-
September 6, 2012 by Jason Hood
F F Bruce on the Gospel
I was looking up a topic in New Dictionary of Theology, ed. David F. Wright, Sinclair Ferguson, and J. I. Packer (IVP, 1988) Tuesday morning and happened to wonder what they did with the gospel. It turns out that the editors recruited a crack exegete for that entry.
In light of the current debates over the definition of the gospel, F. F. Bruce’s short five paragraph piece (278-9) is remarkably pertinent. He certainly emphasizes some “soterian” dimensions, to use the label Tom Wright applies to contemporary evangelicalism in his introduction to Scot McKnight’s recent book on the gospel.* With “[t]he preacher becomes the preached one,” Bruce appears to yield to much 20th century NT scholarship (think Bultmann, and further back in the historical Jesus movement to which Bultmann was reacting) that stressed a disjunction between Jesus’ proclamation and the later apostolic proclamation of him. I owe this observation to McKnight, who shows in his book that this distinction isn’t true: Jesus absolutely preached himself, just as the later church did. In fact, they learned their proclamation of him from him, and Jesus’ sermon in Luke 24 is not terribly different from the conversations Jesus had in public (“Just as Jonah was…”) and his disciples (the Son of Man must suffer, die…and be raised).
But Bruce’s concluding summation is almost identical to McKnight, as well as those in the Reformed redemptive historical tradition who emphasize the priority of historia salutis over ordo salutis. That is, they stress that the gospel is the Triune God’s work in the life, death, resurrection, ascension and return of Jesus as the capstone of the story of redemptive history, rather than the application of that work in salvation. (The latter is understood to be the result of the former, of course, and if you deny or downplay “ordo salutis,” you’re getting it all wrong.)
Here’s Bruce’s summary of the basic elements in the NT preaching of the gospel message:
1. the prophecies [and I'd clarify that it's story as a whole, not just individual prophecies] have been fulfilled and the new age inaugurated by the coming of Christ;
2. he was born into the family of David;
3. he died according to the Scriptures, to deliver his people from this evil age [McKnight and Reformed redemptive-historical types emphasize "from their sins," rather than movement from age-to-age, although the two are obviously related];
4. he was buried and raised again the third day, according to the Scriptures;
5. he is exalted at God’s right hand as Son of God, Lord of living and dead;
6. he will come again to judge the world and consummate his saving work.
If I remember his book on Paul correctly, Bruce has a more “Pauline” flavor of gospel there…but this piece comes after that book, and may reflect further study.
[[* Update: was just reminded that Tom got the label "soterian" from Scot's book.]]
Leave A Comment
Welcome to the SAET blog. Herein you will find the theological/pastoral ramblings of the Rev. Matthew Mason, the good Doctor Jason Hood, and Pastor Gerald Hiestand. All three write under the premise that theology and the pastorate belong together, and that (at least some) pastors must once again function as writing theologians for the wider church, for the ecclesial renewal of theology and the theological renewal of the church.






Recent Comments
Nice work, Jason! This is helpful.
09/6/12 9:32 AM | Comment Link
F.F. Bruce on the Gospel said...
[...] 8, 2012 By Michael F. Bird Leave a CommentOver at SAET, Jason Hood has a great post about F.F. Bruce on the Gospel. Highly relevant to the TGC “Did Jesus preach the gospel debate” too. Here is [...]
09/8/12 12:03 AM | Comment Link
Notables (8/8/2012) « KINGDOMVIEW said...
[...] F. F. Bruce on the Gospel [...]
09/8/12 12:35 PM | Comment Link
September: Spring comes to Biblical Blogaria - Sansblogue said...
[...] For more ancient (modern) history Matt Page at the Bible Films blog went all risque with the classic The Sign of the Cross (1932). Despite its now rather tame poster this was apparently the film that prompted censorship in the USA. Meanwhile, on a more serious note Jim Davila went all Gnostic. While Jason Hood looked back on F F Bruce on the Gospel. [...]
09/30/12 6:03 AM | Comment Link