From Jesus to Christ and PBS Special and rudolf bultmann

I happened on this special tonight while it still had most of its time to run, and I was pulled in by the beauty of the art, the professionalism of the production, the clarity and engaging quality of the scholars interviewed and the importance of the topic for Western, as well as World, civilization. The philosophy behind the production reflects the triumph in American New Testament studies of the last remaining disciples of the Marburg Neutestamentler Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976). Or, to put the matter slightly differently, the presentation reflected the dominance of German categories of conceptualizing early Christianity, categories which have been sharpened by virtue of fresh manuscript finds from the Egyptian desert after WWII (at Nag Hammadi). The purpose of this and the next essay is to understand the philosophy behind the PBS special and comment on both the attractive features and rather gaping holes in our knowledge of earliest Christianity.*

[*My own acquaintance with earliest Christianity comes through a Ph. D. in the subject from Brown University and a DAAD Fellowship at the University of Tuebingen in 1980-81 to study with scholars who would, in general, not be terribly sympathetic to the material presented tonight.]

The Long Shadow of Walter Bauer

In 1934 Walter Bauer published what, in retrospect, was probably the most important book in early Christian studies of the 20th century. Translated into English in 1971 as "Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity," Bauer argued two major theses: (1) that earliest Christianity was, from the very beginning, a phenomenon of incredible diversity, where what would later become heresy was more powerful in many regions than the eventual orthodoxy; and (2) that the most effective way of studying the earliest Christian movement(s) was to engage in regional studies. Through Bauer the language of early Christian "trajectories" entered into scholarly speech, so that one might talk about the "Egyptian" or "Roman" or "Palestinian" or "Ephesian" trajectories of earliest Christianity. Though surely not meant as a joke, another tradition of study of earliest Christianity, represented by the distinguished Roman Catholic scholar Raymond Brown, talked about "circles" or "communities" of faith, such as the "Johannine Circle" in the Asia Minor town of Ephesus. But trajectories were all the rage in the 1970s when I entered into the field, even though every time I heard a scholar speak on a certain early Christian trajectory, I wanted to look skyward to see if I could see trailing clouds of glory.

The Thesis Develops

In fact, the Bauer thesis was a sort of warmed over, though much more carefully documented, presentation of the original thesis of Tuebinger Ferdinand Christian Baur, the controversial scholar of the mid-19th century at that great University in Germany. Influenced by Hegelian philosophical categories, Baur posited the existence of tension between various "parties" of earliest Christians going back to the days of the New Testament. The thesis of early Christian "diversity" therefore emerged from radical Protestant critiques of orthodox Christianity, and I would think that about 95% of the scholars standing behind the PBS specials are either lapsed or active Protestants today. Though shunning any official anti-Catholicism, the philosophy behind the PBS special is generally quite critical of, and finds quite boring, the emerging Catholic tradition in the first three centuries.

But I am getting a little ahead of myself. My point here is that the Bauer thesis, building on the earlier Baur thesis, was helped along considerably by the finds in the Egyptian desert just after WWII of 52 texts, written in Coptic from the 4th century, texts known as the Nag Hammadi documents. Though written in the 4th century, these texts not only bear witness to a complex world of Christianity at that time and earlier, but also give us texts of people or movements that we previously knew about only through those that wrote against them. The so-called heresiarchs in the 4th-5th centuries, such as Epiphanius of Salamis, had presented the philosophies of many early Christian writers only to debunk them. Now, thanks to the finds at Nag Hammadi, we could hear the voices of these long-suppressed figures speak. Thus, when these finds were connected to the new historicism of the 1970s and beyond, which was committed to letting long-suppressed voices speak, the stage was set for a reconceptualization of the development of earliest Christianty. In short, Bauer provided the thesis, Nag Hammadi provided the additional ammunition, and the spirit of the 1970s-1990s provided the philosophical orientation for the triumph of what one might call the "diversity thesis" of early Christianity.

Unpacking the Diversity Thesis

The diversity thesis, then, is the regnant root metaphor of mainstream New Testament scholarship today. Whisper the word "diversity" in any Ivy League early Christianity program, and you are halfway to your dissertation. But what is meant by "diversity" and what interests current scholars of early Christianity needs to be said more precisely. "Diversity" means two things: (1) it means that there were competing voices within Christianity for nearly 300 years, struggling against each other for influence and dominance; and (2) there was diversity of religions in the Graeco-Roman world, religions that were all in competition with Christianity. This struggle of religions becomes the template through which the first 300 years of our era are then viewed. Mention this kind of diversity and you will be ready to write your dissertation. Because this diversity (which is a historical fact and which, from the philosophy of these scholars is a good thing) took place for 300 years, the central question scholars find interesting, then, is how this diversity eventually gave way to a unified or more "orthodox" view of things. But, in fact, most of these scholars, being lapsed Protestants, are not really interested in the ultimate "triumph" of orthodox Christianity, because it stands for the very thing they don't want to embrace: exclusivism. Therefore, most scholars of early Christianity are content to stay safely within the first three centuries of Christianity because otherwise you really have to deal with some very unpleasant historical and theological questions. I won't say, however, that all these scholars are like this: only about 90% of them are.

Make no mistake about it, however. The scholars interviewed have spent lifetimes combing through the data of the earliest days of Christianity. They know a lot. Some of the things we don't know, however, are described in the next essay.

1632