What do you think?
Rate this book
Theology of the New Testament
It is difficult to overestimate the singularity of Rudolf Bultmann. Bultmann's Theology of the New Testament changed the course of New Testament interpretation and has continued to influence the field until today. As ambitious in scope as it is consistent in method, Bultmann's volume asks and provides answers to the big questions. Bultmann also found a way to wed a sober-minded commitment to historical reconstruction to his deep desire for the New Testament to speak to contemporary humans.
648 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1953
7 people are currently reading
210 people want to read
About the author
Rudolf Karl Bultmann
94 books56 followersRudolf Karl Bultmann (August 20, 1884, Wiefelstede – July 30, 1976, Marburg) was a German Lutheran theologian and professor of New Testament at the University of Marburg. He was one of the major figures of early 20th century biblical studies and a prominent voice in liberal Christianity.
Bultmann is known for his belief that the historical analysis of the New Testament is both futile and unnecessary, given that the earliest Christian literature showed little interest in specific locations.] Bultmann argued that all that matters is the "thatness", not the "whatness" of Jesus, i.e. only that Jesus existed, preached and died by crucifixion matters, not what happened throughout his life.
Bultmann relied on demythologization, an approach interpreting the mythological elements in the New Testament existentially. Bultmann contended that only faith in the kerygma, or proclamation, of the New Testament was necessary for Christian faith, not any particular facts regarding the historical Jesus.
Bultmann is known for his belief that the historical analysis of the New Testament is both futile and unnecessary, given that the earliest Christian literature showed little interest in specific locations.] Bultmann argued that all that matters is the "thatness", not the "whatness" of Jesus, i.e. only that Jesus existed, preached and died by crucifixion matters, not what happened throughout his life.
Bultmann relied on demythologization, an approach interpreting the mythological elements in the New Testament existentially. Bultmann contended that only faith in the kerygma, or proclamation, of the New Testament was necessary for Christian faith, not any particular facts regarding the historical Jesus.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
September 5, 2017
Well, this is tough to summarize.
On the whole -- it's no surprise that Sanders makes a lot of this work dated, particularly on Paul and deprecating references to the way that the "Hellenistic synagogue" eroded the eschatological urgency of NT thought. But a lot of the material here is still really outstanding. Bultmann's treatment of John is helpful, and Bultmann's extensive wrestling with the relationship between the present and the future in Christian thought is absolutely fascinating.
Of course every theologian and NT scholar ought to read this. It's a classic -- but at the same time, it's not the kind of thing you should only read because you ought to. Yes, dated treatments of legalism will make you appreciate Sanders, but there's still a lot here to make you think. The final treatment at the end about why theology mattes and what the task of theology is is particularly helpful.
On the whole -- it's no surprise that Sanders makes a lot of this work dated, particularly on Paul and deprecating references to the way that the "Hellenistic synagogue" eroded the eschatological urgency of NT thought. But a lot of the material here is still really outstanding. Bultmann's treatment of John is helpful, and Bultmann's extensive wrestling with the relationship between the present and the future in Christian thought is absolutely fascinating.
Of course every theologian and NT scholar ought to read this. It's a classic -- but at the same time, it's not the kind of thing you should only read because you ought to. Yes, dated treatments of legalism will make you appreciate Sanders, but there's still a lot here to make you think. The final treatment at the end about why theology mattes and what the task of theology is is particularly helpful.
July 3, 2021
I just finished "Theology of the New Testament," Complete in one Volume, by Rudolph Bultmann.
I think I know what people's problem with him are: if you demand the Gospels be reporting rather than faith narrative then Bultmann isn't for you. A great writer, though. And his ability to spot redaction and editing in the gospels is an odd way to commonly talk but often convincing. This leads to him pitting a low vs high Christology (Mk v John/Paul) in a way that only asks us to think about the presented paradoxical information. This part of the book ends with a chapter on Gnosticism which is the most in depth coverage I've yet read.
