post tenebras lux

red herringderail.Hey Chris, it was your flipping statement, you tell me what you meant by it. You said "And so archaeology has also confirmed that surrounding the Jesus story", and I'm just asking you to explain yourself.

Or are you now saying that archaelogy hasn't confirmed anything? :huh:

Gamera

The very word gospel (in Greek and English), good news, points to a narrative. It states that something has happened and that event is something good and worth sharing.

That's how the word is used in the NT, and historically in Christianity. Paul's epistles are not gospels, their meditations on the gospel message, arts of living, advice, whatever. Paul didn't write a gospel. But he surely preached the gospel, and it appears the gospel he preached was narrative in nature (he preaches about Jesus' life, death and resurrection -- a biography)

Gamera

[QUOTE=dog-on;4537274]What does this have to do with the issue of whether Paul preached a narrative or not?

Ah, your question seems rhetorical and hence ambiguous. If you mean did Paul preach a gospel -- i.e., an event (which he identified as the life, death and resurrection of Jesus), then yes the gospel "preceeded" Paul's epistles (is that what you mean by 'preceding Paul'?)

It's clear the gospel message was preached well before the written gospels (is that what you mean?), and it's clear that Paul's epistles presuppost a gospel about Jesus. That's why he refers to his preaching about Jesus life, death and resurrection (is that what you mean?)

Gamera

Well, but the point is, good news is an "event," something that happened. A new theology isn't in event and hence isn't a gospel. Paul clearly understood the difference and speaks about preaching the gospel, which he identifies as a narrative (the life, death and resurrection of Jesus), as opposed to his epistles, which are reflections on the gospel message and how to apply it to the lifes of Christians. Paul never gives the slightest indication that he thought his letters were "gospel." The world simply didn't lend itself to that construction, either at the time, or later.

Gamera

Well, again, in Greek, good news requires an event. A gospel isn't a meditation or a theology or a new theorum. It refers to an event.

Whenever Paul mentions what he preached in preaching the gospel he always mentions it was about Jesus life, death and resurrection. That's a narrative. Indeed it's a biography.

Paul clearly knows the difference between preaching the gospel (a narrative) and thinking about how to apply the gospel to a Christian's life (an epistle, theology). Nowhere does Paul confuse his epistolary writing with his preaching the gospel.

I haven't done it, but I bet a review of the use of the word gospel in Greek will always refer to an event, and never to a meditation, ratiocination or application of knowledge.

That's why the gospel wasn't an "argument" according to the NT texts, it was a Kerygma - a proclamation. You can argue theology; but you can only proclaim a narrative. The gospel was proclaimed, i.e., recited, narrated.

Toto

Gamera, this is stretching things too far. "Good news" does not have to be an event, much less a narrative. Paul did not define the gospel as a narrative, in particular he did not define it as a historical narrative of actual events. I don't think that he actually defined his gospel, since people are still arguing over what his gospel was.

If you are going to make these unconventional and outlandish claims, please at least back them up with some quotes from Paul or some secondary sources.

Toto

OK - let's look at a typical use of the word gospel in, uh, the Gospels:

What is this gospel that Jesus preaches? Surely it is not his own life story, or his crucifixion/resurrection, which had not happened yet. It is the "gospel of the kingdom," which in Matt 24 seems to be defined as the upcoming end of the world "13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

Or Mark 1:14 . . . Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Gamera

I already did back it up: Paul often mentions that the the gospel he preaches is about the narrative of Jesus's life.

I didn't claim Paul defined it as a narrative. He didn't have to. In the Greek it virtually has to be in a narrative form. It means an event, a good event, good tidings. It cannot be a meditation or an argument. The word gospel appeaers elsewhere in Greek, including Homer, and always refers to some good event that actually happened (not an argument or a theology or an idea).

Now, what that event was may have been at issue at the time (indeed it was for sure -- Paul warns against false gospels all the time) But what isn't at issue is you preach a gospel as narrative, you can't really "argue" a gospel.

Rather than thinking it's "outlandish" to see a reference to a narrative in these verses, I think it's a bit outlandish to ignore what is obvious: you don't refer to a person's life, death and afterlife except in the context of a narrative (indeed, a biographical narrative). So rather than characterizing my argument as outlandish, why don't you engage the verses and explain why you think they aren't a reference to a narrative:

Romans 1:3 - the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh (biographical elements relating to Jesus' ancestry)

2 Tim 8: 8 Do not be ashamed then of testifying to our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel in the power of God, 9 who saved us and called us with a holy calling, not in virtue of our works but in virtue of his own purpose and the grace which he gave us in Christ Jesus ages ago, 10 and now has manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. 11 For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher, 12 and therefore I suffer as I do. (biographical element relating to Jesus's death and resurrection)

1 Corinthians 1:17 - For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. (biographical element relates to Jesus' death)

Romans 10:14 - But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher? (a virtual absolute reference to the gospel as the biography of Jesus)

1 Corinthians 1:23 - but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, (reference to Jesus historical death by crucifixion)


1 Cor 15:1 -Now I would remind you, brethren, in what terms I preached to you the gospel, which you received, in which you stand, 2 by which you are saved, if you hold it fast--unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9 (claim that the gospel is pure biography about Jesus' life, death and resurrection)


2 Corinthians 11:4 - For if some one comes and preaches another Jesus than the one we preached, (i.e., a different biography of Jesus, a different narrative about him)

2 Timothy 2:8 - Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descended from David, as preached in my gospel, (i.e., the gospel is pure biography of Jesus)

Toto, deal with this language rather than avoiding its obvious implication -- Paul preached the gospel as a narrative, i.e., the arc of Jesus' life.

Gamera

Toto, do you want to deal with how Paul used the term or how the author of Matthew used it.

Paul clearly used it as a narrative of Jesus' life, death and resurrection. I've given you the verses.

As to the Synoptic references to the gospel, Jesus uses the term gospel of kingdom or the gospel of God or the gospel of the kingdom of God (there are all kinds of variations) which in fact suggests again an historical narrative in which Jesus places his life and ministry in the context of the history of Israel. (Indeed Paul does this to at times, hence Galatians 3:8 - And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "In you shall all the nations be blessed.")

Thus, for instance:

Luke 4:16 -- 16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up; and he went to the synagogue, as his custom was, on the sabbath day. And he stood up to read; 17 and there was given to him the book of the prophet Isaiah. He opened the book and found the place where it was written, 18 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, 19 to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord." 20 And he closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant, and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. 21 And he began to say to them, "Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing." 22

Seems to me the meaning of the "good news" here is obvious -- Jesus is claiming that there is a narrative to Jewish history, prophesied in the Old Testament, in which he, Jesus, would come and through his life, death and resurrection, become a savior to the poor (emblematic of all lost humanity).

If you think it's not a reference to an historical narratization, pray tell us what the heck is Jesus talking about then?

Toto

So how could gospel be such a clear references to Jesus' life story, and yet be used by Jesus to refer to the coming of the kingdom of the Lord? If there is any event involved in this gospel, it is that future coming of the kingdom.

The NIV says: The gospel was promised by the prophets, but this does not identify the gospel.


What biographical element? That Christ Jesus abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel? I don't see it.

Again, a reference to the cross and its mystical power, which you read to be a reference to the crucifixion and death of Jesus. But Paul doesn't say that.

Virtual absolute?? With no mention of the gospel or any biographical details?

If you hadn't read the four narrative gospels in the NT, you would not know what this referred to.

I say interpolation. But in any case, it doesn't actually identify the gospel with "pure biography."

What different narrative? Would anyone have cared if Jesus were born in Nazareth instead of Bethlehem? This undoubtedly refers to different versions of the Savior - that he was a docetic ghost or a mere human.

Not written by Paul, in any case.

I just don't see it. Jesus' gospel was the coming of the Kingdom of God. Paul's gospel was either the same, or the extension of salvation to the gentiles.