The problem with his theology is that without miracles in the Bible we must do away with the most significant mirace of all - the resurrection. And without the resurrection, death has not been conquered and we have no hope of immortality; moreover, our sins have not been forgiven because God's resurrection of Jesus showed his acceptance of Jesus' sacrifice for us.
The widely known Jesus Seminar followed along the same lines of Bultmann. In their attempt to reform the view of Jesus for the church, they dismissed any accounts having to do with miracles out of hand. They insisted that any of these accounts were unhistorical. How did they come to this conclusion? They say that the historical Jesus cannot be a supernatural figures. They give no reasons why this must be so...it simply is because that's the way they define it - if it's supernatural, it can't be historical. This is a presupposition. They are saying, "we don't believe in miracles, so any miracle story cannot be true and historical." This will of course lead to a non-supernatural Jesus.
Many people with whom we share Christ may have these same presuppositions. They simply have a problem believing the miraculous events in the Bible. Gently reveal their presuppositions to them and show them that there is no good reason for holding them. Many of the people who have a problem with the supernatural Jesus of the NT will nevertheless believe in God. With these people, you can make them see that miracles are not a problem for Him. This may require correcting their image of God first by making sure their view of God is the Christian God of the Bible. With a non-Christian who is held up by the supernatural Jesus, you can start by showing him or her who God is, then moving on to his ability to perform miracles.
Once you have shown that there is no reason to believe miracles are simply myth, you can back up your argument with the strong historical evidence for the resurrection - which couldn't have been anything but a miracle. You can then show how Jesus' birth, death, and resurrection were God's solution to the human predicament of sin, death, and hopelessness and that the miracles Jesus performed in His ministry were done to show that He was indeed God's anointed One, God's appointed Messiah, and ultimately the very Son of God.
While we may give Bultmann the benefit of the doubt by believing that his intentions were good, there is no need to compromise. We can keep the historical, supernatural Jesus and still show people that a saving faith in Him is reasonable and rational. In fact, without the supernatural, historical events of Jesus' birth, death, and resurrection, we have no Christianity at all. We have no hope.
Posts
7 comments:
When Osiris is said to bring his believers eternal life in Egyptian Heaven, contemplating the unutterable, indescribable glory of God, we understand that as a myth.
When the sacred rites of Demeter at Eleusis are described as bringing believers happiness in their eternal life, we understand that as a myth.
In fact, when ancient writers tell us that in general ancient people believed in eternal life, with the good going to the Elysian Fields and the not so good going to Hades, we understand that as a myth.
When Vespatian's spittle healed a blind man, we understand that as a myth.
When Apollonius of Tyana raised a girl from death, we understand that as a myth.
When the Pythia , the priestess at the Oracle at Delphi, in Greece, prophesied, and over and over again for a thousand years, the prophecies came true, we understand that as a myth.
When Dionysus turned water into wine, we understand that as a myth. When Dionysus believers are filled with atay, the Spirit of God, we understand that as a myth.
When Romulus is described as the Son of God, born of a virgin, we understand that as a myth.
When Alexander the Great is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a myth.
When Augustus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal , we understand that as a myth. woman
When Dionysus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a myth.
When Scipio Africanus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a myth.
So how come when Jesus is described as
the Son of God,
born of a mortal woman,
according to prophecy,
turning water into wine,
raising girls from the dead, and
healing blind men with his spittle,
and setting it up so His believers got eternal life in Heaven contemplating the unutterable, indescribable glory of God, and off to Hades—er, I mean Hell—for the bad folks...
how come that's not a myth?
Bino Bolumai
/ In Bino Veritas >
Thanks for you comment. Comparing Jesus to mythological stories is wildly popular right now, so this is really relevant.
First, it is important to remember that just because you can name some myths doesn’t mean that Jesus was a myth. The claims and miracles of Jesus deserve to be investigated on their own merit, not judged by the fact that myths exist.
Second, Jesus was a historical person. That is virtually undisputed by any scholar in any field. His miracles are also historically rooted. The men who wrote the New Testament were either first-hand witnesses to them or were recording what first-hand witnesses had told them. There were plenty of people who were hostile to Jesus and his radical new message that could have called them liars and set the record straight if these stories had been mere myths. But that wasn’t the case. In fact, the writers of the NT knew what they were claiming was extraordinary, but they were also convinced it was true because they had seen it for themselves or heard it from a reliable witness. They were not interested in mythological tales, they wanted to report the remarkable – yet historical – events. If you’ve read the New Testament accounts of Jesus alongside mythological tales, you can surely see the difference. The NT reports actual historical events that involved actual, flesh-and-blood people. You can’t say that about mythology.
The resurrection of Jesus is backed up by so much strong, historical evidence that scholars who deny it are forced to come up with other (often ludicrous) theories – none of which have any historical evidence to back them up.
Third, I would ask you why you believe Jesus and his miracles were only myths? What evidence do you have that this is so? Do you have preconceptions that won’t allow you to believe in miracles even in the face of good evidence? Is your disbelief more about the fact that you just can’t find good reason to believe or is it about your own unwillingess to believe no matter what good reasons you’re offered? Are you willing to at least think about these things, and openly and honestly see where it takes you?
Hope this has at least given you something to look in to!
I am by far from being a scholar, but I do understand that when the things that were being said and written about Jesus were being said and written, there were many people still living who were eye-witnesses to those facts. None of those witnesses, even those who wished to deny Jesus, could deny the events and many died, not for faith in an ideal they had been taught, but because they had first hand knowledge of Jesus death and resurrection.
