The Gospel in its First-Century Setting

What did gospel mean for people who lived in the first century around the Mediterranean? What did gospel mean for the first Christians, who used the term so significantly? What can we learn by considering the documents and history of this formative time period? Exploring these questions is my task today.

Euangelion
It will not surprise you to hear that the one who utilises the word gospel (euangelion) more than anyone else in the Bible is Paul. In fact, it barely appears anywhere else. The noun occurs a handful of times in Matthew and Mark, a smaller handful of times in the non-Pauline letters, twice in the book of Acts, and over 50 times in Paul. The Greek version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, never uses this singular noun. So where does Paul get this word from, and how does he expect it will be interpreted by his hearers?

Echoes of Empire
One scholar writes: All attempts to derive the Pauline use of euangelion (gospel) from the Septuagint have failed. The noun does not appear there with the Pauline double meaning, which denotes both the act and the content of proclamation. Nevertheless, in extrabiblical Greek usage the term possesses a dynamic meaning that also embraces content and action. The dynamic tendency finds expression above all in the predominance of the plural. The closest parallel (albeit in the plural) to the Pauline usage of euangelion occurs in an inscription from Priene.1 This inscription from Priene () is a piece of political flattery offered to Augustus Caesar. You have a translation of the inscription in your handout:
This seemed fitting to the Greeks of Asia, in the opinion of the high priest Apollonius of Menophilos Azantius: Seeing as everything in our life has been arranged by the effort of Providence, and our life has been granted the greatest honour in the coming of Augustus, who for the benefaction of humans was filled by Providence with virtue. He was sent to be a saviour for ourselves and those after us. He is the one who will put an end to war, and set everything in place. And in his coming, Caesar has surpassed the expectations of all of the preceding gospels, not only surpassing the preceding benefactors, but not even giving any hope that those who follow him might surpass him. And this gods birthday inaugurated the gospels, which came about because of him, for the sake of the world. This is what the people of Asia resolved in Smyrna.2

This piece of political flattery uses the imagery that was prevalent in Caesars political propaganda: he is the saviour who comes to bring peace. Elsewhere Augustus is labelled the son of god, given that he was the political son of Julius
1

Dieter Georgi, Romans: Missionary Theology and Roman Political Theology in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society (ed. Richard A. Horsley; Harrisburg: Continuum, 1997), 148. 2 Priene Calendar Inscription, translation mine.

Caesar, who was believed to have become divine after his death. And the news about Caesars coming to power is described with the term gospels euangelia. You have another inscription in your handout, from about the same time. This inscription is from Pergamum, and reads:
Mys. Pergamon 17 bc-2 ac IGR 4.317 [ ] For the god Caesar [] Augustus, Absolute Sovereign [] of Gospels, [ ], [Erected by] Metrodorus, the chief[ ] [] [ ] [ ] [ ], [ ] . trainer from among his own, and ruler and president of the games of Augustus servants, through the Guide Dionysus, [erected] by the abundances of the festival of treasures he established.

Ive not seen this inscription translated anywhere else, but I think its an interesting one. Here Metrodorus depicts Augustus Caesar both as a god, and as Absolute Sovereign of Gospels. In these and other inscriptions like them, Caesar, the head of the Roman empire, is treated as the saving son of God, whose coming leads to victory and peace. In the light of this sort of evidence, a movement has developed within New Testament Studies in recent years, which seeks to detect echoes of empire in Paul and the New Testament more broadly. This movement calls us to be attentive to the ways in which New Testament writers might be choosing their vocabulary so as to present the gospel of Jesus Christ as a rebuttal of the gospel of Caesar. So Dieter Georgi proposes: Paul has very concrete and critical objections to the dominant political theology of the Roman Empire under the principate. By using such loaded terms as euangelion, pistis, dikaiosyne, and eirene as central concepts in Romans, he evokes their associations to Roman political theology.3 N.T. Wright similarly states: [Pauls task was] articulating his message in implicit, and sometimes explicit, subversion of the new ideology which was sweeping the Mediterranean world. I refer to the ideology of the Roman empire.4 In a recent article entitled, The Politics of Ephesians and the Empire, Nijay Gupta and Fredrick Long summarise the conclusions of many scholars, saying: Paul was critical of the Empire and its promises of peace, justice and divine blessing.5
3 4

