Read on Twitter
Oooh, fun.
Barth is doing in 47.1 in III.2 with the past, present, and future of Jesus' one existence in all eternity exactly what he did with pre-, supra-, and post-temporality in God's one existence in all eternity in 31.3 in II.1.
Can't divide them or prioritize any one.
Barth is doing in 47.1 in III.2 with the past, present, and future of Jesus' one existence in all eternity exactly what he did with pre-, supra-, and post-temporality in God's one existence in all eternity in 31.3 in II.1.
Can't divide them or prioritize any one.
And to basically the same effect with respect to the eschatological future: it is not a space of radical difference from what God has always been in God's own free and loving self-determination.
God cannot be "freed" in eschatology from Godself to do something else.
God cannot be "freed" in eschatology from Godself to do something else.
The parousia, the so-called "second coming" of Jesus, is not something else than the resurrection or the gift of the Spirit.
Nor are these 3 forms of it someone else in any way than the incarnation.
Nor was the incarnation in any way someone else than the Father and Creator.
Nor are these 3 forms of it someone else in any way than the incarnation.
Nor was the incarnation in any way someone else than the Father and Creator.
Every time we seek to pit temporalities in God against one another—much less to imagine multiple independent personalities in God and pit them against one another!—we serve our own desires to pit "us" against "them" here in the fallen world, which is a failure to be human.
