| Part 1 The Theory of Faith | Hirohumi Hoshika |
■Prologue
[1] Barth, Karl. "Dai 4-kan wakai-ron I/2 [Volume IV: The Doctrine of Reconciliation I/2]." Kyōkai kyōgi-gaku [Church Dogmatics]. Trans. Yoshio Inoue. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1972. Print. (241). "How can we recognize what happened in the past as something that happened for us today?"
[2] Zahrnt, Heinz.Shiteki Iesu no tankyū [The Search for the Historical Jesus]. Trans. Eiji Azumi. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1971. Print. (176). *The following English translation does not contain the relevant page. Zahrnt, Heinz. THE HISTORICAL JESUS. Trans. J.S.Bowden. London: COLLINS, 1963. Print.
■Consideration
[1] Hick, John H. Philosophy of Religion. 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs: A Simon & Schuster, 1990. Print (78). "William Alston has set forth the ways in which religious experience differs from sense experience. One major difference is that religious experience is not universal among human beings, whereas sense experience is. Everyone is equipped with, and no one could live without, beliefs about our physical environment. However, not everyone has, or apparently needs to have, beliefs concerning the Divine. Religious experience, and the beliefs that reflect it, seem to be optional extras, nonessential for human survival and flourishing."
■Review 1
[1] Bultmann, R. "Genshi kirisutokyō no Kirisuto-shishin to shiteki Iesu tono kankei [The relationship between the early Christ message and the historical Jesus]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 9 [COLLECTED WORKS 9]. Trans. Tashio Aono. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1994. Print. (146-147).
[2] Käsemann, Ernst. Shin'yaku shingaku no kigen [The origins of New Testament theology (an abridged edition of EXEGETISCHE VERSUCHE UND BESINNUNGEN)]. Trans. Hidetoshi D. Watanabe. Tokyo: Nihonkirisutokyōdan-shuppankyoku, 1973. Print. (90).
[3] Bultmann, R. "Genshi kirisutokyō no Kirisuto-shishin to shiteki Iesu tono kankei [The relationship between the early Christ message and the historical Jesus]." (134-135). The following passage refers to G. Bornkamm of the Bultmann school, who argued that the church’s kerygma carries on the message of Jesus. Hunter, A.M. Shiteki Iesu to Fukuinsho [A translation of Bible and Gospel]. Trans. Gosaku Okada, and Sadao Kawashima. Tokyo: KYOBUNKWAN, 1976. Print. (208-210). Mitton, C. L. Iesu: Sono jijitsu to shinkō [Jesus: The Fact behind the Faith]. Trans. Junji Kino shita. Tokyo: KYOBUNKWAN, 1974. Print. (104-105). Yoshinobu, Kumazawa. Burutoman [Bultmann]. Tokyo: Nihonkirisutokyōdan-shuppanbu, 1965. Print. (219-221).
[4] Käsemann, Ernst. Shin'yaku shingaku no kigen [The origins of New Testament theology]. (121).
[5] Bultmann, R. "Genshi kirisutokyō no Kirisuto-shishin to shiteki Iesu tono kankei [The relationship between the early Christ message and the historical Jesus]." (134).
[6] Bultmann, R. Iesu [Jesus]. Trans. Junshiro Kawabata, Seiichi Yagi. Tokyo: Mirai-sya, 1989. Print. (17).
[7] ibid., (12).
[8] Bultmann, R. "Pauro shingaku ni taisuru rekishi-teki iesu no igi [The Significance of the Historical Jesus for Pauline Theology]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 11 [COLLECTED WORKS 11]. Trans. Hiroshi Tsuchiya. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1986. Print. (235).
[9] Bultmann, R. "Genshi kirisutokyō no Kirisuto-shishin to shiteki Iesu tono kankei [The relationship between the early Christ message and the historical Jesus]." (134).
[10] Bultmann, R. "Shin'yaku seisho shingaku Ⅲ 'Furon hōhō-ron to gakusetsu-shi' [New Testament Theology Ⅲ 'Appendix: Methodology and History of Scholarship']." Burutoman chosaku-shū 5 [COLLECTED WORKS 5]. Trans. Junshiro Kawabata. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1995. Print. (195).
