J.F. Peter, "Evangelism, Mythology, and Bultmann," Canadian Journal of Theology 6.1 (Jan. 1960): 42-52
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Evangelism, Mythology, and Bultmann J. F. PETER EMYTHOLOGISING1 is with us as the topic of the day for New DTestament scholars, theologians and apologists. And there can be no avoiding it by any whose work is that of evangelism, for the questions it raises relate to every attempt to preach the Gospel. The term is practically synonymous with the name of Rudolf Bultmann, Professor Emeritus of Marburg, whose essay Neues Testament und Mytho logie (New Testament and Mythology) in 19432 precipitated a discussion which has spread from Germany to all parts of the world where Christianity is taken seriously, and which is as yet far from concluded.8 That essay is in two parts, the first of which sets the problem by pointing to the unacceptability to modem man of much of the thought-form of the New Testament writers, and by contending that an existentialist interpretation of its mythology ( that is, a grasping of the understanding of human existence which its myths are endeavouring to express) is the only solution which will preserve the essence of the kerygma. The second part of the essay gives the Christian interpretation of Being,4 stating that the life of faith is one of radical self-commitment to God, and then goes on to assert the significance of God's act in Christ, which makes the decision to self-commitment possible, and which cannot be known apart from this decision. Before we proceed further, we need to look at some of the terms which have arisen in this discussion. There is, first, the term "Demythologising" itself. It is a translation of the German Entmythologisierung-a word which, so far as I can ascertain, 1. This is the usual translation of the German Entmythologisierung, though the no less cacophonous "demythologisation" and "demythicisation" are also found. 2. This was not Bultmann's first approach along this line. Julius Schniewind (K•rygma and Myth, p. 59) speaks of "Di!" Frage der natiirlichen Offenbarung" as "Bultmann'a first essay on the subject", while Helmut Thielicke (Kerygma and Myth, p. 138) and Oscar Cullmann (Christ and Time, p. 30) refer to the volume (Offenbarung un4 Heilsgeschehen) in which that essay appears. D. M. Baillie (God Was in Christ, second edition, p. 212) says that "as far back as 1927, Emil Brunner discussed Bultmann'a attempt to interpret myth in existential terms." 3. At first, because of the circumstances which then prevailed, the discussion waa restricted to Germany, but there it had reached quite large proportions by the end of the War, and five volumes of essays {all bearing the title Kerygma und Mythos), published in Hamburg by Herbert Reich and edited by H. W. Bartsch, appeared between 1948 and 1955. Much of the first volume of th!"se {including Bultmann's initial essay) has been made available in an English translation (Kerygma and Myth, edited by H. W. Bartsch, translated by Reginald H. Fuller, London: S.P.C.K., 1953). 4. This word represents the German Dasein {"being-there") which is one of the many technical terms used by Martin Heidegger. It refers to the way of existence which ii peculiar to man. It is translated variously as "Being," "human Being," and "human life." (See Translator's Preface to Kerygma and Myth, p. xi.) 42 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY, Vol. VI ( 1960), No. 1 EVANGELISM, MYTHOLOGY, AND BULTMANN 43 Bultmann himself has coined> and which denotes the activity of removing mythology. 11 By "mythology" Bultmann means "the use of imagery to express the other worldly in terms of this world and the divine in terms of human life," as, for instance, when "divine transcendence is expressed as spatial distance."8 His program of Demythologising is one of interpreting the mythological element in the message of the New Testament in such a way as will, without substracting from that message in any way, make it under standable by modem man; and it is Bultmann's conviction that this can only be done by an existentialist interpretation. The term "existentialist" refers to a movement, expressing itself in various ways, which concentrates attention upon the existence of things as they are in themselves, and not just upon thought of them, and in particular upon the existence of men as individuals. What Bultmann wants to do in his existentialist interpretation of the New Testament is remove all in it that is not expressive, in terms understandable by men today, of an experience which can be repeated in their own lives. We shall need to note also the distinction which has been made in some German scholarly writings between two words which both find translation in English as "history": the words Historie and the much more common Geschichte. Historie