gospel reading and reflection

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sara Lee

Senior Member
Chinese
HI, everyone~
I came across a term "gospel reading and reflection" on Google. It is often used as the title of a section on many websties.

Here are some source links:

Read today’s Gospel Reading and Reflection — Columban Missionaries of the Philippines
https://d2y1pz2y630308.cloudfront.net/5360/documents/2014/11/CRS-Family-Catechesis-Sessions.pdf
GOSPEL READING AND REFLECTION
Children on Today's Gospel and Readings Luke 10:1-12 St Swithun


I found that "gospel reading and reflection" is widely used on Google, but I'm not sure what it actually refers to, whether it makes sense, and whether it's a correct or natural expression.

"gospel reading and reflection" - Google Search

In addition, I found "Gospel Reading and Reflection for Kids" appear frequently on Google when I searched "gospel reading and reflection" on Google. Is "gospel reading and reflection" closely related to some kind of readings for kids or is it specially used for kids? I'm really not sure about this.



Q1. What's the meaning of "gospel reading and reflection"? What does it usually refer to? Does it make sense?
Is it a common term among you English natives? Should I change it into "gospel readings and reflections" if I use it?

Q2. Is "gospel reading and reflection" specially used to associate with/refer to those Christian readings about the Bible verses for kids or Christian?

Q3. Is it fine or okay to use "gospel reading and reflection"/ "gospel readings and reflections" to refer to daily Bible reading and reflection, which includes some Christian sermons, God's words, interpretations of the Bible verses, and or topics for Bible study that Christians care most about, etc., provided for Christians to read and help/allow them to make (daily) Christian reflections/spiritual reflections.

:confused::confused:
 
Last edited:
  • bennymix

    Senior Member
    Nothing wrong with Gospel Reading(s) and Reflection. Of course very young kids might not know 'reflection'.

    If more than the Gospels {i.e. Bible, NT} is read, you can expand it. e.g. Christian readings and reflection.

    ADDED: 'Gospel' has a broad sense compatible with, say epistles of Paul, who certainly preached the Gospel.
     
    Last edited:

    owlman5

    Senior Member
    English-US
    What does it usually refer to?
    I assume that it refers to reading portions of the New Testament -- probably something from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John -- and reflecting on the message that was read.

    Does it make sense?
    Yes.

    Is it a common term among you English natives?
    Not among all of us. It may be common among some Christians.

    Should I change it into "gospel readings and reflections" if I use it?
    Perhaps you should if you want to emphasize the idea that you intend to have many of these reading and reflection sessions. But that approach sure doesn't seem to add anything important to the singular version of the phrase.

    Is "gospel reading and reflection" specially used to associate with/refer to those Christian readings about the Bible verses for kids or Christian?
    I don't imagine that non-Christians would be particularly interested in the phrase. I see nothing in it to suggest that it is specifically intended to appeal to kids.

    Is it fine or okay to use "gospel reading and reflection"/ "gospel readings and reflections" to refer to daily Bible reading and reflection, which includes some Christian sermons, God's words, interpretations of the Bible verses, and or topics for Bible study that Christians care most about, etc., provided for Christians to read and help/allow them to make (daily) Christian reflections/spiritual reflections.
    If you don't have any particular focus on the New Testament or the first four books of the New Testament, Bible reading and reflection is probably a more accurate description of what you intend to do.
     

    natkretep

    Moderato con anima (English Only)
    English (Singapore/UK), basic Chinese
    'Gospel reading' means a reading from one of the four Gospels in the Bible - as mentioned by other people. For example, in an Anglican communion service, there will be a reading from the book of Psalms, and then a second reading, and then a Gospel reading.

    A reflection is a comment about the passage, perhaps its significance and how it might be applied to one's life.
     

    Sara Lee

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    If you don't have any particular focus on the New Testament or the first four books of the New Testament, Bible reading and reflection is probably a more accurate description of what you intend to do.
    Got it,
    Thank you so much for each of your detailed and helpful answers, owlman5.
    I have learnt a lot.

    'Gospel reading' means a reading from one of the four Gospels in the Bible - as mentioned by other people. For example, in an Anglican communion service, there will be a reading from the book of Psalms, and then a second reading, and then a Gospel reading.

