An old question
ouvde. ga.r evgw. para. avnqrw,pou pare,labon auvto. ou;te evdida,cqhn avlla. diV avpokalu,yewj VIhsou/ CristouHere are a couple of my favourite comments on this verse:
“… for I did not receive it [the gospel] from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ”. (Galatians 1:12)
- "the gospel is not simply 'from Christ' but is Christ" -- (Dunn, Galatians, 54)
- "the gospel happened to Paul when God stepped on to the scene, invading his lie in Christ" -- (J Louis Martyn, Galatians, 144 – a spiritual grandchild of Barth [via Käsemann?] in many ways)
These absolutely delightful texts are causing me to wonder what the best category for characterising the gospel in Paul would be.
What do you think?
Should we speak of the gospel, in Paul, primarily as Christ himself? as God in Christ? or as Christ's advancing lordship? or as a story? or an event (of grace, proclamation)? or a strict set of propositions (perhaps related to 'justification')? Should we mix these together somehow?