The Kerygma: Recovering the Apostolic Proclamation

The basis for our confidence in what the earliest Christians actually preached.

---

This confidence is not without foundation. Behind nearly two millennia of creedal development, liturgical tradition, and systematic theology lies a prior reality: a public announcement, made by specific people in specific places, about something they believed God had done. The Greek word for that announcement is κήρυγμα (kērygma). Before there were creeds, before there were councils, before the New Testament documents were collected into a canon, there was a message. Apostles stood in synagogues and marketplaces and declared that God had acted decisively in Jesus of Nazareth. That declaration is the kerygma, and understanding it is essential for understanding everything that came after.

This article begins by examining the Greek word itself, its lexical roots and civic background, and then surveys how it is used across the New Testament. From there it turns to the landmark work of C.H. Dodd, who in 1936 set out to reconstruct the content of the apostolic proclamation and demonstrated that the kerygma of Paul and the kerygma of Luke-Acts represent not competing messages but convergent witnesses to a single apostolic tradition, rooted in a common source that reaches back to within a few years of the crucifixion itself.

---

I. Lexical Foundation

The Word-Family

The noun κήρυγμα belongs to a tight word-family in Greek:

• κῆρυξ (kēryx) — "herald," a public official who makes authoritative announcements on behalf of a king, magistrate, or assembly.
• κηρύσσω (kēryssō) — "to herald, to proclaim publicly," the verbal form.
• κήρυγμα (kērygma) — "that which is proclaimed," the content of the herald's announcement.

The distinction between the verb and the noun matters. κηρύσσω refers to the act of proclaiming; κήρυγμα refers to the substance of what is proclaimed. The kerygma is not the activity of preaching but the message that is preached.

The Civic-Rhetorical Background

In classical and Hellenistic Greek, the κῆρυξ occupied a recognized civic role. He was the authorized mouthpiece of the sovereign or the assembly, the one who stood in the marketplace or the public square and delivered an official announcement. The herald did not speak on his own authority; he spoke for someone. His message was not a philosophical argument to be debated but an authoritative declaration to be received: a new law, a summons to war, the terms of a peace treaty, the accession of a king.

This background is important because it shapes every New Testament use of the word-family. When the apostles κηρύσσουσιν ("proclaim"), they are not offering personal opinions or philosophical theses. They are functioning as heralds, authorized agents delivering an announcement on behalf of God. The kerygma carries the authority of the one who sends, not the eloquence of the one who speaks. Paul makes this explicit in 1 Corinthians 2:1–5, where he insists that his proclamation did not rest on rhetorical skill but on the power (δύναμις) of God.

Kerygma versus Didache

The New Testament itself suggests a functional distinction between κήρυγμα (proclamation) and διδαχή (teaching). The kerygma is what you announce to those who have not yet heard: the initial, public, missionary proclamation. The didache is what you teach to those who have already responded: the ethical instruction, liturgical practice, and theological elaboration that follow conversion. The kerygma is addressed to the world; the didache is addressed to the church.

This distinction is visible in the texture of the documents themselves. Paul's letters, for instance, are almost entirely didache. They presuppose the kerygma and work out its implications. They are written to people who have already believed. The kerygma itself must be inferred from hints, allusions, and occasional summaries embedded within the didactic material. Similarly, the Didache (a late first- or early second-century document whose very title means "Teaching") presents itself as post-conversion instruction, not initial proclamation; it assumes its audience has already received the kerygmatic message.

This distinction should not be pressed too rigidly. In practice, the categories overlap: Paul "teaches" outsiders, and the Acts speeches include instructional elements. But as an analytical starting point, it remains valuable. There is a real difference between the initial announcement ("God has raised Jesus from the dead; repent and be baptized") and the subsequent instruction ("Here is how you should conduct yourselves at the Lord's Supper"). The kerygma creates the community; the didache sustains it.

---

II. New Testament Usage of κήρυγμα

The noun κήρυγμα appears roughly eight to nine times in the New Testament, depending on textual variants. Each occurrence contributes something to our understanding of what the earliest Christians understood the term to mean.

The Pauline Occurrences

1 Corinthians 1:21. "It pleased God through the foolishness of the κήρυγμα to save those who believe."

Paul sets the kerygma in direct contrast to σοφία ("wisdom"). The world sought God through philosophical wisdom and failed. God chose a different mode of communication, a public announcement, a herald's cry, that the world regarded as foolish. The kerygma is not a sophisticated argument; it is an announcement of an event. Its power does not reside in its intellectual elegance but in the divine act it proclaims.

