Bringing Barth’s Critique of Religion to the Inter‐faith Table

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although he criticized Barth under the enigmatic phrase “positivism of revelation,” Bonhoeffer saw Barth’s criticism of religion as “his really great merit.” In the present age in which inter-faith dialogue has become more pressing than it has perhaps ever before been, theology can at times engage in two conversations that are not only separate but at worst self-contradictory: in its discussions with secular society, theology can engage in critical discussions about religion, drinking deeply from the well of criticism offered by the likes of Feuerbach, Nietzsche, Durkheim, and Marx; yet, in its discussions in inter-faith settings, the danger can arise that these critiques are thrown out altogether or at least lie in abeyance.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)75-94
Number of pages20
JournalThe Journal of Religion
Volume88
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2008

Fingerprint

Critique of Religion
Theology
Religion
Criticism
Danger
Critical Discussion
Merit
Feuerbach
Friedrich Nietzsche
Contradictory
Interfaith Dialogue
Revelation
Emile Durkheim
Drinking
Karl Marx
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Positivism

Cite this

Bringing Barth’s Critique of Religion to the Inter‐faith Table. / Greggs, Tom.

In: The Journal of Religion, Vol. 88, No. 1, 01.2008, p. 75-94.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{34f02b1812264da98ab4e2d4589c5d7e,
title = "Bringing Barth’s Critique of Religion to the Inter‐faith Table",
abstract = "Although he criticized Barth under the enigmatic phrase “positivism of revelation,” Bonhoeffer saw Barth’s criticism of religion as “his really great merit.” In the present age in which inter-faith dialogue has become more pressing than it has perhaps ever before been, theology can at times engage in two conversations that are not only separate but at worst self-contradictory: in its discussions with secular society, theology can engage in critical discussions about religion, drinking deeply from the well of criticism offered by the likes of Feuerbach, Nietzsche, Durkheim, and Marx; yet, in its discussions in inter-faith settings, the danger can arise that these critiques are thrown out altogether or at least lie in abeyance.",
author = "Tom Greggs",
year = "2008",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1086/522280",
language = "English",
volume = "88",
pages = "75--94",
journal = "The Journal of Religion",
issn = "0022-4189",
publisher = "University of Chicago",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bringing Barth’s Critique of Religion to the Inter‐faith Table

AU - Greggs, Tom

PY - 2008/1

Y1 - 2008/1

N2 - Although he criticized Barth under the enigmatic phrase “positivism of revelation,” Bonhoeffer saw Barth’s criticism of religion as “his really great merit.” In the present age in which inter-faith dialogue has become more pressing than it has perhaps ever before been, theology can at times engage in two conversations that are not only separate but at worst self-contradictory: in its discussions with secular society, theology can engage in critical discussions about religion, drinking deeply from the well of criticism offered by the likes of Feuerbach, Nietzsche, Durkheim, and Marx; yet, in its discussions in inter-faith settings, the danger can arise that these critiques are thrown out altogether or at least lie in abeyance.

AB - Although he criticized Barth under the enigmatic phrase “positivism of revelation,” Bonhoeffer saw Barth’s criticism of religion as “his really great merit.” In the present age in which inter-faith dialogue has become more pressing than it has perhaps ever before been, theology can at times engage in two conversations that are not only separate but at worst self-contradictory: in its discussions with secular society, theology can engage in critical discussions about religion, drinking deeply from the well of criticism offered by the likes of Feuerbach, Nietzsche, Durkheim, and Marx; yet, in its discussions in inter-faith settings, the danger can arise that these critiques are thrown out altogether or at least lie in abeyance.

U2 - 10.1086/522280

DO - 10.1086/522280

M3 - Article

VL - 88

SP - 75

EP - 94

JO - The Journal of Religion

JF - The Journal of Religion

SN - 0022-4189

IS - 1

ER -