Before the Marian prayer, the Pope mentioned that at the time of Jesus the “term Gospel” (Euangellion) was used to proclaim Roman emperors. Whatever the content, these proclamations were seen as “good news,” news of salvation because the emperor was seen as the lord of the world and his edict were seen as heralding something good.”
“Applying this word to Jesus’ preaching,” the Pope said, “was heavily charged with criticism. It was like saying that God, not the emperor, was Lord of the world and that the true Gospel was that of Jesus Christ. The ‘Good News’ that Jesus proclaimed is best encapsulated by these words: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Mt, 4:17; Mk, 1:15).
From http://marymagdalen.blogspot.com/2008/01/on-euangellion.html

 

 

This is something I have never heard before and sounds unbelievably provocative! Did Paul use the same word (Euangellion) to describe the teachings of Jesus that was already in use to proclaim Roman emperors? Proto-Evangelion is the word used for the works attributed to James describing the life of Mary. Applying the word used to proclaim an emperor to the life of Mary seems just as provocative.

 

I seem to recall that evangelion was a reward given to the carrier of the labarum when the news of battle was positive. Sorry I can't find that reference right now.

 

 

 

Views: 520

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Interesting thought. A link that may interest you.

I find it interesting that the Roman Emperors, and Catholic Church, would use a Koine Greek word. I know Koine Grek was the Lingua Franca of the eastern side of the Empire but Latin was still the language of politics, power, and influence.
This is from your link; Evangelion (that we call the gospel) is a Greek word; and signifieth good, merry, glad and joyful tidings, that maketh a man's heart glad, and maketh him sing, dance, and leap for joy: as when David had killed Goliah the giant, came glad tidings unto the Jews, that their fearful and cruel enemy was slain, and they delivered out of all danger: for gladness whereof, they sung, danced, and were joyful.- Tynsdale

This is not correct. No form of evangelion was used to describe the celebration of David killing Goliath. But I agree that using Koine Greek for Roman Emperors sounds strange. Also strange that evangellion is a word built using symbols of battle. Would this word have been meaningful to a semitic audience?

Michael Findlay said:
Interesting thought. A link that may interest you.

I find it interesting that the Roman Emperors, and Catholic Church, would use a Koine Greek word. I know Koine Grek was the Lingua Franca of the eastern side of the Empire but Latin was still the language of politics, power, and influence.
I haven't gone into the topic to know what words were actually used for David's encounter with Goliath. The link I posted was a quick Google search. I'll have a better look later today, right now I have a very sick pup that needs to see a vet as soon as they open. It seems like it could be an interesting topic so thank you for posting it, I look forward to reading what others think.
The Protoevangelion in Genesis is found in chapter 3, verse 15. That it is "proto" means that it was regarded as having prior authority to all earthly rulers.
Alice,
When Paul used euvangellion as teachings of Jesus was he trying to be provocative? It was suggested Paul used this word to imply Jesus was higher than emperor.

Alice C. Linsley said:
The Protoevangelion in Genesis is found in chapter 3, verse 15. That it is "proto" means that it was regarded as having prior authority to all earthly rulers.
There is much debate about whether Genesis 3:15 represents the first good news of the coming Messiah. Some Jewish translations of the Hebrew are less controversial (although they may be as self-serving as Christian translations might), using plural pronouns:

"I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your offspring and hers;
They shall strike at your head,
And you shall strike at their heel.”

This reading eschews messianic foreshadowing, instead foretelling the ongoing hostile relationship between all of Eve's offspring and those of the Serpent.

Among Earth's differing faiths, there are equally differing stories of their origins. While various cultures may believe their origin story to be the true story of the world, as an anthropologist I need to see these origin myths as being essentially equal in their veracity, all interpreted within the context of their respective cultures.

Reading it as an anthropologist, Genesis 3:15 seems to represent an explanation in part for why the world is as it is (i.e., people and snakes are going to fear one another, and attack one another), an explanation that might be found in an origin myth. It is not alone in this part of chapter 3, either. We also learn why snakes slither on the ground, why childbirth is so very painful, why men should rule over women, why life is hard, and even why humans are mortal.

I'm well aware that I'm not the first to refer to Genesis as an origin myth. I just wanted add an anthropological perspective to the discussion, since this is a site dedicated to Anthropology.



Alice C. Linsley said:
The Protoevangelion in Genesis is found in chapter 3, verse 15. That it is "proto" means that it was regarded as having prior authority to all earthly rulers.
Paul Wren said:
Reading it as an anthropologist, Genesis 3:15 seems to represent an explanation in part for why the world is as it is (i.e., people and snakes are going to fear one another, and attack one another),
Just as a slight aside to this comment Paul G. Hiebert in his book "Anthropological Reflections on Missiological Issues" ISBN 0-8010-4394-8 indicates that this idea can cause potential issues for Bible Translation into minority languages. Not all cultures fear snakes, some even have snakes as allies, so to a translator this can cause some problems especially if they are working in a society which has strong animistic tendencies.
None of the examples that have been posted use Euvangellion. Paul was the first to use this word. I would like to know what it meant to him.
Susan Burns said:
None of the examples that have been posted use Euvangellion. Paul was the first to use this word. I would like to know what it meant to him.
Susan to know this you would have to read it in context, taking one verse or even the couple of verses immediately surrounding it does not give proper context.

The word itself is ευαγγελιον and has 2 parts in Koine Greek ευ=eu (meaning good) and αγγελιον=angelion (meaning message) so the word would normally mean good message or good news. Depending on the context of the statement, Paul was known to be a very good communicator and could make a point in many ways to suit his intended audience, I personally would think he was not deliberately trying to be provocative in a sense that he was saying Jesus is better than the emperor, Paul after all was a Roman citizen. I would think it is more like he was saying Jesus is the good news to your salvation.
The Church Fathers teach that "the Woman" is not Eve since Eve is not named until verse 20 (5 verses later). It is a small detail but anthropologists have to pay attention to details.

Paul Wren said:
There is much debate about whether Genesis 3:15 represents the first good news of the coming Messiah. Some Jewish translations of the Hebrew are less controversial (although they may be as self-serving as Christian translations might), using plural pronouns:

"I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your offspring and hers;
They shall strike at your head,
And you shall strike at their heel.”

This reading eschews messianic foreshadowing, instead foretelling the ongoing hostile relationship between all of Eve's offspring and those of the Serpent.

Among Earth's differing faiths, there are equally differing stories of their origins. While various cultures may believe their origin story to be the true story of the world, as an anthropologist I need to see these origin myths as being essentially equal in their veracity, all interpreted within the context of their respective cultures.

Reading it as an anthropologist, Genesis 3:15 seems to represent an explanation in part for why the world is as it is (i.e., people and snakes are going to fear one another, and attack one another), an explanation that might be found in an origin myth. It is not alone in this part of chapter 3, either. We also learn why snakes slither on the ground, why childbirth is so very painful, why men should rule over women, why life is hard, and even why humans are mortal.

I'm well aware that I'm not the first to refer to Genesis as an origin myth. I just wanted add an anthropological perspective to the discussion, since this is a site dedicated to Anthropology.



Alice C. Linsley said:
The Protoevangelion in Genesis is found in chapter 3, verse 15. That it is "proto" means that it was regarded as having prior authority to all earthly rulers.
Alice C. Linsley said:
The Church Fathers teach that "the Woman" is not Eve since Eve is not named until verse 20 (5 verses later). It is a small detail but anthropologists have to pay attention to details.
May I ask what "woman" the church fathers think the passage is talking about?
Are you saying that Church Fathers believe that the woman mentioned as late as verse 16 is a different person than the one referred to in verse 20 as Adam's wife and "Eve"?

To which Church Fathers are you referring? This is an important and not-so-small detail.

Paul

Alice C. Linsley said:
The Church Fathers teach that "the Woman" is not Eve since Eve is not named until verse 20 (5 verses later). It is a small detail but anthropologists have to pay attention to details.

Paul Wren said:
There is much debate about whether Genesis 3:15 represents the first good news of the coming Messiah. Some Jewish translations of the Hebrew are less controversial (although they may be as self-serving as Christian translations might), using plural pronouns:

"I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your offspring and hers;
They shall strike at your head,
And you shall strike at their heel.”

This reading eschews messianic foreshadowing, instead foretelling the ongoing hostile relationship between all of Eve's offspring and those of the Serpent.

Among Earth's differing faiths, there are equally differing stories of their origins. While various cultures may believe their origin story to be the true story of the world, as an anthropologist I need to see these origin myths as being essentially equal in their veracity, all interpreted within the context of their respective cultures.

Reading it as an anthropologist, Genesis 3:15 seems to represent an explanation in part for why the world is as it is (i.e., people and snakes are going to fear one another, and attack one another), an explanation that might be found in an origin myth. It is not alone in this part of chapter 3, either. We also learn why snakes slither on the ground, why childbirth is so very painful, why men should rule over women, why life is hard, and even why humans are mortal.

I'm well aware that I'm not the first to refer to Genesis as an origin myth. I just wanted add an anthropological perspective to the discussion, since this is a site dedicated to Anthropology.



Alice C. Linsley said:
The Protoevangelion in Genesis is found in chapter 3, verse 15. That it is "proto" means that it was regarded as having prior authority to all earthly rulers.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Translate

OAC Press

@OpenAnthCoop

Events

© 2019   Created by Keith Hart.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service