[11] Bultmann, R. "Shin'yaku seisho shingaku Ⅰ [New Testament Theology Ⅰ]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 3 [COLLECTED WORKS 3]. Trans. Junshiro Kawabata. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1994. Print. (112).
[12] Bultmann, Rudolf, KERYGMA and MYTH. HARPER & ROW PUBLISHERS., New York, 1966 p.41
[13] Charlesworth, James H. Kore dake wa shitte okitai shiteki Iesu [The Historical Jesus You Should Know (Original title: The Historical Jesus An Essential Guide)]. Trans. Minoru Nakano. Tokyo: KYO BUN KWAN Inc., 2012. Print (66-68). "It may be confirmed that there is some consensus among Christian scholars. ... Fourthly, there is a continuity from 'teachings on the Kingdom of God' by Jesus to the 'sermons about Christ' by his earliest disciples. They never normatively distinguished or categorized the 'historical Jesus' and the 'Christ of faith'." ――However, Charlesworth's description fails to capture what Bultmann described as the difference between "historical Jesus and the Christ of the kerygma". Bultmann takes for granted the continuity between the two in the sense that Charlesworth refers to here. (Chapter 4 - Consideration 4 See the citation in note [4].)
[14] The problem of "the discontinuity between the historical Jesus and the apostolic kerygma" is based on the mainline's theological premise that "Jesus in the Gospel era was not divine, but later, in the apostolic age, Jesus was deified as the Christ", so it is natural that conservatives would not accept this problem setting itself. For confirmation that this premise is incorrect, see Part 1 - Chapter 3 - Proposition 1 (Argument), and Chapter 4 - Consideration 4. However, even so, the understanding that "historical facts do not give faith" must be maintained for the reasons stated below.
■Review 2
[1] Bultmann, R. "Shin'yaku seisho shingaku Ⅲ [New Testament Theology Ⅲ]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 5 [COLLECTED WORKS 5]. (195).
[2] Bultmann, R. Shin'yaku seisho to shinwa-ron [New Testament and Mythology]. Trans. Kikuo Yamaoka. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1980. Print. (89).
[3] Bultmann, R. "Genshi kirisutokyō no Kirisuto-shishin to shiteki Iesu tono kankei [The relationship between the early Christ message and the historical Jesus]." (145).
[4] Bultmann, R. "Shin'yaku seisho shingaku Ⅱ [New Testament Theology Ⅱ]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 4 [COLLECTED WORKS 4]. Trans. Junshiro Kawabata. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1994. Print. (340).
[5] In contemporary theology, G. Thiesen has simply adopted Bultmann's problem framework without question. "How can we understand the transition from the historical Jesus to the Son of God as proclaimed by the kerygma?" "Why do they say so much more about Jesus than he would have originally said about himself?" Theissen, G. "Shiteki iesu to kēryuguma ― gakumon-teki kōsei to shinkō e no michi [Historical Jesus and the Kerygma ― Scholarly Construction and the Path to Faith]." Trans. Ichirō Sudō. Seinangakuindaigaku shingaku ronshū 68(1). [Seinan Gakuin University Theological Studies 68(1)]. Japan: Seinan Gakuin University Academic Research Institute., 2011. Print. (199, 202). https://seinan-gu.repo.nii.ac.jp/search?page=1&size=20&sort=-controlnumber&search_type=2&q=1744346814446
■Argument
[1] Kirisutokyō daijiten henshūiinkai. "Kēryuguma." Kiristokyo Daijiten [Christian Encyclopedia]. Tokyo: Kyobunkan. 1983. Print (385).
[2] Käsemann, Ernst. Shin'yaku shingaku no kigen [The origins of New Testament theology]. (91).
[3] Marshall, I. Howard. "Shito no hataraki [The Acts of the Apostles]." Tinderu seisho chūkai [Tyndale New Testament Commentary]. Trans. Yuji Tomita. Tokyo: Word of Life Press Ministries, 2012. Print. (83). "It has been argued, to date, that this speech follows the same framework as other speeches and sermons in the Acts of the Apostles, and that this framework—along with the way in which Luke infuses it with specific content—reflects his own theology."
[4] The following quote is from The New International Version. (The Committee on Bible Translation. 1978.)
[5] In NIV, the word "But" is also used in translations of Peter's kerygma outside of chapter 13, but since this is a additional translation for which there is no corresponding word in the original Greek, it is enclosed in parentheses in the quotation.
[6] I expressed this view in my essay Hirakareta Kirisutokyō no tame no Shinkō to Riseiron [Faith and Reason for an Open Christianity], Part 16 (2010). Later, I found a similar viewpoint in G. Theysen's Iesu to Pauro [Jesus and Pauls], Trans. Nihon shin'yaku gakkai. Tokyo: Kyobunkan, 2012. Print. (152-154), but as follows, Theysen's perspective remains a superficial examination applying psychology. Theissen argues that the view of Jesus, which was unjustly diminished by the crucifixion, was balanced by the resurrection and exaltation, thereby reducing the apostles' cognitive dissonance, but assuming that this was indeed the psychological transformation that occurred among the apostles, it would only offer them "comfort" or "hope". However, what is found in the apostles' kerygma is more than just comfort or hope in faith; as we see in this section, it is confidence in Jesus. Therefore, the discovery of the resurrection proposition of "God's approval of Jesus" must be understood not as an adjustment to the psychological balance of the apostles, but as the discovery of a doctrine that would confirm and guarantee the impression that they had about Jesus while he was alive. The concept of "cognitive dissonance" as described by Theissen can be traced back to L. Festinger, H.W. Riecken, and S. Schachter's book, When Prophecies Fail (1956). When a religious group's prophecy failed and nothing happened, it is recorded that the members of that group changed their interpretation of what the prophecy meant and strengthened their faith. One way to resolve "cognitive dissonance" is to change one's interpretation of an event, and it is argued that this creates faith. The birth of Christianity through the acquisition of the "resurrection proposition," as seen in this essay, differs from the process of religious renewal in the aforementioned religious groups. The point is that in the early church, it wasn't a case of "changing the interpretation when nothing happened", but rather, because the unexpected event of the resurrection occurred, the apostles restored their original perception of Jesus. Christianity states that "if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty" (1Cor. 15:14), and it is a religion in which an active event precedes faith. However, distinguishing between the religious group in When Prophecies Fail and the early Christian apostles by stating that the difference lies in whether they "changed their interpretation even though nothing had happened / changed their interpretation because a new event occurred," or "abandoned their previous claims and changed their interpretation / came to adopt some interpretation for the first time from a state of having no specific claims," and considering the former as adopting a convenient interpretation and the latter as adopting a more rational interpretation, would not be a fair treatment of both. Whether it is a change in interpretation or the acquisition of a new interpretation, in either case it is a affirming the consequent inference, as described in Part Two, Faith and Reason, Chapter 2 - Easy Study 4 "Hermeneutics", and is an uncertain inference about an event. The effectiveness of interpretive thinking lies in acquiring new perspectives on events, and in this respect, the acquisition of interpretation by the religious group in When Prophecies Fail and the Christian apostolic community must be considered the same. The former's change in interpretation was self-preservation-driven, and it can be argued that their motivation for adopting the interpretation differed from that of the Apostles. However, ultimately, the two must be distinguished simply by whether or not their interpretation was correct. Both the people in When Prophecies Fail and Christianity are "fact-based" faiths, so the correctness of their beliefs will ultimately be judged by the facts.
[7] Chekhov, A. P. Daigakusei [The Student]. Trans. Hiroko Kojima. Tokyo: Publisher Michitani, 2005. Print.
■Succession
[1] I once shared the "resurrection proposition" with a friend who did not share my faith, but he remarked, "I suppose that holds meaning for those who believe in God, but for someone without faith, it’s a topic that offers no real point of entry."
[2] Bruce, F. F. "I & II Corinthians." The New Century Bible Commentary. London: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984, Print. (37). A "common myth" is that "intellectual sermons" were changed to "foolish sermons", but my interpretation is that "sermons on the resurrection" were abandoned and "sermons on the cross" were given. Both are different in terms of their contents as "common myths", but they are the same in that they assume that Paul changed his policy after his failure in evangelizing Athens.
[3] Sunao Iwakuma. Shin'yaku Girishiya-go Jiten [New Translation Greek Dictionary]. Tokyo: Yamamoto Shoten, 1982. Print.
[4]Nihon kirisutokyō kyōgi-kai bunsho jigyōbu. "Shinjō-shū, jō, ge [Creed collection 1, 2]." Kirisutokyō koten sōsho Ⅰ, Ⅱ [Library of Christian Classics I, II]. Tokyo: Shinkyō shuppansha, 1955, 1957. Print. Nobuo, Watanabe. Kodai kyōkai no shinkō kokuhaku [The Confession of Faith of the Early Church]. Tokyo: Shinkyō shuppansha, 2002. Print. Kelly, J. N. D. Shoki kirisutokyō kyōri-shi, jō, ge [Early Christian Doctrines 5th Ed.]. Trans. Kenji Tsuda. Japan: Ichibaku shuppansha, 2010. Print.
[5] Heidelberg Catechism.Trans. Masaichi Takemori. Tokyo: Shinkyō shuppansha, 1984. Print. (42).
[6] Barth, Karl. Kyōkai kyōgi-gaku Ⅰ/ 2 Wakai-ron [Church Dogmatics IV/1: The Doctrine of Reconciliation], Chapter 14: "The Lord Jesus Christ as Servant", Section 59: "The Obedience of the Son of God" Ⅲ: "The Father's Verdict". Trans. Yoshio Inoue. Tokyo: Shinkyō shuppansha, 1972. Print. (276). "The resurrection as the proclamation and execution of God’s judgment on the path He walked."
[7] The following are Japanese books that describe the resurrection as "God's vindication of Jesus." Yutaka, Maeda, Miyata Hakaru, et al. Kirisutokyō nyūmon -Haideruberuku shinkō mondō ni yoru- [An Introduction to Christianity: Based on the Heidelberg Catechism]. Tokyo: Komine shoten, 1982. Print. (67). "The resurrection of Christ is ... vivid proof that the One rejected on earth was, in fact, the One accepted by God." Busch, Wilhelm. 365-Nichi no Shu [365 MAL ER: Tagliche Andachten]. Trans. Hiroshi Kishimoto. Tokyo:Inochinokotoba-sha, 1976. Print. (128). "'He deserves the death penalty!' 'Away with him! Away with him!' — Ever since that time, scholars and common people alike have been shouting these words. ... The mild-mannered, Christian citizens of Europe do not shout such things. Yet, secretly, they wish to bury Jesus and endorse the verdict that 'He deserves the death penalty.' A verdict by majority vote! Yet there is one person from whom an answer has not yet been sought: the Father of Jesus Christ, the living God. ... The Resurrection is the final verdict on Jesus. Through it, all the various human verdicts against him are utterly shattered."
■Mission
[1] Refer to the following for historical interpretations regarding the "Cross". McGrath, A.E. Kirisutokyō shingaku nyūmon [Christian Theology: An Introduction]. Trans. Masami Kōjiro. Tokyo: KYOBUNKWAN, 2002. Print.
[2] In addition to this 'conviction' of faith, the "universality" of faith is thought to include the 'immutability' of the "Historical Jesus-R" in contrast to the uncertainty of historical research — as discussed in Chapter 4, Theology of Faith — as well as the 'transcendence' derived from the fact that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, the objects of faith, are transcendent beings.
[3] Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. Norman Kemp Smith. LONDON: MACMILLAN and Co., 1929. Print. (14). (Axxi)
■Proposition 3
[1] Kierkegaard, Søren. "Tetsugaku-teki danpen eno musubi toshite no hi-gakumon-teki atogaki" [Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments]. Kirukegōru chosaku-shū 8 [Collected Works of Kierkegaard 8]. Trans. Keiji Ogawa and Yoshimu Sugiyama. Tokyo: Hakusuisha, 1969. Print. (34).
