Gospel

VIEW:42 DATA:01-04-2020

GOSPEL.—This word (lit. ‘God-story’) represents Greek euangelion, which reappears in one form or another in ecclesiastical Latin and in most modern languages. In classical Greek the word means the reward given to a bearer of good tidings (so 2Sa_4:10 LXX [Note: Septuagint.] in pl.), but afterwards it came to mean the message itself, and so in 2Sa_18:20; 2Sa_18:22; 2Sa_18:25 [LXX [Note: Septuagint.] ] a derived word is used in this sense. In NT the word means ‘good tidings’ about the salvation of the world by the coming of Jesus Christ. It is not there used of the written record. A genitive case or a possessive pronoun accompanying it denotes: (a) the person or the thing preached (the gospel of Christ, or of peace, or of salvation, or of the grace of God, or of God, or of the Kingdom, Mat_4:23; Mat_9:35; Mat_24:14, Mar_1:14, Act_20:24, Rom_15:19, Eph_1:13; Eph_6:15 etc.); or sometimes (b) the preacher (Mar_1:1 (?), Rom_2:16; Rom_16:25, 2Co_4:3 etc.); or rarely (c) the persons preached to (Gal_2:7). ‘The gospel’ is often used in NT absolutely, as in Mar_1:15; Mar_8:35; Mar_14:9 RV [Note: Revised Version.] , Mar_16:15, Act_15:7, Rom_11:28, 2Co_8:16 (where the idea must not be entertained that the reference is to Luke as an Evangelist), and so ‘this gospel,’ Mat_26:13; but English readers should bear in mind that usually (though not in Mar_16:15) the EV [Note: English Version.] phrase ‘to preach the gospel’ represents a simple verb of the Greek. The noun is not found in Lk., Heb., or the Catholic Epistles, and only once in the Johannine writings (Rev_14:6, ‘an eternal gospel’—an angelic message). In Rom_10:16 ‘the gospel’ is used absolutely of the message of the OT prophets.
The written record was not called ‘the Gospel’ till a later age. By the earliest generation of Christians the oral teaching was the main thing regarded; men told what they had heard and seen, or what they had received from eye-witnesses. As these died out and the written record alone remained, the perspective altered. The earliest certain use of the word in this sense is in Justin Martyr (c [Note: circa, about.] . a.d. 150: ‘The Apostles in the Memoirs written by themselves, which are called Gospels,’ Apol. 1. 66; cf. ‘the Memoirs which were drawn up by His Apostles and those who followed them,’ Dial. 103), though some find it in Ignatius and the Didache. The earliest known titles of the Evangelic records (which, however, we cannot assert to be contemporary with the records themselves) are simply ‘According to Matthew,’ etc.
A. J. Maclean.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909

