Abstract
In this contribution the author responds to Bruce Marshall's Thomist critique of Barth's theology, at the cost of a certain revision of Barth's mature exploration of the “being-for-others” of the eternal Son in CD IV/1. Affirming the eternity of the Son, the Logos asarkos and thus of the immanent Trinity, socially modeled, the article argues that this revision follows the cutting-edge of Barth's thought and provides a dispositional ontology which both allows for a properly divine mutability in the incarnation and at the same time preserves the freedom of reconciling grace.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
