The gospel is indeed the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes. But what is it that must first be believed on for this salvation? And how is that “good news” assimilated over time and further reinforced in the hearts of those believing? By observing Luke’s account of Paul and Barnabas’ first missionary journey (late 40’s AD) from Syrian Antioch into the multi-cultural terrain of Cyprus and Asia Minor, I believe we can gain a fresh appreciation into what I would call the gospel’s progressive or cascading impact upon responding audiences.
At the outset of that famous trek recorded for us in Acts, chapters 13 and 14, Paul and Barnabas were commissioned by the early church at Antioch to communicate this gospel not only to practicing Jews and God-fearing Gentiles, but to Gentiles who had little or no connection at all to Judaism. As they encountered these two primary audiences throughout this journey, the two itinerant preachers used various means to access each. The former was strategically approached via the established synagogues, where Paul integrated his gospel presentation into the normal flow of the Sabbath service. The platform for the latter group involved such events as power encounters or larger, more eclectic gatherings pulled together after this preaching duo’s unusual message leaked out to the general populace from earlier synagogue preaching.
As we consider what Paul and Barnabas proclaimed in the towns visited in this particular journey, we see the presentation of a very basic kernel of gospel material - a “kerygma” which was apparently nuanced according to the audience encountered.[1] For example, among the Jews and God-fearing Gentile proselytes in Pisidian Antioch, we see Paul proclaiming what some have called an updated “Old Testament kerygma”.[2] A similar presentation may have been made in the synagogue at Iconium. In Lystra, among the Gentiles not practicing Judaism, Paul appears to be in the act of presenting the “Veggie-Tails” super-basic version of the gospel (turn from your worthless gods to the living God, the Creator who shows His care for you in his many providences and…). But then suddenly he appears to be tripped-up by the crowd’s desire to pay homage to his godhood rather than listen to his message. One gets the idea that more content might have been shared (probably not of the Jewish kerygma variety - what sense would that have made to most of them?) had the crowd not been so busy trying to worship them (and then later to stone them!).
Among a similar kind of Gentile audience earlier on in the towns of Cyprus, we read that one proconsul, Sergius Paulus, was “amazed at the teaching of the Lord” (which may have included some redemptive acts in Jewish history, but probably included the object lesson of God’s power in blinding the proconsul’s sorcerer attendant). In Derbe we’re told only that Paul and Barnabas “preached the good news and won a large number of disciples.” What was included as part of that good news we’re not told.
So, what seems to be the picture in the Lukan account of this missionary trip is a series of gospel presentations that included selective emphasis on certain aspects of a broader pool of “good news”. How much content was shared and to what degree varied according to the audience encountered.[3] Some contexts afforded a more opportune and hence thorough gospel presentation, while others only allowed certain bare essentials to be brought forward before the opportunity was truncated.
As the good news was proclaimed within a given locale, and people were won to Christ, we recognize a further interesting dynamic on this missionary journey (a dynamic which is arguably germane to most gospel presentations in the New Testament). It seems over time, in subsequent contacts with given responding audiences, additional primary and secondary material needed to be introduced to supplement what was shared in the initial proclamation. That additional material might constitute an extra dose of core material missing in the first-round proclamation; or it might involve further essential teachings to under-gird the gospel to which they had earlier converted. In some instances it probably involved both. In any case, over time a fuller proclamation of the basic kerygma seemed to regularly involve supplementation with essential doctrine. Without this additional secondary material, the original gospel could conceivably not root in someone’s life. This subsequent teaching, probably equivalent to Paul’s “good deposit” (II Timothy I:14), helped foster an environment in the heart conducive to growth in the gospel. It’s not that the gospel was in any way deficient; it’s just that the assimilation of it seemed to involve ongoing reminding, processing and wrestling with further complementary teaching (including core gospel material). One’s understanding and appreciation of the good news was thereby deepened by this further “washing with the Word.”