[2] ibid., (34).
[3] Yasuo Kudō. "Kirukegōru [Kierkegaard]."Hito to shisō 19 [People and Ideas 19]. Tokyo: Shimizu shoin, 1971. Print. (155). "For real human beings, truth is not something to be sought externally, but rather something to be sought within oneself; it is something that must be connected to the eternal and the absolute within oneself — this has been the process of self-generation thus far. All of these were driven by the conviction that 'subjectivity is truth'. Now, however, the self has come to realize that there is no absolute being inherent within itself. Here, the proposition that 'subjectivity is truth' is replaced by the proposition that 'subjectivity is falsehood'. In this case, 'falsehood' means sin. It signifies that human beings have fallen outside the truth of the Absolute. It turns out that the Absolute must be sought not within oneself, but beyond oneself, outside oneself. It is Christianity, as a transcendent religion, that makes a truly religious life possible."
[4] While the validity of an insight bears no inherent relationship to the amount of effort invested in it, such effort can serve as a rough gauge when there is no other evidence to substantiate that validity. To verify the views outlined in the few lines below, I immersed myself in Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments for two months and produced notes totaling approximately 40,000 Japanese characters.
■Proposition 4
[1] Kierkegaard, S. Hanpuku [Repetition]. Tokyo: Iwanamishoten, 1978. Print. (37). (Org. 211).
[2] ibid., (136). (Org. 274).
[3] ibid., (10). (Org. 194).
[4] ibid., (9). (Org. 193).
[5] ibid., (149). (Org. 283).
■Proposition 5
[1] Bultmann, R. "Kyōkanfukuinsho denshō-shiⅠ [THE HISTORY OF THE SYNOPTIC TRADITION Part One]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 1 [COLLECTED WORKS 1]. Trans. Hiromichi kayama. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 2004. Print. (107).
[2] ibid., (221).
■Remark
[1] For inference of affirming the consequent, refer to Part 1, Chapter 3 - Consideration. For details regarding interpretation, refer to Part 2, Chapter 2 - Easy Study 4. The resurrection proposition — "The resurrection is a testament to God's vindication of Jesus" — is one possible interpretation of the event of Jesus's resurrection. Rewritten in the form of a inference, this becomes: (If A, then B) — that is, "[A] If the resurrection is God’s testimony affirming Jesus, then [B] Jesus could not have been left to die on the cross" — and, since (B is true) — that is, "[B] In fact, Jesus was resurrected" — this constitutes a affirming the consequent inference. In a "affirming the consequent inference", the truth of the consequent (Jesus' resurrection) is used to assert the truth of the antecedent (that Jesus' resurrection is God's testimony to Jesus' righteousness). However, unlike the inference of affirming the antecedent, the inference of affirming the consequent can only assert truth as a possibility; it cannot assert truth with certainty. The manner in which this is claimed as truth — though lacking objective certainty, yet holding subjective necessity — is shown respectively in Propositions 1 to 5 of this chapter.
■補論3
[1] Käsemann, Ernst. Shin'yaku shingaku no kigen [The origins of New Testament theology]. (69-123).
[2] ibid., (118).
[3] ibid., (95).
[4] ibid., (93).
[5] ibid., (79).
[6] Stanton, Graham N. Fukuonsho to iesu [The Gospels and Jesus]. Trans. Kikuo Matsunaga. Tokyo: Yorudan-sha, Print. 1998. (100-101).
[7] ibid., (103).
[8] Bultmann, R. "Kyōkanfukuinsho denshō-shiⅡ [THE HISTORY OF THE SYNOPTIC TRADITION Part Two]." Burutoman chosaku-shū 2 [COLLECTED WORKS 2]. Trans. Hiromichi kayama. Tokyo: Shinkyo Shuppansha Pub. Co., 1987. Print. (22).
[9] M.ヘンゲル『ペトロ』教文館 2010年 p.53「アレクサンドリアのクレメンスはエイレナイオスの著作を知っていたが、エイレナイオスとは反対に、マルコはまだペトロの生前に福音書を書き、それが真実であることは彼によって確認されたと述べている。」