    A reflection is a comment about the passage, perhaps its significance and how it might be applied to one's life.
    Indeed. "Gospel reading" can be short for "a Gospel reading", i.e. a passage or extract. But it can also mean the activity of reading from a Gospel.
    Thank you so so much for all your explanations and great answers, @natkretep @ Edinburgher
    They help me a lot.
     

    Sara Lee

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    Nothing wrong with Gospel Reading(s) and Reflection. Of course very young kids might not know 'reflection'.

    If more than the Gospels {i.e. Bible, NT} is read, you can expand it. e.g. Christian readings and reflection.
    Got it~
    Thank you so much for your honest suggestion, Benny.
     

    Sara Lee

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    One further question:
    If a certain section not only has particular focus on the New Testament or the first four books of the New Testament, namely Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, but it covers the whole content of the Bible (any Bible verses possible), so as to apply the truth (/God's words) or share some understandings/reflections to help solve problems that come up in faith, or clear up confusion for believers.

    So is it proper or acceptable to use "gospel reading and reflection" in this context even it not only covers the four Gospels?

    :idea:
     

    pops91710

    Senior Member
    English, AE
    So is it proper or acceptable to use "gospel reading and reflection" in this context even it not only covers the four Gospels?
    Yes, indeed it is. I have been a life-long Christian and see nothing wrong with it. It doesn't matter if it goes beyond the "Four Gospels" which chronical the teachings etc of Jesus Christ. Even though the rest of the Bible is about his teachings and the apostolic missions of the other apostles, it is still teaching His gospel. Gospel is a word meaning good news and comes from the Old English god meaning "good" and spel meaning "news, a story."
     

    Sara Lee

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    Yes, indeed it is. I have been a life-long Christian and see nothing wrong with it. It doesn't matter if it goes beyond the "Four Gospels" which chronical the teachings etc of Jesus Christ. Even though the rest of the Bible is about his teachings and the apostolic missions of the other apostles, it is still teaching His gospel. Gospel is a word meaning good news and comes from the Old English god meaning "good" and spel meaning "news, a story."
    Okay, got it.
    Thank you so much for your great help and answer, Pops.
    Thanks a lot for your help.

    I also would use Bible reading and reflections. :)
    Thank you so much for sharing your opinion and suggestion with me, Ripper~
    Thanks a lot for your help.
    :)
     

    bennymix

    Senior Member
    Indeed. "Gospel reading" can be short for "a Gospel reading", i.e. a passage or extract. But it can also mean the activity of reading from a Gospel.
    Yes, indeed it is. I have been a life-long Christian and see nothing wrong with it. It doesn't matter if it goes beyond the "Four Gospels" which chronical the teachings etc of Jesus Christ. Even though the rest of the Bible is about his teachings and the apostolic missions of the other apostles, it is still teaching His gospel. Gospel is a word meaning good news and comes from the Old English god meaning "good" and spel meaning "news, a story."
    :thumbsup: I have added to my post #2 to clarify.

    ADDED: I have reconsidered See my post #18, below.
     
    Last edited:

    GreenWhiteBlue

    Senior Member
    USA - English
    In the context of the original post, I disagree with pops91710.

    I note that all of the links in the original posts come from Catholic websites. In the Catholic church, a mass is celebrated every day of the year except Good Friday. During the mass, there is a time when there are readings from the Bible. On Sundays there are three readings and a psalm, while on weekdays there are two readings and a psalm, but in every case the final reading comes from one of the four gospels -- that is, from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. On any given day, the scriptures read at mass are the same readings that one would hear in any Catholic church around the world. In the Catholic church all of scripture is honored, but the four gospels are treated with particular reverence -- for example, while the people listen to readings from other portions of the Bible while seated, everyone stands for the gospel. In addition, the homily that is preached after the readings is supposed to reflect primarily on the gospel reading.

    Therefore, in the context of the four links in your original post, the "gospel reading" means the reading from the Gospel for that particular day (as opposed to any other reading from scripture) which would be found in the lectionary (which is the book of readings for services.) Note that not only Catholics but also Anglicans and Lutherans also use lectionaries, and that much of the time the readings heard on Sunday in Catholic churches will be the same as the readings heard in Anglican churches. The "reflection" mentioned in the links is a reflection on the gospel reading (that is, the reading from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John only) that would be heard in church on that day.
     

    Sara Lee

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    Thank you so much for your such detailed explanations and patient answers, Green.
    Thank you so much for your huge help.
     

    bennymix

    Senior Member
    In the context of the original post, I disagree with pops91710.

    I note that all of the links in the original posts come from Catholic websites. In the Catholic church, a mass is celebrated every day of the year except Good Friday. During the mass, there is a time when there are readings from the Bible. On Sundays there are three readings and a psalm, while on weekdays there are two readings and a psalm, but in every case the final reading comes from one of the four gospels -- that is, from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. On any given day, the scriptures read at mass are the same readings that one would hear in any Catholic church around the world. In the Catholic church all of scripture is honored, but the four gospels are treated with particular reverence -- for example, while the people listen to readings from other portions of the Bible while seated, everyone stands for the gospel. In addition, the homily that is preached after the readings is supposed to reflect primarily on the gospel reading.

    Therefore, in the context of the four links in your original post, the "gospel reading" means the reading from the Gospel for that particular day (as opposed to any other reading from scripture) which would be found in the lectionary (which is the book of readings for services.) Note that not only Catholics but also Anglicans and Lutherans also use lectionaries, and that much of the time the readings heard on Sunday in Catholic churches will be the same as the readings heard in Anglican churches. The "reflection" mentioned in the links is a reflection on the gospel reading (that is, the reading from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John only) that would be heard in church on that day.
    I think, upon reflection, that you are right. I've searched online and seen the evidence. Readers may read from Paul, but they say "Epistle" or "Paul", not 'Gospel'.
     

    pops91710

    Senior Member
    English, AE
    In the context of the original post, I disagree with pops91710.
    True, but, let's clear this up.
    As it is on the Catholic website it does refer to the four gospels, clearly. But, I was not discussing the original post. I was answering her question in post #8, and not addressing the link in her original post. As you can see, her question in number 8 was "So, is it proper or acceptable to use "gospel reading and reflection" in this context even it not only covers the four Gospels?' The context she was referring to was that of the preceding paragraph in post #8. There are a number of scriptures after the four gospels that use the word gospel in a general reference to religious messages. In 1st Corinthians 9, it is repeated no less than ten times.
    here's one verse that has it twice: 14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. Clearly, not a reference to the four gospels.
     

    GreenWhiteBlue

    Senior Member
    USA - English
    "So, is it proper or acceptable to use "gospel reading and reflection" in this context even it not only covers the four Gospels?'
    I would still say no. It is true that "the gospel" can have more than one meaning, but we are here clearly speaking of printed matter that can be read. If one is going to do a gospel reading, one needs to read a gospel. The epistles of St. Paul, or of St. John, or of St. Peter, are not "gospels". A gospel reading is drawn from the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. If you are including other books of the New Testament, then you have a New Testament reading, but not a gospel reading.

    In 1st Corinthians 9, it is repeated no less than ten times.
    Well, not quite. St. Paul wrote in Greek, and so never wrote the word "gospel" at all. The question then becomes how one best translates εὐαγγέλιον into modern English.
     
    Last edited:

    Steven David

    Senior Member
    English USA
    Q1. What's the meaning of "gospel reading and reflection"? What does it usually refer to? Does it make sense?
    Is it a common term among you English natives? Should I change it into "gospel readings and reflections" if I use it?

    Q2. Is "gospel reading and reflection" specially used to associate with/refer to those Christian readings about the Bible verses for kids or Christian?

    Q3. Is it fine or okay to use "gospel reading and reflection"/ "gospel readings and reflections" to refer to daily Bible reading and reflection, which includes some Christian sermons, God's words, interpretations of the Bible verses, and or topics for Bible study that Christians care most about, etc., provided for Christians to read and help/allow them to make (daily) Christian reflections/spiritual reflections.

    :confused::confused:
    Hi Sara,

    Q1.

    gospel reading - This simply means "reading the gospel".

    reflection - This means thinking deeply about something, which, in this case, is the gospel.

    When we speak of "reflecting on something", mean that take to think about something and give it some consideration. It's a type of meditation in which we focus our attention and thoughts on something.

    Q2.

    No, this phrase is not used only for kids. It can be applied to all people with an interest in the gospel.

    Q3. Yes, it's fine and okay.

    However, for your example, I'd write or say something like this: "... allows them to reflect daily on their spirituality". There's more than one possibility.

    Steve
     

    bennymix

    Senior Member
    True, but, let's clear this up.
    As it is on the Catholic website it does refer to the four gospels, clearly. But, I was not discussing the original post. I was answering her question in post #8, and not addressing the link in her original post. As you can see, her question in number 8 was "So, is it proper or acceptable to use "gospel reading and reflection" in this context even it not only covers the four Gospels?' The context she was referring to was that of the preceding paragraph in post #8. There are a number of scriptures after the four gospels that use the word gospel in a general reference to religious messages. In 1st Corinthians 9, it is repeated no less than ten times.
    here's one verse that has it twice: 14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. Clearly, not a reference to the four gospels.
    Those are good points, pops. I did note that almost all the sites speaking of 'gospel reading' were catholic; a few were Anglican
     
    Last edited:

    Logos_

    Senior Member
    English - America
    Gospel reading means reading one of the four gospels. However, if I spoke of reading about the gospel (the teaching or revelation of Christ) I might be reading any number of other New Testament books (or other devotional or theological works) besides the four gospels.

    The gospel: the teaching or revelation of Christ.
    The gospels: the first four books of the NT.
     

    pops91710

    Senior Member
    English, AE
    It sounds to me by the various answers that this interpretation is dependent upon what religion you belong to. My church (the church I have been raised in) has never restricted the term gospel reading to the reading of only Matthew, Mark, Luke or John.
    As for the technicality of being written in Greek originally, I think most scriptorians, if not all, know this. I hasten to add we are not talking about the Greek translation and It doesn’t change the usage of the word gospel in the context of my reference.
     

    Logos_

    Senior Member
    English - America
    Reading from the Gospel or the Gospel Reading refers to the Scripture reading from one of the four Gospels. - A Dictionary for United Methodists
    Searching Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist, and Lutheran websites I am unable to find a single instance of gospel reading that indicates anything other than a reading from the four gospels.
     

    bennymix

    Senior Member
    [Edited to remove references to deleted posts. DonnyB - moderator]

    I think we are down to some very picky points, such as "Reading the Gospels" (plural) with an 's'; which does usually indicate the 4 books. Considering a related verb: "Preaching the Gospel" may have a wider meaning as in this example:

    4 Ways of Preaching the Gospel Apart from Pulpit Preaching -- 1. Your life – your lifestyle

    Your life and lifestyle speaks louder than your mouth – preaches louder than your mouth
    .

    By the life and lifestyle you live on earth, a person will either want ‘your God’ or want nothing to do with ‘your god’. By the life and lifestyle you live, Jesus Christ will either be glorified or blasphemed.

    Matthew 5:16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven

    Titus 2:4-5: That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the Word of God be not blasphemed. Read entire Titus 2.
    ---


    4 Ways of Preaching the Gospel Apart from Pulpit Preaching » Christian Truth Center

    ===
    Note that Titus is quoted in this discussion of "Preaching the Gospel"

    "Gospel reading" (singular) in the OP is open to interpretation; it often does mean Reading from one of the four gospels, as at the RC sites. However it could mean reading of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

    In any case, we are not limited to discussing a single proposed wording by a nonnative speaker.
     
    Last edited by a moderator:

    Logos_

    Senior Member
    English - America
    The usage of "preaching the gospel" is irrelevant. That is an entirely different expression. The same goes for "spreading the gospel" and "teaching the gospel." The phrase under examination in this thread is "gospel reading." If you locate any example where "gospel reading" clearly indicates something other than reading one the four gospels, by all means provide it. I continue to search and have found none thus far.
     

    bennymix

    Senior Member
    The usage of "preaching the gospel" is irrelevant. That is an entirely different expression. The same goes for "spreading the gospel" and "teaching the gospel." The phrase under examination in this thread is "gospel reading." If you locate any example where "gospel reading" clearly indicates something other than reading one the four gospels, by all means provide it. I continue to search and have found none thus far.
    I think it's relevant because "preaching the gospel" is arguably the same as "gospel preaching" and it's pretty clear the latter phrase bears some resemblance to the phrase "gospel reading" in the OP!
    "Gospel Preaching" pastor Steve Gaines {link disabled}

    Jan 31, 2017 - Uploaded by Bellevue Baptist Church
    Bellevue Baptist Church. ... Pastor Steve Gaines | 01-29-17 AM | Acts 2:14-41. Bellevue Baptist Church ...