means the study of past events with a view to discover ing, in an objective, detached manner, what actually happened. Geschichte, on the other hand, means the study of past events in such a way that the discovery of what actually happened calls for a decision on our part. Cor responding to this distinction there are two adjectives: historisch, meaning "that which can be established by the historian's criticism of the past," and geschichtlich, meaning "that which, although occurring in past history, has a vital, existential reference to our life to-day."7 Macquarrie observes this distinction by translating historisch as "objective-historical" and geschicht lich as "existential-historical" ;8 and this is the way in which we shall our selves distinguish the concepts they denote. With this small piece of clarification of language behind us, we are the better able to appreciate the importance for the work of evangelism of what Bultmann has to say. The discussion which he has initiated has helped us to see that the events of redemption, or the happenings in which they originate, can be spoken of in three ways. 11 ( i) They may be spoken of, first, in an objective-historical ( historisch) way, as events which took place on our earth and within our time-series, and 5. One German scholar whom I consulted stated that an English equivalent would be "debunking"! 6. Kerygma and Myth, p. 10n. 7. Fuller, in the Translator's Preface to Kerygma and Myth, p. xii. 8. John Macquarrie, An Existentialist Theology (London: S.C.M., 1955) pp. 166, 171. Fuller translates them as, respectively, "historical" or "past historical" and "historic" (Translator's Preface to Kerygma and Myth, p. xii). 9. Ian Henderson notes these on pp. 18-19, 41-42, of Myth in the New Testament (London: S.C.M., 1952); and John Macquarrie on pp. 166-171 of An Existentialist Theology. 44 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY which can be subjected to investigation by the historian in the same way as can countless other events of the past. That Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea and that he was crucified under Pontius Pilate are on the same level -so far as their status as events is concerned; we are not here discussing whether they enjoy the same degree of evidence to establish them-as, say, the birth of Alexander or the death of Nelson. It is Bultmann's conviction that this objective-historical way of speaking is of little or no value in the preaching of the Gospel. For there is in this way of speaking no declaration of an event of redemption. As Gogarten puts it, the word kerygma means the proclamation or announcement of a herald, and a herald is not the same thing as a reporter. His proclamation is not, or at any rate not primarily, intended to be a kind of report about something that has happened; rather is it "a kind of declaration of the sender's will, addressed to and intended for the particular person to whom the herald is sent."10 This factor is absent when the objective-historical way of speaking is employed. (ii) The events of redemption, or the happenings in which they originate, may be spoken of, secondly, in what Buhmann calls a "mythological" ( mythologisch) way, as events which did in fact take place on our earth and within our time-series, but which were marked by features showing them to be different from the countless other events of the past. That the birth of Jesus at Bethlehem was the Word becoming flesh and that angels appeared to tell shepherds of the unusual significance of this birth, that the death of Jesus on Calvary was the offering up of the Son of God for the sins of the world and that there was darkness over all the land from the sixth hour to the ninth hour: these have the status of objective-historical events, in the sense that there are documents which record that they took place, but the very manner of their recording shows that they are thought of as not on the same level as the birth of Alexander and the death of Nelson. It is Bultmann's conviction that this mythological way of speaking is only a hindrance to the preaching of the Gospel. For what is then being demanded is acceptance of a cosmology which modem man knows to be obsolete, and of an imagery which he does not recognize as a faithful ex pression of what he experiences, or can experience. (iii) In the third place, these things may be spoken of in an existential historical (geschichtlich) way, as events which take place here and now in my experience. The Word becoming flesh and the Son of God offering Himself are recognized as events of redemption, not because Jesus was born at Bethlehem and was crucified on Calvary, nor because I am impressed by the unusual nature of these happenings, but because they enter into the situation in which I am here and now, and set before me a present possibility.