THE RESURRECTION BULTMANN & WRIGHT

Bultmann post enlightenment period - need for empirical evidence.

Bultmann said that it was 'impossible to expect modern minded people to believe in the Resurrection of a corpse.' He is NOT making an attempt to prove Christianity false - he was attempting to make it appropriate for modern world and align it within reason.

Essentially, he wrote to defend Christianity in the modern world.

Key Theme was demytholosiation of the Bible.  This is NOT removing all the mythology in the Bible, but recognising where it happens and interpreting it in a more meaningful way.

Concluded that to be a Christian all one needed to accept was that Jesus lived, preached and died.  Not necessary to believe in physical Resurrection or Physical virgin birth as these are myths.  Readers should look beneath the myth to understand what is being taught.

BULTMANN defines myth as s ‘the report of an event or occurrence in which supernatural, superhuman powers or persons are at work’.  Myths are a way in which the NT people attempted to a) expain the world in which they live and their existence in it and/or b) to explain the divine in himan terms.

Bultmann NT writers shared a common world view in which mythological terminology made sense but modern readers can't undertand it.  The job then is for modern readers to 'de-code' what was really being said and taught.

Virgin Birth and Resurrection are examples of myth.  They are human attempts to explain the work of God in human terms - and were never meant to be taken 'at face value.'Recognise that these events are myth, work to undertand the myth to look beneath it to see what is really being taught,

In this way Bultmann believed he could reinterpret the supernatural for a modern world whilst keeping to the integrity and meaning of the original texts

Resurrection is not an historical event,- the Resurrection sotires are myths which explain the work of God in human terms. Resurrection cannot be proved empirically and is not an objective fact. BULTMANN's demythologised RESURRECTION  holds that:    

1. the stories are about a reaslisation that the crucifixion was not a defeat but a victory.

2. Jesus is not literally God's son but is the expression of the divine and so the term 'God's son' is appropriate way to show this.

3. The crucifixion and 'Resurrection' are one event - not 2 seperate events.

4. Jesus enters death and death no longer holds any power.  

5. Disciples realise that when Jesus suffered death he was already the 'son of God'.  Death did not and could not take that away; The Lord of Life had enterd death and conquered it.

6. Easter is about the rising of this faith in the early Church. Bultmann tries to maintain the kerygma - preacing of the Early Church about Jesus whilst rejecting the Resurrection as historical

NT Wright - Anglican Bishop and New Testament scholar and historican

REJECTs BULTMANN.  Both are post enlightenment thinkers but Wright rejects the idea that we need to demyhtologise the Resurrection.

RESURRECTION of Jesus IS an historical event - and he concludes this based on more than just 'the Bible' as a special sourcce of revelation. Wright says ' the best historical explanation is the one that inevitably raises all kinds of theological questions: the tomb was indeed empty and Jesus was indeed seen alive, becasue he has truly risen from the dead.'

Wright first looks at Bultmann's idea of myth and offers his counter argument. He then explores other possible reasons and offers counter positions- the only thing that we are left with is a supernatural explanation.  This is the only reasonable remaining possibility and although extraordinary it would be folly to discount it on that basis alone

Wright warns against the tendancy to rejct the supernatural simply becasue it is supernatural. Wright marries post enlightenment, rational workd view with a sacred world view.

Wright challenges Bultmann - asking 'what common myth did the NT people hold in common'For Bultmann's argument to work there needs to be a common idea.    BUT there isn't.

Wright explores Greek and Jewish belief about life after death and Resurrection - the major influences on the NT writers. In Greek thought - no evidence of belief in bodily resurrection - maybe a place of the dead (Hades) but certainly no physical form of life after death  

Jewish thought - diverse - nothing shared - Sadducces no life after death, Pharisees there is a place shoel where the soul may wait for judegment. Some believed in a physical resurrection but no concensus on manner, time.

BUT - although there was NOTHING common to draw on - the Early Church has a consistent, coherent belief - WHY - because it actually happened.  There is no other reasonable explanation as to why, amongst all the difference beliefs, they would arrive at this Resurrecion message,  

The disciples themselves would have to have gone through a variety of mutations of their own belief to arrive at such an 'extraordinary' tale .  This is unlikely and therefore the most reasonable thing to do is accept the Resurrection occured.

ALL OTHER EXPLANATIONS DO NOT CUT 

Jesus did not die on the cross; he fainted, slipped into a coma – and wrapped up in grave clothes regains consciousness and exits the tomb.

NOT A VERY GOOD EXPLANATION

The likelihood of the  Romans not finishing the job seems absurd. They knew ***********. Furthermore, the  Gospels record that the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side and ‘blood and water came forth.’ Jesus  had indeed died on the cross. 

Some also suggest that the disciples stole the body but this is also illogical.

The disciples feared for their own lives and hid. The tomb was guarded.What purpose would them have in stealing a body and proclaiming a resurrection.       All but John are eventually executed for their belief in Jesus.

The idea that the disciples simply hallucinated is also suspect. Group hallucinations have been reported but never has there been a report of people hallucinating the same subject matter in different times and in  different places.

Finally, the idea that the resurrection experience was some ghostly apparition also lacks credibility John’s Gospel Thomas touches Jesus.

When we have examined all the other alternatives and found them unlikely or suspect we are 1 left with only ONE solution- the Resurrection of Jesus was an historical event.