Georgi, 148. N.T. Wright, Paul in Fresh Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005), 59. 5 Nijay K. Gupta and Fredrick J. Long, The Politics of Ephesians and the Empire: Accommodation or Resistance? JGRChJ 7 (2010) 112-36; 112.

They go on to apply such a reading to Ephesians: In fact, the particular language of Ephesians shows many signs of counterimperial resistance by affirming the establishment of an alternative political identity in the church assembly around Jesus Christ as the one Lord (4.5). Such a God-ordained body politic with its reigning Lord trumps, while subverting, Roman imperial prerogatives, positions and even specific titulature.6 Caesar summoned those within his empire to respond to his saving lordship with loyalty and devotion. But, according to this recent movement in New Testament studies, Paul was quietly calling Christians to be subversive, by giving their loyalty and devotion to a different lord, a different saviour, a different son of god, a different gospel. And so Paul adopted this term euangelion and applied it to one who had been crucified by Caesar, the Messiah Jesus. According to N.T. Wright, Paul is communicating the claim that Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.7 How then should we evaluate the suggestions of this recent movement in New Testament studies? I think its worth recognising first of all that it does indeed provide some useful illumination of the context in which the Christian message would have been heard and interpreted. When Paul wrote to Christians in Caesars hometown Rome, telling them that Jesus was the son of God whose coming was announced in the gospel, it may well have occurred to them that this would have been a controversial letter to read out in the imperial palace of Nero. But its also worth considering that if this did happen, Nero would have noticed differences to the language of imperial propaganda. For one fairly significant thing, in every clear inscription Ive seen that applies the noun euangelion to Caesar or another ruler or Roman victory, the word is used in the plural. And yet, in every instance of its use in the New Testament, the word is used in the singular. Graham Stanton comments: Wholesale borrowing from the [Roman] imperial cult is implausible, for Christian use of the noun gospel in the singular is almost without contemporary precedent. Although there are some similarities in terms of concepts and ideology, there are also very significant differences.8 Donald Robinson concurs: The sudden, frequent, and invariable use of the singular [euangelion] in the NT to designate the divine proclamation and the complete absence from it of the contemporary plural use [euangelia], is quite remarkable.9
6 7

Gupta & Long, 115. Wright, Paul in Fresh Perspective, 69. 8 Stanton, Jesus and Gospel, 34.

Im inclined to agree that this discrepancy is noteworthy. Paul is not simply using the language of Roman propaganda and replacing Caesar with Christ. I think there is more to the story here than a simple adoption of imperial terminology although that is no doubt part of the story.

The Story of Euangelion

So Id like to try to recount more fully the story of how euangelion came to be a crucial Christian word and concept. I see it as a story that has five stages. And it doesnt begin with Paul, but with Jesus: 1. Messianic Self-Identification 2. Missionary Proclamation 3. Apostolic Codification 4. Catechetical Transformation 5. Biographical Renovation

