tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13840519.post3809914293224174046..comments2024-03-27T03:32:53.817-05:00Comments on Euangelion: Bultmann the Heretic!Michael F. Birdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09713482855679578651noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13840519.post-71594004453817930322008-03-01T03:53:00.000-06:002008-03-01T03:53:00.000-06:00There is another story underlying the NT. It was ...There is another story underlying the NT. It was covered-up by lying Flavian historians.geoffhudson.blogspot.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14724916983698195467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13840519.post-3070125442842566932008-02-29T21:21:00.000-06:002008-02-29T21:21:00.000-06:00I don't see how the overarching point - presumably...I don't see how the overarching point - presumably that 'myth' and 'history' have changed places, although this scarcely seems to be true in any obvious sense, but perhaps the wider context makes it clearer, but I don't have my copy of Richardson here to hand - would impact Bultmann, who repudiated the Liberal attempt to peel off a shell of myth in the hope that a kernel of timeless truth would be exposed.<BR/><BR/>I recommend to anyone interested in Bultmann's theology <A HREF="http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=431" REL="nofollow">reading it for oneself</A>. Even if one finds much of his exegesis of John problematic, for instance, he still identifies correctly what is arguably the most crucial issue in Biblical interpretation and theology in relation to the Christian faith: If we agree that it cannot be necessary for a contemporary person to accept a first-century worldview in order to become a Christian, then how do we <I>translate</I> the message for today?James F. McGrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02561146722461747647noreply@blogger.com