Scripture and God in Christianity

We have already seen in this chapter how Bultmann uses the "Christ myth" of the New Testament
for a Christian self-understanding by means of "existential interpretation". The result is that
"the problem of the 'Jesus of history' is bracketed off from 'theology', and the latter is made dependent
on itself." 294 In the words of E. Kasemann: "the earthly, crucified Jesus was to be seen
only in the light of Easter day. But it was also realized that the event of Easter cannot be adequately
comprehended if it is looked at apart from earthly Jesus." 295 It follows without saying that
for the early church "the life of Jesus was constitutive for faith, because the earthly and the exalted
Lord are identical." 296 This position is quite paradoxical and in a sense contradictory. The
difficulties involved are still the same: Is Christianity in its traditional garb, the religion manifestly
preached by Jesus himself or what the later Christians thought about him? In either way the
question of authenticity and logical proof would by and large still be there. However, in spite of
its limitations, this has been the position adopted by a majority of English theologians as H. Conzelmann
observes: "They thus reserve for themselves the possibility of drawing a continuous line
from Jesus' understanding of himself to the faith of the community. Easter is no way ignored, but
the content of the Easter faith, and with it the basic christological terms and titles, is traced back
to Jesus' own teaching. The theology of the community appears as the working out of the legacy
of the Risen Christ on the basis of his appearance...." 297
A. M. Ramsey summarizes the Anglican position in the following words: "Modern Anglican theology
owes many of its characteristics to the central place held within it by the Incarnation. Anglicanism
has, for instance, dwelt much on the Nicene and Chalcedonian dogmas and on those
ancient Fathers who directly interpreted them. Always somewhat insular in its attitude to continental
theology, Anglicanism in these years paid little heed to continental movements and writers,
except when they concerned the Person of Christ, in history or dogma: as did the writings of
Harnack, Ritschl and Schweitzer. Furthermore, the doctrine of the Incarnate Christ as the Logos
gave a constant impulse towards relating the Incarnation, wherever possible, with contemporary
movements in thought or social progress." 298 It is true as we have seen already in Kelly, Moule
and Stanton. It will suffice here to quote A. M. Ramsey himself who observed that "The theology
of the Apostles sprang ... not from their own theorizing, but from certain historical events which
led them to beliefs far removed from their own preconceived notions. The most significant of the
events was the Resurrection." 299 Therefore, to Ramsey, "The Resurrection is the true startingplace
for the study of the making and meaning of the New Testament .... Jesus Christ had, it is
true, taught and done great things: but He did not allow the disciples to rest in these things. He
led them on to paradox, perplexity and darkness; and there he left them.... But His Resurrection
threw its own light backwards upon the death and the ministry that went before; it illuminated the
paradoxes and disclosed the unity of His words and deeds. As Scott Holland said: " In the resurrection
it was not only the Lord who was raised from the dead. His life on earth rose with Him; it
was lifted up into its real light." 300 He concludes that "It is desperate procedure to try and build a
Christian Gospel upon the words of Jesus in Galilee apart from the climax of Calvary, Easter and
Pentecost. If we do so we are professing to know Jesus better than the first disciples knew Him;
and the Marcan record shews us how complete was their perplexity before the Resurrection gave
them the key.... early oral tradition about Jesus was handed down, every written record of Him
was made only by those who already acknowledged Him as Lord, risen from the dead." 301 The
37