1. Messianic Self-Identification
I mentioned earlier that the word euangelion is used only a handful of times in Matthew and Mark. While thats true, it is perhaps worth noting that the places at which the noun is used are fairly important. For example, towards the beginning of Matthew, the noun is used twice, in 4:23 and 9:35, to summarise the characteristic activity of Jesus: he teaches in the synagogues, proclaims the gospel of the kingdom, and heals people. Towards the end of Matthew, the noun is used twice again, in 24:14 and 26:13, to summarise what will happen after Jesus has departed: the gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world. If this is the case that a key component of Jesus earthly ministry was to proclaim the euangelion and to prepare his disciples to proclaim the euangelion throughout the world then I think its worth considering whether Christian utilisation of euangelion arose not simply from Pauls creative counter-imperialism, but from the impact of the historical Jesus. Now, it might be objected at this point: But Luke and John dont use that noun at all; and even if Matthew and Mark use it, Jesus himself probably taught in Aramaic, so is unlikely to have used the word euangelion! Now thats true, and thats why this is only stage one of the story. And although the Synoptics dont heavily feature the noun euangelion, they do utilise the related verb, euangelizo/euangelizomai. And again, this verb is used at crucial points to characterise the mission of Jesus and his disciples. So at the beginning of Luke-Acts, angels utilise this verb to announce what is happening at this turning point of history. And then in chapter 4, the verb is on the lips of Jesus as he offers an interpretation of his own identity and mission. This crucial passage, in which Jesus interprets his identity in the light of Isaiah, is printed in your handout:

Donald Robinson, The Church and Evangelism published in Interchange 21 (1977), 62-3; reprinted in Donald Robinson: Selected Works Volume 2: Preaching Gods Word (ed. Peter G. Bold and Mark D. Thompson; Camperdown: Australian Church Record, 2008) 114-116; 115.

The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news () to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, 19 to proclaim the year of the Lords favour.

18

Did you notice the nature of the mission that Jesus asserts in this passage? It is the mission of a proclaimer: He has anointed me to proclaim good news to proclaim freedom to proclaim the year of the Lords favour. Later in the same chapter, Jesus rejects the opportunity to heal more people, insisting that he was sent to proclaim () the gospel of the kingdom, and this is what he must do. Later, Jesus offers this characteristic proclamation as part of the evidence to John the Baptist that he is indeed the promised one: Jesus is Isaiahs promised proclaimer. This is immensely important. Roland Deines rightly states: Jesus own understanding of his mission [is] primarily based on his specific and personal application of Scripture.10 Deines goes on to note that: the extensive use of Scripture in the New Testament and especially in the Gospels needs to be understood as a consequence of Jesus own application of Scripture to his ministry.11 So this is stage one of the story of euangelion: messianic self-identification as the Isaianic proclaimer of Gods kingdom.

2. Missionary Proclamation
The second stage is missionary proclamation. And here we can resume looking at Luke-Acts. Weve already noticed that in Luke the angels proclaim the coming of Jesus, and Jesus interprets himself to be the Isaianic proclaimer of Gods kingdom. Luke 8:1 notes that when Jesus went about proclaiming the kingdom, the Twelve were with him. Then in chapter 9, Jesus sends the Twelve out, calling them to imitate his ministry of proclaiming the kingdom and healing the sick. In the following chapter, 72 disciples are sent out with the same commission. It seems that the identity and mission of Jesus disciples is built on the selfunderstanding of Jesus as the Isaianic proclaimer. Eckhard Schnabel points out that this invitation to share in Jesus ministry of proclamation served to prepare the disciples for their future role: Jesus instructs the Twelve in terms of a short-term missionary tour through Galilean villages. At the same time he describes their imminent mission as a

10

Roland Deines, Jesus and the Jewish Traditions of His Time Early Christianity 1/3 (2010): 344371; 363. 11 Deines, 363; emphasis original.

paradigm of a permanent mission in the future. The short-term mission is training for their later activity.12 Indeed, Lukes second volume shows us this later activity. But intriguingly, whereas their mission alongside Jesus had consistently been described as teaching and proclaiming the kingdom, Acts 5:42 tweaks this summary significantly, saying that they did not cease teaching and proclaiming the Messiah, Jesus. According to Luke, then, those who were trained by Jesus to proclaim the kingdom faithfully continue this task by proclaiming the Messiah. He is the content of their proclamation, because they have perceived that it is in him that Gods kingdom has come. Similarly, Acts 8:12 says that Philip was proclaiming the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ. Acts 10:36 sums up the proclamation as the message of peace through Jesus Christ. Acts 11:20 says that the believers were proclaiming the Lord Jesus. He is the content of their proclamation. So this is stage two of the story of euangelion. The appointed witnesses of Jesus share in his task of proclamation. They are euangelizomenoi, proclaimers, and the content of their proclamation is Jesus himself.

