Relativism and Absolutism in Bultmann's Demythologising Hermeneutic

Joseph Runzo

doi:10.1017/S0036930600044215

Relativism and Absolutism in Bultmann's Demythologising Hermeneutic

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 February 2009

Joseph Runzo

Show author details

Joseph Runzo: Affiliation:
Chapman College Orange, California 92666

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

… the reliability of the kerygmatic tradition must not be questioned, for otherwise the eschatological event to which the kerygma testifies would be implicated in the relativity of all historical knowledge.

Type: Research Article
Information: Scottish Journal of Theology , Volume 32 , Issue 5 , October 1979 , pp. 401 - 419

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0036930600044215 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 401 note 1} Bultmann, Rudolf, ‘A Reply to the Theses of J. Schniewind’, in Bultmann, Rudolf et al. , Kerygma and Myth: A Theological Debate, ed. Bartsch, Hans Werner (New York: Harper and Row, Harper Torchbooks, 1961), p. 116.Google Scholar

^{page 401 note 2} Bultmann, Rudolf, ‘New Testament and Mythology’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 9.Google Scholar

^{page 402 note 1} Bultmann, Rudolf, ‘The Case for Demythologization’, in Jaspers, Karl and Bultmann, Rudolf, Myth and Christianity: An Inquiry into the Possibility of Religion without Myth, trans. Guterman, Norbert (New York: Noonday Press, 1958), p. 60.Google Scholar

^{page 402 note 2} Bultmann, Rudolf, ‘New Testament and Mythology’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 9.Google Scholar

^{page 402 note 3} Bultmann, Rudolf, Jesus Christ and Mythology (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958), p. 18Google Scholar. cf. Bultmann, , ‘The Case for Demythologization’, in Myth and Christianity, p. 59.Google Scholar

^{page 402 note 4} See Bultmann, , ‘The Case for Demythologization’, in Myth and Christianity, p. 58.Google Scholar

^{page 402 note 5} See Bultmann, Rudolf, Theology of the New Testament, trans. Grobel, Kendrick (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1955), vol. a, p. 251.Google Scholar

^{page 402 note 6} See, for example, Bultmann, Rudolf, Jesus and the Word, trans. Smith, Louise Pettibone and Lantero, Erminie Huntress (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958), p. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 403 note 1} Bultmann, , ‘A Reply to the Theses of J. Schniewind’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 122.Google Scholar

^{page 403 note 2} See Bultmann, , Jesus Christ and Mythology, pp. 32–34.Google Scholar

^{page 403 note 3} Bultmann, , ‘New Testament and Mythology’, in Kerygma and Myth, note 2, p. 10Google Scholar. cf. Bultmann, Rudolf, History and Eschatology (Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univ. Press, 1957), p. 12Google Scholar, and ‘The Case for Demythologization’, in Myth and Christianity, p. 61.

^{page 403 note 4} Bultmann, , Jesus Christ and Mythology, p. 21.Google Scholar

^{page 403 note 5} Bultmann, Rudolf, ‘Bultmann Replies to His Critics’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 197.Google Scholar

^{page 403 note 6} Bultmann, , Jesus Christ and Mythology, p. 15 (cf. p. 38)Google Scholar. Bultmann is careful to say that myth is not simply what later turns out to be false: e.g. old and now rejected scientific views are not ‘myths’. (See Bultmann, , ‘A Reply to the Theses of J Schniewind’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 103Google Scholar.)

^{page 404 note 1} For a discussion of some difficulties not considered here which arise from Bultmann's ambiguous usage of‘myth’ see Hepburn, Ronald W., ‘Demythologizing and the Problem of Validity’, in New Essays in Philosophical Theology, eds. Flew, Antony and Maclntyre, Alasdair (New York: Macmillan, 1955), pp. 227–242Google Scholar. It should be noted that Bultmann holds that certain mythological concepts—e.g. transcendence—can never be dispensed with (‘A Reply to the Theses of J. Schniewind’, in Kerygma and Myth, pp. 102–3).

^{page 404 note 2} Bultmann, , ‘The Case for Demythologization’, in Myth and Christianity, p. 67.Google Scholar

^{page 404 note 3} Bultmann, , History and Eschatology, p. 78.Google Scholar

^{page 405 note 1} Bultmann, , Jesus Christ and Mythology, p. 48.Google Scholar

^{page 405 note 2} Bultmann, , History and Eschatology, pp. 110, 113.Google Scholar

^{page 405 note 3} ibid., p. 119. It is this recognition that every interpretation of history involves the presuppositions of the interpreter which provides the philosophical foundation for Bultmann's pioneering work concerning the necessity of using form and redaction criticism to investigate the early church's own historical interpretation of the Christ-event in the biblical texts.

