Christian ethics from the perspective of neighbourly love: RudolfBultmann and Stoic ethics. This article consists of various sections. The first concerns a cultural-sensitive explanation of the meaning of the term ‘neighbour’. The second exemplifies RudolfBultmann’s understanding of the meaning of the love commandment which is found in the Jesus tradition and in the New Testament. This explanation represents a paraphrase of Bultmann’s reflection on the notion ’neighbourly love’ in Afrikaans. The article elaborates on (...)Bultmann’s interpretation by means of expanded exegetical comments. The article also endorses Bultmann’s juxtaposition of Christian ethics with Greek Stoic ethics. This Greek heritage is described in an expanded way. The article discusses Bultmann’s understanding of neighbourly love within the context of the core values of his hermeneutics. The results are made relevant for the present-day Christian ethical perspective on the adherence to the so-called natural law, applied to the South African sociopolitical situation. (shrink)
RudolfBultmann's program of demythologizingAs the heading above indicates, the main purpose of this essay is an endeavour to give an exposition of Bultmann's program of demythologizing. Attention is consecutively given to Bultmann's definition of myth; the problem, according to Bultmann, created for modem man by the mythic worldview of the New Testament and the mythological depiction of the salvation event therein; the impossibility of upholding this view in modem times; the necessity for demythologizing; demythologizing (...) through existential interpretation; results, such as Bultmann's views on speaking about God; the acts of God; God's revelation; the Christ-event and eschatology. The essay is concluded with a short, mainly appreciative evaluation. (shrink)
RudolfBultmann was one of the leading thinkers within an influential theological direction that arose in Europe after the First World War, known as dialectical theology. Comprehensive introductions to the life and work of Bultmann in the South African theological journals, written in Afrikaans, either does not exist, or are difficult to trace for the Afrikaans readership. This article on Bultmann aims to fill the gap by offering a lexicographical contribution on the life and work of (...)Bultmann. The focus of this article is on Bultmann as a Lutheran thinker. The theme of the New Testament and systematic theology is essentially the same, namely to explain the concept of Christian self-understanding as an eschatological event in which faith is expressed for the sake of faith in God and only in God. Bultmann explained the same theological concepts with his theology as those that were explained by the church reformers of the 16th century, but under radically new circumstances. The so-called modern and postmodern people of our time not only broke ties with the past, but in the process they also lost their ability for using historical-critical patterns of thought that tries to bridge historical distances, and therefore sacrificed all efforts to think systematically on the altar of relativism. We can learn from Bultmann what systematic reformed theology really is. (shrink)
RudolfBultmann aimed to make the revelation of Jesus a reality for people in the present, but fell short of his objective. In Demythologizing Revelation, Chester O’Gorman picks up where Bultmann left off by demythologizing the Christ event through the philosophy of provocative thinker Slavoj Žižek.
RudolfBultmann as historianThe work of Bultmann has had a rather negative reception in South Africa, partly because of the fact that little attention has been paid to his historical interpretation of the New Testament. Unfortunately his name is linked only to his use of philosophical categories in Biblical interpretation. After a few remarks about his early study years and the ideas which framed his later research, the article deals with his work as historian. First he is (...) treated as a historian of religion and then as a literary historian. An attempt is made to understand and describe his views in his contemporary context. The description is done within the framework of the academic context in which he received his training, and the scientific circle in which he performed his academic activities. In conclusion a few remarks of evaluation are made. (shrink)
Some scholars have speculated whether the conservative New Testament Calvinistic scholar, Machen and the New Testament critical scholar, Bultmann attended Marburg University at the same time. We now know that they did. They even attended two courses together which were taught respectively by Weiss and Jülicher. Although these men were strong opposites with respect to the environment in which they were raised as well as their theological presuppositions and conclusions, they both enjoyed the engaging environment of Marburg as students. (...) Mainly using personal letters, we learn that a comparison of these two young students goes further than their theological and biblical interests. Both had encyclopedic academic interests which carried over into a fascinating interdisciplinary way of life. (shrink)
Bultmann a-t-il été en partie victime d’une certaine « logique du protestantisme » ? R. Marlé a posé la question. Un théologien protestant peut être d’accord pour le fond avec la critique catholique, mais en la reprenant dans un esprit différent qui fera valoir la particula veri propre à Bultmann. On passera en revue à cet effet les quatre principaux griefs qui lui sont adressés.a) Réduction, au profit de la foi, de l’objectivité de l’historique et de celle du (...) monde. — L’objectivité à revendiquer est celle des données de la croyance, qui sont incarnées, et celle du monde comme lieu de salut. b) Survalorisation de la subjectivité de l’acte de foi au détriment de son contenu. — La particularité de l’engagement de foi dans le présent doit être maintenue, intégrée à une mémoire et à un corps de symbolismes et de références. c) Rejet de la révélation de Dieu à l’extérieur de la raison et de l’expérience historique. — Contre un refus radical à l’excès des médiations de la croyance, on maintiendra que Dieu est « pensable », sans que cela revienne à le « comprendre ». d) Insuffisance de la conception de la théologie comme simple intellectus fidei. — L’exercice théologique doit se déployer sous un horizon universel, mais aussi à un niveau socio-culturel attentif à toutes les inscriptions du religieux dans l’histoire et les mentalités.En définitive, on peut tenir le « fidéisme » du Bultmann pour l’illustration d’un « destin protestant », sans qu’il ait renié pour autant la théologie dialectique, mais pas davantage la théologie libérale, en tant que la première est une riposte articulée à la modernité et non un retour en arrière.Was Bultmann, to some extent, a victim of a certain “Protestant logic”? R. Marlé asked that question. A Protestant theologian can fundamentally agree with the Catholic position but take it in a different spirit, which would highlight the particula veri proper to Bultmann. The four principal complaints addressed to Bultmann in this matter will be reviewed.a) Reduction, in favor of the faith, of the objectivity of the historical and that of the world. — The objectivity demanded is for the tenets of belief, which are incarnate, and for a world as the place of salvation. b) Overvaluing of the subjectivity of the act of faith to the detriment of its content. — The particularity of the engagement of faith in the present must be upheld, integrated into a memory and a body of symbolisms and references. c) Rejection of the revelation of God outside reason and historical experience. — Against a radical refusal of the excess of mediations of belief, one can hold that God is “thinkable”, without being “understood”. d) Lack of the conception of theology as simple intellectus fidei. —The theological task should spread itself under a universal horizon, but also to a socio-cultural level that is attentive to all the inscriptions of the religious in history and mentalities.Finally, one can hold the “fideism” of Bultmann as an illustration of a “Protestant destiny”, without necessarily denying dialectical theology. Nor, indeed, liberal theology, in so far as the former is an articulated reply to modernity and not a return to the past. (shrink)