Transcendentalism and Immanentalism: the case of Barth, Bultmann, Calvinism and Adventism

Koot van Wyk (DLitt et Phil; ThD)

Visiting Professor

Kyungpook National University

Sangju Campus

South Korea

Conjoint Lecturer of Avondale College

Australia

15 August 2011

The first time I heard these two terms discussed was in 1976 when Prof. dr. Lombard from Unisa came to Helderberg College in Somerset West and spoke to the Theological students about Barth and Bultmann. Lombard was a Barth-expert and it is not sure but the Seventh-day Adventist Jack Blanco graduated under him with a comparison between the Creation thoughts of Barth compared to that of Ellen White. He was dean of the seminary at Andrews University for some time and is currently at Southern Adventist University.

Dr. J.J.F. Durand was also a professor in Systematic theology but at Stellenbosch University together with the another famous Systematic theologian, prof. dr. W.D. Jonker. Stellenbosch is only about 20km from Helderberg College and interaction between the two institutions is to be expected. The Adventist Systematic theologian Eric Webster completed his doctoral on Christology in Adventism comparing Ellen White, Waggoner, Heppenstall and Douglas views and graduated in 1984 with prof. dr. Raoul Dederen from Andrews University as an outside examiner. His dissertation was published by Andrews University Press and is still available. It is very resourceful and Webster's analysis is detailed and careful.

Durand's book, Die Lewende God: Wegwysers in die Dogmatiek (Pretoria: N.G. Kerkboekhandel, 1976) is the inspiration for this writing. What we are going to do is to take his chapter on Barth and Bultmann and present it in English but with an Adventist twist using two other Seventh-day Adventist theologians, prof. dr. Edward Heppenstall and his successor prof. dr. Hans LaRondelle. LaRondelle studied and completed his doctorate under Gerhardus Berkhouwer just like the famous Calvinist Systematic theologian prof. dr. Adrio König. When one reads these Adventist doctorals, one is impressed how they move in to see what the Calvinists are saying but come out with an Adventist synthesis that either compares well to a point or polarize with what Adventists are getting at. The books, Our High Priest by Heppenstall and Perfectionism by LaRondelle are utilized here.

Transcendent means "to go out above" and immanent means "to stay inside". God is transcendent in that He is not His creation but goes above it. God is immanent in that He is closely available always. Three views of God is allocated in philosophy: 1) Deism where God only transcendental; 2) Pantheism in which God is only immanent in His creation; 3) Theism in which God is both transcendental and immanent (Durand 1976: 40). Adventists do not want to speak about this topic without the Rebellion in Heaven event and also not without the Fall of Man event. Both are linked since it is the greatest tragedy of the universe (Heppenstall chapter 1 paragraph 2). The Rebellion in Heaven event is also linked to this event (Heppenstall chapter 1 paragraph 19).

The Revelation of God is a free act of God but a forced act by forcing Himself voluntary in that Jesus voluntarily presented Himself willing to the Trinity to die should there be sin on earth and thus, in order to carry out this salvation history, the history had to be revealed to mankind and the universe through this lesson. Revelation is didactic for Adventists since God reveals Himself but also content about His actions in past, present and future and lay out His agenda to bring Eden back again, restored by a new creation.

Rudolf Bultmann had a problem with the Revelation of God. Bultmann's problem started when he accepted the closed universe view of science as representative of reality and that the New Testament ideas is beyond that of science and so mythical (Durand 1976: 44). He wanted to read the New Testament in such a way that it is not God speaking to us but that it is man speaking about humans and in reading it we can here and there selectively find things that surprise us about ourselves. When I understand these new things that speaks to me personally from the New Testament, then that is my faith in God and that is the revelation of God. He acknowledge that Jesus revealed Himself but he refuse to say what He revealed. Content or information must give way to commitment in Bultmann's view. This is because he is working with an immanent theory of Revelation.

Adventists make it clear that Revelation is both an act and the word of God. It is both content and commitment. As Heppenstall stated: "center of Christian faith is outside not inside humans" (Heppenstall chapter 1 paragraph 29). "Ultimate truth is not in ourselves but in Christ" (ibid, chapter 1 paragraph 33). Heppenstall also said that "truth is both doctrinal and personal" (Heppenstall chapter 12).

