tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post2066223628367496770..comments2023-12-08T04:43:40.135-06:00Comments on The Fire and the Rose: Bigger Than Bultmann?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post-81350436613620707932014-05-16T07:17:57.571-05:002014-05-16T07:17:57.571-05:00I've mentioned this story somewhere in blogdom...I've mentioned this story somewhere in blogdom before, told to me by a ministerial colleague and an esteemed theologian, but it bears repetition. As a young man my friend went with a mate to hear the famous Welsh conservative evangelical preacher and bĂȘte noire of theological liberalism Martyn-Lloyd-Jones preach. In his sermon "The Doctor" laid into Bultmann. On leaving the chapel, the friend of my friend said, "What a demolition of Bultmann. Jesus would have loved it." To which my friend replied, "Maybe. But at least Jesus would have read him."<br /><br />Thanks, David. The one problem I have reading your stuff is that I always get a stiff neck from nodding in agreement.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15489409381009363165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post-30378221666441108362014-05-01T08:09:46.078-05:002014-05-01T08:09:46.078-05:00False panegyric and true polemic seem balanced, to...False panegyric and true polemic seem balanced, to me. Not that this really seems like a polemic. Let's not confuse detailed antagonistic (struggling-against) analysis with war.Matthew Frosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10232613079168523464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post-56126871101172592722014-04-30T21:35:51.232-05:002014-04-30T21:35:51.232-05:00Ugh... The whole "Bultmann is a subjective pi...Ugh... The whole "Bultmann is a subjective pietist!" Objection , makes my eye twitch. Especially when they cite 'Jesus Christ & Mythology' (Lectures that thoroughly refute that objection) to make their point! (David Bentley Hart).<br /><br />I'm looking forward to the upcoming 'Beyond Bultmann' book , and hope that he receives fair treatment.<br /><br />Good post , David.Paul.Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08143470434678015241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post-72951748991902685752014-04-30T21:32:48.775-05:002014-04-30T21:32:48.775-05:00A provocative and interesting take on an important...A provocative and interesting take on an important discussion. I actually do know Jason, who is a careful scholar and close reader. Perhaps Internet polemics are not the best way to get at the nuance of this conversation. Richard L. Floydhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12113908222186199761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post-74127684253919142782014-04-30T20:31:49.449-05:002014-04-30T20:31:49.449-05:00I probably should have mentioned this in the post ...I probably should have mentioned this in the post itself, but those interested in reading Bultmann should consult the <a href="http://fireandrose.blogspot.com/2013/11/rudolf-bultmann-readers-guide.html" rel="nofollow">"reader's guide"</a> that I posted last year. Let me know if you have any questions about it.David W. Congdonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03009330707703611224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post-38112984012081101042014-04-30T19:59:03.330-05:002014-04-30T19:59:03.330-05:00As one of those "most Christians" who ha...As one of those "most Christians" who have never studied Bultmann, are there any resources do you recommemd for a jumping off point (or was that tacitly implied via the title list in the Bultmann rennaisance paragraph)?intoPreacherzsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06654368004408302048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post-69063343448135884682014-04-30T19:06:18.335-05:002014-04-30T19:06:18.335-05:00The other thing wrong with this is the idea that W...The other thing wrong with this is the idea that Wright wants to fight Bultmann. Even his well-known arguments with Borg and with Crossan are conducted politely. He considers them colleagues. He isn't trying to win a fight--except in the sense that all scholars want their views to be accepted. CT doesn't get that and never has.<br /><br />Further, it is hardly the average evangelical who considers Albert Schweitzer his hero in reconstructing the historical Jesus. Like all creative scholars, Wright doesn't easily fall into accepted categories. Neither did Bultmann. Creative scholars take risks and so they make mistakes--but they also make discoveries.<br /><br />I have my issues with Bultmann, but his commentary on John was one of the best ever written. I also want to read your interpretation. One should always be open to new interpretations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com