1 Corinthians 2:4. "My speech and my κήρυγμα were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power."

Here Paul reinforces the distinction. His kerygma was not dressed in rhetorical finery. It did not rely on the persuasive techniques of the Greco-Roman orator. Whatever effect the kerygma had was produced not by Paul's eloquence but by the Spirit's power working through the proclamation. The herald is nothing; the message is everything.

1 Corinthians 15:14. "If Christ has not been raised, then our κήρυγμα is empty (κενόν)."

This is the most theologically significant occurrence. Paul ties the validity of the entire kerygma to a single claim: the resurrection of Jesus. If the resurrection did not happen, the kerygma is empty: not merely incorrect, but vacuous, without content. The resurrection is not one element among many; it is the load-bearing wall. Pull it out and the whole structure collapses.

The surrounding verses (15:3–7) provide what is widely regarded as the earliest kerygmatic formula in the New Testament: "Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, and he was buried, and he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures, and he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve." Paul explicitly identifies this as received tradition, something he was handed, not something he invented.

Romans 16:25. "...according to my gospel and the κήρυγμα of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery..."

Here Paul uses "my gospel" and "the kerygma of Jesus Christ" as near-synonyms, suggesting that the kerygma is the core of what Paul means by "gospel." The genitive "of Jesus Christ" is most naturally read as an objective genitive: the kerygma about Jesus Christ, the proclamation whose content is Jesus as Messiah and Lord.

Titus 1:3. "...He manifested His word in the κήρυγμα with which I was entrusted..."

The kerygma is here presented as a trust, something deposited with Paul for safekeeping and faithful transmission. This language anticipates the παραθήκη ("deposit") terminology of the Pastoral Epistles (cf. 1 Tim 6:20; 2 Tim 1:14) and reflects a growing sense that the kerygma is a fixed body of content to be guarded, not a fluid message to be reinvented.

2 Timothy 4:17. "...so that through me the κήρυγμα might be fully accomplished (πληροφορηθῇ)..."

The kerygma is here envisioned as a task with a scope that can be "filled up" or "brought to completion." Paul sees his apostolic mission as the delivery of the kerygma to the nations, a task with geographic and temporal boundaries.

The Synoptic Occurrences

Matthew 12:41 / Luke 11:32. "The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the κήρυγμα of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here."

Jesus himself uses the term here, and in its most basic sense: Jonah's kerygma was a public announcement demanding a response (repentance). Nineveh responded; "this generation" is failing to respond to a proclamation of even greater magnitude. The kerygma, whether Jonah's or Jesus', is a declaration that places the hearer under obligation.

Summary of NT Usage

Across these occurrences, a consistent profile emerges. The kerygma is:

1. A public proclamation, not a private instruction or esoteric teaching.
2. Event-centered, announcing something God has done, above all the death and resurrection of Jesus.
3. Authoritative, carrying the weight not of the herald's own credentials but of the God who sends him.
4. Demand-making, calling for a response: repentance and faith.
5. Distinguishable from didache, though related to it as foundation to superstructure.
6. Entrusted to specific heralds, who are responsible for its faithful transmission.

---

III. C.H. Dodd and The Apostolic Preaching

The Project

Dodd's The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments, a slim volume based on three lectures delivered at King's College London in 1935, set out to answer one question: "How far is it possible to discover the actual content of the Gospel preached or proclaimed by the apostles?"

The question was pointed. German form criticism, led by Bultmann, had been treating the Gospel material as community creations, shaped by the liturgical and pastoral needs of early churches rather than by historical memory. Dodd did not contest the form critics' literary analysis, but he asked a different question. Rather than dissecting the Gospels into community creations, he asked: What was the message that created those communities in the first place? Before there were churches to shape tradition, there was a proclamation that brought those churches into existence. What was it?

The Method: Paul as Starting Point

Dodd began with Paul, not the Gospels or Acts, because Paul's letters are the earliest datable Christian documents. His method was to sift through the epistles for places where Paul refers back to what he originally preached, or cites formulaic material that crystallizes the kerygmatic content.

The key passage is 1 Corinthians 15:1–11. Paul uses the technical Jewish language of tradition-transmission: "I delivered (παρέδωκα) to you what I also received (παρέλαβον)." This is not casual language. It signals the passing on of authorized tradition, the same terminology used in rabbinic circles for the chain of Torah transmission. And Paul dates this tradition early: he received it, most likely during his visit to Jerusalem described in Galatians 1:18, within a few years of the crucifixion.