^{page 405 note 4} ibid., p. 121. The beginnings of this position were stated much earlier in Jesus and the Word (see p. 11).

^{page 405 note 5} Bultmann, , Theology of the New Testament, vol. 2, p. 251.Google Scholar

^{page 406 note 1} In order to prevent logical contradictions, there will necessarily be statements which will be excepted from the strictures of these relativising sentential operators: e.g. the law of non-contradiction.

^{page 406 note 2} Bultmann, , ‘New Testament and Mythology’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 7.Google Scholar

^{page 406 note 3} See ibid., p. 3.

^{page 407 note 1} Bultmann, , History and Eschatology, p. 136.Google Scholar

^{page 407 note 2} Bultmann, , Jesus and the Word, p. 4 (italics mine).Google Scholar

^{page 408 note 1} ibid., p. 5, and Bultmann, , ‘New Testament and Mythology’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 10.Google Scholar

^{page 408 note 2} Bultmann, , History and Eschatology, p. 116 (italics mine).Google Scholar

^{page 409 note 1} See Troeltsch, Ernst, The Absoluteness of Christianity and the History of Religions, trans. Reid, David (Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1971), p. 117.Google Scholar

^{page 409 note 2} Bultmann, , ‘The Case for Demythologization’, in Myth and Christianity, p. 71.Google Scholar

^{page 409 note 3} Carnap, Rudolf, ‘Empiricism, Semantics and Ontology’, in Semantics and the Philosophy of Language, ed. Linsky, Leonard (Urbana, Ill.: Univ. of Illinois Press, 1952), pp. 209f.Google Scholar

^{page 410 note 1} Bultmann, , ‘A Reply to the Theses of J. Schniewind’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 105 (italics mine), cf. p. 110.Google Scholar

^{page 411 note 1} Bultmann, , Jesus Christ and Mythology, pp. 48, 53, 56, and 57.Google Scholar

^{page 412 note 1} Bultmann, , ‘Bultmann Replies to His Critics’, in Kerygma and Myth, pp. 191–192.Google Scholar

^{page 412 note 2} Bultmann, , ‘The Case for Demythologization’, in Myth and Christianity, p. 59.Google Scholar

^{page 413 note 1} Bultmann, , ‘New Testament and Mythology’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 16.Google Scholar

^{page 413 note 2} Bultmann, , ‘Bultmann Replies to His Critics’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 193.Google Scholar

^{page 413 note 3} Bultmann, , History and Eschatology, p. 155.Google Scholar

^{page 413 note 4} Bultmann, , Theology of the New Testament, vol. 2, p. 241.Google Scholar

^{page 414 note 1} Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1962), p. 111.Google Scholar

^{page 414 note 2} See especially ibid., ch. 10.

^{page 415 note 1} ibid., p. 158.

^{page 415 note 2} Bultmann, , Jesus Christ and Mythology, p. 83Google Scholar. cf. Bultmann, , Kerygma and Myth, p. 210.Google Scholar

^{page 416 note 1} Bultmann, , ‘Bultmann Replies to His Critics’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 192.Google Scholar

^{page 416 note 2} Bultmann, , Jesus Christ and Mythology, p. 85.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 1} ibid., p. 54.

^{page 417 note 2} Bultmann, , ‘A Reply to the Theses of J. Schniewind’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 105.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 3} Bultmann, , ‘New Testament and Mythology’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 41.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 4} Bultmann, , ‘The Case for Demythologization’, in Myth and Christianity, p. 69.Google Scholar

^{page 418 note 1} ibid., p. 67.

^{page 418 note 2} See Section I of William James's essay, ‘The Will to Believe’.

^{page 419 note 1} Bultmann, , ‘A Reply to the Theses of J. Schniewind’, in Kerygma and Myth, p. 111.Google Scholar

^{page 419 note 2} I am indebted to Gordon Kaufman and George MacRae, whose comments helped me clarify several of the issues raised in this paper.

Article contents

Relativism and Absolutism in Bultmann's Demythologising Hermeneutic

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests