Page History

...

Study of his writings confirms that, when Bultmann wants to speak of what characterizies God on any serious idea of God, Christian or otherwise, he most commonly speaks of "das Jenseitige" (or in some cases, "das Jenseits"), and thus of "die Jenseitigkeit Gottes."

Wiki MarkupThus, in his most nearly formal definition of "myth," or "mythology," in the programmatic essay, he says that "\[t\]hat mode of representation is mythological in which _das Unweltliche, Göttliche_ appears as _Weltliches, Menschliches, das Jenseitige_ appears as _Dieseitiges_, as when, for example, _Gottes Jenseitigkeit_ is thought of as spatial distance" (22, n. 2 \ [42, n. 5\]).unmigrated-wiki-markup

Or, again, in the sentence in the text to which the above is a footnote, he says: "Myth talks about _dem Unweltlichen_ \ [as\] worldly, _dem G{_}{_}ö{_}{_}ttlichen_ \ [as\] human\[ly\]. . . . Therefore, the motive for criticizing myth, that is, its objectifying representations, is present in myth itself insofar as its real intention to speak of _einer jenseitigen Macht_ to which both we and the world are subject is hampered and obscured by the objectifying character of its assertions" (22 f. \ [10\]).

Wiki MarkupThen, at the end of the same essay, where Bultmann expressly denies that the demythologizing he has attempted to carry out still leaves us with "a mythological remainder," he concludes with the statement that, properly demythologized, "_\[d\]ie Jenseitigkeit Gottes_ is not made _zum Diesseits_ as \ [it is\] in myth; rather the paradox of the presence of _des jenseitigen Gottes_ in history is affirmed" (48 \ [42\]).unmigrated-wiki-markup

In his later comprehensive reply to his critics, he says: "Myth actually talks about _den jenseitigen Mächten oder Personen_ as though they were _diesseitigen, weltlichen_ \ -\- contrary to its real intention. ¶"For what is this intention? Myth talks about _jenseitigen Mächten_, about demons and gods, as powers on which we know ourselves to be dependent, of which we do not dispose, whose favor we need and whose wrath we fear. . . . In this way myth gives expression to a certain understanding of human existence . . . . \ [I\]t knows of _eine andere Wirklichkeit_ than _die Weltwirklichkeit_ that science has in view. It knows that the world and human life have their ground and limit in _einer Macht_ that lies _jenseits_ everything falling within the realm of human reckoning and control \ -\- in _einer transzendenten Macht_. ¶"But myth talks about _dieser jenseitigen Wirklichkeit und Macht_ inadequately when it represents _das Jenseitige_ as spatially distant, as heaven above the earth or as hell beneath it. It talks about _den jenseitigen M{_}{_}ä{_}{_}chten_ inadequately when it represents them as analogous to _den diesseitigen_ _M{_}{_}ä{_}{_}chten_ and as superior to these powers only in force and unpredictability. . . . Myth talks about gods as human beings, and about their actions as human actions. . . . Myth thus makes the gods (or God) into human beings with superior power. . . . ¶"In short, myth objectifies _das Jenseits_ into _Diesseits_, and thus also into the disposable, as becomes evident when cult more and more becomes action calculated to influence the attitude of the deity by averting its wrath and winning its favor. ¶ "Demythologizing seeks to bring out the real intention of myth, namely, its intention to talk about human existence as grounded and limited by _eine jenseitige, unweltliche Macht_, which is not visible to objectifying thinking" (183 f. \ [98 f.\]).unmigrated-wiki-markup

Immediately following, Bultmann speaks of God as "_das Jenseits_," or "_das Jenseits der Welt_," that we cannot talk about "as it is 'in itself;' because in doing so we would objectify _das Jenseits_, God, into _einer diesseitig-weltlichen Phänamen_" (184 \ [99\]).

Wiki MarkupLater in the essay, in discussing "talk about the act of God," Bultmann speaks of "the idea of _der Unweltlichkeit, der Jenseitigkeit_ of divine action" being preserved "only if such action is represented not as something taking place between occurrences in the world but as something that takes place in them, in such a way that the closed continuum of worldly occurrences that presents itself to an objectifying view is left intact. God's act is hidden from all eyes other than the eyes of faith. The only thing that can be generally seen and established is the 'natural' occurrence. In it God's hidden act takes place" (196 f. \ [111\]).unmigrated-wiki-markup

Finally, in the concluding paragraphs of the essay, Bultmann argues that "demythologizing is a demand of faith itself." Only by demythologizing myth, which is to say, only by interpreting it in existential terms, can faith clearly grasp "_die Jenseitigkeit und Verborgenheit_ of divine action." And in the same context Bultmann also says that "_\[d\]ie Unsichtbarkeit Gottes_ excludes any myth that would make God and God's act visible" (207 \ [122\]).unmigrated-wiki-markup

In another essay on demythologizing, Bultmann also speaks of God as "_eine transzendente Macht_," and as "_das Transzendente_," although in this context, too, he still relies on the contrast between "_das Jenseits_" and "_das Diesseits_" (_GV_ 4: 134 f. \ [161\]).

4 May 1997