Sentences with phrase «kerygma which»

He must not in deference to modern man make light of those elements in the kerygma which modern man is likely to regard as myth, for the simple reason that every attempt to preach Christ God is bound to seem myth to him.

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.

From the days of the primitive kerygma which lies behind the speeches in Acts, behind the oral tradition which was eventually crystallized in Mark and Q, the primary source of the theology of the cross is the words and deeds of Jesus of Nazareth.

In the course of it theologians have rediscovered the kerygma which is enshrined in the cosmology of the creation myth.

All this is no more than is implied in the phrase of the kerygma which describes Him as «going about doing good, because God was with Him,» and it affords a necessary and valuable supplement to the Marcan picture of the strong Son of God, and the Matthaean picture of the royal Lawgiver.

There are three points in the Pauline kerygma which do not directly appear in the Jerusalem kerygma of Acts:

We have been speaking of the need for finding a way of stating the kerygma which will be relevant to our own time, while it will also be true to the abiding affirmation of faith which gives the Church its essential being.

That is to say, the Christian gospel, the kerygma or proclamation, indeed remains and must remain fixed as the message of the Church, the heart of its life and the meaning of its existence; but at the same time we must find ways in which we can both understand and declare that kerygma which will not smother it in an unimaginative biblicism, but which will be appropriate for our own day.

Not exact matches

Thus Fuchs has carried through with regard to Jesus» action the same thesis which Käsemann presented with regard to his message: in the message and action of Jesus is implicit an eschatological understanding of his person, which becomes explicit in the kerygma of the primitive Church.

It is this eschatological action of God in history which Jesus proclaimed, and which reached its final formulation in the kerygma.

Thanks especially to the critical study of Dr. C. Harold Dodd, as summed up in his notable little book The Apostolic Preaching, we have become familiar with the word kerygma, Greek for «the proclamation»; and taught by Dr. Dodd and those who have followed the line of enquiry which he laid down, we have come to see that this kerygma was the very heart of the earliest Christianity.

The historicity of those sayings of Jesus which are most like the kerygma has been put indefinitely in suspense by methodological considerations.

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.

But in the midst of his eschatological description of Christian existence Paul introduces a few phrases which express the existential meaning of the kerygma.

Accordingly, in the surest current way of getting on the track of Jesus» preaching, it is elevated to a methodological presupposition that everything which points toward the post-Easter kerygma can not be considered for Jesus» preaching.

This survey of basic problems for a new quest has not led to the conclusion that Jesus and the kerygma are basically incommensurate, a conclusion which would have made the positive solution of the central problem a priori impossible.

I should answer that such an understanding of the way in which the compilation of the gospel narratives took place, and also of the nature of the material which they contain, delivers us in our preaching of the kerygma from much that was troublesome and confusing to an earlier generation.

an examination of some of the comparisons or contrasts which have been made between Jesus and the kerygma.

The extent to which the kerygma continues to reveal the existential meaning of Jesus can be illustrated from an interesting Pauline passage, I Cor.

For its «historicity» depends upon the demonstration that it does not present the Church's view and consequently could not have originated there since the new quest of the historical Jesus is primarily concerned with investigating the area in which Jesus and the Church's kerygma overlap, the limitation of current methods for identifying historical material is apparent, and the resultant methodological difficulty must be recognized.

This criticism might lead one to suppose that such a method is valid only in terms of the original quest, which largely rejected the kerygma as a falsification of Jesus, and consequently set Out to distinguish him sharply from that theological perversion.

The liberation that love engenders and the claim that it lays upon us are absolutely binding; they are kerygmatic address, which, as Bultmann interprets Paul, «accosts each individual, throwing the person himself into question by rendering his self - understanding problematic, and demanding a decision of hint» The kerygma can be defined as «absolute» in two respects.

The way in which Dodd attempts to reconcile the kerygma and the quest is in the second place misleading, since it interprets the «historical section of the kerygma» (42) in terms of a positivistic view of history, rather than in terms of the theological approach to history which actually characterized primitive Christianity.

The evangelist, therefore, is deliberately subordinating the «futurist» element in the eschatology of the early Church to the «realized eschatology» which, as I have tried to show, was from the first the distinctive and controlling factor in the kerygma.

Has Paul's kerygma of cross and resurrection, which is what lies behind the Apostles» Creed, really said everything that we want to know about the significance of Jesus?

It is in the epistles of Paul, therefore, that full justice is done for the first time to the principle of» realized eschatology» which is vital to the whole kerygma.

And here too, just as in the case of the sermons in Acts (2.22; 10.38), the use of various Jewish and Hellenistic styles of narrating the divine in history» should not mislead us as to the normative kerygmatic significance which is to be maintained throughout this transition from «kerygma» to «narrative».

We have now to turn once more to the primitive kerygma, with special attention to that part of it which attributed an eschatological significance to facts of the present.

It is true that in other forms of the kerygma in Acts there is no such explicit reference to the Spirit in the Church, except in v. 32, which belongs to what is probably a secondary doublet of the story given in iii - iv.

The complete absence from the kerygma of a chronology for the public ministry should have been sufficient evidence to indicate that the kind of historicity in which the kerygma was interested differed basically from that with which Dodd was occupied.

There is, it seems to me, in the kerygma of hope, both an innovation of meaning and a demand for intelligibility, which simultaneously create the measure and the task of approximation.

The word here translated «preaching,» kerygma, signifies not the action of the preacher, but that which he preaches, his «message,» as we sometimes say.

The Pauline kerygma, therefore, is a proclamation of the facts of the death and resurrection of Christ in an eschatological setting which gives significance to the facts.

At the end of the introduction I was suggesting a possible direction of research by saying that the discourse of the philosopher on freedom which stays close to the kerygma, which makes itself homologous with it, is the discourse of religion within the limits of reason alone.

A philosophy of limits which is at the same time a practical demand for totalization — this, to my mind, is the philosophical response to the kerygma of hope, the closest philosophical approximation to freedom in the light of hope.

Those elements therefore of the kerygma, which we have already recognized in Romans, are to be regarded not only as parts of what Paul calls» my Gospel,» but as parts of the common Gospel.

Judgment is for Paul a function of the universal lordship of Christ, which He attained through death and resurrection, and His second advent as Judge is a part of the kerygma — as Judge, but also as Saviour, for in i Thess.

I therefore see as converging toward the idea of a post-Hegelian Kantianism the spontaneous restructurings of our philosophical memory and those which proceed from the shock effect of the kerygma of hope on the philosophical problematic and on the structures of its discourse.

This whole process constitutes the philosophy of religion within the limits of reason alone; it is this process which constitutes the philosophical analogon of the kerygma of the Resurrection.

As the epistles from which we have quoted belong to the fifties of the first century, they are evidence of prime value for the content of the early kerygma.

It is to be observed that the first clause, «the word which He sent to the children of Israel, preaching the Gospel of peace through Jesus Christ,» which forms a sort of heading to the whole, is a virtual equivalent of the term «kerygma» or» Gospel.»

This summary provides the framework within which the Jerusalem kerygma is set.

Therefore I understand the hermeneutics of religious freedom as the explication of the meanings of freedom which accompany the explication of the founding word or, as we say, the proclamation of the kerygma.

So far, then, from running away from Historie and taking refuge in Geschichte, I am deliberately renouncing any form of encounter with a phenomenon of past history, including an encounter with the Christ after the flesh, in order to encounter the Christ proclaimed in the kerygma, which confronts me in my historic situation.

tried to show that we can trace in the Gospel according to Mark a connecting thread running through much of the narrative, which has some similarity to the brief summary of the story of Jesus in Acts x and xiii, and may be regarded as an expanded form of what we may call the historical section of the kerygma.

So far, therefore, Mark serves as a commentary on the kerygma, and explains why in even the very brief summaries of it which we have in Acts x and xiii so much stress is laid on the part taken by John the Baptist.

The significance of the kerygma, which proclaims the redemptive work of God in Christ, lies in its opening up in a universally relevant fashion the manner of God's dealing with the whole created order in carrying out his saving purpose.

The kerygma is primary, and it acted as a preservative of the tradition which conveyed the facts.

In both Matthew and Luke, however, an element in the kerygma receives emphasis which is not prominent in Mark, that, namely, which declared that Christ was «born of the seed of David,» and so qualified for Messiahship according to prophecy.

Nevertheless, like the sacraments (which would otherwise become bare symbols), the kerygma necessarily assumes the form of tradition, for it is more than a summary of general truths, and is itself part of the eschatological event.