a history of the life, actions, death, resurrection, ascension, and doctrine of Jesus Christ. The word is Saxon, and of the same import with the Latin term evangelium, or the Greek ευαγγελιον, which signifies “glad tidings,” or “good news;” the history of our Saviour being the best history ever published to mankind. The history is contained in the writings of St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John, who from thence are called evangelists. The Christian church never acknowledged any more than these four Gospels as canonical: notwithstanding which, several apocryphal gospels are handed down to us, and others are entirely lost.
The four Gospels contain each of them the history of our Saviour's life and ministry; but we must remember, that no one of the evangelists undertook to give an account of all the miracles which Christ performed, or of all the instructions which he delivered. They are written with different degrees of conciseness; but every one of them is sufficiently full to prove that Jesus was the promised Messiah, the Saviour of the world, who had been predicted by a long succession of prophets, and whose advent was expected at the time of his appearance, both by Jews and Gentiles.
2. That all the books which convey to us the history of events under the New Testament were written and immediately published by persons contemporary with the events, is most fully proved by the testimony of an unbroken series of authors, reaching from the days of the evangelists to the present times; by the concurrent belief of Christians of all denominations; and by the unreserved confession of avowed enemies to the Gospel. In this point of view the writings of the ancient fathers of the Christian church are invaluable. They contain not only frequent references and allusions to the books of the New Testament, but also such numerous professed quotations from them, that it is demonstratively certain that these books existed in their present state a few years after the conclusion of Christ's ministry upon earth. No unbeliever in the apostolic age, in the age immediately subsequent to it, or, indeed, in any age whatever, was ever able to disprove the facts recorded in these books; and it does not appear that in the early times any such attempt was made. The facts, therefore, related in the New Testament, must be admitted to have really happened. But if all the circumstances of the history of Jesus, that is, his miraculous conception in the womb of the virgin, the time at which he was born, the place where he was born, the family from which he was descended, the nature of the doctrines which he preached, the meanness of his condition, his rejection, death, burial, resurrection, and ascension, with many other minute particulars; if all these various circumstances in the history of Jesus exactly accord with the predictions of the Old Testament relative to the promised Messiah, in whom all the nations of the earth were to be blessed, it follows that Jesus was that Messiah. And again: if Jesus really performed the miracles as related in the Gospels, and was perfectly acquainted with the thoughts and designs of men, his divine mission cannot be doubted. Lastly: if he really foretold his own death and resurrection, the descent of the Holy Ghost, its miraculous effects, the sufferings of the Apostles, the call of the Gentiles, and the destruction of Jerusalem, it necessarily follows that he spake by the authority of God himself. These, and many other arguments, founded in the more than human character of Jesus, in the rapid propagation of the Gospel, in the excellence of its precepts and doctrines, and in the constancy, intrepidity, and fortitude of its early professors, incontrovertibly establish the truth and divine origin of the Christian religion, and afford to us, who live in these latter times, the most positive confirmation of the promise of our Lord, that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
3. The Gospels recount those wonderful and important events with which the Christian religion and its divine Author were introduced into the world, and which have produced so great a change in the principles, the manners, the morals, and the temporal as well as spiritual condition of mankind.
They relate the first appearance of Christ upon earth, his extraordinary and miraculous birth, the testimony borne to him by his forerunner, John the Baptist, the temptation in the wilderness, the opening of his divine commission, the pure, the perfect, and sublime morality which he taught, especially in his inimitable sermon on the mount, the infinite superiority which he showed to every other moral teacher, both in the matter and manner of his discourses, more particularly by crushing vice in its very cradle, in the first risings of wicked desires and propensities in the heart, by giving a decided preference to the mild, gentle, passive, conciliating virtues, before that violent, vindictive, high-spirited, unforgiving temper, which has been always too much the favourite character of the world; by requiring us to forgive our very enemies, and to do good to them that hate us; by excluding from our devotions, our alms, and all our virtues, all regard to fame, reputation, and applause; by laying down two great general principles of morality, love to God, and love to mankind, and deducing from thence every other human duty; by conveying his instructions under the easy, familiar, and impressive form of parables; by expressing himself in a tone of dignity and authority unknown before; by exemplifying every virtue that he taught in his own unblemished and perfect life and conversation; and, above all, by adding those awful sanctions, which he alone, of all moral instructers, had the power to hold out, eternal rewards to the virtuous, and eternal punishments to the wicked. The sacred narratives then represent to us the high character that he assumed; the claim he made to a divine original; the wonderful miracles he wrought in proof of his divinity; the various prophecies which plainly marked him out as the Messiah, the great Deliverer of the Jews; the declarations he made that he came to offer himself a sacrifice for the sins of all mankind; the cruel indignities, sufferings, and persecutions to which, in consequence of this great design, he was exposed; the accomplishment or it, by the painful and ignominious death to which he submitted, by his resurrection after three days from the grave, by his ascension into heaven, by his sitting there at the right hand of God, and performing the office of a Mediator and Intercessor for the sinful sons of men, till he shall come a second time in his glory to sit in judgment on all mankind, and decide their final doom of happiness or misery for ever. These are the momentous, the interesting, truths on which the Gospels principally dwell.
4. We find in the ancient records a twofold order, in which the evangelists are arranged. They stand either thus, Matthew, John, Luke, Mark; or thus, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John. The first is made with reference to the character and the rank of the persons, according to which the Apostles precede their assistants and attendants (ακολουθοις, comitibus.) It is observed in the oldest Latin translations and in the Gothic; sometimes also in the works of Latin teachers; but among all the Greek MSS. only in that at Cambridge. But the other, namely, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, is, in all the old translations of Asia and Africa, in all catalogues of the canonical books, and in Greek MSS. in general, the customary and established one as it regarded not personal circumstances, but as it had respect to chronological; which is to us a plain indication what accounts concerning the succession of the evangelists, the Asiatic and Greek churches, and also those of Africa, had before them, when the Christian books were arranged in collections. It is a considerable advantage, says Michaelis, that a history of such importance as that of Jesus Christ has been recorded by the pens of separate and independent writers, who, from the variations which are visible in these accounts, have incontestably proved that they did not unite with a view of imposing a fabulous narrative on mankind. That St. Matthew had never seen the Gospel of St. Luke, nor St. Luke the Gospel of St. Matthew, is evident from a comparison of their writings. The Gospel of St. Mark, which was written later, must likewise have been unknown to St. Luke; and that St. Mark had ever read the Gospel of St. Luke, is at least improbable, because their Gospels so frequently differ. It is a generally received opinion, that St. Mark made use of St. Matthew's Gospel in the composition of his own; but this is an unfounded hypothesis. The Gospel of St. John, being written after the other three, supplies what they had omitted. Thus have we four distinct and independent writers of one and the same history; and, though trifling variations may seem to exist in their narratives, yet these admit of easy solutions; and in all matters of consequence, whether doctrinal or historical, there is such a manifest agreement between them as is to be found in no other writings whatever. Though we have only four original writers of the life of Jesus, the evidence of the history does not rest on the testimony of four men. Christianity had been propagated in a great part of the world before any of them had written, on the testimony of thousands and tens of thousands, who had been witnesses of the great facts which they have recorded; so that the writing of these particular books is not to be considered as the cause, but rather the effect, of the belief of Christianity; nor could those books have been written and received as they were, namely, as authentic histories, of the subject of which all persons of that age were judges, if the facts they have recorded had not been well known to be true.
5. The term Gospel is often used in Scripture to signify the whole Christian doctrine: hence, “preaching the Gospel” is declaring all the truths, precepts, promises, and threatenings of Christianity. This is termed “the Gospel of the grace of God,” because it flows from God's free love and goodness, Act_20:24; and when truly and faithfully preached, is accompanied with the influences of the divine Spirit. It is called “the Gospel of the kingdom,” because it treats of the kingdom of grace, and shows the way to the kingdom of glory. It is styled, “the Gospel of Christ,” because he is the Author and great subject of it, Rom_1:16; and “the Gospel of peace and salvation,” because it publishes peace with God to the penitent and believing, gives, to such, peace of conscience and tranquillity of mind, and is the means of their salvation, present and eternal. As it displays the glory of God and of Christ, and ensures to his true followers eternal glory, it is entitled, “the glorious Gospel,” and, “the everlasting Gospel,” because it commenced from the fall of man, is permanent throughout all time, and produces effects which are everlasting.
Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Richard Watson
PRINTER 1849.

