Neo-Orthodoxy Essay

Glenn Coleman

Grand Canyon University: HTH-469

5/8/2016

These four theologians Barth, Brunner, Bultmann and Niebuhr are considered as Neo-Orthodoxy theologians. While these theologians can be placed in the same category of theologians, their theologies have little in common. Neo-Orthodoxy, also known as the theology of crisis, is a diverse movement that have no common articulated set of essentials. The Neo-Orthodoxy movement was movement that was born out of the traditional protestant beliefs. It was the chipping away from the traditional protestant stance. The start of the Neo-Orthodoxy movement beginning occurred after World War I. From its beginning, the common views of the Neo-Orthodoxy movement included the theological views of the absolute transcendence of God over all knowledge and work, the sovereignty of revelation in Jesus Christ, the authority of the Scripture, and the sinfulness of humankind. These common views of the Neo-Orthodoxy movement and other views of the movement would eventually be seen from different perspectives within the movement. This essay will look at the different views found within the Neo-Orthodoxy movement. The essay will compare the views of Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, Reinhold Niebuhr and Rudolph Bultmann to see why these theologies are considered to be neo-orthodoxy. The essay will also look at the distinctive features of each theology and view both the negatives as well as the positives of the theology.

The first theologians, Karl Barth, of this paper is also known as the father of the neo-orthodoxy movement. Barth is considered to be a neo-orthodoxy theologian because he of his affirmation of the orthodox Christian faith against the liberal theology. On one hand, Barth believed that the bible was the Word of God and that God inspired it. In an objective sense, Barth denied the Bible as the Word of God. Barth believed that the Bible was a collection of documents compiled by humans. Barth believed that the Became the...