Heidegger/Bultmann Reading Group - Philosophical Concept | Alexandria
Heidegger/Bultmann Reading Group: A clandestine intellectual rendezvous, born from the unlikely convergence of existential philosophy and radical theology, the Heidegger/Bultmann Reading Group represents far more than just philosophical inquiry. It embodies a quest to unearth the fundamental nature of being and belief within the shadows of secular modernity. Was it merely an academic exercise, or a blueprint for reconceptualizing faith in a world unmoored from traditional certainties?
In 1941, amidst the tumult of World War II, a small circle began meeting in Marburg, Germany, led by philosopher Martin Heidegger and theologian Rudolf Bultmann. Their correspondence from this period, meticulously preserved, reveals a shared urgency to dismantle what they perceived as the encrusted, outdated layers of both metaphysics and doctrine. This was more than a theological discussion; it was a philosophical excavation occurring as established orders crumbled.
Over the ensuing decades, the Group's influence resonated far beyond the confines of academia, subtly altering the landscape of hermeneutics and biblical interpretation. Bultmann’s "demythologizing" of the New Testament, heavily influenced by Heidegger’s existentialism, sparked controversy and inspired new generations of thinkers to grapple with the core questions of faith and existence. Less known is the extent to which this dialogue influenced Heidegger's own thinking on language and the nature of revelation. Did their shared grappling with finitude and authenticity lead to a new understanding of transcendence, or simply a sophisticated articulation of human limitation?
The legacy of the Heidegger/Bultmann Reading Group lies not only in its published works but also in the ongoing debates it ignited. Today, as postmodernism continues to challenge traditional structures of meaning, their work remains a touchstone for those seeking to navigate the shifting sands of belief in the 21st century. Are we, in echoing their questions, unwittingly perpetuating their radical project, or are we destined to rediscover the very myths they sought to dismantle?