In simple terms ‘gospel’ means ‘good news’. When God’s Old Testament people Israel were in captivity in Babylon and God announced to them that he was going to release them and bring them back to their homeland, that was good news (Isa_40:9; Isa_52:7; Isa_61:1-2). When Jesus came to release people from the bondage of Satan and give them new life, that too was good news (Luk_4:16-19).
Based on facts
The gospel that Jesus Christ proclaimed was that the promises God gave to Old Testament Israel were now fulfilled in him. The promised kingdom of God had come, and salvation was available to all who would repent of their sins and trust in him for forgiveness (Mar_1:14-15; see KINGDOM OF GOD).
Early Christian preachers, such as Peter, John, Stephen and Paul, preached the same message. But whereas Jesus’ preaching of the gospel was during the period leading up to his death and resurrection, the early Christians’ preaching followed his death and resurrection. They therefore laid great emphasis on Jesus’ life, death and resurrection as historical facts that no one could deny. Those facts were the basis of the gospel they preached (Act_2:22-42; Act_3:12-26; Act_7:1-53; Act_13:17-41; 1Co_15:1-7).
There is only one gospel (Gal_1:6-9). It is called the gospel of God, or the gospel of the grace of God, to emphasize that it originates in God and his grace (Act_20:24; Rom_15:16; 1Th_2:2; 1Th_2:8; 1Ti_1:11). It is called the gospel of Christ, or the gospel of the glory of Christ, to emphasize that it comes only through Jesus Christ (Rom_15:19; 2Co_2:12; 2Co_4:4; 2Co_9:13). It is called the gospel of the kingdom, the gospel of salvation and the gospel of peace, to emphasize that those who believe it enter God’s kingdom and receive eternal salvation and peace (Mat_9:35; Eph_1:13; Eph_6:15).
A message of life
Because the gospel is inseparably linked with the great truths of God’s saving work through Christ, ‘gospel’ has a meaning far wider than simply ‘news’. It refers to the whole message of salvation, and even to salvation itself (Mar_8:35; Mar_10:29; Rom_1:1-4; Rom_1:16-17; Eph_3:7; 1Pe_1:25; see JUSTIFICATION; SALVATION). Through it the power of God works, bringing life to those who accept it, and destruction to those who reject it (Rom_1:16; 2Co_4:3; Heb_4:2). Sometimes the single word ‘gospel’ is used for the body of Christian truth, or even for the whole new way of life that comes through Jesus Christ (Rom_16:25; Php_1:7; Php_1:27).
God entrusts the gospel to Christians so that they might preserve it and pass it on to others (Gal_2:7; 1Th_2:4; 1Ti_1:11). Therefore, while it is God’s gospel, it becomes in a sense their gospel (Rom_2:16; 1Th_1:5; 2Ti_2:8). Christians have a responsibility to spread this gospel worldwide, even though it may mean sacrificing personal desires and suffering personal hardships. They will carry out the task gladly when they appreciate what God’s love has done for them through Christ (Mat_24:14; Mar_16:15; 1Co_9:16; 1Co_9:23; 2Co_5:14; Eph_6:19-20; 1Th_2:2; see EVANGELIST; MISSION).
Bridgeway Bible Dictionary by Don Fleming
PRINTER 1990.

