Author Description

Most books of academic theology make for boring reading. Not so Karl Barth's commentary on Romans. He writes with apostolic fervor, piling on adjectives and exclamation points. As a seminarian he had a conversion experience while reading Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (of all things) and afterward found the popular liberal theology of his day unsatisfactory. As a young pastor he turned to Paul's letter to the Romans to rediscover the pure apostolic evangel, and published the results in a commentary that has been described as "the bomb dropped on the theological playground." Like Luther, he was only trying to find the way for himself but suddenly found himself leading a movement. "I was like a man climbing a bell tower at night," he said, "who lost his balance, grasped the bell rope and woke up the whole town!" He hated the terms "Barthianism" and "neo-orthodoxy," preferring to call his doctrine "Crisis Theology," because the gospel is God's radiance invading the dark world of men. He was severe in his criticism of mystics and religious romantics, and "pneumatics" (Pentecostals) did not rise high enough in his esteem to even merit criticism, but his "Romerbrief" has been, for some, a ladder of mystical ascent, a "via negativa" that demolishes everything "on this side [of the] resurrection" until the reader is left with nothing but God revealed in Christ."What men on this side resurrection name 'God' is most characteristically not-God. Their 'God' does not redeem his creation, but allows free course to the unrighteousness of men; does not declare himself to be God, but is the complete affirmation of the course of the world and of men as it is. This is intolerable, for, in spite of the highest honours we offer him for his adornment, he is, in fact, 'No-God'. The cry of revolt against such a god is nearer the truth than is the sophistry with which men attempt to justify him. Only because they have nothing better, only because they lack the courage of despair, do the gen