OSCAR CULLMANN A N D SALVATION

HISTORY
M. R. PLAYOUST. S.J

INTRODUCTION

The view of history found in the Bible is called salvation history

because the events recounted there are regarded as Gods acts for the
salvation of the world. The term salvation history is one translation of
the word Heilsgeschichtewhich was itself probably first coined in pietistic
circles of eighteenth-century southern Germany by the Swabian theologian,
Bengel. Bengel saw both teleological as well as chronological principles
in biblical events, and he thought that he could predict with certainty the
date of the End.
In the nineteenth century, salvation history was popularized in more
orthodox circles by J. C. K. von Hofmann and the Erlangen school.
Against some liberal theologians of the time who wanted to dispense with
the Old Testament or who treated the Bible as a textbook of theology
(alternatively, of ethics), von Hofmann stressed the unity of the Old and
New Testaments, saw Jesus as the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecies,
and taught that the Book of Acts recorded the continuation of Gods
saving work in the Church.
Oscar Cullmann is at present the most prominent Protestant exponent
of salvation history, although his views differ significantly from those of
von Hofmann. He was born in Strasbourg in 1902, baptized into the
Lutheran Church (of which he is still a lay member) and was educated
mainly in his home city. Between 1930 and 1938 he was professor of New
Testament and ancient church history at Strasbourg, and since 1938 he
has been a professor at the University of Basel; he also teaches regularly
at the Sorbonne and at the Protestant theological seminary in Paris.
Cullmann regards himself primarily as a biblical theologian whose
task is simply to listen to what the New Testament authors have to say.
He attempts to approach the writings without preconceived views and
seeks to identify their unique theological character and central message.
He is not particularly concerned when a specified problem cannot be
answered biblically and must be passed on to the dogmatic theologians.
1 S. C. Guthrie, Jr., Oscar Cullmann, in A Handbook of Christian Theologians, ed.
M. Marty and D. Peerman (Cleveland, 1965), pp. 338 ff.
29
30 M. R . PLAYOUST

Insofar as Cullmann found the unique message of Christianity to be

salvation history (meant temporally, not metaphysically), he set himself
apart from the mainstream of German Word of God theologians,
especially Karl Barth and his followers, and Rudolf Bultmann with
his existentialist school. More recently, as will be discussed below, the
works of Pannenberg, Kasemann, von Rad, Rendtorff and others have
established points of contact with Cullmanns views.
It is of particular interest that Cullmanns biblical theology has been
favourably received in Catholic circles ; he attended the Second Vatican
Council, the documents of which include a number of references to salva-
tion history. A good many years earlier, he had established areas of
substantial agreement with scholars such as the present Cardinal
DaniClou.1
It will be useful to consider briefly a recent Catholic article on salvation
history2 so that this can later be compared with Cullmanns views. As a
principle of interpretation, salvation history asserts the fact that God has
made a progressive revelation of himself and his will in Scripture. As a
theological affirmation, it affirms that salvation (delivering man from
evil and reuniting him in grace with God) is historic, and that history
(both facts and interpretative memory) is salvific; the salvific acts of God
are begun and brought to completion as actual happenings within the
historic processes of human activity.

C U L L M A N N S C U R R E N T POSITION

In this section will be summarized information from Christ and Time,

first published in 1946, together with the additional introductory chapter
to the 3rd edition in 1962,s and from Salvation in History, which appeared
in Germany in 1965.4
If one approaches the Bible in an unbiased way, it is apparent that it
is the proclamation of concrete historical events which took place at a
particular time and in a particular place. It does not proclaim any of the
following: metaphysical speculation, philosophy of any kind, eternal
truths, nor is it about mans authentic existence.
Gods saving acts occur in time. The biblical concept of time is to be
understood in analogy to a straight line (unlike the Hellenistic idea of
circular time). The line is formed, on the one hand, by linking individual
1 J. DaniBlou, God and the Ways of Knowing (New York, 1957-fxst published in
French, 1954); and later works.
2 E. L. Peterman, New Catholic Encyclopedia (Washington, 1967), vol. XII, p. 999.
8 0. Cullmann, Christ and Time (London, 19623 [first German edition, 19461).
4 0. Cullmann, Salvation in History (London, 1967 [German edition, 19651).
 OSCAR C U L L M A N N A N D S A L V A T I O N HISTORY 31
moments of time (Ka1pol)l in which God chooses to reveal himself and
realize his plan of salvation and, on the other hand, by linking whole
periods of time (aiGSves) which these particular actions mark off. Our
time is, therefore, a delimited portion of Gods time which is qualitatively
no different from ours;2 this is contrary, say, to the Platonic view of time.
In the Old Testament, time was regarded as being divided into three
ages: the period before creation, the present age and the future. It was
generally thought that the coming of the Messiah would coincide with the
end of the present age. However, on to this three-fold division Christianity
imposed the Christ-event, which was recognized as occurring during
present time, and as being the mid-point of all time.3
The particular events which, connected together, were to save man
from his sin included the election of Israel (Exodus, Law, Promised
Land), the reduction of the faithful to a small remnant and finally to
Jesus himself. Through the Christ-event, salvation spreads to the apostles,
to the Church (which is the new Israel) and will eventually reach the
whole world before the E q m o v . Christ is the unique event, once for all
($qbrraQ, who bears Gods lordship over time and in whom all
redemptive time can be ~ u rv ey edHe .~ fulfilled all which went before him,
yet he anticipated in his person all that was to come.5 Containing within
itself the whole of Gods plan (okovoyia) of salvation, the Christ-
event is both vertical and aligned horizontally in the saving process.6
Cullmann sees attempts to dehistoricize Christianity and to deny
salvation history as the major heresies of the Churchs life: in the second
century (Gnosticism and Marcionism) and in the twentieth century
(existentialism).7
(a) Revelation, prophecy and kerygrna. God reveals to certain selected
individuals, who are eyewitnesses, that specified historical events are
divine saving acts; he also reveals the connexion between these events
and the rest of salvation history. The new events and their interpretation,
including the saving connexion, are incorporated into the kerygma or
proclamation of Gods saving action in the community. At the same
time, the old kerygma is re-interpreted to make clear its continuity with

1 This interpretation is challenged by James Barr, The Semanfics of Biblical Language

(London, 1961) and Biblical Words for Time (London, 19692), also by H. Anderson,
Jesus and Christian Origins, (New York, 1964), pp. 140 ff.
2 Christ and Time, pp. 61 ff.
3 Ibid., pp. 69 ff.
4 Loc. cit., pp. 69 ff.
5 Ibid., pp. 121 ff.
6 Salvation and History, p. 100.
7 Ibid., pp. 24 ff.
32 M . R. PLAYOUST

the new facts.1 The Bible does not make a clear distinction between
revealed prophecy concerning actual historical events (which can be
tested by scientific historical studies) and revealed prophecy about
mythical events (e.g. creation). The common bond of prophecy is, how-
ever, always present.2
(b) History and salvation history. Cullmann distinguishes clearly between
ordinary history and salvation history: the latter consists of only a few
otherwise insignificant events, and their selection by God (as well as the
connexion between them) is made known only by revelation.3 The
material relationship between the two derives from the election essential
to salvation history; the election reduces to a narrow line which then
continues for the salvation of all mankind, leading ultimately to a
funnelling of all history into this line, in other words, a merging of secular
history with salvation history.4 The inclusion of the historically un-
verifiable (e.g. myths) and the presence of gaps (due to divine selection
of events on either side of the gap) are characteristic of salvation
history.5
(c) The intermediate period. This period, the time between Christs
Resurrection and his Parousia, was originally thought by the early
church to be of brief duration, although Cullmann does not agree that
the delay of the Parousia was an overwhelming problem which caused
the early church to change in any essential way its original witness.6
Characteristic of this period is the tension between the already (the
decisive battle won by Christ) and the not yet (the final fruits of victory
at the Parousia). Christ already reigns as Lord over the world (although
unrecognized).7 The church experiences the manifestations of the Spirit
and the conviction of its own special task for this period-the mission of
preaching.8 The Christian, instructed by 1 Thess 1:3, I Thess 5:8 and 1
Cor 13: 3, has faith in the Christ-event past and present, hope in the
saving event yet to come, and love as the normative principle and realiza-
tion of faith and hope.g

Ibid., pp. 90 ff. Except for the aspect of revelation, there are some notable similarities
here with Traditionsgeschichte as understood by W. Pannenberg and R. Rendtorff: see
Revelation as History, ed. W. Pannenberg, (New York and London, 1968 [German
edition, 19611).
a Christ and Time, pp. 94 ff.
Ibid., pp. 19 E. and Salvation in History, p. 78.
Salvation in History, p. 166.
5 Ibid., pp. 136 ff. and pp. 150 ff.
Ibid., pp. 236 ff.
7 Christ and Time, pp. 185 ff.
Salvation in History, p. 240.
Ibid., p. 338.
 OSCAR C U L L M A N N A N D S A L V A T I O N HISTORY 33
CULLMANN S l N C E CHRIST A N D TIME

Christ and Time was fairly reviewed but trenchantly attacked by Rudolf
Bultmann in 1948.1 Cullmann replied in part in an introductory chapter
to the third edition some years later, and in general there has been a
productive debate between him and existentialist theologians. It is of
interest that Bultinann criticized Cullmanns views as being insufficiently
Christian and too influenced by Jewish apocalyptic; since then, many
theologians, especially one of Bultmanns pupils, Ernst Kasemann, have
emphasized just this apocalyptic influence on the growth and develop-
ment of Jesus self-consciousness and on the thought of the earliest
Christian communities.
The majority of Old Testament scholars have always favoured a
salvation-historical approach. In particular, many of the methods and
results of G. von Rad have been adopted by Cullmann and appear in
Salvation in History.
Wolfhart Pannenberg and co-workers, while differing radically from
Cullmann about the nature of revelation and of history, share with him a
profound respect for interpreted historical facts, and their practical
conclusions are frequently similar. This will be discussed below. James
Robinson sees that the present-day Barthian theologians and Cullmann
and Pannenberg are already close together in their theological perspectives,
but this may be rather an over-simplification.2 Finally, Cullmanns
interest in the self-consciousness of Jesus has been paralleled by the work
of the so-called post-Bultmannian theologians who, among other things,
have been searching for the faith of the man, Jesus, who lies behind the
kerygmatic Christ.3
Cullmanns geometrical conception of time and salvation history, with
clearly delineated epochs and convergent lines advancing to Christ and
two divergent lines proceeding from him,4 have been strongly criticized.
Although these aspects have been de-emphasized in Salvation in History,
it is not clear to what extent he has revised his views. Two common
questions are: Is not eternity in the Bible something quite different both
from Greek timelessness and from Cullmanns endless time? If Gods

R. Bultmann, History of Salvation and History, in Existence and Faith (London,

1960), pp. 268-284.
J. M. Robinson, Revelationas Word and History, in New Frontiers in Theology, vol.
III, Theology as History (New York, 1967), pp. 15-21.
3 See, for example,a discussion of some of the implications of Kasemanns work in
H. Anderson, Jesus and Christian Origins, p. 144.
Christ and Time, p. 83. There are also concentriccircles to illustrate Christs present
Lordship in the world on p. 188.
34 M . R. P L A Y O U S T

and mans time are only quantitatively distinguished, what does this do
to the relationship between God and man?1
Cullmann explains that his concept of linear time is purely biblical and
in no sense does he intend it to be a philosophy of history.2 Linear time is
essentially a framework within which the message of the Gospel is most
lucid.3 It is a background to the New Testament present-future tension.
This tension actually weakens linear time4 and it is the tension which
Cullmann considers to be especially significant.5
Cullmann now emphasizes that the sequence of events called salvation
history is not necessarily a straight line. Although the general direction
of salvation is clear, the line is better described as a fluctuating or wavy
one due to mans sin before God.6 The divine sequence of events can,
because of sin and judgment, also be a history of disaster, Unheilsge-
schichte.7
Cullmann argues that Jesus saw himself as the Suffering Servant (ebed
Yahweh) and as the coming Son of Man: that is, he saw himself in a
salvation-historical (heilsgeschichtlich) perspective as the fulfilment of Old
Testament prophecies.8 Cullmann does not consider that Jesus used these
two Messianic titles himself, but they are a correct interpretation by the
early church of Jesus self-consciousness. Cullmann is very firm on this:
If Jesus was convinced that this was his divine mission, then it is implied
that he deliberately included himself within salvation history; and again
if he had such a self-consciousness, not a single part of his preaching can
be unaffected by it. Anyone who refuses to credit Jesus with such a
consciousness in any form, the consciousness of fulfilling the function
implicit in each Jewish honorific title, must also reject Jesus relationship
to salvation history.g The above rigid statements appear to go beyond
the evidence and beyond the logic of the case; it is not clear how Cullmann
would regard a less than explicit self-consciousness or, alternatively, a
development in Jesus human consciousness which became complete only
towards the moment of his death.
On the question of eschatology, Cullmann argues that the tension
between the already and the not yet was present in Jesus own life.
S. C. Guthrie, Jr., Oscar Cullmann, p. 352.
Christ and Time, p. xxiv (in 3rd edition).
3 Ibid., p. xxviii.
Ibid., p. xxv.
6 Ibid., p. xxvi.
Salvation and History, p. 15.
. .
7 Ibid., p. 21.
81bid., pp. 230 ff. See also Cullmanns The Christology of the New Testament,
CPhiladelDhia-London. 1959).
Salvation and History, 6,231.
 OSCAR C U L L M A N N A N D S A L V A T I O N HISTORY 35
Although Jesus did expect the end to occur while at least some of his
hearers were alive, yet there was still time remaining and this period was
of importance. Cullmann discusses this point with reference, especially,
to Mk 9: 1, Mk 13: 30 and Mt 10: 23.l Jesus preached that salvation was
already present in his own person, yet a period would elapse before final
consummation.2 While he attributed a decisive saving role to his death as
the crowning of his earthly work, it is clear that his ethical teaching, his
preaching of the need for alertness and his missionary instructions to his
disciples presupposed an interval between his death and his final return
with the ultimate cosmic turn of the aeons.3
Thus, the early churchs proclamation of Jesus as Messiah and centre
of history was not solely Easter reinterpretation, but rather a remembering
of revelation, darkened by misunderstanding, but made alive by the
Holy Spirit4-a remembering of Jesus own kerygma which he had
proclaimed in words and deeds. Likewise, the early church, when faced
with the new fact that the Parousia had not yet come and that time was
still continuing, and experiencing the manifestations of the Spirit and the
conviction of its missionary task, gradually clarified and added to its
kerygma. The change was not an invention of a new epoch, but the
extension of the intermediate period of tension already included in Jesus
own teaching5
Cullmann, therefore, explicitly rejects Schweitzers view that Jesus
eschatology was consistent and future, as well as Dodds emphasis on
realized eschatology. He also disagrees strongly with Bultmann who rein-
terprets eschatology existentially, removed from the realm of time.6 To
the post-Bultmannians, who are basically existentialist, Cullmann suggests :
Anyone who speaks of a continuity between the historical Jesus and the
Christ of early Christian faith is implying a salvation history, whether he
wants to or n0V.7
With some caution, Cullmann discusses the use of Old Testament
excerpts in the New Testament narratives.* Generally, for example, when
Paul uses typological parallelism between two figures or phenomena, he
presupposes a wider salvation-historical framework. Frequently, he deals
with only one theological problem at a time, so throwing into relief just
one aspect of salvation history. Cullmann recognizes that repetition of
events rather than consummation has less salvation-historical interest,
and that allegory actually eliminates any historical meaning. Although

1 Ibid., pp. 209 ff. Ibid., p. 227.

3 Ibid., pp. 193 ff. and p. 228. Ibid., p. 110.
5 Ibid., pp. 236 ff. Ibid., pp. 31 ff.
Ibid., p. 52. Ibid., pp. 127 ff.
36 M. R. P L A Y O U S T

from some parts of the New Testament it is possible that the early
Christians had a formal biblicist-rabbinical approach to the Old Testa-
ment expecting it to be fulfilled to the letter in any way, elsewhere it is
clear that their understanding was more profound. They had a deep
insight into the plan of God accomplished in events.l This latter approach
is rooted in a total understanding of the old covenant and the concept of
its fulfilment. It goes far beyond the rabbinical principles and does not
lose the salvation-historical perspective.
Bultmann has argued that Cullmann derived his salvation history by
an illicit synthesis of varied New Testament witness.2 Cullmann admits
the many differences among the scriptural writers, but points to an
implicit salvation-historical perspective underlying all the works.3
Cullmann also allows for development and correction of the kerygma as
the biblical writers realized that the time of the church was of uncertain
duration$ he agrees that the explicit understanding of the present as an
intermediate period of salvation history is to be found only in later books
such as Luke-Acts. He largely agrees with Conzelmanns account of
salvation history in Luke5-but denies, of course, that it was a purely
Lucan invention. Cullmann agrees that Luke faced a danger of degrading
eschatological expectation and of regarding the present as an independent
period rather than the first stage of the end time; however, Luke did not
succumb to this danger-unlike the church later on.6
Cullmanns exegeses of the Pauline and Johannine writings differ con-
siderably from those of Bultmann. On Paul, Cullmann argues that salva-
tion history is the kernel of his message, not just a relic of his Jewish
past. Salvation history is the basis of his call for decision. Paul received
an interpretative personal revelation (drrro~&Avly~) in regard to the
Gentiles: the universalism seen in Rom 9-11 is still bound to the idea of
the election and unfaithfulness of Israel in Gods plan (okovopia). The
tension between the already and the not yet is dominant: circumcision
is rejected because Israel ~ m odtptta
h has been fulfilled, we are holy-
yet sinners, the church is the perfect anticipation of the end, time is short
but there is a lot to be done.7
Since Bultmann finds in John a particularly congenial realized
eschatology in which future aspects have been demythologized to an
existential kernel, the opposite of salvation history, it is not surprising

Ibid., p. 134. R.Bultmann, History of Salvation and History, pp. 278 ff.
Christ and Time, p. xx (in 3rd edition).
Salvation in History, pp. 168 ff.
5 H. Conzelmann, The Theology of St. Luke (London, 1960 [Germanedition, 19541).
Salvation in History, pp. 239-240. 7 Ibid., pp. 248 ff.
 OSCAR C U L L M A N N A N D S A L V A T I O N H I S T O R Y 37
that Cullmann strongly disagrees with this exegesis. The disagreement is
by no means restricted to those passages in John which Bultmann
attributes to later interpolations. Cullmann finds it significant that the
compendium of Johannine theology is indeed presented primarily as a
life of Jesus who is regarded as the centre of history and the fulfilment of
many Old Testament concepts. The historical life of Jesus is presented
seriously in its time course, Jesus being aware of carrying out a fixed
divine plan with selected KaipoI and b p a i . The Gospel certainly manifests
reinterpretation of Jesus life in the light of the Resurrection and the
experience of the Holy Spirit, but this procedure itself is salvation-
historical. Its aim is to depict the connexion between Jesus life on earth
and the life of the Risen Christ in the church by seeing both at the same
time. Cullmann agrees that John concentrates the event of Creation, the
life of Israel and the life of the church into Jesus life; however, he argues
that this emphasizes Jesus place at the mid-point, and correctly sums up
all salvation history in Jesus while at the same time incorporating his life
into that history.1 It is doubtful whether Cullmanns attempts to find
salvation history in John are as successful as his exegeses of other New
Testament books.
It has been argued against salvation history that it undercuts personal
responsibility,2 restricts contingency and annihilates freedom.3 Cullmann
answers these objections fairly well even in his early book, Christ and
Time. He denies that salvation history is a false striving for security or
that it is opposed to authentic consciousness of Christian existence.4
Actually, salvation history makes a personal claim on each individual
Christian to align himself now with Gods saving plan.5 Thus salvation
history provides the basis for existential decision. On the other hand, it
does provide a safeguard against excessive individualizing of the Gospel
message and against emphasizing self-redemption with loss of sight of
Gods general plan of redemption.
Cullmann examines the act of faith which he considers to be the sub-
jective appropriation of objective saving events.6 He argues that the
subjective/objective distinction is biblical. One should approach the
Scriptures prepared to listen obediently, as in Rom 10:17, without seeking
to impose anything extraneous (e.g. a philosophical system) on to the
witness. Preliminary acceptance of biblical history is the usual Vorver-
Ibid., pp. 268 E.
a R. Bultmann, History of Salvation and History, pp. 276 ff.
P. Tillich, Systematic Theology, vol. III (Chicago, 1963), p. 372.
Salvation in History, p. 20.
Christ and Time,pp. 217 ff.
Salvation in History, pp. 69 and 321.
38 M . R. P L A Y O U S T