3. Apostolic Codification
The third stage is apostolic codification. It seems evident from 1 Corinthians 9 that Paul is familiar with Jesus instructions to the Twelve in their preparatory mission. In 1 Corinthians 9:14 Paul says, the Lord [meaning Jesus] has commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should receive their living from the gospel. This is exactly the way the Synoptics describe Jesus instructions to the Twelve. They are not to take money with them, but to expect to be provided for by those with whom they share the message. Paul identifies himself as belonging to the group to whom this applies. He too is a proclaimer, commissioned by Jesus to fulfil the expectation of Isaiah that the kingdom of God will be proclaimed throughout the earth. Indeed, Paul quotes Isaiah in Romans 10:15: How beautiful are the feet of those who are euangelizomenon those who are proclaiming! The content of Pauls proclamation is the same as the content of the other disciples proclamation. It is, according to Romans 10:17, the word about Christ. Paul learned the content of his proclamation when he encountered Christ on the road to Damascus. So he recounts in Galatians 1:12, I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ. The risen Jesus Christ revealed himself to Paul, and thus Paul immediately had the same content to proclaim as the other disciples: Jesus Christ himself is risen as Lord of Gods kingdom. So at this point in the story, we have a number of disciples of Jesus, who view themselves as proclaimers in the mould of Jesus. And the content of their proclamation is the person of Jesus the risen Messiah. But I think its possible to speculate that at this point a certain codification occurred. That is, the apostolic pillars of the early Christian movement discussed the common content that they were already proclaiming, and agreed that as proclaimers euangelizomenoi they had a common euangelion, singular the gospel. We may get a hint of this in Galatians 2:
12

Eckhard J. Schnabel, Early Christian Mission Volume One: Jesus and the Twelve (Downers Grove: IVP, 2004), 293.

2 I went [to Jerusalem] in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel [to euangelion] that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain. 6 As for those who were held in high esteem whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritismthey added nothing to my message. 7 On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised. 8 For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Cephas and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised. Indeed it is from this point that the singular noun to euangelion becomes prominent in labelling the common content of Christian proclamation. I mentioned earlier that the noun occurs only twice in Luke-Acts. One of these occurrences is in Acts 15, in which Peter expresses solidarity with Pauls mission to the Gentiles, by saying that even in his own ministry, God had ordained that certain Gentiles would hear to euangelion and believe. The other occurrence is in Acts 20, in which Paul insists on going to Jerusalem to express solidarity with the Christians there, and fulfil the task of proclaiming to euangelion. So Peter, the apostle to the Jews, proclaimed the same euangelion to Gentiles. And Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, proclaimed the same euangelion in Jerusalem. It may be, then, that the unprecedented consistent use of a singular noun, euangelion, to refer to the Christian message, was at least partially intended to indicate the unity of a common singular cooperative Christian movement, whether in Rome, Greece, Jerusalem, or Asia Minor; whether through the missionary activity of Peter, Paul, James, or John. Indeed, when Paul talks about to euangelion, he is often keen to draw attention to its singularity, as a common message applicable both to the recipients and to people across the churches and across the world: 1 Thessalonians 3:2: We sent Timothy, who is our brother and co-worker in Gods service in spreading to euangelion of Christ, to strengthen and encourage you in your faith 2 Corinthians 9:13: Because of the service by which you have proved yourselves, others will praise God for the obedience that accompanies your confession of to euangelion of Christ Romans 1:14-16: I am obligated both to Greeks and non-Greeks, both to the wise and the foolish. That is why I am so eager to preach to euangelion also to you who are in Rome. For I am not ashamed of to euangelion, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile Philippians 1:3-14: I always pray with joy because of your partnership in to euangelion. Whether I am in chains or defending and confirming to euangelion, all of you share in Gods grace with me

