faith’
‘God’s being is expressed in earthly suffering, not an “uninvolved heavenly holiness”. The atheistic protest is rendered mute by the theology of the cross’
‘the abstract questions of theodicy fall away in the shadow of the event of the cross’
‘ … the reality of the cross, a reality that offends human logic … counters all natural expectations of divine power’
‘In the environs of Jesus Christ, we are conscious of both transcendence and closeness. It is a transcendence, however, that is not empty transcendence. And it is a closeness that reveals that God’s answer transcends even our highest concepts’.
* D. Bonhoeffer’s opposition to the tendency to think ‘in terms of two spheres’ such as ‘natural and supernatural’ is instructive (‘Ethics’, p. 198). He writes, ‘In Christ we are offered the possibility of partaking in the reality of God and in the reality of the world, but not in the one without the other. The reality of God discloses itself only by setting me entirely in the reality of the world … I never experience the reality of God without the reality of the world or the reality of the world without the reality of God’ (p. 195).
Opposing ’shallow this-worldliness’, Bonhoeffer maintains that ‘it is only by living completely in this world that one learns to believe’ (‘Letters and Papers from Prison’, pp. 225-226). He emphasizes that ‘the relation of the Church to the world is determined entirely by the relation of God to the world’ and not by ‘the world as it understands itself’ (‘Ethics’, pp. 204-205). Bonhoeffer maintains that ‘the “heart” in the biblical sense is not the inward life, but the whole man in relation to God’ (‘Letters and Papers from Prison’, p. 214). Bonhoeffer’s theme of ‘The “Worldly” Christian’ is helpfully discussed by K. Hamilton (‘Life in One’s Stride, A Short Study of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’, pp. 64-69). Hamilton observes that ‘Bonhoeffer categorically refuses to demythologize the resurrection … (and that he) finally walked to his execution saying that for him it was the beginning of life’ (pp. 65-67). Bonhoeffer’s thought is not determined by the ultimacy of this world but by his opposition to ‘the separation … (of) the two spheres of the sacred and secular’ and his insistence that ‘faith is always … an act involving the whole life’ (Hamilton, pp. 65, 67 – citing ‘Letters and Papers from Prison’, p. 224 – , 69, n. 49).
* Bonhoeffer, writes, ‘Our relation to God is not a “religious” relationship … but … a new life in “existence for others”‘ (‘Letters and Papers from Prison’, p. 210). Commenting on Bonhoeffer’s emphasis on the ‘deep this -worldliness of Christianity, Berkouwer maintains that he does ‘close the door into the “beyond”‘ without ‘de-eschatologiz(ing) the gospel’ (‘A Half Century of Theology’, p. 214). Citing these words from Bonhoeffer, R. G. Smith, , in his discussion of ‘This-Worldly Transcendence’, (‘The Whole Man: Studies in Christian Anthropology’, p. 102), describes the Christian’s relation to the world thus: ‘The Christian cannot be indifferent to this world which God made and loves. Yet how can he be other than against it in its evil and sin and hopelessness? Both positions are necessary, and both at the same time, and without reserve’ (p. 107).

Popular posts from this blog

Lord, help us to love You ...

Lord, help us to love You – and help us to love one another. How can we say that we love You if we are not learning to love one another? How can we learn to love one another if we are not opening our hearts to the greatest love of all – Your love for us. Fill us with Your love. Change us by Your love. May our whole life shine with the glory of Your love.

God continues to carry forward His great purpose of salvation.

Genesis 16:1-16
We move from salvation and the assurance of salvation to Satan and the activity of Satan. Sarai came with temptation - "Why don't you sleep with my slave? Maybe I can build a family through her." Abram gave in to temptation -"Abram agreed with Sarai (Genesis 16:2). The evil influence of Sarai continued: "Sarai mistreated Hagar so much that she ran away" (Genesis 16:6). When we read of Satan and his activity, we must not imagine, for a moment, that Satan wins the victory over the Lord and His purpose of salvation. This becomes clear as the story develops. The Lord's purpose will not be thwarted by the activity of Satan. The "Almighty Lord" will be victorious. This chapter ends with the birth of Ishmael. It is not a high- point in the purpose of God. It is a sign that Satan is trying to overthrow God and His gracious purpose. This leads to a 13-year gap in God's speaking to Abraham (Genesis 16:16-17:1), but that…

Isaac and Jesus

Genesis 22:1-24
Abraham was prepared to sacrifice Isaac - "You did not refuse to give Me your son, your only son" (Genesis 22:12). God did give His only Son for us - "God did not spare His only Son but handed Him over to death for us all" (Romans 8:32). While there may be comparisons made between the sacrifice of Isaac and the sacrifice of Jesus, we must emphasize the great difference - the sacrifice of Isaac did not happen, the sacrifice of Jesus did. For Isaac, there was a way out. For Jesus, there was no other way. Abraham's faith was proved genuine without the sacrifice of Isaac. Our faith only becomes a reality through the sacrifice of Christ (Galatians 2:20-21; Galatians 3:13-14).