Looking back to that 1st missionary journey, we see evidence of this dynamic. As the missionaries backtracked through the cities they just visited, we’re told they engaged in “strengthening the disciples and encouraging them to remain true to the faith” (14:22a). I imagine in those re-visitations Paul and Barnabas stressed certain deeper teaching (perhaps showing converts “the way of God more adequately”, as Priscilla and Aquila did for the Jewish preacher Apollos in Acts 18). They may have also highlighted the aspect of suffering as a more subliminal yet very important part of this gospel (in 14:22b, we see Paul and Barnabas returning to the towns and informing the new disciples of that additional heavy reality they face: “We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God”).
What I’m getting at is this: we cannot rightly talk about the “gospel” in isolation from the necessary follow-up ministry of under-girding that gospel. It trails behind but is still part and parcel to the kerygma seating itself in people’s hearts and lives. As Paul noted to Timothy, sound doctrine is in accord with or “conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God” (I Timothy 1:11). This suggests that the good news is ideally shared in a multi-layered fashion over time, with an outer prominent kerygma, but also with accompanying layers of deeper material. These layers complement and further enrich it as good news.
At this point I’d like to expand this discussion beyond this 1st missionary journey and briefly explore the makeup of both this “good news” and this “good deposit”. When we observe Paul in action, he seems to have a firm grasp of a basic kerygma, and he and his close cohorts appear to have had a uniform grasp of a broader doctrinal good deposit. So, what was the composition of that core gospel? And what about the good deposit – what did that constitute? C.H. Dodd and many others have argued that Peter’s speeches represent the kerygma ideal in terms of the inclusion of certain bare essentials. The ancient kerygma as summarized by Dodd from Peter’s speeches in Acts was:
- The Age of Fulfillment has dawned, the “latter days” foretold by the prophets.
- This has taken place through the birth, life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
- By virtue of the resurrection Jesus has been exalted at the right hand of God as Messianic head of the new Israel.
- The Holy Spirit in the church is the sign of Christ’s present power and glory.
- The Messianic Age will reach its consummation in the return of Christ.
- An appeal is made for repentance with the offer of forgiveness, the Holy Spirit, and salvation.
These key elements or something close to them, Dodd argues, would have been part of the primary repertoire employed to elicit faith in the hearer, whether that hearer heard the full scope on round one, or whether they heard that full scope over time in successive presentations of the good news.[4] (I find it surprising that Dodd’s summary excludes any obvious reference to the aggressive inclusivity we see exhibited by Paul in locales such as Pisidian Antioch, and emphasized so prominently in letters like Galatians and Romans. This was a huge part of what made the gospel good news for the Gentiles – that they were actually included and united into one people of God).
Whatever primitive kerygma the Apostles drew upon in their missional preaching, Dodd contends that within the Apostolic era and beyond, into the history of the early Church and its liturgy, a mature, more evolved kerygma emerged:
“As the Church produced a settled organization of its life, the content of the kerygma entered into the Rule of Faith, which is recognized by the theologians of the second and third centuries as the presupposition of Christian theology. Out of the Rule of Faith in turn the Creeds emerged. The so-called Apostles’ Creed in particular still betrays in its form and language its direct descent from the primitive apostolic Preaching. At the same time, the kerygma exerted a controlling influence upon the shaping of the Liturgy. While theology advanced from the positions established by Paul and John, the form and language of the Church’s worship adhered more closely to the forms of the kerygma. It is perhaps in some parts of the great liturgies of the Church that we are still in most direct contact with the original apostolic Preaching.”[5]
Has the Church over the ages unnecessarily complicated matters by moving away from a simple kerygma employed by the original Apostolic preachers? Have we as a Body, historically, been guilty of elevating secondary material into the realm of primary gospel? And do we thereby obstruct the way to faith in our missional preaching, by making the gospel overly complex or a matter of cognitive ascent to a list of doctrines? Should we rather provide a very simple gospel message that even the most unsophisticated could manage to grasp? A lowest-common denominator kerygma which might be comprised of only the following: God has made a way to Himself through Jesus’ death that involves the pure gift of His acceptance and the wiping away of our sins, offered apart from anything we have done or could do to earn or obligate that acceptance, and conditioned upon our endurance in trust (through the encouragement and inspiration of the Scriptures and the ongoing kindness of God in the Holy Spirit).[6]
Whatever we conclude ought to be part of a bare-minimum kerygma, we do need to keep the focus on Jesus Christ resurrected, given as the Savior of the world to all who will believe (Romans 1:2-4). Along with this, we need to offer the community of Christ an ongoing immersion in the stories and instruction of Scripture (the good deposit will thereby continually touch us to help insure that the primary gospel remains alive in our hearts). This good deposit, as Paul envisioned it, is admittedly difficult to pinpoint with precision. And it may have included 1st century cultural elements which have over the centuries been superceded (e.g. the role of women, slaves, etc.). I suppose this is where our confidence in the ministry of the Holy Spirit is called upon. As we let the Scriptures master us in our community studying to show ourselves approved, we can be assured that the Spirit of God will shore up the gospel in our hearts.
In the Modern era the Church has, as the argument goes, overemphasized the gospel as content to be believed, rather than as encounter with the living Person, Jesus Christ. So as to avoid any conclusions that what I’m suggesting thus far is skewed too far toward content or assent to doctrinal formulations, I want to underscore this other key facet integrally wed to our gospel proclamation and under-girding – the ministry of the Holy Spirit. In his letters to the Ephesians and the Corinthians, the Apostle Paul mentioned another “good deposit” left to the church – “the promised Holy Spirit who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance” (Ephesians 1:14; cf. II Corinth. 5:5). We cannot fairly talk about the “good news” if we leave out the prospect of a long term, increasingly deeper and satisfying interaction with BOTH good deposits that point us to Jesus (and what true life in Him means). In the gospel we meet Christ, and we continue to find encouragement in the living Word of God along with the active presence of the Spirit (also ministering in power, not just revealing the Scriptures). This dual interaction is the only way that we too, like an aging Paul, might be disposed to say at life’s end “bring the scrolls, especially the parchments” (II Timothy 4:13). Still intrigued by God’s Word to the very end. Still looking for how the Spirit might yet make this good news even better.
To put a wrapper on this discussion, I want to re-iterate my belief in the simplicity of the gospel. It is first and foremost encounter with Jesus Christ Himself – He is the embodiment of the good news (which can be understood and eventually articulated by its recipients in concrete words – even if that means a person only initially knows inside that God has forgiven and accepted them in Christ). As well, I would add that before the Apostle Paul or any gospel proclaimers from his day on, down to the present, ever muttered a word about Jesus into a given context, the Spirit was active preparing the ground to receive the seed of the Word. This advance work of the Spirit, including His confirming signs and wonders in certain cases, along with the personal meeting of Christ (Spirit to spirit), sets the stage for the deeper ministry of the washing with the Word over time. The kerygma and the “good deposit” and the “Good Deposit” all harmoniously over time increasing our appreciation and understanding of the wonder of the gospel of Jesus Christ. This leaves room for a “belonging before believing” perspective (which was arguably also present in Paul’s day among the newly forming church communities where the gospel was first going out), where we value giving normal people adequate immersion in the body of Christ. This community immersion enables them to feel and experience Jesus Christ in people who “embody” that gospel and good deposit, and hence fosters openness to receive the forgiveness, acceptance and hope that Christ offers.
—————————————
Some afterthoughts as they pertain to postmodern ministry:
1. Exegeting our audiences is as important as exegeting the Word we bring to them, if we hope to have the gospel heard as good news.
2. Missional preaching is not primarily about one-shot unloading of the kerygma on unsuspecting people. In whatever opportunities God allows for sharing these words of life, may we be ever prayerful and discerning about how best to share (what to include; what to hold back on). An ongoing relationship with our hearers helps insure that the gospel gets a fuller hearing (in which we are ideally over time able to pass on the good deposit).
3. However we view Scripture and theology, we must not tire of pursuing fresh, creative, multi-dimensional ways of interacting with the good deposit, toward the under-girding of this wonderful gospel in our lives. May we break out of the mono-lithic manners in which we promote that interaction.
4. See that growth in the gospel involves a commitment to remain missional and to live out the gospel together like we really believe it.
5. In Pisidian Antioch, Paul clearly laid out a warning for those Jews rejecting the gospel. This was part of his proclamation. Does any warning fit in our presentation of the gospel today, or do we not feel there is any place for that?
6. “We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God”, Paul told the churches in Asia Minor as he backtracked through. What does this mean as it pertains to the good news? Is it part of that, and if so, does it make it less good or even better?
7. One way we effectively under-gird the gospel is through the repetition of the drama of Communion. Jesus knew we needed to remember and keep remembering this enacted kerygma, so that we might keep it alive in our hearts and communities.
[1] C.H. Dodd popularized this term “kerygma” in a series of lectures given in 1935, which are bound in the book, The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments (Harper and Row, 1964); I’m using the term in a more generic sense to describe the essential kernel of truth, the core gospel content. Dodd viewed kerygma much more narrowly, as the content of the good news proclaimed in order to introduce a person to Christ and to appeal for their conversion. He saw as a separate category the doctrinal and ethical teaching of the church (“didache”) a person needs to be grounded in once they become a Christian. Kerygma and didache could of course overlap (e.g. Jesus’ atoning death having a key role in both), but didache was broader in thematic content and not strictly ‘kerygmatic’ as it was used in edifying the body.
[2] In Acts 13:17-22 Paul’s speech before the Jews at the synagogue (not unlike Peter and Stephen’s famous speeches recorded in Acts 2 and 7, respectively) seems to contain a confessional summary narrating certain great redemptive acts of God (e.g. God’s choice of the Patriarchs, His blessing of the children of Israel in Egypt and their favored Exodus; God’s securing of Canaan; His provision of Judges and choice of David to be Israel’s king). To this list Paul adds John the Baptist’s ministry pointing to the coming Saviour, and, most importantly, Jesus’ “unnoticed” arrival, death and resurrection. These events become the sequel to God’s dealings with His people, and ultimately the grand fulfillment of all the Scriptures have promised - in essence, a more updated or developed kerygma. See Tyndale NT Commentary on Acts, by E.M. Blaiklock (IVP, Leicester, England; 1977), pp. 105-106.
[3] This seems to have been standard practice for gospel-proclaimers in the book of Acts. If we look more broadly to Paul’s preaching on other missionary journeys, or at significant gospel-sharing situations (like Peter’s and Stephen’s speeches), we see a corroborating pattern of proclaimers tailoring their first-round gospel presentation according to audience. Certain aspects of an overall kerygma are included or excluded according to their hearers’ pre-understandings about God (e.g. In Acts 2 before a Jewish audience Peter presents what many call the most thoroughly developed kerygma; In contrast, Paul before the Athenian philosophers presents only key aspects about a living Creator God who is calling people everywhere to repent, and who one day will judge the world by His appointed One whom He raised from the dead).
[4] A slight alteration of Dodd’s kerygma: the apostolic kerygma was “a proclamation of the death, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus that led to an evaluation of His person as both Lord and Christ, confronted man with the necessity of repentance, and promised theforgiveness of sins” (R. H. Mounce. The Essential Nature of New Testament Preaching, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960, p. 84).
[5] Quoted from the third lecture in The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments, by C. H. Dodd (Harper and Row, 1964).
[6] This might be equivalent to the kerygma Paul urged Titus to stress among the new converts on the island of Crete (see Titus 3:4-8). Most commentators argue that this kernel in verses four to seven is a quote from an early church hymn sung at baptisms. In this case there seems to be a direct correlation between their holding this kerygma in steady view and their success in aspiring to holy living (“This is a trustworthy saying. And I want you to stress these things [the kerygma just mentioned], so that those who have trusted in God may be careful to devote themselves to doing what is good.”).
Latest comments