The Greek word, which literally signifies glad tidings, is translated in the English Version by the word Gospel, viz., God's spell, or the Word of God. The central point of Christian preaching was the joyful intelligence that the Savior had come into the world (Mat_4:23; Rom_10:15); and the first Christian preachers, who characterized their account of the person and mission of Christ by the term Gospel. This name was also prefixed to the written accounts of Christ. We possess four such accounts; the first by Matthew, announcing the Redeemer as the promised King of the Kingdom of God; the second by Mark, declaring him 'a Prophet mighty in deed and word' (Luk_24:19); the third by Luke, of whom it might be said that he represented Christ in the special character of the Savior of sinners (Luk_7:36, sq.; 15:18-19, sq.); the fourth by John, who represents Christ as the Son of God, in whom deity and humanity became one. The ancient church gave to Matthew the symbol of the lion, to Mark that of man, to Luke that of the ox, and to John that of the eagle; these were the four faces of the cherubim. The cloud in which the Lord revealed Himself was borne by the cherubim, and the four Evangelists were also the bearers of that glory of God which appeared in the form of man.
Concerning the order which they occupy in the Scriptures, the oldest Latin and Gothic Versions place Matthew and John first, and after them Mark and Luke, while the other MSS. and the old versions follow the order given to them in our Bibles. As dogmatical reasons render a different order more natural, there is much in favor of the opinion that their usual position arose from regard to the chronological dates of the respective composition of the four gospels: this is the opinion of Origen, Irenaeus, and Eusebius. All ancient testimonies agree that Matthew was the earliest, and John the latest Evangelist. The relation of the Gospel of John to the other three Gospels, and the relation of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke to each other, is very remarkable. With the exception of the history of the Baptist, and that of Christ's passion and resurrection, we find in John not only narratives of quite different events, but also different statements even in the above sections. On the other hand, the first three Evangelists not only tolerably harmonize in the substance and order of the events they relate, but correspond even sentence by sentence in their separate narratives (comp. ex. gr.Mar_1:21-28 with Luk_4:31-37; Mat_8:31-34; Mar_6:34; Mar_5:17; Luk_8:32-37, etc.). The thought that first suggests itself on considering this surprising harmony is that they all had mutually drawn their information from one another. Some critics are of opinion that Matthew was the oldest source, and that Mark drew his information both from Matthew and Luke; again, according to others, Luke was the oldest, and Matthew made use of Luke and Mark; while most critics in Germany have adopted the view that Matthew was the oldest, and was made use of by Luke, and that Mark derived his information both from Matthew and Luke. Some of the most modern critics are, on the other hand, of opinion that Mark was the original evangelist, and that Matthew and Luke derived their information from him. The difference of these opinions leads to the suspicion that none of them are right, more especially when we consider that, notwithstanding the partial harmony of the three evangelists in the choice of their sentences, there is still a surprising difference in them as regards the words of those sentences; a fact which compelled the critics who suppose that the evangelists made use of each other's writings, to account everywhere for such deviations, and frequently to have recourse to the most trivial and pedantic arguments. To us these differences in word and phrase would appear inconceivable were we disposed to assume that the evangelists had copied one another.
As the three Evangelists mutually supply and explain each other, they were early joined to each other, by Tatian, about A.D. 170, and by Ammonius, about A.D. 230,  and the discrepancies among them early led to attempts to reconcile them. And with this view various elaborate treatises have been composed, both in ancient and modern times. But when we consider that one and the same writer, namely, Luke, relates the conversion of Paul (Act_9:22; Act_9:26), with different incidental circumstances, after three various documents, though it would have been very easy for him to have annulled the discrepancies, we cannot help being convinced that the Evangelists attached but little weight to minute preciseness in the incidents, since, indeed, the historical truth of a narration consists less in them, in the relation of minute details, than in the correct conception of the character and spirit of the event.
The Popular Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature
by John Kitto.