standifis; faith occurs when one recognizes that one is personally claimed
by the events described in the witness.l Cullmann argues that a series of
events can be the object of faith and discusses this with reference to the
faith of the witnesses in Gal 1: 12 ff. and Rom 9-11. Further, it is
constitutive of salvation history that the revelatory process is incorporated
within it.2 The argument here is somewhat circular: only by the Crucifixion
and Resurrection can one see the significance of Adam and Israel in the
preparation for Jesus, and only the thus understood Adam and Israel
enable one to grasp the significance of Jesus death and Re~urrection.~
Within the church, not as individuals, we are expected to make new
biblical interpretations today although we are not official eyewitnesses.
We can best emulate the biblical witnesses act of faith in the events
interpreted only if we are confronted with the event to which they were
eyewitnesses and which they interpreted for US'.^
Cullmann emphasizes that the ethics resulting from acceptance of
salvation history, although not yet fully worked out, are not opposed to
existentialism. Ethical decision (to test, G O K I W ~ ~ E I Vis
) a place where
vertical existence meets horizontal saving.5 The ethical imperative is
grounded in the indicative: we are holy, therefore we must sanctify our-
selves. Correct ethical judgments at each moment are a fruit of the Holy
Spirit in the individual. Paul does not give general rules but concrete
examples; however, from the indicative of salvation history there is a
general principle of application, love.6 In the salvation-historical guide-
lines for the present, a decision becomes very definite and concrete: the
law is to be fulfilled radically in view of the Kingdoms closeness, guided
by love.7
Lastly, on the question of the significance of the present time in the
world, Cullmann dissociates himself both from the more orthodox
Protestant denial of a continuation of salvation history and from the
Catholic position which affirms salvation history but with an infallible
institution.8 Briefly, since the end of Acts, salvation history continues as
the unfolding of the Christ-event. But revelation of the divine plan by
event and by eyewitnesses interpretation was completed with apostolic
times. Salvation history is still developing but in ways hidden, so that we
cannot now designate certain occurrences as saving events; this will not
be possible until the Parousia.9

Ibid., pp. 70-73. Ibid., pp. 115 ff.

3 Christ and Time, p. 137. 4 Salvation in History, p. 328.
5 Ibid., p. 329. Christ and Time, pp. 222 ff.
7 Sulvation in History, pp. 330 ff. Ibid., pp. 302-304.
9 Ibid., pp. 294-301.
 OSCAR C U L L M A N N A N D SALVATION HISTORY 39
SOME S P E C I A L Q U E S T I O N S

(a) Complete dualism is excluded from Cullmanns scheme because the

goal of the saving events is the salvation of all mankind. This establishes
an inner bond between Heilsgeschichte and history because the one
develops inside the other, not alongside it;l at the Parousia, too, all
history is merged into salvation history.2
Like Cullmann, Pannenberg and his group stress revelation through
the deeds of God in history, but they criticize Cullmann for apparently
holding that the interpretation of salvation history is something indepen-
dent of the events, added on, as it were, from the outside by an authori-
tative word. Basically, Pannenberg believes in universal or world history
through which God reveals his divinity by showing himself to be the
power over everything finite which enters into history . . . Revelation
means that God joins himself to the finite.3 He is reluctant to admit a
qualitative dualism between history and salvation history. He finds that
the qualitatively different aspect of Cullmanns heilsgeschichtlich events
must lie not in their divine selection, nor in their interpretation in the
context of tradition, but in a special supplementary revelational interpreta-
tion. He rejects the latter because every interpretation of an event must
be justified (only) from the context in which it was experienced or from
the context of new experiences which call forth new interpretation^'.^
The clear separation between profane and salvation history is under-
lined by the fact that Cullmann treats the historically verifiable events in
Heilsgeschichte in exactly the same way as myth. Yet a myth about a
non-historical act of God cannot satisfactorily be equated with historically-
verifiable acts of God such as those establishing the nation of Israel.
Whilst it is true that the Old Testament tells of acts of God, it is also
true that the scriptures witness to the whole religious consciousness of the
nation, and to its conviction of the ever-present guidance of God.
It seems disconcerting that biblical salvation history seems largely to
neglect the manifold ways, outside the Israelite nation, in which God
prepared the world to receive his complete self-revelation in his Son. This
was a world ostensibly at peace, enjoying the Pax Romana, united
linguistically as well as by well-guarded land and sea routes, yet also a
world of intense spiritual yearning with widespread popular superstition.
The confident humanism of ancient Greece was waning, and men were
dissatisfied with the religions of Emperor-worship, Gnostic currents or the
Ibid., p. 153.
Ibid., pp. 162 and 166.
3 W. Pannenberg in Theology as History, op. cit., pp. 253-254.
Ibid., pp. 247-248,n.46.
40 M . R. P L A Y O U S T

