Abstract
ABSTRACT This article argues that the early Barth made too little of the concrete in a theologically spatiotemporal sense. In his wariness towards abstract a priori thinking, Barth refrained from developing a social imaginative poise that might embody a genuinely free, Christian creatureliness. In contrast, Bonhoeffer’s insistence on the concrete command of Christ led to his assertion that the “Jewish question” required concrete action as a status confessionis for the Christian church in his context. Barth initially considered Bonhoeffer’s radicalism to be extreme and hasty, yet he later came to view the events of the Confessing Church's resistance with some regret, having not immediately displayed the categorical opposition that Bonhoeffer had advocated. Cone’s high esteem for Bonhoeffer reveals an important challenge regarding the integrity of Christian theology and ethics today in the brains and bodies of White scholars.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