Bultmann is a better writer, if not scholar, than Jeremias. Jeremias would spend so much time dealing with what seemed irrelevant nuances of Aramaic that the reader (l) would zone out. Bultmann is vastly more readable--note: this like Jeremias is translated from German. He has his hangups as is commonly known but his moments of brilliance and insight cause one to forgive his demythologization of everything.
"But as a being endowed by God with special dignity and responsibility, man stands between God and the creation and must decide between the two," V1, p 229.
Bultmann says that Jesus is both the revealer and the revelation (in John's theology). That is very good and if its the only thing I remember from this 650 pp then it's plenty.
It's interesting that Bultmann will quote Paul and then Ignatius in the same string of scriptural references. So he is gaining similar information from the Apostolic fathers that he was from the Apostles and, to him, they are colander.
Even with all the mythology/demythologization, Gnosticism in scripture, Resurrection cults of Greco-Roman influence, etc this is one of the most fantastic books on Biblical (NT) theology I've read.
#BiblicalScholarship #NewTestamentTheology #TheologyOfTheNewTestament #RudolphBultmann #Bultmann #BultDawg #Kerygma #Demythologization #GermanBiblicalScholars #GermanTheologians
I think I know what people's problem with him are: if you demand the Gospels be reporting rather than faith narrative then Bultmann isn't for you. A great writer, though. And his ability to spot redaction and editing in the gospels is an odd way to commonly talk but often convincing. This leads to him pitting a low vs high Christology (Mk v John/Paul) in a way that only asks us to think about the presented paradoxical information. This part of the book ends with a chapter on Gnosticism which is the most in depth coverage I've yet read.
Bultmann is a better writer, if not scholar, than Jeremias. Jeremias would spend so much time dealing with what seemed irrelevant nuances of Aramaic that the reader (l) would zone out. Bultmann is vastly more readable--note: this like Jeremias is translated from German. He has his hangups as is commonly known but his moments of brilliance and insight cause one to forgive his demythologization of everything.
"But as a being endowed by God with special dignity and responsibility, man stands between God and the creation and must decide between the two," V1, p 229.
Bultmann says that Jesus is both the revealer and the revelation (in John's theology). That is very good and if its the only thing I remember from this 650 pp then it's plenty.
It's interesting that Bultmann will quote Paul and then Ignatius in the same string of scriptural references. So he is gaining similar information from the Apostolic fathers that he was from the Apostles and, to him, they are colander.
Even with all the mythology/demythologization, Gnosticism in scripture, Resurrection cults of Greco-Roman influence, etc this is one of the most fantastic books on Biblical (NT) theology I've read.
#BiblicalScholarship #NewTestamentTheology #TheologyOfTheNewTestament #RudolphBultmann #Bultmann #BultDawg #Kerygma #Demythologization #GermanBiblicalScholars #GermanTheologians
November 20, 2012
REVIEW AND CRITIQUE Bultmann, Rudolf. Theology of the New Testament. Translated by K. Grobel. 2 vols. New York: Scribner, 1951–55.The New Testament: The History of Investigation of its Problems
Theology of the New Testament, like other works of Bultmann, calls for demythologizing the supernaturalism of the New Testament and reinterpreting it existentially according to the “kerygma” that was timeless to Christian faith.
Bultmann situates the theology of the New Testament in the Hellenistic thought world and proposes that the Johannine dualism was adopted from the Gnosticism as an existential move of the early Christian community.
Bultmann is very ingenious in utilizing form-critical and historical-critical methods to achieve his program of demythologized historical reconstruction and re-mythologized existentialist program.
Critiques:
For conservative students of the NT, Bultmann's work is of good value for serious consultation, as long as we are able to "de-Bultmannize" his modernist and existentialist proclivity of interpretation. He has indeed asked many good questions and rightly observed the theological features of the so-called "primitive Christianity".
For example, he has rightly observed the Jesus portrayed in the Johannine Gospel as the Reveler of God who reveals himself as the revelation of God. However he was too speculative and in fact erroneous to attribute what he has observed to the Gnostic dualism.