mystery cults of the East; it was an age of syncretism, of philosophical

and religious amalgamation in which the educated world was sophisti-
cated, long familiar with the thoughts and ideas of philosophers, whereas
the popular world was swarming with numerous teachers, often un-
scrupulous and avaricious. It is of interest that Cullmann does, very
briefly, mention the possibility of hidden ways in which God prepared the
world for salvation.
(b) Is the concept of salvation history biblical? If one passes over the
above-mentioned difficulties about the separation of salvation history
from profane history and about the somewhat artificial restriction of the
line of redemptive history to a few biblical events, then the crucial out-
standing question is whether temporally-conceived salvation history is,
in fact, biblical. Whilst a conservative existentialist theologian such as
J. Macquarrie replies affirmatively (but see later), Bultmann considers
Heilsgeschichte to be an illicit synthesis of varied New Testament witness;
only false harmonization can produce a unitary New Testament under-
standing of time and history.2
James Barr, on lexical grounds, argues that Cullmann is not justified
in translating K a p 6 s as a fixed point of time and aiwv a duration of
time and deriving therefrom a supposedly biblical linear concept of
time. Barr says that the men of the Bible had nothing to say directly about
time or eternity, and were apparently little interested in philosophical or
theological speculation about them. Semantically, it is an illegitimate
procedure for Cullmann to appeal to the lexical stock of the Bible rather
than to the actual statements it makes.3 Barr also argues that God can,
in the biblical view, impart specific messages to men of his choice but if
we persist in saying that this direct, specific communication must be sub-
sumed under revelation through events in history and taken as subsidiary
interpretation of the latter, I shall say that we are abandoning the Bibles
own representation of the matter for another which is apologetically
more comfortabIe.4 However, there are a number of New Testament
passages, containing no word for time, which nevertheless suggest an
early Christian understanding of salvation history with a given beginning
in the creation of the world and a given end in the Parousia of the Son
of Man5-one example is Mt 24: 37 which is related to the Noah cycle of
stories.
1 Salvation in History, p. 163.
R. Bultmann, History of Salvation and History, pp. 278-279.
3 3. Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language and Biblical Wordsfor Time.
4 J. Barr, Revelation, in Dictionary of the Bible, 2nd edition eds. F. C. Grant and
I-I. H. Rowley (Edinburgh, 1963), pp. 847-849.
5 H. Anderson, Jesus and Christian Origins, pp. 142-143.
 OSCAR C U L L M A N N A N D SALVATION HISTORY 41
Bultmanns attitude to salvation history may be summarized as follows.
The Old Testament is a record of human failure and there is no continuity
with the New Testament. Jesus is the end, not the mid-point of time.
Salvation has occurred and further time is the continuing realization of an
eschatological occurrence, not salvation history.1 The kerygma is an
urgent call for authentic existence, now.
(c) Should salvation history, if biblical, be demythologized? J . Macquarrie
challenges Cullmanns assumption that we must inevitably hold to the
biblical view of time by renouncing all standards of thought which are
incompatible with the biblical outlook. He considers that it is ludicrous
to demand of us today that, in order to be genuine Christian believers,
we must share biblical ideas of time and history that no longer make
sense. Now that we have learned to distinguish between such concepts as
time, cosmic process, history and myth it is unreasonable to revert
to an undifferentiated way of thinking removed from us by two thousand
years: to insist on such a reversion would be to put Christianity into an
insufferable strait-jacket.2 The old idea that the cosmic process is to be
understood as centring in Gods dealing with man, and that this is
recorded in the sacred biblical history of creation, fall, redemption and
final consummation, becomes pathetically improbable.3 Macquarrie
argues that the sacred history recorded in the Bible is but a tiny fragment
of mans history, and it should not be used to construct a metaphysics of
history. Events of history and events of nature are ambiguous and it
would be a bold optimist who would claim that he could see in them the
working out of a providential scheme.4
Bultmann wishes to demythologize any salvation-historical elements in
the biblical writings because they obscure the essential Christian message.5
Only an occurrence experienced and laid hold of in faith can be designated
a salvation occurrence. Faith has to understand the cross of Christ as
the salvation occurrence that is valid for me.6 It cannot be interested in
a connected series of divine events, nor with Christ at the mid-point of
a time line. Rather, the appearance of Christ signifies the eschatological
event which puts an end to the old aeon. Henceforth there can be no
more history and also no more history of salvation, for the latter has
reached its end precisely in him.
R. Bultmann, op. cit., pp. 281-282.
J. Macquarrie, The Scope of Demythologizing (New York, 1960), pp. 62 ff.
J. Macquarrie, Principles of Christian Theology (London, 1966), p. 28.
Ibid., p. 220.
R. Bultmann, New Testament and Mythology in Kerygma and Myth, Vol. I , ed.
H. W. Bartsch (New York, 1961), pp. 1-44.
6 R. Bultmann, Existence and Faith, op. cit., p. 276. Ibid., p. 281.
42 M . R. P L A Y O U S T