    ====

    Are we now going to get picky about whether Acts is "gospel" or "one of the gospels".
     

    Logos_

    Senior Member
    English - America
    I think it's relevant because "preaching the gospel" is arguably the same as "gospel preaching" and it's pretty clear the latter phrase bears some resemblance to the phrase "gospel reading" in the OP!
    This is so simple: Obviously "gospel" in "preaching the gospel" and "gospel preaching" mean the same thing. It means preaching Christ's teaching or the revelation of Christ. "Gospel reading" means reading one of the four gospels that contain those teachings. I have been unable to locate a single example where gospel reading means anything else. If you can, I invite you to provide it.

    "gospel" 1st sense: Christ's teaching and his revelation as the Messiah
    "gospel" 2nd sense: The first four books of the NT that contain those teachings and revelation

    Gospel preaching uses the first sense.
    Gospel reading uses the second sense.

    That is the standard usage. Acts is not one of the gospels (second sense), but it does chronicle the spread of the gospel (first sense).
     
    Last edited:

    Logos_

    Senior Member
    English - America
    If an educated group of native speaking Christians heard that "gospel reading" was going to be part of a church service, they would understand that as a reading from the four gospels. If it turned out to be a reading from any of the other books they would be confused.
     

    Roxxxannne

    Senior Member
    English (northeastern US)
    If an educated group of native speaking Christians heard that "gospel reading" was going to be part of a church service, they would understand that as a reading from the four gospels. If it turned out to be a reading from any of the other books they would be confused.
    Is that true of all branches of Protestant Christianity in the US today? I'm not a Christian, so I'm just wondering about how mainstream (Methodist and UCC, for example) congregations use the word compared to breakaway denominations. Note: I'm using the word 'breakaway' in a neutral, scholarly sense.
     

    bennymix

    Senior Member
    Logos_ said:

    If an educated group of native speaking Christians heard that "gospel reading" was going to be part of a church service, they would understand that as a reading from the four gospels. If it turned out to be a reading from any of the other books they would be confused.


    Is that true of all branches of Protestant Christianity in the US today? I'm not a Christian, so I'm just wondering about how mainstream (Methodist and UCC, for example) congregations use the word compared to breakaway denominations. Note: I'm using the word 'breakaway' in a neutral, scholarly sense.
    First note that the question How does a denomination in a church service, label the sections of the service, is not that of the OP, which is about an educational site on the internet that is not, I presume, R. Catholic.

    Second, as to the example in my post #28, wherein there is a reading from Acts. I suggest that the "educated Christian" proposed by Logos would be quite aware that Luke-Acts is generally thought to be one book by the same author, given the name Luke. Hence such person would unlikely be confused or upset to hear Acts in a "Gospel Reading" where that phrase might be slightly extended to "Reading the Gospel of Jesus Christ".

    Drawing a hard line around the four books is not so straightforward as my friend Logos suggests.

    The Gospels | The Bible Project
    https://thebibleproject.com › explore › gospel-series

    Luke-Acts is one Gospel account which tells of the climax of the Bible's overall ... Just as importantly, the Gospel also takes great care to point out how Christ ..

    ===================
    The Gospel in Acts
    The preaching of Jesus’ death and resurrection is central in Acts. The Greek verb for “preach the gospel” (euangelizo) occurs more in this book than in any other in the New Testament. About a third of the book of Acts consists of speeches, and most of these are speeches by Peter or Paul proclaiming the gospel. The good news of the salvation accomplished in Christ and applied by the Holy Spirit extends to the “ends of the earth” through preaching.

    The Gospel in Acts
    ===================

    To reiterate: Yes the non-catholics who follow the Catholics in naming sections of the ordinary church service (or a special service such as baptism) will have a section of "Gospel reading" limited to the 4 books. Accordingly, there may be a section of reading from Epistles, labeled so. This is my impression based on internet searches and direct experience.

    ===
    Note to Roxanne. "Breakaway" is a tricky term. The Anabaptists and Quakers 'broke away' before the Methodists were on the scene; and the founders of methodism (e.g. Wesley) did NOT consider it a denomination, i.e., a breaking away, but a reforming stream within the Anglican church.
     
    Last edited:

    Logos_

    Senior Member
    English - America
    "The gospel in Acts" is a perfectly legitimate expression, but it has little to do with the issue at hand. The book of Acts has never been considered a gospel. Does it describe the preaching and spread of the gospel? Of course. Yes, biblical scholars believe that Luke and Acts are by the same author and that at some point they may have been conjoined. This is an entirely different subject. The fact that most of the NT describes and elucidates the gospel and its spread should not be taken to mean that "gospel reading" means reading biblical books other than the four gospels. "Gospel" has a wider meaning (the teachings and revelation of Christ) and a narrow meaning (the four Gospels) and these should not be conflated.

    The question is whether a "gospel reading" can be shown to clearly indicate anything other than a reading from one of the four gospels. If anyone finds such an example, please share it. I have been unable to locate any.

    Hypothetical examples:
    "Everyone we are now ready for our Gospel reading. Please turn to chapter 3 of Acts." Incorrect. That would be utterly ridiculous.
    "We are now going to study the gospel in Acts." Correct
    "We are now going to study the Gospel of Acts." Incorrect
    "We are now going to read about the spread of the gospel in Acts." Correct
    "Paul's preaching of the gospel is described in Acts." Correct
    "Our reading of the Gospel will proceed tomorrow with Acts." Incorrect

    Usually, gospel in its wider sense will not be capitalized. It is sometimes capitalized in its narrower sense, but I have seen many exceptions to this.
     
    Last edited:

    Logos_

    Senior Member
    English - America
    Is that true of all branches of Protestant Christianity in the US today? I'm not a Christian, so I'm just wondering about how mainstream (Methodist and UCC, for example) congregations use the word compared to breakaway denominations. Note: I'm using the word 'breakaway' in a neutral, scholarly sense.
    I don't know of any church, in America or otherwise, where "gospel reading" means something other than reading from the four Gospels.
     

    bennymix

    Senior Member
    "The gospel in Acts" is a perfectly legitimate expression, but it has little to do with the issue at hand. The book of Acts has never been considered a gospel. Does it describe the preaching and spread of the gospel? Of course. Yes, biblical scholars believe that Luke and Acts are by the same author and that at some point they may have been conjoined. This is an entirely different subject. The fact that most of the NT describes and elucidates the gospel and its spread should not be taken to mean that "gospel reading" means reading biblical books other than the four gospels. "Gospel" has a wider meaning (the teachings and revelation of Christ) and a narrow meaning (the four Gospels) and these should not be conflated.

    The question is whether a "gospel reading" can be shown to clearly indicate anything other than a reading from one of the four gospels. If anyone finds such an example, please share it. I have been unable to locate any.

    Hypothetical examples:
    "Everyone we are now ready for our Gospel reading. Please turn to chapter 3 of Acts." Incorrect. That would be utterly ridiculous.
    "We are now going to study the gospel in Acts." Correct
    "We are now going to study the Gospel of Acts." Incorrect
    "We are now going to read about the spread of the gospel in Acts." Correct
    "Paul's preaching of the gospel is described in Acts." Correct
    "Our reading of the Gospel will proceed tomorrow with Acts." Incorrect

    Usually, gospel in its wider sense will not be capitalized. It is sometimes capitalized in its narrower sense, but I have seen many exceptions to this.
    You seem to want to keep a narrow focus on the label for a part of a Western Christian church service, where 'gospel reading' is normally a reference to the 4 books.

    I find your conclusions rather baldly stated, in black-and-white terms, without the proper backup from the evidence.

    Example: Logos: / The book of Acts have never {your bold} been considered a gospel./

    You ignore my example is post #34--

    https://thebibleproject.com › explore › gospel-series
    Luke-Acts is one Gospel account which tells of the climax of the Bible's overall

    But beyond that, you go way beyond the evidence. It is a simple logical fallacy to go from "I have never seen a 120-pound white dog on my front lawn" to "There has never been a 120 pound dog on my front lawn." Such a transition oversteps the evidence.

    Looking at your "hypothetical examples"--there is a second fallacy here, in that you propose your constructed examples (apparently) to support your position. In particular you invite us to consider your judgments --'correct' or 'incorrect'--as having evidentiary value because of their (not surprising) accord with your position.

    I generally don't find them objectionable, except perhaps the last one:

    Logos //"Our reading of the Gospel will proceed tomorrow with Acts." Incorrect//

    There is simply no reason to restrict the range of "the Gospel" to the 4 books.

    An Orthodox Christian website has a rather good discussion of this point. An orthodox scholar Fr. John Behr, quoting Frances Young's book on Biblical Exegesis:

    //In fact, this interpretative relation to a text, to Scripture, is also intrinsic to the Gospel itself. The earliest formula for proclaiming the death and resurrection of Christ – a formula, which is retained in all subsequent creeds, – is that Christ was crucified and raised “according to the Scriptures”:

    I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures. (1 Cor 1:3-5)

    Clearly the Scriptures that Paul is referring to here are not the four Gospels but what we know as the Old Testament.//


    In short, the Corinthians passage *states* the Gospel, in Pau's words before the Christian scriptures, including "The Gospels," were written (so far as we know) or canonized. And Paul says this Gospel is in "the scriptures" which can only mean the Jewish scripture of the time.

    Fr. John Behr. Scripture, the Gospel, and Orthodoxy

    Behr proceeds:

    Nevertheless, the Gospel was delivered. Debates certainly raged about the correct interpretation of this Gospel – yet it was nevertheless delivered once for all. But again, a qualification has to be made: the Gospel was never fixed in a specific text: what came to be recognized as “canonical” gospels are described as “The Gospel according to … ,” unlike, for instance, “The Gospel of Thomas” or “The Gospel of the Hebrews.”
    ===

    It would be convenient if things were so cut and dried and dichotomous as you argue when you say,

    //Logos: Gospel preaching uses the first sense.
    Gospel reading uses the second sense. [the 4 books]// {your post #29}

    That is the standard usage. //

    One need alter only a word, or the order, for the boundaries to become blurred; the dichotomy starts to disappear.

    A. Preaching of the Gospel
    B. Reading of the Gospel {your last 'hypothetical example'}

    And if you wish to be picky, we could discuss the omission of 'of', which I submit does not change the meaning.

    This blurring is evident in passages such as the following (same site) by F. Chizhenko

    //Either reading or hearing the Gospel, we stand upon this vertical heavenly road, and walk upon it to Paradise. This is what the Gospel is.
    Therefore, it is very important to read the New Testament every day. According to the counsel of the holy fathers, we ought to include the reading of the Holy Gospel and the Apostol (The Acts of the Holy Apostles, the catholic epistles of the Apostles and the fourteen epistles of the holy and preeminent Apostle Paul) in our cell (home) rule of prayer. The following sequence is usually recommended: two chapters from the Apostol (some read one chapter), and one chapter of the Gospels every day.//


    Here he speaks of both reading "the Gospel" and also reading "one chapter of the Gospels" (the 4 books, plural).

    To conclude with a specific focus: I do not accept your judgement (incorrect) as proven, regarding your last example. There is no simple dichotomy as your propose by focussing on the two phrases "gospel preaching" and "gospel reading".

    I appreciate your considered responses and hope, if the dialogue continues, we inquirers after the logos remain amicable.
     
    Last edited:

    DonnyB

    Sixties Mod
    English UK Southern Standard English
    It seems to me that this thread has strayed into areas of theology and Christian worship which are far outside the remit of our language forum, certainly beyond what Sara Lee's question originally asked.

    I'm therefore now closing it: thanks to everyone who has taken part. DonnyB - moderator.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    < Previous | Next >
    Top