Bultmann's existentialist's re-mythologizing program of the NT theology also demonstrates a vivid example of how the interpreter's own worldview controls his hermeneutic procedures and produces the results as his worldview allows him to see. Most of today's biblical scholarships are in practice doing the same thing, but not as brave or self-conscious as Bultmann. He is surely a respectable enemy to the conservative Christianity.
Theology of the New Testament, like other works of Bultmann, calls for demythologizing the supernaturalism of the New Testament and reinterpreting it existentially according to the “kerygma” that was timeless to Christian faith.
Bultmann situates the theology of the New Testament in the Hellenistic thought world and proposes that the Johannine dualism was adopted from the Gnosticism as an existential move of the early Christian community.
Bultmann is very ingenious in utilizing form-critical and historical-critical methods to achieve his program of demythologized historical reconstruction and re-mythologized existentialist program.
Critiques:
For conservative students of the NT, Bultmann's work is of good value for serious consultation, as long as we are able to "de-Bultmannize" his modernist and existentialist proclivity of interpretation. He has indeed asked many good questions and rightly observed the theological features of the so-called "primitive Christianity".
For example, he has rightly observed the Jesus portrayed in the Johannine Gospel as the Reveler of God who reveals himself as the revelation of God. However he was too speculative and in fact erroneous to attribute what he has observed to the Gnostic dualism.
Bultmann's existentialist's re-mythologizing program of the NT theology also demonstrates a vivid example of how the interpreter's own worldview controls his hermeneutic procedures and produces the results as his worldview allows him to see. Most of today's biblical scholarships are in practice doing the same thing, but not as brave or self-conscious as Bultmann. He is surely a respectable enemy to the conservative Christianity.
November 30, 2019
This isn't the best introduction to Bultmann's theology. I knew a bit about his existentialist philosophy and how he attempts to demythologize the gospels through other reading, but I've never heard a fleshed-out defense of that theology. I didn't get it from this book.
In this work, Bultmann seems to make a lot of assumptions and assert them as fats with little to no (almost always no) argumentation as to why that opinion should be considered fact. In several places, he says "these words were put into the mouth of Jesus by the early church" and doesn't defend why he thinks that is the case. A lot of his subsequent theories and points rest on some of those assumptions, so I would've liked to see it argued thoroughly (or even at all).
But maybe he does that in other works that I haven't read.
If you, like me, are looking for a defense of form criticism, existentialist philosophy applied to the gospels, or demythologization, you should look elsewhere. If you want to know how those philosophies lead one to read and study the New Testament and how they work in application, then this is the book for you.
In this work, Bultmann seems to make a lot of assumptions and assert them as fats with little to no (almost always no) argumentation as to why that opinion should be considered fact. In several places, he says "these words were put into the mouth of Jesus by the early church" and doesn't defend why he thinks that is the case. A lot of his subsequent theories and points rest on some of those assumptions, so I would've liked to see it argued thoroughly (or even at all).
But maybe he does that in other works that I haven't read.
If you, like me, are looking for a defense of form criticism, existentialist philosophy applied to the gospels, or demythologization, you should look elsewhere. If you want to know how those philosophies lead one to read and study the New Testament and how they work in application, then this is the book for you.
October 28, 2023
I wouldn’t say I liked this so much as I found it really well-written and well-argued. I don’t share many of Bultmann’s assumptions, but within his hypothesis, his combination of dialectics and historical explanation works to give a coherent account of NT theology. Compared to Bousset, in my opinion, Bultmann was far more attentive to the actual theology of the authors (versus what just fits into the Religionsgeschichtliche approach). So I wouldn’t recommend it for its conception of “Judaism” and “Hellenism,” it’s significant for it what it offered in its time.
January 15, 2019
This book is not about New Testament theology it is about man-centered theology. It is not a good book.
August 9, 2007
This author is a New Testament scholar.
April 19, 2018
With Bultmann's penchant for demythologizing the supernatural content of the New Testament, it is hard to take him seriously as a scholar.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews