I am not a serious seminary student. However, since, I became Christian in 1999; it's been a practical question of mine to know the Word of God and to preserve His church. This book has theologically provoked me what it means to make claims of God.
Barth's literary force and theological imagination are pushed to the fullest to examine the boundary condition of Christianity. So used to scientific and analytical thought mode and its ways of written expression, this book struck me that claims of God are topologically very different in argument form.
Unlike the linearity in every form of deductive thinking, Barthian statements were like multiple pockets of concepts that create an organic network. Resembling the inherent structure of church, the infinitum will of God expressed by finite beings, his style of commentary also reveal that syntactic nature.
As an amateur Christian reader, it was also nice to find out the origins of some of the commonly used phrases. Barth begins the book by emphasizing the paradoxical difference between God and man (Kierkegaard). Paradoxical revelation from the God's part is the main theme that comes back again and again in his book. Barth intentionally, as a leader of Neo-orthodox movement, makes us focus more on Godly perspective.
All the humanistic approaches will be suspended while reading this book. For example, one cannot, but suspect Tillich's noble endeavor of incorporating the history and philosophy into theology. To Tillichans, Barthians would seem like preservers of a closed system from antiquity, killing the evolution of historical church and its theology. However, now as a fan of Barth, I defend his claims and attack Tillichans for trusting too much on human nature.
Because of Barth, I think I will purchase some of Christian Classics to know and learn more about earlier wisdom of fellow Christians.