Paul Tillichs position is more complex. In general, he does not want

to demythologize, but he does understand myths in a non-literal sense.
He accepts Christ as the centre of history but he understands this to mean
a moment of history for which everything before and after is both
preparation and reception. As such it is both criterion and source of the
saving power in history.l He denies the progression of salvation history,
but admits a movement from immaturity to maturity which was
necessary in order to prepare for Him in whom the final revelation would
occur.2 Thus, from a special point of view, he can understand particular
developments in their creative sequences. 3

CONCLUSION

It is frequently argued that Cullmanns theology of salvation history is

too simple and generalized, too neatly schematized, to do justice to the
complexity of New Testament writings and their theological content.*
His geometrical concept of time, epochs and eternity has been mentioned
above. His emphasis on isolated, individual prophets, who must be
eyewitnesses, personally receiving divine revelation while fully conscious
of its origin from God could strike one as unduly mechanical and
organized.5
Cullmanns acceptance of the divine origin of biblical interpretation
(and, indeed, of myth as well as of historical event) does not square
completely with his stress on the search for the actual event which gave
rise to the interpretation. If we lie in the mainstream of salvation history,
it is not clear why we have to be confronted with the naked events in
order to accept the same interpretation and the same faith as the original
witnesses.6
Cullmanns stress on eyewitnesses forces a major break at the end of
the first Christian generation. Although salvation continues, none of the
divine plan for the present era will be known until the Parousia.7 There
is no authoritative development of doctrine or of Christian understanding.
Church dogmas concerning the divine essence and persons are, for
Cullmann, correct biblical inferences, but not revealed. He may assess
too lightly the role of the Holy Spirit in the progressively developing
Church.
1 P. Tillich, Systematic Theology,III, p. 364.
Ibid., p. 365. Ibid., p. 374.
4 See,for example, S. G. Guthrie, Jr., Oscar Cullmann, pp. 351-354.
5 Salvation in History, pp. 89-90 and 98.
Ibid., pp. 96, 148 and 328.
7 Ibid., pp. 300 ff.
 O S C A R C U L L M A N N A N D S A L V A T I O N HISTORY 43
Avery Dulles complains that Cullmanns anti-philosophical bias has
prevented him from giving a coherent justification of his principles and
procedures. He asks how Cullmann can take for granted that the modern
Christian must accept the views of the biblical writers about time and
history (a point discussed above), and his assumption that philosophical
reflection can never improve on the biblical outlook.1
One problem underlying many of the others is Cullmanns absolutism.
Salvation history is the very heart of Christianity: Christianity cannot
exist without it. The biblical philosophy of history is binding on all men
of all cultures and ages.
At an important stage of world theological development, Dr Cullmanns
distinguished exegetical work in the areas of biblical time, Heilsgeschichte
and Christology has emphasized the historical dimension of salvation
and of revelation. After a long debate with existentialist and Barthian
theologians, he has seen more recently a renewed historical interest
among both Protestant and Catholic scholars.
The very simplicity and clarity of his salvation history have made it
popular amongst those who are not professional theologians and have
encouraged its use in preaching. Strong points are its biblical orienta-
tion, its positive assessment of the Old Testament, its emphasis on Christ
as a mid-point from which are assessed all things before and after, and
his carefully worked out balance between realized and future eschatology
with due stress on the resulting tension between the already and the
not yet. Its temporal and future orientations lead impressively to the
doctrine of Christian hope, based soundly in faith and love.

1 A. Dulles, Revelatfon Theology (New York, 1969), p. 125.