عنوان مقاله [English]
Critical analysis of Karl Barth's opposition to natural theology shows that it is demonstrably based on a narrow understanding of natural theology and is mostly shaped through his reaction to the misuse of theological concepts during the heydays of Hitler's rule over Germany. In his increasing opposition to natural theology in its various implications and forms, Barth seems to have been basing his arguments on ontological, epistemological, biblical and practical grounds as he leaned heavily on revelation as the sole basis of all that pertains to the formation of faith and dogma. By engaging Barth in the aforementioned areas, it will be shown that Barth's arguments fall short of consistency in that they contain false designations of natural theology by focusing on a limited and out-dated version of it, an inherent vicious circularity, a highly selective interpretation of respective biblical texts as well as a fallacy of relevance. It will be argued that the concept of revealed theology is not necessarily opposed to a constructive approach to natural theology, which seeks to appreciate the manifest glory of God in creation as an unfolding secret observed and understood through the rational faculties within the human mind.