I think of these two as engaged in a monumental struggle over the mechanics of the Trinity, but on the ground, they sound remarkably alike. Take Hart on creation:
“Creation is thus without foundations; it attends God, possessing no essence apart from its character as a free and open utterance within the infinity of his self-utterance. In creation God, who is never without his Word, nevertheless utters himself ‘outward’ to that which has being only because God’s address can never be without reply (Isa. 55:11)” (TBotI 252).
Hart and Jenson concur on:
1. Abolishing the meaningful distinction of essence and accident — as creatures, we are accident all the way down.
2. Understanding creation as suspended in the mutual discourse of the Trinity.
3. Understanding the being of creation as a “reply” to God’s beckoning call — that God’s creative word must have its response is creation’s stability.