Gospel
This word, "conformably to its etymological meaning of Good-tidings, is used to signify,
(1.) The welcome intelligence of salvation to man, as preached by our Lord and his followers.
(2.) It was afterwards transitively applied to each of the four histories of our Lord's life, published by those who are" therefore called "Evangelists," writers of the history of the Gospel (εὐαγγἐλιον).
(3.) "The term is often used to express collectively, the Gospel-doctrines; and 'preaching the Gospel' is accordingly often used to include not only the 'proclaiming' of the good tidings, but the 'teaching' men how to avail themselves of the offer of salvation;" the declaring of all the truths, precepts, promises, and threatenings of Christianity. It is termed "the Gospel of the grace of God," because it flows from God's free love and goodness (Act_20:24); and, when truly and faithfully preached, is accompanied with the influences of the divine Spirit. It is called "the Gospel of the kingdom," because it treats of the kingdom of grace, and shows the way to the kingdom of glory. It is styled "the Gospel of Christ" because he is the author and great subject of it (Rom_1:16); and "the Gospel of peace and salvation," because it publishes peace with God to the penitent and believing, gives, to such, peace of conscience and tranquillity of mind, and is the means of their salvation, present and eternal. As it displays the glory of God and of Christ, and ensures to his true followers eternal glory, it is entitled "the glorious Gospel" and "the everlasting Gospel," because it commenced from the fall of man, is permanent throughout all time, and produces effects which are everlasting. This use of the word "gospel" has led some to suppose that Gospel-truth is to be found exclusively or chiefly in the "Gospels," to the neglect of the other sacred writings; and others, to conclude that the discourses of our Lord and the apostolic epistles must exactly coincide, and that in case of any apparent difference, the former must be the standard and the latter must be taken to bear no other sense than what is implied by the other. Whereas, it is very conceivable, that though both might be, in a certain sense, "good tidings," yet one may contain a much more full development of the Christian scheme than the other (Eden; Watson). It has been disputed whether the Gospel consists merely of promises, or whether it can in any sense be called a law. The answer plainly depends upon adjusting, the meaning of the words gospel and law. If the gospel be taken for the declaration God has made to men by Christ, concerning the manner in which he will treat them, and the conduct he expects from them, it in plain that this includes commands, and even threatenings, as well as promisesa; but to define the Gospel so as only to express the favorable part of that declaration, is indeed taking the question for granted, and confining the word to a sense much less extensive than it often has in Scripture (comp. Rom_2:16; 2Th_1:8; 1Ti_1:9-11); and it is certain that, if the Gospel be put for all the parts of the dispensation taken, in connection one with another, it may well be called, on the whole, a good message. In like manner the question, whether the Gospel be a law or not, is to be determined by the definition of the law and of the Gospel, as above. If law signifies, as it generally does, the discovery of the will of a superior, teaching what he requires of those under his government, with the intimation of his intention of dispensing rewards and punishments, as this rule of their conduct is observed or neglected; in this latitude of expression it is plain, from the proposition, that the Gospel, taken for the declaration made to men by Christ, is a law, as in Scripture it is sometimes called (Jam_1:25; Rom_4:15; Rom_8:2). But if law be taken, in the greatest rigor of the expression, for such a discovery of the will of God and our duty, as to contain in it no intimation of our obtaining the divine favor otherwise' than by' a perfect and universal conformity to it, in that sense the Gospel is not a law. See Witsilus, On the Covenants, volume 3, chapter 1; Doddridge, Lectures, lect. 172; Watts, Orthodoxy and Charity, Essay 2.

CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.

FACEBOOK

Participe de nossa rede facebook.com/osreformadoresdasaude

Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores