English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

"We know that God is He whom we do not know, and that our ignorance is precisely the problem and the source of our knowledge." (Barth).

2007-10-22 16:31:01 · 12 answers · asked by NHBaritone 7 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

12 answers

Barth is saying that knowing what you don't know is useful knowledge. That's the straight up, straight forward way to condense it. It is akin to the ancient Gnostics (and even back to the pre-Socratics) who made ignorance of the unknown part of the formula in their appreciation of the world. It is very subtle and very beautiful, and for the Greeks was one of the ways they removed the divine from the natural world. It is a way of saying that you don't have to know everything in order to understand enough; and what you do need to know are what makes the questions good or not. Do that and you no longer need to rely on divities to figure out how the heavens move or why we live and then die. It is sufficient to simply know that these things are not known now, but perhaps can be known later.

Rumsfeld, that old cold warrior, despite his war mongering, said it thus:
"That there are known knowns,
There are things we know that we know,
There are known unknowns,
That is to say there are things that we now know, we don't know
But there are also unknown unknowns,
There are things we do not know we don't know
And each year we discover a few more
Of those unknown unknowns."

As for Gallahad above: if you think Barth's language is twisted in comparison to Catholic doctrine, you've been reading the wrong Catholic texts. Barth may not be plain spoken, but at least he is not elaborating fables, as the papal bulls do when they decree that the church should not be questioned.

2007-10-22 17:28:41 · answer #1 · answered by kwxilvr 4 · 1 0

Wow! I've never heard anyone who despises Karl Barth! I think that's pretty ignorant(referring to Galahad) Anyway- Basically I have always understood, and somewhat agree that God is ultimately unknowable, we cannot fully know God, and that not knowing is the problem, but also a part of understanding more about God.

2007-10-22 16:41:00 · answer #2 · answered by keri gee 6 · 1 0

Well, it represents a remnant primitive degree in Judaic mythology wherein Jews have been nonetheless Polytheistic, or an oral culture that describes god as many, that's, trendy faith, consequently 'our photo'. The compilers and editors of the Bible weren't too cautious of their enhancing of oral culture. @ Zephod_babblebrox or nonetheless you spell it... This is without doubt no longer the case, as though God was once addressing himself within the 'Majestic Plural', why does he decide on to take action handiest right here and a couple of different location, and use the constant first character pronoun to explain himself in other places?

2016-09-05 20:38:09 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Nice! I like it!
Hmm hard to explain really. Its being aware that you don't know something, realizing that not knowing something is the actual problem and feeling that if you could know then you would know everything/or you are using that lack of knowledge as a source of knowledge there for the knowledge is faulty.
Sorry, that's just as freaking confusing I suppose.

2007-10-22 16:36:31 · answer #4 · answered by ~Heathen Princess~ 7 · 1 0

Karl Barth is describing "mystery".

2007-10-22 16:41:47 · answer #5 · answered by Dencel 2 · 0 0

I say this and I say it as a devout Catholic: I have always dispised Barth. Any Papal encyclical is plain-soken common sense by comparison to that pretentious academic fool.

2007-10-22 16:37:35 · answer #6 · answered by Galahad 7 · 1 0

He sounds like a Taoist.

Looked at but cannot be seen - it is beneath form;
Listened to but cannot be heard - it is beneath sound;
Held but cannot be touched - it is beneath feeling;
These depthless things evade definition,
And blend into a single mystery.

In its rising there is no light,
In its falling there is no darkness,
A continuous thread beyond description,
Lining what can not occur;
Its form formless,
Its image nothing,
Its name silence;
Follow it, it has no back,
Meet it, it has no face.

Attend the present to deal with the past;
Thus you grasp the continuity of the Way,
Which is its essence.

2007-10-22 16:33:56 · answer #7 · answered by Joe R 2 · 1 0

Theology=Poison.

2007-10-22 16:36:59 · answer #8 · answered by Callen 3 · 0 1

A person can study about God but not know him, obviously.

2007-10-22 16:38:50 · answer #9 · answered by hisgloryisgreat 6 · 1 0

Trying to find answers to questions that aren't even questions I dare say.

2007-10-22 16:35:30 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers