Written Gospel usage

[jpurssey]

I've been thinking about how the Gospels may have been used in the early church and realise that i have heard or read little about it.
it is comparatively easy to imagine the letters being read out at some church meeting and also being studied by some church "elders" (I use the word in general terms as I do not want to provoke an argument, but simply to distinguish those with an ability and interest to study them). Even the letters are sometimes long and are quite complex.

I grew up with a lot of verses being used in isolation, and with a loss of context. A lot oi sermons were constructed that way. I doubt very much that the early church used the gospels and letters that way.

I understand that the written gospels were collations of spoken stories that were assembled to give a message to their particular audiences. These would have been the stories that the early christians told to one another and to their non-christian audience. Given the level of literacy, many would needed to have the gospels read to them.

What would have been the circumstances in which the Gospels were read to an audience?

How was a Gospel delivered in its entirety to an audience?

Does anyone know of any scholarship on this matter?

[Keith Sherwood]

Literacy might have been poor in the early church in a sense - but as the early church's foundation members were Jews and as a Jewish boy had to know the books of Moses and be able to recite the whole of the book of leviticus by heart

It is hardly possible that the early church was ignorant but rather the oposite and relied heavily on the written word and literacy - even if I myself could not read I would still understood the nuances of argument, debate and appreciate the written word - otherwise letters of the apostles had no point

Keith

[RAP]

One who reads the writings of the Apostles may notice their apparent tendency to cite verses in isolation. In his epistles, Paul tends to string pearls from diverse parts of scripture and even cites two secular writers to make application for his readers.

IHA

Yes, very true. Also, the OT passages are often pulled from apparent obscurity. The allegory of Hagar, Ishmael and Isaac would be lost on us today if it were not for the Apostle explicitly calling it to our attention.

They must have been readers (i.e. not necessarily as illiterate as we might think) as Paul commends the Bereans for their diligence in "searching the scriptures daily" to confirm what the Apostles were saying was consistent with the written word. The Colossians were told to exchange letters with the Laodiceans (lost letter or is it Galatians??). It would seem reasonable that the letters were read in their entirety in one sitting in much the same way as we read letters from the mission field today.

[jpurssey]

Thank you Michael, Keith and RAP.
This performance of John's Gospel shows it could be read in just over 2 hours. I can imagine that sort of time being available to people in the 1st century.

The Gospels do seem to be a writing down and reworking of spoken stories. They were assembled and structured in particular ways to suit particular audiences. I would like to know the extent to which they were written for Christians to use to understand their own calling, or for Christians to bring the good news to others.

Although the first Christians were Jews, the differences in the Gospels reflects differences in concerns by the time the gospels were written down. E.g. The story about which is the greatest commandment is treated differently by each of the gospel writers. Some Jewish practices are explained for people who would not have been familiar with them.
Luke-Acts is dealing with a situation and an explanation of why Christianity has become more gentile than Jewish. John's audience is in a milieu where gnostic thought is influential and I suppose deals with the question of how to bring the good news to people who have gnostic beliefs.
Matthew, with its genealogy, shows the gospel to be an continuation and completion of the Jewish faith.
Mark is said to have been written for people in Rome.

As to literacy, there are different views on how literate the people were then. Another aspect of this is that very few copies would have been available.

[jpurssey]

Michael.

I agree with you and RAP about the letters.
But I would prefer to focus this thread on the Gospels.

[RAP]

My feeling is that the entire NT, gospels or epistles, were primarily for the assembly. Both the gospel of Luke and the Acts were first written for the benefit of one man, Theophilus, a lover of God. That's how focused things were. Theophilus is representative of every lover of God and the Spirit of God uses him to open his private letters to us all. These writings provide instruction, encouragement and correction for the people of God who were to take the content to the lost world.

One can reasonably speculate that the receipt of any novel piece of written information would be read in its entirety at the earliest possible gathering. It was news after all. It was as MLW has quoted "to be read to all the holy brethren...". A two-hour reading of a gospel does not seem all that out of place in the context of Paul preaching to midnight, reviving Eutychus, (a young man who was truly "fortunate" to be under the ministry of the Apostle) and then continuing on to daybreak. That was then, this is now. One or two things may be wrong today when folks start to squirm after 25 minutes and get moderately irate after 40 minutes -- either the preaching is insipid or the congregation has ADD. Maybe a little of both. Lukewarm comes to mind consistent with the age. Brethren we need to study -- study the scriptures -- with an effort that is equal to or better than that which we bring to bear on secular education or work.

[jpurssey]

It would be a remarkable occasion today to hear a whole gospel at one sitting. (That's why I remarked on Brad Sherrill's performance of the Gospel of John ) I cannot remember even a whole letter being read, including the shorter ones of John and Jude; though I may have forgotten an occasion.
as to the current concentration span, our culture is making it short in most aspects of life including films, stories, political speeches etc.

The introduction to Luke I understand to be a classical Hellenic preface style, so Theophilus may not be a real person.

I would like to think that these messages of Good News were primarily for Christians to take to the world, though I am sure they were also used within the churches. But I need more information. It is easy to surmise either way, but I am still open to persuasion.

[RAP]

I recently purchase the entire Bible (NASB) on MP3 and transferred it to my iPod. Absolutely great when we walk the dogs.

[Keith Sherwood]

Just a comment on Theophilisa

His title changes from most excelent - this iis a title which means all powerful in the sense of being a Roman governer of a province to not being one proves this is an actual man

As the period of service in such a position was for one year 'Consul' and could be extended to three years - but no more - 'Pro Consulhe change in title fits exactly what we know of high Roman officials

We have to reckon on Theophilos being a high Roman official and an actual person - there is at least one man included in Paul's writings whose fame was known to all believers but who is never named, maybe because of his position within the Roman civil service

My own feelings because of the internal evidence is that Mark, Luke and Acts were written to support Pauls defence and that Theophilis if the friend of the accused whom will speak for him

There it seems is only one named person in scripture who fits the bill and that is Sergius Paulus - I can give my reasons for this in greater detail if requested - such a man of such status would be of great help in the defense of Paul. He continued in Roman service and his unusual Roman name 'Paul' meaning little means that he is almost certainly the same Sergius Paulus who later became the keeper of the banks of the river Tiberius a very important post as the river was the life line of Rome

Keith

Keith

[jpurssey]

An interesting thought, Keith.

Mark and Luke-Acts certainly don't strike me that way. I would have thought that a lot of their content would have been of no interest to those involved in deciding Paul's case.

[Keith Sherwood]

there were two main charges against Paul
1) that he was starting a new religion
2) the he was a rabble riser or caused trouble in the empire

If he failed to win the case - every christain became legaly an enemmy of Rome

Luke (and Mark?) in the main prove that Christ is the Son of God the jewish messiah and that believers in him followed the faith of their fathers and that their faith therefore was legal in the empire

Acts proves A) that Paul was a real apostle in fellowship with all the apostles and all teaching the same thing
B) that the church everywherre was under the direction and obeyed the apostles doctrine
C) that the apostles teahght good citizenship to all believers and obedience to authority
D_that there were legal precedents aquiting them or declaring their innocents by King Agrippa, Magistrates Phillipi, Geverners Gallio and theown Clerk Ephesus and cooperarion with authority Sergius Paulus - reaD Pliny the elders comments on Cyprus
Throughout Acts it is only events that are relevent to these dtails that are told - so nothing is reported about his trip through Galatia and the miracles recorded mirror exactly Peters ministry who the world acknowledged as the most influencial believer and adostle

Keith

[Keith Sherwood]

I thought I would tidy up the last post

Theophilus is a real person

He is a very high ranking Roman as in Luke which would be finished, I suspect,Paul was shipped to Rome for trial he has the title 'most excellent' was the title of governors Acts 24 v 3 and 26 v 25

It means 'all powerful' indicating they have all the might of Rome behind them and must be obeyed

All these appointments are for one year only but can be extended to a max. of three years after which they are replaced.

Acts – which was completed in Rome some time later and by that time the official duties and office had finished and the title was no longer his and this rings true to what we know about these offices

In the epistles we have a very well known individual whose name is never mentioned 2 Cor 8 v 22
it could be the man who has the code name Theophilus is the same man, for no one would be better equipped to ensure the considerable bounty in gold sent to Jerusalem had save passage than a well known and respected high standing Roman.

The content of Acts is evidently written for Paul's defence which was a defence of the gospel and every believer – Paul's 1st trial was the most important event concerning the Gospel after the ascension of the Lord – it has resulted in I assume in Luke Acts and all the prison letters and is even therefore an event which benefits us to this day – let alone believers then

The evidence that is written as a defence document is overwhelming
A) the detailed references to identifiable events -named people – high officials – etc
B) the evidence of Paul's apostles ship through the miracles that reduplicate Peters
C)the evidence of his harmony and complete compliance and agreement in all points of doctrine and practice with the apostles
D)the manner of the apostles control over all believers through servants to them ( as Barnabas to Antioch etc)
E) The legal precedents of aquittal and declared innocence of accusations of being a trouble maker
1)In Asia at Ephesus by the town Clerk
2)In Europe and a Roman Colony in Phillipi by Magistrates
3)In Corinth by Gallio who carefully insisted that it was not a matter for Rome
4)In Caeseara by being declared innocent by King Agrippa
4) backed up by help to |Rome in dealing with the troublesome ans unwholesome Jewish Magicians in Cyprus historicaly commented on by Pliny the elder and his good relations with Sergius Paulus and his relations with Publius the chief man of Malta and also by the freedom allowed to him by Felix acts 24 V 3 and Julius proving his trustworthiness

The whole of Acts is written with Paul's defence in mind and when nothing malarial to the case happens no comments are made at all which confuses many students of the bible who have not considered its intended purpose Acts 16 v 6 – their confusion is so great about the lack of comment in the narrative is silent that they try to relocate Galatia

|Regarding Theophilus it seems strange that such a person is not identified or mentioned – I think he is. I believe one of the greatest heroes of the apostolic age is Sergius Paulus whose name Saul of Tarsus adopted possibly because through his help is solving a huge political control problem in Cyprus is silencing Elymus the leader of the sorcerers who literally controlled Cyprus and made it difficult to govern – read Pliny the Elder on the matter – Saul was put forward for Roman Citizenship and had his name changed as was the Custom when one was made a citizen and would then bear the name of his sponsor Paulus and belong to the tribe of Sergio

If this is true Sergius Paulus gave Paul great protection within the empire

On top of that Sergius Paulus had great estates near Antioch in Pisidian where Paul and Barnabas travelled to next and began the gospel wok that spread throughout the region

Before Nero he would need an accepted man to be his friend to speak for him Sergius Paulus who was or was to become the keeper of the banks of the river Tiber – literally in control of the highway for goods wealth and the navy and army of Rome would be the ideal man

It is a guess but I think Sergius Paulus is Theophiolus or at least the best candidate

Keith

[jpurssey]

A search on "Gospel Genre" has provided a couple of useful links:

The Gospel Genre
and
What Is a Gospel? by James Still. Although this appears on the Internet Infidels website it still seems to have useful information.

Another useful site is Archive Early Christian Writings

I shall look in the Early Church Chat forum and see if it there.

[Keith Sherwood]

What are you looking for?

Keith

[jpurssey]

Just to see if the Archive Early Christian Writings site is listed in the Early Church Resources thread. It wasn't, so I have added it.