Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Eleven Reasons why I like Bultmann

I was asked by a friend last week what I like about Bultmann:

  1. He's German. So is my wife (that should score me points with the ladies)
  2. He sounds like a character from an old Frankenstein movie, which is kinda cool
  3. He smoked a pipe and had big friendly cheeks
  4. His theological vision, together with its relationship with NT exegesis, was breathtaking in its scope. He sought to answer many problems all at once, and in many ways was arguably successful.
  5. He was a fine exegete. Cf. especially his commentary on 2 Corinthians.
  6. He recovered the centrality of the gospel, of God's word to us in Christ, from some of the more fanciful projections of the Religionsgeschichtliche Schule, and wedded it to a healthy Lutheran spirituality.
  7. His faith was fearless. He looked the loin of critical scholarship in the mouth and said 'do your worst!' – and he, in fact, led the way in developing new tools for understanding the text.
  8. His preaching was, at least at one level, highly practical, existential, demanding of a decision for Christ.
  9. He wrote succinctly and clearly.
  10. Theology for Bultmann was not mere speculation; to speak of God is about the faith and life of the believer.
  11. Theology for Bultmann was, at least in principle, grounded in exegesis, in his dealing with the biblical texts.

Oddly, in almost all of the above points I also see a dark shadow cast. Precisely in his strengths one finds the roots and/or evidence of his most detrimental weaknesses. But they are for another post.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

12. He was not Jim West.

John H said...

He looked the loin of critical scholarship in the mouth

Oh my. That's conjuring up all sorts of images I don't want in my head at this time in the morning. Should it perhaps read "lion"? :-)

Chris Tilling said...

John, thanks for your comment, and for the laugh. The typo is absolutely hilarious! I must leave it there for posterity!

I wrote recently in my review of the Snodgrass book, that no body should do without Stories without Intent! But this typo is even better. Pricelss.

John C. Poirier said...

I must disagree with no. 6, in that you seem to approve of equating "the gospel" with "God's word to us in Christ". This is a serious misstep, and, in fact, constitutes one of the major openings for the whole misguided dialectical theology project. The gospel is the apostolic kerygma, nothing more, nothing less. It is *not* a word of address, except in the secondary aspect that it has to be preached to be spread.

steph said...

I didn't think it was a typo - it was either a tillingism or a phonetic spelling of lion (in New Zild we pronounce 'lion', like 'loin')

J. B. Hood said...

Not only does this list explain your love for Bultmann, it explains why so many of us love you so: "big friendly cheeks".

R.O. Flyer said...

Good post. You gotta love the Bultmann.

Jason Pratt said...

I'm with Steph--I thought the loin was intentional. It gets even better when the sentence continues.

"He looked the loin of critical scholarship in the mouth and said 'do your worst!'"

No fear of the detented vagina of scholarship here! I mean, a lot of us stick ourselves out in vulnerability, expecting to be petted into ecstatic acceptance, only to discover... ... well, look, let's just move along to the next article, okay...

JRP

Brian said...

hmmm, I always figured he'd have a lot of explaining to do at the judgment for leading so many people astray with his anti-supernaturalism - but maybe I am wrong.

Jason Pratt said...

Moving hastily away from that line of thought, may I suggest:

13.) Bultmann would have had a dim view of Lewis' "Fernseed and Elephants" seminary address, thus providing a much needed link to NT Wright. (And exemplifying evidence of his most detrimental weaknesses. {g} Please ignore the "root" analogy in light of the above...)

JRP

Jason Pratt said...

Brian,

Weirdly enough Bultmann thought he was engaging in an evangelical call for people to commit their lives to Christ. But yeah, it's hard to take him seriously in some of that language sometimes--after a while it sounds like pre-post-modern language games.

That being said, a conservative re-habilitation of Bultmann might prove to be a great dissertation or book-research project. I've occasionally suggested as much to Joe Hinman (one of my fellow Cadrists; no relation to the Cadrists in my novel) who is fan of Bultmann.

JRP

Brian said...

Jason, that would be interesting.

Celucien L. Joseph said...

I agree with #11

T. Michael W. Halcomb said...

none of those sean the baptist links take me to sean the baptist's site

Theophilus Punk (PLStepp) said...

Love the blog; although the typo gave me pause.

I teach at a Christian liberal arts university, and wrestle with the students in my Biblical Theology class (undergrads who are headed into all kinds of careers, not just ministry) over Bultmann.

In a benign kind of way, old Rudy haunts me. When I describe Bultmann's views, they're horrified and offended; "Why would we study HIM?" But later in the semester, when we compare Bultmann's conclusions with Ehrman, Funk, etc., they start to think that Bmann looks pretty mild.

steph said...

It absolutely wasn't a typo. As he isn't from New Zild, it was a carefully considered chrisism (aka tillingism). He's just bluffing in 'recognising' a typo

nelson moore said...

Anything you don't like about him, Chris?

Brian said...

just lett you know Chris, I responded to your reply on Luke 15 - but we may have all moved on.

Chris Tilling said...

John c. Poirier, great comment. Thanks. I'll have to think about that.

JB, I feel all good about my big fat wobbly cheeks now!

Jason, Steph,
It was a typo! Honest!!

Hi Brian,
I know your feelings. I could write, and probably will, as many reasons on why I am suspicious about Bultmann. But as an Evangelical, I rejected him without appreciating his good points.

Hi Perry Stepp,
"In a benign kind of way, old Rudy haunts me. When I describe Bultmann's views, they're horrified and offended; "Why would we study HIM?" But later in the semester, when we compare Bultmann's conclusions with Ehrman, Funk, etc., they start to think that Bmann looks pretty mild."

That was my experience too! You see on which side he is after you read one of the 'new athiests'! Welcome to my blog. From your "Who is Perry L. Stepp?" step, you sound like a man after my own heart! Coffee, Paul, Eternal juvenile .... though I don't understand the deadhead bit.

Thanks Brian, I responded.

Hi Nelson, hope you're enjoying your time at home.
Things I don't like about Bultmann? Oh yes. I will probably write just such a post soon.