Today I received a copy of Matthias Gockel’s latest offering, <!– –>Barth and Schleiermacher on the Doctrine of Election: A Systematic-Theological Comparison, to review from our friends at the Journal of Theological Studies. The book is a revised version of his PhD thesis, completed at Princeton and defended in 2002. I’m looking forward to reading it and offering some thoughts on it here at PT Forsyth Files. If anyone has already read it and wants to offer me a heads up on what I’m in for (or what I’m not), then don’t hold back.

For now, here’s the blurb on it from OUP:

‘The book argues that the doctrine of election in Karl Barth’s early theology shows a striking resemblance to the position of Friedrich Schleiermacher, and that his later christological revision of the doctrine overcomes the limitations of his earlier ‘Schleiermacherian’ position. Initially, both agree that predestination is not a pre-temporal decision by which God has decreed once and for all who will believe and who will not believe. Instead, the outcome of the divine decision is determined when God addresses a human being here and now. Schleiermacher’s concept of a single divine decree is consistent with Barth’s assertion that God addresses every person in the same way, but the responses to the address are diverse. Their doctrine of election is theocentric and envisions a teleological relation between reprobation and election, in which the former always serves the purpose of the latter, without an endorsement of universalism. Whereas Schleiermacher rejects the concept of double predestination, Barth modifies it twice. In Church Dogmatics II/2 it refers no longer to the twofold possibility of faith and unbelief but to the double determination of individual human beings and God’s own being. It explains that God sees every human being and also Himself in Christ.’