Sentences with phrase «testament kerygma»

The theological entailment of this is that the locus of revelation is not just the event of Jesus Christ or the word about him or, on the other hand, human experience, but is rather the intersection of the New Testament kerygma with the universal archetype of death and resurrection which underlies that fundamental human life rhythm of upset and recovery (Susanne Langer) and which generates comic narratives.

(The New Testament kerygma [a primitive baptismal confession?]

He writes: «While earlier generations of Christian thinkers tended to stress only the «already here» aspects of the New Testament kerygma, more recent scholarship has sought to reintegrate the eschatological «not yet» into their vision.»

In this way Bultmann's study of the New Testament kerygma compelled him to move beyond the view of it as the objectification of a religious idea, and come to recognize in its «happened - ness» its essence.

If current research upon the New Testament kerygma serves to draw attention to the historicity of the proclaimed word of God, as treasure in such earthen vessels as Jewish or Hellenistic thought patterns, research upon Jesus» message would serve formally to draw attention to the flesh of the incarnation.

It is simply because Germany's leading exegetes have correctly understood the demythologized meaning of the New Testament kerygma, that they have looked through the kerygma not directly to a principle inherent in human nature, but rather to Jesus as the event in which transcendence becomes possible.

Such would seem to be the fundamentally negative implication in Bultmann's thought about the event which underlies the New Testament kerygma and the understanding of human life of which it is the expression.

For this we must look at the total setting of the New Testament kerygma, or witness to the faith, for while references to the Kingdom were constantly on the lips of Jesus, they become noticeably fewer in the rest of the New Testament.

It is my aim also to show that the appearance or garb of mythology can to a large extent be removed from the New Testament kerygma.

Not exact matches

This parallel has been obscured by the fact that the term «kerygma» can ambiguously refer both to fragments of primitive Christian preaching embedded in the New Testament text, and to the word of God I encounter from the pulpit or in my neighbour today.

Nor has anything been more characteristic of recent research than the gradual detection of early kerygmatic fragments in the New Testament, in which the original eschatological meaning of the christological titles used in the kerygma is still apparent, and is clearly distinct from their later metaphysical use: Jesus is «exalted» to the rank of cosmocrator with the «name that is above every name,... Lord Jesus Christ», in order to subjugate the universe (Phil.

We are convinced that this restatement does better justice to the real meaning of the New Testament and to the paradox of the kerygma.

Therefore it was also natural that the kerygma as we find it in the New Testament should not only be couched in biblical terms but also that these terms require for their proper understanding an awareness of the whole Old Testament witness and record.

And the Protestant Christian knows that the New Testament originated in the apostolic kerygma of the living apostolic Church and therefore is and remains her book.

The first effect of the modern view of history and human existence upon New Testament study was, as we have seen, to focus attention upon the kerygma as the New Testament statement of Jesus» history and selfhood.

In this survey of the apostolic Preaching and its developments two facts have come into view: first, that within the New Testament there is an immense range of variety in the interpretation that is given to the kerygma; and, secondly, that in all such interpretation the essential elements of the original kerygma are steadily kept in view.

1 holds in the New Testament, we may safely put it down as one of the fundamental texts of the primitive kerygma.

For my part I have been very much taken with — I should say, won over by — the eschatological interpretation that Jurgen Moltmann gives to the Christian kerygma in his work The Theology of Hope.1 As we know, Johannes Weiss and Albert Schweitzer are at the origin of the reinterpretation of the whole of the New Testament, starting with the preaching of the Kingdom of God and of the last things and breaking with the moralizing Christ of the liberal exegetes.

In this problem we are concerned with the right hearing of the New Testament message, of the kerygma of Jesus Christ the Son of God.

The recognition of the kerygmatic character of the gospels, and of the fact that the kerygma was not confined to the historical narratives of the gospels, made the right interpretation of the mythology of the New Testament more urgent than it had ever been before.

Does this drastic criticism of the New Testament mythology mean the complete elimination of the kerygma?

Joseph Sittler has labeled the two poles of the hermeneutical struggle «narrative» and «kerygma» locating the tension within the literature of the New Testament itself.

This so - called Jesus - kerygma, which is very definitely Christian Witness even though its christology is merely implicit, in contrast with the explicit christology of the Christ - kerygma that we find in Paul and John and the other New Testament writings, represents the earliest witness of faith that we today are in a position to recover.

(g) The mythological element in the kerygma is not, we have shown, the importation into the New Testament of ideas from non-Biblical religions, ideas which could be eliminated or superseded by interpreting the underlying understanding of human life.

«50 The kerygma is a rereading of the Old Testament.

Such notions introduce elements into the New Testament witness that strike me as artificial — foreign substances that the body of Christian kerygma will feel compelled to reject.

Can we accept the kerygma of the New Testament as good news for our generation?

It is — and here Bultmann agrees with the New Testament — the kerygma of the cross and resurrection.

This was the element in the kerygma which Jewish controversialists continued to repudiate down to the Dialogue of Justin Martyr, and which the Gnostics are already repudiating in the New Testament with their anathema lesous (1 Cor.

In this he argues that the proclamation is not revelation, but leads to revelation, so that the historical Jesus is the necessary and only presupposition of the kerygma (a play on Bultmann's famous opening sentence of his Theology of the New Testament), since only the Son of man and his word, by which Jeremias means the historical Jesus and his teaching, can give authority to the proclamation.

The Christologies of the various forms of the kerygmata known to us from the New Testament and Christian history are not necessarily coherent with one another, still less necessarily consistent with the teaching of the historical Jesus, and historical research may well raise problems for a form of the kerygma, as, for example, research into the eschatology of Jesus raised problems for the older liberalism.

In this new and interesting development, hermeneutic has, in effect, taken the place of kerygma and a concern for an existentialist interpretation of the kerygma has been modified by a concern for the historical Jesus until it has become a concern for an existentialist interpretation of the New Testament — now seen not as a source book for knowledge of the historical Jesus, as in the older liberalism, but as a means whereby that faith which came to word or language in Jesus may come to be word - or language - event for us.