Bultmann has no room in his thought that God reveals Himself. God remains a far, distant, unknown and majestic God. There is no space in his thinking for content of the doctrine of God. It is diametrically opposed to Adventism. The doctrine of the Trinity also has no space here (Durand 1976: 45). For him the Scripture's message of Christ as the eternal Son of God and the message of the Holy Spirit for him all belong to myth (Durand 1976: 45). "It is remarkable," says Durand "that when the main point of the Scripture's doctrine of revelation is left behind, that the most radical transcendentalism can turn over very easily into immanentalism" (Durand 1976: 45). In order to answer J.A.T. Robinson's book, Honest to God, Bultmann declared that the thought of God above and outside the world is impossible (ibid). Bultmann explains that only a thought about God that finds the transcendental in the "Dieseitige" or "Jenseitige" is possible. God meets us in so many different situations, says Bultmann that one can speak of the changeability of God or "Wandlungen Gottes" (Durand 1976: 45). We cannot help to see that Bultmann tries to explain God only in an experiential level. Everyone's experiences of God is different so there are pluralistic different "Gods". Robinson borrowed his ideas from Bultmann and Paul Tillich. Tillich wanted to see God in the deepest levels and thus as part of the depth of all existence(s). Robinson tried to bring a synthesis between their ideas but ended up with a kind of pantheism. We can only meet God in our human relations since God is in the depth of all existence and meeting another existence will teach us the love of the Great I Am. God is not transcendental outside our existence but inside us as the last depth inside us (ibid). In Robinson's view God does not reveal Himself but man discovers Him by analysis of the depths of interpersonal relationships (Durand 1976: 45).

Adventists contrasts with Paul Tillich (see also the article of Raoul Dederen in AUSS) and with Bultmann and Robinson when Heppenstall said: "true confidence is not self-generated" (Heppenstall chapter 4 paragraph 91). "Philosophy and testimonies cannot give us the Word of God" (ibid, chapter 4 paragraph 109). "Saving faith turns outward from the subjective to the objective Word of God" (ibid, chapter 4 paragraph 112). "We are not summoned to seek emotional excitations that we identify as the presence of God" (ibid, chapter 4 paragraph 111). "One cannot test the truth by the way we feel" (ibid, chapter 4 paragraph 115). "Ultimate truth is not in ourselves but in Christ (ibid, chapter 1 paragraph 33). "Religion of redemption is a supernatural rescue, a saving operation" (ibid, chapter 1 paragraph 1). "Spiritual communion with God lies at the foundation of all true worship" (ibid, chapter 4). "Nothing in the writings and philosophies of men, nothing in the experiences of men, gives us the Word of God" (ibid, chapter 4). Contra Bultmann, Heppenstall emphasizes "Faith not only believes what God has said but opens our whole life to what is revealed there" (ibid, chapter 4). "Men tend to concentrate too much on the inner experience and too little upon the realities of the living God" (ibid, chapter 4).

Durand listed also two other scholars who thought like Robinson and Bultmann, namely Herbert Braun and Manfred Metzger. Braun felt that God is there where I am busy in love and that He is a specific mode of my actions with my neighbors (Durand 1976: 46). An independent existence for them of God does not exist. This is what immanentalism is. The God-is-dead theology has the same view (Durand 1976: 46).

The process of development of immanental theology is the following: Bultmann could not maintain that God reveals Himself and also not that God reveals. With Robinson one wonders whether there is still a revelation since you have to discover God. With Braun there is a question placed on the God of the revelation.

Durand felt very uncomfortable with this view of immanentalism of these scholars and certainly Adventists like Heppenstall and LaRondelle as well as Dederen would not feel happy with them.