First, it is important to remember that just because you can name some myths doesn’t mean that Jesus was a myth. The claims and miracles of Jesus deserve to be investigated on their own merit, not judged by the fact that myths exist.
Well, if the very first thing you do is assert that there is no connection, then you're pretty much guaranteed to end up concluding the same thing.
Alexander the Great's father was a great god in the sky, his mother was a mortal woman. The divinity of his father was seen as a sign of his greatness.
Romulus' father was a great god in the sky, his mother was a mortal woman. The divinity of his father was seen as a sign of his greatness.
Scipio Africanus' father was a great god in the sky, his mother was a mortal woman. The divinity of his father was seen as a sign of his greatness.
The Emperor Augustus' father was a great god in the sky, his mother was a mortal woman. The divinity of his father was seen as a sign of his greatness.
Jesus' father was a great god in the sky, his mother was a mortal woman. The divinity of his father was seen as a sign of his greatness.
Shall we accept that you have no answer to explain the similarity between Jesus' divine birth and all these other ancient divine births?
Second, Jesus was a historical person. That is virtually undisputed by any scholar in any field.
Alexander was a historical person.
Romulus was a historical person.
Augustus was a historical person.
Scipio was a historical person.
There were plenty of people who were hostile to Jesus and his radical new message that could have called them liars and set the record straight if these stories had been mere myths. But that wasn’t the case.
How do you know they didn't?
In fact, the writers of the NT knew what they were claiming was extraordinary, but they were also convinced it was true because they had seen it for themselves or heard it from a reliable witness. They were not interested in mythological tales, they wanted to report the remarkable – yet historical – events. If you’ve read the New Testament accounts of Jesus alongside mythological tales, you can surely see the difference.
I have. I can't. Please help me see the differences:
"At Alexandria a commoner, whose eyes were well known to have wasted away...fell at Vespasian's feet demanding with sobs a cure for his blindness, and imploring that the Emperor would deign to moisten his eyes and eyeballs with the spittle from his mouth.
... Vespasian.... did as the men desired him. Immediately the hand recovered its functions and daylight shone once more in the blind man's eyes. Those who were present still attest both miracles today, when there is nothing to gain by lying."
Tacitus, The Histories, 4.81
1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth....
6 When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay,
7 And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing.
John Ch 9
He composed such incantations also by which distempers are alleviated. And he left behind him the manner of using exorcisms, by which they drive away demons, so that they never return;
and this method of cure is of great force unto this day; for I have seen a certain man of my own country, whose name was Eleazar, releasing people that were demoniacal in the presence of Vespasian, and his sons, and his captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers. The manner of the cure was this: He put a ring that had a Foot of one of those sorts mentioned by Solomon to the nostrils of the demoniac, after which he drew out the demon through his nostrils; and when the man fell down immediately, he abjured him to return into him no more, making still mention of Solomon, and reciting the incantations which he composed.
And when Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he had such a power, he set a little way off a cup or basin full of water, and commanded the demon, as he went out of the man, to overturn it, and thereby to let the spectators know that he had left the man...
Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 8.2.5
28 And when he came to the other side, to the country of the Gadarenes, two demoniacs met him, coming out of the tombs, so fierce that no one could pass that way.
29 And behold, they cried out, "What have you to do with us, O Son of God? Have you come here to torment us before the time?"
30 Now a herd of many swine was feeding at some distance from them.
31 And the demons begged him, "If you cast us out, send us away into the herd of swine."
32 And he said to them, "Go." So they came out and went into the swine; and behold, the whole herd rushed down the steep bank into the sea, and perished in the waters.
33 The herdsmen fled, and going into the city they told everything, and what had happened to the demoniacs.
34 And behold, all the city came out to meet Jesus; and when they saw him, they begged him to leave their neighborhood.
Gospel of Matthew, 8:28-33
The NT reports actual historical events that involved actual, flesh-and-blood people. You can’t say that about mythology.
Josephus is reporting historical events that involved actual, flesh-and-blood people. Tacitus is reporting historical events that involved actual, flesh-and-blood people.
The resurrection of Jesus is backed up by so much strong, historical evidence that scholars who deny it are forced to come up with other (often ludicrous) theories – none of which have any historical evidence to back them up.
You've devolved into mere assertion.
Third, I would ask you why you believe Jesus and his miracles were only myths? What evidence do you have that this is so? Do you have preconceptions that won’t allow you to believe in miracles even in the face of good evidence? Is your disbelief more about the fact that you just can’t find good reason to believe or is it about your own unwillingess to believe no matter what good reasons you’re offered? Are you willing to at least think about these things, and openly and honestly see where it takes you?
I ask because
Jesus healed the sick. Pagan Gods healed the sick.
Jesus walked on water. Pagan Gods walked on water.
Jesus turned water into wine. Pagan Gods turned water into wine.
Jesus calmed the storm. Pagan Gods calmed storms.
Jesus fulfilled prophecy. Pagan Gods fulfilled prophecy.
Jesus prophesied correctly. Pagan Gods prophesied correctly.
Jesus raised the dead. Pagan Gods raised the dead.
Jesus rose from the dead. Pagan Gods rose from the dead.
Jesus apostles performed miracles. Pagan Gods' apostles performed miracles.
Either you see the similarities or you don't. If you don't, please just say so.
If you do see the similarities, please tell me how you explain them.
Bino Bolumai
/ In Bino Veritas /
Bino, please see new post "In Response" for my reply to your last comments.
Awesome discussion!! I loved reading this....
Bino, keep the questions coming.
Greta, keep the responses rolling :)
Post a Comment