Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- PART I JESUS AND GOSPEL
- 2 Jesus and Gospel
- 3 The fourfold Gospel
- 4 Jesus traditions and gospels in Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
- 5 The law of Christ and the Gospel
- PART II JESUS
- PART III THE GOSPELS AND PAPYRI CODICES
- Bibliography
- Index of passages cited
- General index
5 - The law of Christ and the Gospel
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 December 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- PART I JESUS AND GOSPEL
- 2 Jesus and Gospel
- 3 The fourfold Gospel
- 4 Jesus traditions and gospels in Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
- 5 The law of Christ and the Gospel
- PART II JESUS
- PART III THE GOSPELS AND PAPYRI CODICES
- Bibliography
- Index of passages cited
- General index
Summary
There are some baffling phrases hidden in early Christian writings which are worth careful examination. The phrase ‘the law of Christ’ is one such. Although it is used only once in the New Testament (Gal. 6.2), it teases exegetes, it raises central questions of theological method, and it still forces us to ask awkward questions. Was this phrase part of Paul's Gospel? And should it be part of Christian proclamation today?
In his influential commentary, H. D. Betz insists that Gal. 6.2, and indeed all the ethical directives in Gal. 5.13–6.10, are not directly derived from the Gospel that Paul preached. Richard Hays has argued, surely correctly, that this disjunction of kerygma from conduct arises from an over-emphasis on individualistic soteriological elements at the expense of the corporate dimension in Paul's theological thought. Paul's encouragement to the Galatian Christians to ‘fulfil the law of Christ’ (Gal. 6.2) was surely part of the Gospel message he wished to convey to the Galatian churches and no mere ethical addendum.
But that leaves us with a further set of questions. Why did Paul not make good theological capital out of the phrase in his other letters? Did the apostle decide that the phrase was too ambiguous or too prone to misunderstanding to merit further use? If so, should we follow his lead and drop it from contemporary theological reflection and from liturgies? Is this a phrase which has ‘punched above its weight’ for far too long?
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Jesus and Gospel , pp. 110 - 124Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2004