 Colossians 1:6: to euangelion is bearing fruit and growing throughout the whole worldjust as it has been doing among you since the day you heard it and truly understood Gods grace Ephesians 3:6: Through to euangelion the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body The proclaimers and believers of Jesus Christ share one message: to euangelion, the gospel. And what is the content of this common gospel? Lets look at the other passage in your handout, in which Paul makes it crystal clear just what the authentic common gospel tradition consists of. In particular, well look at verses 3-5, which I take to be a codified creed:
3

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.

Notice that Pauls summary of the common gospel tradition involves both a claim about history that Jesus genuinely died and rose and an interpretation of this history that it happened for our sins, in fulfilment of the hope of the Old Testament Scriptures. This is the common Christian gospel, to euangelion. Of course there may be other factors involved in the crystallisation of the singular noun euangelion as a common label for the Christian message. It may be that alongside the desire to express a united Christian proclamation, the apostles did indeed have a desire to counter the propaganda of Caesars inscriptions. Graham Stanton suggests: In the Graeco-Roman world of Pauls day, glad tidings were associated regularly with the new hope, the dawn of a new era, the good news brought about by the birth, the accession, or the return to health of a Roman emperor. Hence there could be more than one set of glad tidings. For Christians, on the other hand, the Gospel is Gods initiative, the good news of Gods fulfillment of his plan and his purposes for humankind: its focal point is Jesus Christ, Gods Son. The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus was Gods once for all disclosure of the one glad tiding. For Paul, his proclamation of good news was not the birthday of Christ which marked the dawn of the new era, as with Augustus, but the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. This was Gods good news.13 So perhaps that was another reason for the remarkable adoption by early Christians of an exclusive use of the singular noun euangelion: the desire to hint that while Caesar announces multiple gospels, this is the gospel. So that is stage three of the story of euangelion: apostolic codification.

4. Catechetical Transformation
Stage four of the story is catechetical transformation. By catechetical I mean the way in which people are trained and nurtured in the faith. It should not be taken for granted that early Christianity pursued development and unity via letters from the
13

Stanton, 34.

apostolic pillars to the various churches, designed to confirm and remind of the gospel. This flows out of the previous stage: Peter, Paul, James, and John wrote to churches, crossing each others boundaries to an extent in order to express solidarity in the faith. The letters arising from these apostolic missionary enterprises utilise a range of singular nouns to label the common content of their proclamation: Paul14 and Peter15 make mention of the gospel Paul,16 Peter,17 Hebrews,18 and Jude19 refer to the faith Paul,20 Peter,21 James,22 Hebrews,23 and John24 utilise the word All singular nouns that encapsulate the common message of Christianity. The purposes and contents of these letters are greatly varied, but they bear witness to a united focus on Jesus, and on the changed world that he has brought about through his coming. This utilisation of unusually long teaching-letters that overlap in terminology and content was a striking development, and I think arose again from the conviction of the apostolic pillars that they shared an important message for all people. They were not just proclaiming words; they were proclaiming the word. They were not just declaring beliefs; they were declaring the faith. They were not just announcing gospels; they were announcing the gospel. That this catechetical strategy was a creative cooperative enterprise is suggested by the imaginative effect that the common gospel has had on the arrangement of many of these letters. Weve seen already that according to Pauls tradition in 1 Corinthians 15, the gospel is the message about the death and resurrection of Jesus. Whats intriguing is that these twin foci seem to give structure to the whole letter. The letter begins with a focus on the cross, and calls the Corinthians themselves to pursue the path of the cross rather than the honour of present rulers, who are destined for destruction. The letter ends with a focus on the resurrection, and calls the Corinthians themselves to recall that the rulers of this age will be judged, whereas the dead in Christ will one day share in Christs resurrection. So Pauls gospel of the death and resurrection of Jesus is giving structure and direction to Pauls apostolic letter. The letter of James is different to 1 Corinthians in authorship, occasion, destination, terminology, and probably date. But fascinatingly it carries a similar movement. The book of 1 Corinthians begins by inviting believers to reject the present honour of boastful rulers in favour of the gift of the cross, and ends by foretelling the judgement of boastful rulers and the resurrection of those who belong to Christ. Similarly the book of James begins by inviting believers to reject the present honour of the boastful rich in favour of the gift of Gods wisdom, and ends by foretelling the judgement of
14 15

