Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
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.
Paul R. Hinlicky (Wed,) studied this question.