The Notebooks of Schubert Ogden

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

Version 1 Next »

Scanned PDF

As much as I think that "Christ-kerygma" as well as "Jesus-kerygma" can
be reasonably said to have its origin in the Christ-event, and thus to be formally
and not merely substantially apostolic and canonical, I still think there are good
reasons for saying such things as the following:
[TJhe canon of the church, and hence also the primary authority for
theology, must now be located in what form critics generally speak of as
the earliest layer of the synoptic tradition, or what Marxsen in particular
refers to as 'the Jesus-kerygma,' as distinct both from 'the Christkerygma'
and from 'the mixed form of the Jesus-kerygma and the Christkerygma'
that we find expressed in the writings of the New Testament
(OT: 64).
[T]he true apostolic and, therefore, canonical witness [refers to ] the
earliest layer otwitness now accessible to us through historical-critical
study of the [s]~optic [g]ospels, which, following one of the most
careful students of this whole matter, Willi Marxsen, I call the Jesuskerygma
(F&F: 45 £.).
Here, if anywhere, in these earliest Jesus-traditions [sc. these very oldest traditions that any quest of the historical Jesus must perforce reconstruct],
or, as Willi Marxsen prefers to say, in this earliest 'Jesus-kerygma,' we
have what for us today must function as the real Christian canon or norm
of appropriateness (PC: 113 f.).
17 September 2005

  • No labels