1 Corinthians 15:1 1 Peter 4:17 16 Philemon 1:6 17 1 Peter 5:9 18 Hebrews 4:14 19 Jude 1:3 20 Romans 10:17 21 1 Peter 2:8 22 James 1:22 23 Hebrews 4:12 24 1 John 2:14

the boastful rich and the ultimate harvest for those who belong to God. So James gospel of humiliation and exaltation is quietly suggested by the structure of his letter: true servants of the Lord Jesus Christ are those who receive wisdom from God to face humiliation in the present, and await exaltation from God in the future. It is surely no coincidence that the Lord Jesus Christ himself underwent humiliation in his death and the beginning of exaltation from God in his resurrection. Both of these letters are speaking about the decisively changed world of those who belong to Christ, using the rhythm of the gospel, and the varied language and categories of the Old Testament scriptures the scriptures in accordance with which Christ died, was buried, rose, and appeared. I have said a lot more about this topic of the gospel-arrangement of the New Testament letters, so I wont continue on that topic now; but I invite you to look into the extensive paper I have done on that topic if it interests you. So thats stage four: the training and nurturing of Christians is pursued by allowing the common gospel of apostolic mission, in its rich variety of expressions, to give creative shape and content to teaching-letters. And its especially at this stage that the letter authors may have chosen to play on the Christian gospels relation to the Imperial gospels of Caesar.

5. Biographical Renovation
Stage five of the story of euangelion is biographical renovation. As we have seen, right from the beginning, the content of Christian proclamation was Jesus himself. We have seen in 1 Corinthians 15 that, if we are to zoom in to see what it is about Jesus that the apostles agree to be most significant, we find his death for sin, his burial, his resurrection, and his appearances in accordance with the Scriptures. So the final stage in the story of euangelion is not an unexpected one: it is the writing down of fuller accounts of the interpreted history of Jesus, under the title euangelion. So Mark begins his biography with the words, The beginning of to euangelion of Jesus Christ. With this move, the biographical genre has been renovated, to become, itself, Christian proclamation. Like 1 Corinthians 15:3-5, Marks Gospel involves both the reporting of history Jesus lived and suffered and died and rose and the interpretation of that history it happened in fulfilment of the Old Testament Scriptures, and results in the ransom of many. This was the gospel to euangelion and as might be expected, overlapping versions soon emerged for use by the various directions of early apostolic mission. At first, these four written Gospels were referred to as the one Gospel the Gospel according to Matthew, or Mark, or Luke, or John. Later this fourfold Gospel was referred to as four Gospels. So that is my attempt at the story of euangelion. Stage one was messianic self-identification. Jesus understood himself to be the Isaianic proclaimer of Gods kingdom. Stage two was missionary proclamation. Jesus sent his disciples to be proclaimers in his mould. After his death and resurrection, they continued proclaiming the kingdom by focusing their proclamation on the person of 10

Jesus himself. Stage three was apostolic codification. The early Christian leaders agreed that the proclamation they were already making constituted an agreed common gospel for the whole world, both Jews and Gentiles. Sometimes this was referred to as the gospel; at other times it was referred to as the faith or the word. According to 1 Corinthians 15, this gospel focused on the death and resurrection of Jesus, interpreted as being for sins, in fulfilment of Scripture. Stage four was catechetical transformation. This gospel was creatively incorporated into lengthy teaching-letters from the leaders of apostolic mission. Stage five was biographical renovation. The interpreted-history of Jesus was developed into a fuller written account of the proclamation, versions of which then appeared for the various directions of early apostolic mission.

