Professor: Indukiri John Monhan Razu Presenter: S.

Peter
The Christology of Karl Barth
As with most contemporary theologians the theology of Barth is avowedly Christo-centric.
For Barth, at least, this does not mean that the topics of theology are limited to a study of the per-
son and work of Christ but rather that all theology finds its focal center in Christ and that all
knowledge of God is obtainable only through Christ.1 Barth insists, moreover, that the person of
Christ and the work of Christ cannot be discussed separately. Liberals who speculated about
the abstract person of Christ soon came to doubt the necessity for a doctrine of the God-man. The
study of the person of Christ, therefore, must be embedded in a context of a study of the work of
Christ for our salvation. It is in this work that we recognize his deity, and it is in this work that we
see the significance and importance of a doctrine of the deity of Christ.2 The presupposition of the
incarnation of Christ is the pre-existent logos and the Christian doctrine of the trinity. According to
Barth God exists eternally in three modes. This is not Sabellianism for the modes are not revelatory
modes but modes lying eternally in the ultimate being of God. The incarnation of Christ is an in-
carnation of the whole Godhead but by means of an incarnation of the second mode of God to
whom has been peculiarly appropriated the task of redemption.3 Barth’s statement of the virgin
birth is very clear. He writes, “The incarnation of the Son of God out of Mary cannot indeed consist
of the origination for the first time here and now of the Son of God, but it consists of the Son of
God taking to himself here and now this other thing which exists previously in Mary, namely flesh,
humanity, human nature, humanness. It claims that the man Jesus has no father (exactly in the way
in which as the Son of God he has no mother).4 The real purpose of the virgin birth is not to ac-
count for Jesus’ sinlessness, nor even to explain the deity of Christ. It is rather a sign which
stresses the humanness of Christ. The particular virtue of the virgin birth is that it stresses clearly
that man himself does not cooperate in the work of redemption carried on by the second mode of
the Godhead.5 The formula “Mary, Mother of God” Barth defends as a safeguard against Nestorian-
ism. The phrase, however, is not particularly happy because it has led in modern times to the Ro-
man church’s glorification of Mary.
The virgin birth, therefore, the reality of which points to the lack of all human work in salva-
tion, has led by Roman exaltation of Mary to a stress upon human participation in salvation.6 The

1
Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics (Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1936), IV, 1, 123.
2
Karl Barth, ”God the Son," Church Dogmatics, I/1 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 447.
3
Church Dogmatics, I, 1, 484 ff. and 495.
4
Karl Barth, The Humanity of God (Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1960), 23.
5
John Thompson, Christ in Perspective: Christological Perspectives in the Theology of Karl Barth (Grand
Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1978), 61.
6
Church Dogmatics, I, 1, 138, 139, and 140.
reality of the human nature of Christ is guaranteed by the virgin birth but also by the clear gospel
record of the full humanity of Christ. All forms of Docetism and Apollinarianism Barth repudiates
as doing less than justice to the Biblical records.7The humanity he ascribes to Jesus Christ, how-
ever, is no “speculative humanity.” Man does not first figure out what is humanity and then dis-
cover Jesus Christ to be that thing, but he discovers in Jesus Christ what is really humanity.8
Barth’s testimony to the sinlessness of Christ is somewhat ambiguous. In his early Romans Com-
mentary he had declared that Jesus stood as a sinner among sinners.”9 This is sharpened in his dog-
matics to the explanation that in becoming flesh Jesus partook of a sinful human nature but that Je-
sus never actually sinned. As the eternal son of God sin is actually impossible to Christ.10 In his
most recent work this is further toned down to the “weakness” of sinful flesh. His sinlessness as the
God-man, in any case, consisted of his overcoming the sinful fleshly nature which he had assumed.
In spite of the reality of his temptation he refused to sin and by his death upon the cross in obedi-
ence to the will of the Father he triumphed over sin.11 The true divinity of Christ is affirmed again
and again by Barth. Jesus is “very God of very God,” he argues. He was possessed even in his
earthly life, even as a baby of Bethlehem, even in his death on the cross, of all the divine attributes.
Though in his earlier works Barth makes disparaging statements about the importance of Christ’s
bodily resurrection,12 in his Church Dogmatics he makes plain that he accepts a bodily resurrection
on the third day. For him, the empty tomb is a historical fact, but belief in the deity of Christ is
not grounded in the bodily resurrection as evidence or proof. The bodily resurrection, none-the-
less, is significant because it is the sign that in Christ it is the ever- living God who acts. Without
the resurrection therefore the Christian would be without hope.
In Relation to Ethics
Barth has two arguments of relating Christology to ethics; the negative and positive argu-
ments are two ways of putting the same point. Where the negative argument concludes that any
non-Christologically grounded approach to ethics is fatally flawed, biblical concept of sin. Where
the positive argument provides supportive reasons to think that a Christologically-grounded ethics

7
Eberhard Busch, The Great Passion: An Introduction to Karl Barth’s Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans, 2004), 131.
8
Paul Dafydd Jones, The Humanity of Christ: Christology in Karl Barth’s Church Dogmatics (London and
New York: T & T Clark, 2008), 43.
9
Karl Barth, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Oxford University Press, 1933), 97.
10
Church Dogmatics, I, 2, 150 ff.
11
Karl, Barth, ”The Doctrine of Reconciliation," Church Dogmatics, IV/2, IV/3.1, IV/3.2. Edited by G. W.
Bromiley & T. F. Torrance (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1958), 399.
12
The Epistle to the Romans, 204; and The Resurrection of the Dead (New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1933),
135.
is in fact the genuine human ethics.13 Barth than presents the “way of theological ethics,” as he un-
derstands it, as an approach to ethics fundamentally distinct from other ways, whether secular, reli-
gious or even (liberal) Christian. The difference is a matter of starting points.14 From where do we
begin our ethical thinking? On what principles or basis will the ethical claims we make rest? For
Barth, properly Christian ethical thought has to start from the object of theology, namely God, and
(again) God conceived not abstractly but concretely, that is, as preeminently revealed in Jesus
Christ, the gracious Word and work of God.15 But what does it mean in practice for one’s ethical
thought to start from God, that is, from the gracious God revealed in Jesus Christ? For one thing, it
means that we begin from revelation, and hence Barth’s doctrine of revelation is inextricably in-
volved here. Barth's ultimate evaluative standard is the gospel of God's grace, the Word and Work
of God in Jesus Christ.16

