‘The enemy of my enemy is my enemy’: Markus Barth's awkward hostility to critics of his theology of reconciliation

Markus Barth (1915-1994) is best-known for his pioneering work in Jewish-Christian dialogue, and his Anchor Bible commentaries. Convinced that Ephesians 2:14-16 is the core of Paul's gospel, Barth concluded that the ‘one new man’ in Christ not only necessitates an indissoluble solidarity betwee...

Descrizione completa

Salvato in:  
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autore principale: Lindsay, Mark R. 1971- (Autore)
Tipo di documento: Elettronico Articolo
Lingua:Inglese
Verificare la disponibilità: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Caricamento...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Pubblicazione: Cambridge Univ. Press 2024
In: Scottish journal of theology
Anno: 2024, Volume: 77, Fascicolo: 2, Pagine: 126-137
(sequenze di) soggetti normati:B Barth, Markus 1915-1994 / Bibel. Epheserbrief 2,14-16 / Riconciliazione / Dialogo interreligioso / Cristianesimo / Ebraismo / Conflitto
Notazioni IxTheo:BH Ebraismo
CC Cristianesimo; religione non cristiana; relazioni interreligiose
HC Nuovo Testamento
KAJ Età contemporanea
Altre parole chiave:B Jewish-Christian dialogue
B Markus Barth
B Reconciliation
B Supersessionism
B the Holocaust
Accesso online: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descrizione
Riepilogo:Markus Barth (1915-1994) is best-known for his pioneering work in Jewish-Christian dialogue, and his Anchor Bible commentaries. Convinced that Ephesians 2:14-16 is the core of Paul's gospel, Barth concluded that the ‘one new man’ in Christ not only necessitates an indissoluble solidarity between Christians and Jews, but entails that all enmities have been negated by Christ's reconciliatory work. Ironically, this conviction provoked in him an antagonism towards many of his Jewish interlocutors. Their refusal to ‘forget Auschwitz’ caused Barth to accuse them of not being sufficiently conciliatory, and in turn led him, with sadly supersessionistic logic, to eschew reconciliation with them, because he did not think they took reconciliation seriously enough.
ISSN:1475-3065
Comprende:Enthalten in: Scottish journal of theology
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1017/S0036930623000674