What is the Gospel?

The time has come, then, to draw together the things that weve been exploring, in answer to the key question, What is the gospel? I want us to notice three things: 1. The content of the gospel in the first century 2. The significance of the gospel in the first century 3. The political effect of the gospel in the first century

The Content of the Gospel in the First Century

What was the content of the Christian gospel in the first century? If we had to sum it up in one word, it would have to be: Jesus. If we were allowed a full sentence, it might be something like this: Jesus is the Messiah of Gods kingdom, who died for our sins and rose as Lord of the world, awaiting cosmic vindication. Or it might be something like this: Those who receive from God will share in the humiliation of the Lord Jesus Christ in the present, and share in the exaltation of the Lord Jesus Christ when he comes. If we were allowed a full stretch of papyrus, it would be the book of Mark, or Matthew, or Luke, or John fuller accounts of the interpreted history of Jesus Christ, the one who lived and died and rose and ascended in fulfilment of Scripture, in order to ransom many. This is the gospel. This is the faith. This is the word. It will undoubtedly be expressed differently for different circumstances; and different elements of it will be more or less unpacked as required. But it is a common proclamation, for all people. In the words of Revelation 14:6, it is the eternal euangelion to be proclaimed to every nation and tribe and tongue and people.

The Significance of the Gospel in the First Century

What was the significance of the gospel in the first century? I think its worth noticing that in the story that weve recounted, this gospel arises from the mission of Jesus and creatively shapes Christian identity and church life. In other words, it is not just the message by which people first enter the faith; it is rather the lifeblood of our Lord and of our own identity and calling. When the apostles wanted the scattered Christians to be nourished and to grow, they wrote to them about the gospel, and allowed their very epistles to be shaped by the gospel. For first century Christianity, the gospel of Jesus Christ had pride of place.

The Political Effect of the Gospel in the First Century

What was the political effect of the gospel in the first century? I raise this question because of the recent movement in New Testament studies that urges us to hear the language of gospel as inherently politically subversive. I want to face this head-on

11

by asking an important, but perhaps surprising, question: Does the claim that Jesus is Lord necessitate the corollary that Caesar is not? Let me ask a parallel question: Does the claim that God is king necessitate the corollary that Nebuchadnezzar is not? The answer is not simple: Nebuchadnezzar, this Caesar of a previous empire, is allowed by God to exercise his temporal kingship although he is on thin ice when he will not acknowledge that his own sovereignty is dependent on and subservient to divine sovereignty. But until the time that Gods kingdom comes in its completeness, and the rulers of this age either perish or lay down their crowns before him, the book of Daniel holds back from demanding that the crowns should be removed from their heads. Similarly, we should be attentive to the reticence of the New Testament to outright condemn Caesar or his representatives in the present. We cant simply say that it was too dangerous for Jesus or Paul to be open about their opposition to Caesar because the New Testament presents Jesus as reticent before Pilate even when his execution is inevitable: when Pilate offers him the golden opportunity to lay claim to Caesars crown, Jesus replies, My kingdom is not of this world. The gospel of Jesus Christ does not simply constitute a condemning alternative to the gospel of Caesar; rather it offers the promise of the kingdom of God, of which human attempts at peace and rule are a legitimate but hopelessly marred shadow, as we wait for the time when every rule and authority is brought under the feet of Jesus Christ, whether willingly or not. That time will not come until the resurrection of Jesus has reached its destination in his cosmic glorious vindication. The political effect of the Christian gospel in its first century setting, then, was not only to suggest subversion of Caesars misplaced desire for ultimate loyalty; but also to cause submission to Caesars marred but legitimate attempt at keeping the peace. As with Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in Nebuchadnezzars court, there was both subversion and submission. That, I think, was the political effect of the gospel in the first century. And that brings us to question time.

12