Karl Barth focused on transcendentalism. In the void of modern Calvinistic theology, the Calvinists in the Reformed tradition has leaned heavily on Barth. Many of them are Barthians. Barth reacted against the subjectivism of Friedrich Schleiermacher. Schleiermacher was a Rationalist who deserted the Pietist religion of his father and mother. His roommate said about him, "Schleiermacher, who does not want to have anything to do with the Bible, is writing a book on religion". In his Römerbrief of 1918 Barth hoped to emphasize the holiness and otherness of God. Between God and man, God and the world, there is an unending qualitative difference. God is not identical with what we call God, or what we experience as God, or what we expect to be God or even worship as God. He is the total Other (Durand 1976: 41). There is a gap between man and God. Barth felt that without this gap there is no revelation. In Christ this gap is bridged. Barth's Christology becomes the theme for all his discussions. Barth only admits a revelation with Christ. There is no revelation of God with extensive information in our known realities. God remains secretive, remains unknown and is the sovereign God that does not allow Himself to be capsuled in His revelation (Durand 1976: 41). This was the first phase of Barth's thinking, the early phase. Later in his Kirchliche Dogmatik, Barth shifted his thinking. Now he emphasizes that although God is transcendentally free to reveal Himself or not, He describes this freedom as a freedom to love. Christ is that Love displayed. Revelation is now full of actualizations and understanding of the being of God. God happens (Ereignes). God is so close to His revelation that the revelation becomes the "repetition of God". God is His own double. God reveals Himself in revelation (Durand 1976: 42). This was a good change in the thought of Barth. Adventists could agree with these statements of Barth. In 1956 Barth wrote a book explaining the shift in his thoughts, Die Menschlichkeit Gottes. He explains that he overreacted against the anthropological view of God's revelation by Schleiermacher by stressing transcendentalism in abstraction. But it remained abstract and that to get back to the equilibrium, it was necessary for him to write this book emphasizing the human aspect of Christ. God does not reveal Himself in an empty vacuum, but He speaks as the Partner of man. His godliness included His anthropology or humanity. This is true Christology. Barth continued this view in his Kirchliche Dogmatik IV, 1. Also the selfhumiliation in Christ is rooted in the nature of God.

Durand and Jonker wonder whether this phase of Barth's thought did not result in a situation that God and His revelation becomes one? (Durand 1976: 43). Is God now not calculable? Reformation theology could not get away from the secret of the incarnation. Barth's view is that revelation is the complete exposure of God's nature, but God remains the free Subject of the Revelation. He is and remains the Lord of the revelation. Even in the form of Christ He is free to reveal or not to reveal. Revelation does not become revelatedness. Man cannot possess revelation. God hides Himself even when He reveals.

Durand and Jonker is not satisfied with the concept that God is the double of His own revelation. They feel it opens the doors for speculation regarding the Trinity and other aspects (Durand 1976: 44).

Adventists concept of revelation is that the Holy Spirit was the editor of the Scriptures and made sure that what God wanted to make known about Himself is recorded with enough and efficient detail so that the content can serve as a tool towards salvation. God reveals Himself in Christ the fullest but also in Nature and in the Bible. Ellen White in her book Steps to Christ makes this very clear. The reason Canon developed since each book was completed is because the Holy Spirit was active to bring together a Holy content that could serve as objective source of truth, verifiable, calculative, witnessing, testifying about the nature of God, so much as He was willing to reveal. We learn His agenda in prophecy from beginning to end. We learn His nature during the dealings of men and women in history. It is not that we read the revelation of God but that it reads us. Humbly we fall on our knees and search where in the lives of these men and women, good and bad, our own self reveals itself. In their steps, in God's working with them, in their changes we find markers, indicators how we can imitate towards steps of salvation for ourselves. Trust and faith and focusing on Christ our Salvation, we do arrive and similar experiences as them. By understanding and analyzing the meant we arrive at the means, and the two harmonize, not polarize. If something was wrong in those days it will be wrong in our day. That is what eternal truths are.

Different than Barth, Adventists stress the fact that it is not only Christ that is revealed but also the content of the Bible with Christ as revelator from A to Z. Christ is the Lord of the Old Testament and that is what Hebrews 11:27 says, that Moses knew Christ. If he knew Christ then Christ was the Great I Am of Exodus 3. God is for Adventists transcendental but chose to reveal Himself through Christ, and through the Bible composed under editorship of the Holy Spirit and through nature, the beauty. God reveal himself to an individual through the Holy Spirit washing the reason clean by conversion and with faith the reading can start, faith lessons. Daily walking with Christ through his Holy Spirit and reading His word for content and information, commitment leads to a daily walk with God. Is that immanent? It is not permanent but depends on our actions and free will and our abiding with His will. We are free to leave Him as He is free to leave us, but the Bible spell out His involvement with humanity. Never to stop pleading for surrender to His love gift.

The pseudo-polarizations of the following is not accepted in Adventism:

a. Christ the person is important not doctrine;

b. means is more important than what it meant;

c. content is not important but person is;

d. faith is more important than doctrines;

e. emotional reaction is more important than intellectual understanding;

f. not content is important but commitment;

g. not informational is important but transformational.

Adventism does not work with an either-or but with both and-and.