The Paradox of Bultmann’s Historical Jesus for Faith: A Question of History

Abstract

Rudolf Bultmann created an individualist theology of existentialism to replace the ethical-moral theology of the liberal tradition. The impact of Bultmann’s theology, which privileged post-Easter church kerygma over the historical Jesus, is the core of the problem and is situated in Bultmann’s existentialist view of history, derived from Martin Heidegger’s Being and Time. His theology derived additional, important support from the findings of Hans Jonas’ dissertation on Gnosticism. Bultmann divided history into two components, positivist history (Historie), and individualised history (Geschichte). The study examines strengths and weaknesses in Bultmann’s historical epistemology, with respect to conflict between the historical Jesus and the post-Easter kerygmatic faith of the disciples, the social and cultural spin-offs of alienation and anti-Judaism, and the resulting conflict with former students and foreign scholars. The conclusion is that Bultmann was so opposed to liberal historiography that he was willing to construct a theology of individual existence, devoid of social responsibility to the world at large, and replete with inconsistency regarding continuity between the historical Jesus and the kerygma. Nevertheless, Bultmann is credited with awakening the need to examine the authenticity of the gospels and New Testament message in a new light.