Emil Brunner Christian Theologian

The Life of Emil Brunner Born December 23, 1889 in Winterthur, near Zurich, Switzerland. Studied at the University of Zurich and Berlin and earned a Doctor of Theology in 1913. Lived in England for a time but returned to fight WWI in the Swiss militia. Lectured in Europe, England and America Visiting professor at Princeton Theological Seminary (1938-1939) Helped to build up the International Christian University in Tokyo. (1953-1955) The Life of Emil Brunner

Spiritual Development His father’s side reached back to the time of the Reformation which gave him the lofty ideal of Swiss liberty and democracy. His maternal grandfather was a Reformed minister. Brunner pastored the Canton of Glarus where five centuries earlier Swiss Reformer Ulrich Zwingli pastored. The Religious Socialist Movement greatly formed his thought. Brunner believed his dialectical theology came not from a theological or philosophical system but from the Holy Spirit. Spiritual Development

Oxford Group Movement which sought to revitalize the church and theology as it engaged the spiritual life of the Christian community. It brought a close connection between the spiritual reality and fellowship or communion. Truth as Encounter was an idea supported by Brunner that the only way to understand the gospel was to be personally engaged in an encounter with God. Spiritual Factors

Brunner argued against immanence and believed it was embedded in the liberal Protestant theology of the day. Brunner incessantly condemned all attempts to know God only from human reason. Brunner believed truth sat at the juxtaposition of revelation and reason listed in that order. Brunner believed the duty of Christian theologians was to reflect on the revelation of God in Christ and generate all doctrinal formulations as faithful expressions of that revelation. Major Theme

Mediation Brunner rejected liberalism and orthodoxy Liberalism limited the mystery of God to reason and believed it replaced Christian theology with the science of religion Orthodoxy fails to separate God’s Word from the human characteristics of the Bible. It forces to defend the legalistic beliefs or allegorize passages that were intended to have a literal meaning. Brunner sees the Bible as God’ revelation shared through humans. We encounter Jesus in Scriptures which reveals truth. Mediation

Brunner believes that God is revealed in nature Brunner believes that God is revealed in nature. God’s creation allows humans to know something about God. Judgment comes from a standard that either humans will respond to or not. That standard is theologia naturalis, ignoring it was denying the revelation through creation and denies human’s relationship to God. The greatest revelation in in Jesus Christ is required. Revelation

Brunner believes that faith is a human decision that starts in the church. The proclamation of the Word of God leads people to believe. Faith’s truth comes from an encounter with the person of Jesus Christ not by reason or research. Doctrine provides structure for our personal encounter with Jesus Christ. Faith deal not in truth but with God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. Faith

Jesus Christ God is reveal in Jesus Christ. Brunner believes that Christian theology and specifically salvation is Christocentric Revelation can happen in nature but salvation comes through Jesus Christ. Knowing Jesus allow you to say yes to Jesus. The outside observer cannot say yes. Jesus Christ

Note of interest: both had fervent responses to each other but the real interest is they were at one point theological comrades. The focus of their debate was nature and grace, creation and redemption, and state and church. Brunner believed that nature was a point of contact for humans. The imago Dei though fallen give a remnant awareness of God. The church must preach the Gospel to those that have this remnant awareness. Barth denies any revelation that is not a revelation through Jesus Christ. The revelation only comes from God and not human reception of God through the natural world. It is noted that Barth’s passion might stem from his struggle with Nazi ideology that swayed German Christians through natural theology. Brunner and Barth resolved their conflict but it remains as one of the great conflicts in contemporary theology. Brunner vs Barth

Brunner as one of the leading systematic theologians of the 20th century still has a voice that needs to be heard. He provides a path to formulate and present eternal truths that require philosophical, scientific, and psychological insights. He also makes theological insights that speak to the local pastor and not solely expert theologians Brunner still has a major voice if the goal of theology is to help support the mission of the church. Assuming that Brunner and Barth ended in the same place Brunner would still have a voice in constructive theology since Barth did not agree with constructing a theology on an external philosophical foundation. I believe Brunner would likely agree. Relevance

Humphrey, J. E. , & Patterson, B. E. (1976). Emil Brunner Humphrey, J. E., & Patterson, B. E. (1976). Emil Brunner. Waco, TX: Word Inc. Heinrich Emil Brunner (1889-1966). (n.d.). Retrieved May 08, 2017, from http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/bce/brunner.htm References