The Rise and Fall of the Second Quest

The second quest for historical Jesus covers the period from 1953 to the 1970s. We will observe three things under this period.

First, there are the seeming contradictions that characterized this period. Such contradictions are evident between the prior abandonment that describes the first quest and the new interest to continue the quest. It was surprising because the initiator of the second quest was a student of Bultmann himself, who influenced the widespread pessimism about the viability of the quest. Ernest Kasemann, after identifying both the historical and theological factors that contributed to the end of the first quest, argued on theological grounds for the case of the second quest to prevent it from falling into a docetic trap. In contrast to the concluded unbridgeable gap between the historical Jesus and the Christ of faith by scholars during the first quest, Käsemann discerned continuity between them.

Second, the second quest for historical Jesus introduced new developments such as the emergence of redaction criticism, emphasis on the new importance of the Q document, and the presentation of new criteria to assess the historical authenticity of the Gospel material.

Responding to the call of Käsemann, Gunther Bornkham, though pessimistic about the continuation of the quest on biographical and psychological lines, he still affirms that “occurrence and event” (p. 25) can be reconstructed. He thinks that a kind of continuity between history and faith can be maintained. Unfortunately, it is unclear to me what he means by this statement:

Continuity in “the Messianic character of his being is contained in his words and deeds and in the unmediatedness of his historical appearance” (ibid.).

Other scholars not infected by Bultmannian pessimism introduced new methodology and practice.

Lastly, reasons for the demise of the second quest. Primarily, they have something to do with reactions toward the Bultmannian tendencies, whether they're favorable or critical. Some would return to pessimism, and others would challenge the Bultmannian methodology. Even the existence of the second quest itself has been critically questioned.

Grace and peace!