The very reason for our existence is that God determined us to be His covenant partner in
Jesus Christ when He determined Himself in eternity to be God as Jesus Christ, the God-man. In
His own eternal determination of Himself, God already appropriated humanity into Himself. He
then carried out the means of this appropriation in time, in the reconciliation He brought about in
the incarnate Son of Man, Jesus Christ in the flesh, crucified and raised again.17 Since our very ex-
istence finds its ultimate source in this eternal decision of God, we can say that to be the faithful
and obedient children and people of God is our ontological ground. Christologically based ethics as
Barth sees it in the following proposition: Good human life and action is human life and action de-
termined by Jesus Christ, corresponding to the gracious action of God in Jesus Christ.18 Again,
Good human being and action, for Barth, is human being and action sanctified by the Word of God,
namely, Jesus Christ, who justifies and sanctifies us. The activity of making our action good, then,
is accomplished primarily by God and not by us. Thus He is (and not “we are”) our righteousness
and our goodness.19 God alone is good. Good human action is primarily that which has been done
by the human being Jesus Christ who fulfilled the will of God for us, on our behalf, in our place.
The character of good human action, grounded in the love of God revealed in Jesus Christ as it must

13
The Great Passion: An Introduction to Karl Barth’s Theology, 142.
14
”The Doctrine of Reconciliation," Church Dogmatics, IV/2, 410.
15
Karl Barth, ”God the Son," Church Dogmatics, I/1, 399-447. Edited by G. W. Bromiley & T. F. Torrance
(Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 121.
16
George Hunsinger, “Karl Barth’s Christology: Its Basic Chalcedonian Character.” In Disruptive Grace: Stud-
ies in the Theology of Karl Barth (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2000), 147.
17
Edwin Chr. Driel van “Karl Barth on the Eternal Existence of Jesus Christ.”(Muchen: Chr. KAiser, 2007),
45-61.
18
Christ in Perspective: Christological Perspectives in the Theology of Karl Barth, 121.
19
Charles T. Waldrop, Karl Barth’s Christology: Its Basic Alexandrian Character (Berlin: Mouton Publishers,
1984), 92.
be, for Barth, consists in creaturely human love as response to the love of God. The great deal
which Barth has to say concerning this human response of love can be summed up in the two guid-
ing concepts, which, taken together, Barth himself calls “the principle of what we call theological
ethics: the love of God is our only remaining being and the praise of God is our necessary doing.”20

It might appear as though we have just included “love” again along with “praise” under the
heading of “love,” and hence as though we are repeating ourselves. It is to choose the one Lord who
has already chosen us. “The love with which we reply to the love of God for us can begin and grow
only when we go beyond what we can claim as our own love, when we recognise that we the un-
loving are beloved by Him. In other words, it can begin and grow only in the recognition of Jesus
Christ and therefore in Jesus Christ Himself.”21 For Barth, Love for the neighbour, then, springs
from love for God and serves as a sign of love for God as “the inevitable outward side of that which
inwardly is love to God,” as the children of God seek to live out their faith in the present world.
Good human action is the human response to the love of God for us (revealed in Jesus Christ),
which manifests in human love for God and for neighbour. Barth sees our love for God as the in-
ward aspect of good human being and doing, and the latter, the praise of God, as its outward or so-
cial aspect.22

Bibliography

Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics IV, 1, .Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1936.

Barth, Karl,”God the Son," Church Dogmatics, I/1. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975.

Barth, Karl. ”The Doctrine of Reconciliation," Church Dogmatics, IV/2, IV/3.1, IV/3.2. Edited by
Bromiley, G.W. & Torrance, T.F. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1958.

Barth, Karl. The Humanity of God. Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1960.

20
Das Christliche Verstandnis der Offenbarung (Munchen: Chr. Kaiser, 1948), 8 ff.; and Church Dogmatics, I,
2, 457 ff.
21
Christ in Perspective: Christological Perspectives in the Theology of Karl Barth, 132.
22
ibid., 134.
Busch, Ebherhard. The Great Passion: An Introduction to Karl Barth’s Theology. Grand Rapids,
MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2004.

Hunsinger, George. “Karl Barth’s Christology: Its Basic Chalcedonian Character.” In Disruptive
Grace: Studies in the Theology of Karl Barth. Grand Rapids, MI: William B.
Eerdmans Pub lishing, 2000.

Jones, Daddfy Paul. The Humanity of Christ: Christology in Karl Barth’s Church Dogmatics. Lon
don and New York: T & T Clark, 2008.

Thompson, John. Christ in Perspective: Christological Perspectives in the Theology of Karl Barth.
Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1978.

Van, Driel, Edwin Chr. “Karl Barth on the Eternal Existence of Jesus Christ.”.Muchen: Chr. KAi-
ser, 2007.

Waldrop, Charles T. Karl Barth’s Christology: Its Basic Alexandrian Character. Berlin: Mouton
Publishers, 1984.