Dodd was careful to note that Paul's epistles are not themselves kerygma. They are didache, instruction for people who have already believed. "They presuppose the Preaching. They expound and defend the implications of the Gospel rather than proclaim it." But the kerygma can be inferred from the epistles, because Paul occasionally gestures back to what he preached when founding his churches.

From Paul, Dodd extracted a kerygmatic core: the death and resurrection of Christ, set within an eschatological framework (the transition from "this evil age" to "the age to come") and accompanied by scriptural attestation ("according to the scriptures").

The Method: Corroboration from Acts

Dodd then turned to the speeches in Acts, particularly those attributed to Peter (Acts 2:14–39; 3:12–26; 4:8–12; 5:29–32; 10:34–43) and to Paul (Acts 13:16–41), to test whether the kerygma extracted from the Pauline epistles matched the kerygma depicted in early Christian preaching.

He recognized the methodological difficulty: Luke, like all ancient historians, composed speeches with a degree of literary freedom. The speeches in Acts are not transcripts. But Dodd argued that they preserve genuinely primitive material, for several reasons:

1. Archaic christological terminology. The Acts speeches use titles for Jesus that were already falling out of use by the time Luke wrote: Jesus as God's "Servant" (παῖς, Acts 3:13, 26; 4:27, 30), "the Holy and Righteous One" (Acts 3:14), and "the Author of Life" (Acts 3:15). These are not Lukan creations; they are fossils from an earlier stratum.

2. Adoptionistic Christology. The Acts speeches present Jesus' messianic status as conferred by God at the resurrection: "God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified" (Acts 2:36). This "exaltation Christology," in which Jesus becomes Lord and Messiah through the resurrection, is more primitive than the Pauline and Johannine Christologies, which presuppose Jesus' lordship from the outset (or, in John's case, from before creation). Luke would hardly have invented a Christology more primitive than his own theology if he were simply composing freely.

3. Structural correspondence with Paul. The kerygma of the Acts speeches and the kerygma inferred from Paul's letters share the same basic structure: fulfillment of scripture → the death and resurrection of Jesus → exaltation to God's right hand → the offer of salvation → a call to respond. This convergence is too close to be coincidental and too fundamental to be the product of Luke's literary artistry alone.

Dodd's Six-Element Kerygma

From the convergence of Paul and Acts, Dodd reconstructed the apostolic kerygma as follows:

1. The age of fulfillment has dawned. The "latter days" foretold by the prophets have arrived.
2. This fulfillment has taken place through the ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
3. By virtue of the resurrection, Jesus has been exalted at the right hand of God as Messianic head of the new Israel.
4. The Holy Spirit in the Church is the sign of Christ's present power and glory.
5. The Messianic Age will shortly reach its consummation in the return of Christ.
6. An appeal is made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

This reconstruction has been rightly called one of the most influential contributions to twentieth-century New Testament scholarship. As one commentator has observed, "No word among New Testament scholars has received a more affirmative response in the past thirty years than 'kerygma.' Since the publication of The Apostolic Preaching this word, representing a major idea, has captured the church." [1]

---

IV. The Harmony of Paul and Luke-Acts

Dodd's Case for Unity

Dodd's project was, at its heart, an argument for the fundamental unity of the apostolic proclamation. He was not naive about diversity. He acknowledged that different preachers emphasized different elements and that the kerygma developed over time. But he insisted that beneath the variations lay a common message, and he identified this common message by demonstrating the structural convergence between Paul's epistles and the Acts speeches.

His argument rested on a critical observation: Paul himself testifies to the unity of the kerygma. In 1 Corinthians 15:11, after rehearsing the tradition he received about Christ's death, burial, resurrection, and appearances, Paul declares: "Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed." The "they" refers to the Jerusalem apostles: Peter, James, and the others mentioned in the preceding verses. Paul is claiming, emphatically, that his kerygma and theirs are the same.

Dodd took this claim seriously. Paul had submitted his gospel to the Jerusalem leaders (Gal 2:1–2) and received their endorsement. The tradition he cites in 1 Corinthians 15:3–7 was itself received, most naturally from the Jerusalem church during his early post-conversion visits. As Dodd observed, Paul's preaching "represents a special stream of Christian tradition which was derived from the main stream at a point very near to its source." The date at which Paul received the kerygma cannot be later than about seven years after the crucifixion. It may be earlier.

This means that the kerygma Paul preached in the 50s, the kerygma we can extract from the epistles, is not a Pauline innovation. It is the common apostolic tradition, received from the Jerusalem church within a few years of the resurrection, and affirmed by Paul to be identical in substance with what Peter and James proclaimed.

The Convergence in Detail

When we set the Pauline kerygma beside the kerygma of the Acts speeches, the convergence is striking. Both proclaim:

• The fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. Paul insists that Christ died and was raised "according to the scriptures" (1 Cor 15:3–4). The Acts speeches are saturated with scriptural citation: Psalm 16:8–11 (Acts 2:25–28), Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:34–35), Psalm 118:22 (Acts 4:11), and others. Both Paul and the Acts preachers present the Christ-event as the climax of the scriptural narrative.

• The death of Jesus as part of God's plan. Paul proclaims that "Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures" (1 Cor 15:3). Peter in Acts declares that Jesus was "delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23). The specific theological interpretation of the death differs (Paul develops a more explicitly sacrificial/atoning theology), but the fundamental claim is the same: this death was not an accident; it was the fulfillment of God's determined purpose.

• The resurrection as God's vindication of Jesus. This is the absolute center of both kerygmata. Paul: "He was raised on the third day according to the scriptures" (1 Cor 15:4). Peter: "This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses" (Acts 2:32). The resurrection is not presented as a resuscitation or a metaphor; it is presented as God's definitive act of vindication, the event by which Jesus is installed as Lord and Messiah.

• The exaltation of Jesus to God's right hand. Paul: "He must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet" (1 Cor 15:25, echoing Ps 110:1). Peter: "Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God..." (Acts 2:33). Both cite or allude to Psalm 110:1, the most frequently quoted Old Testament text in the New Testament. Jesus is not merely alive; he is enthroned.

• The gift of the Holy Spirit. Paul: the Spirit is the "firstfruits" (ἀπαρχή) and "down payment" (ἀρραβών) of the age to come (Rom 8:23; 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5). Peter: the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost fulfills Joel's prophecy about "the last days" (Acts 2:16–21). Both understand the Spirit as eschatological evidence, proof that the new age has dawned.

• A call to respond. Paul: "We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God" (2 Cor 5:20). Peter: "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins" (Acts 2:38). Both kerygmata terminate in a demand: the announcement is not merely informational; it calls for decision.

Accounting for the Differences

The differences between Paul and Acts have been catalogued many times, and some scholars (notably James Dunn) have argued that the differences are so significant as to constitute separate, even "incompatible," kerygmata. A closer examination, however, suggests that the differences are largely matters of emphasis and audience rather than substance.

1. "Son of God" versus "Servant." Dodd himself noted that the Acts speeches do not call Jesus "Son of God," a title central to Paul's Christology. Instead, the Acts speeches use the older title παῖς θεοῦ ("Servant of God"), drawn from the Servant Songs of Isaiah. But this is a difference of terminology, not of theological content. Both titles identify Jesus as God's uniquely authorized agent. The shift from "Servant" to "Son" reflects not a change in the kerygma's substance but a development in its vocabulary, as the church moved from a primarily Jewish to an increasingly Gentile audience. Significantly, Luke himself records that it was Paul who first "preached Jesus, that He is the Son of God" (Acts 9:20), suggesting that Luke understood the terminological shift as a Pauline contribution within the same kerygmatic tradition, not a departure from it.

2. The theology of the cross. Paul develops a detailed theology of Christ's death as vicarious sacrifice ("Christ died for our sins," 1 Cor 15:3). The Acts speeches present the death as part of God's predetermined plan (Acts 2:23) but do not explicitly interpret it as a substitutionary atonement. Dodd observed that the Jerusalem kerygma connects forgiveness to the whole Christ-event (ministry, death, resurrection, exaltation) rather than specifically to the death.

But this difference is best understood as a matter of theological development within the same kerygmatic framework, not as evidence of a different kerygma. Paul himself received the tradition that "Christ died for our sins" from the Jerusalem church (1 Cor 15:3). The "for our sins" clause is part of the received tradition; it is pre-Pauline. This means that the sacrificial interpretation of the death was not a Pauline invention but a feature of the Jerusalem tradition that the Acts speeches, for reasons of literary compression or audience adaptation, do not always foreground. Luke's Peter does not deny that Christ died "for our sins"; he simply does not always make that clause explicit. And when Paul preaches in a synagogue setting in Acts 13, the speech Luke gives him closely parallels the Petrine speeches, suggesting that Paul could and did preach in the Jerusalem mode when the context called for it.

3. The role of Jesus' earthly ministry. The Cornelius speech (Acts 10:34–43) includes a summary of Jesus' public career ("beginning from Galilee after the baptism that John proclaimed" (10:37)), while Paul's kerygma, as reflected in the epistles, jumps from Davidic descent directly to the cross and resurrection with virtually no interest in the intervening ministry.

This is a genuine difference, but it is explicable by context. Peter was preaching to people who needed to know who this Jesus was: a concrete figure who had recently lived and acted in Galilee and Judea. Paul was preaching to people who already knew the basic narrative (or, if Gentiles, did not need the biographical detail to grasp the kerygmatic point). The sermon before Cornelius, which Dodd described as "the form of kerygma used by the primitive Church in its earliest approaches to a wider public," represents the full kerygmatic narrative, of which Paul's cross-and-resurrection summary is a concentrated extract. The relationship is abbreviation, not contradiction.

4. The Petrine speech at Pisidian Antioch. Acts 13:16–41 records a speech attributed to Paul in a synagogue at Pisidian Antioch. This speech follows the structural pattern of the Petrine speeches almost exactly: scriptural fulfillment, the ministry and death of Jesus, the resurrection as God's vindication, and an appeal for faith and forgiveness. Dodd observed that this convergence supports the conclusion that Paul could preach in the same kerygmatic pattern as Peter, and that when he did, the substance was the same.

As Dodd put it: "It seems clear that within the general scheme of the kerygma was included some reference, however brief, to the historical facts of the life of Jesus. These facts fall within the eschatological setting of the whole, no less than the facts of His death and resurrection. They are themselves eschatological events, in the sense that they form part of the process by which God's purpose reaches fulfilment and His Kingdom comes." [2]

Paul's Own Testimony to Kerygmatic Unity

The strongest argument for the harmony of Paul and Acts is Paul's own insistence on it. Three passages are decisive:

1 Corinthians 15:3. "I delivered to you... what I also received." Paul claims to be transmitting a tradition he was given, not creating a new one. The tradition includes core kerygmatic content: Christ's death, burial, resurrection, and appearances.

1 Corinthians 15:11. "Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed." Paul explicitly asserts that his kerygma is identical in substance to that of the Jerusalem apostles.

Galatians 2:1–2, 9. Paul submits his gospel to the "pillar" apostles in Jerusalem, and they add nothing to it. They extend fellowship. This is not the behavior of people who regard Paul's message as a different gospel; it is the mutual recognition of a shared kerygma.

Dodd's conclusion stands: "Anyone who should maintain that the primitive Christian Gospel was fundamentally different from that which we have found in Paul must bear the burden of proof." [2]

---

V. The Kerygma and Mark 1:14–15

One of Dodd's most elegant insights was his observation that the apostolic kerygma is structurally rooted in Jesus' own proclamation as summarized in Mark 1:14–15: "Jesus came into Galilee preaching the Gospel of God, and saying, 'The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God has drawn near: repent and believe the Gospel.'"

Dodd showed that the Jerusalem kerygma expands each clause of this summary:

• "The time is fulfilled" → the kerygmatic reference to the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy.
• "The Kingdom of God has drawn near" → the kerygmatic recital of Jesus' ministry, death, resurrection, and exaltation, the process by which God's kingdom enters history.
• "Repent and believe the Gospel" → the kerygmatic appeal for repentance and the offer of forgiveness.

This structural correspondence is significant. It suggests that the apostolic kerygma is not a later construction imposed on the Jesus tradition but an organic expansion of Jesus' own preaching. The apostles did not invent a new message; they unpacked the implications of Jesus' own announcement in light of the cross and the empty tomb.

This also bridges the often-noted gap between "the kingdom proclaimed by Jesus" and "the Christ proclaimed by the apostles." The apostolic kerygma does not replace the kingdom proclamation; it fulfills it. Jesus announced that the kingdom was arriving. The apostles announced that it had arrived, through Jesus' death, resurrection, and exaltation. The content changes; the structure endures. [3]

---

VI. The Kerygma and "Realized Eschatology"

Dodd's kerygma reconstruction cannot be separated from his broader eschatological program. He coined the term "realized eschatology" to describe his conviction that Jesus, Paul, and the Jerusalem church all shared: the decisive eschatological event had already occurred. The kingdom of God was not merely approaching; it had arrived. The age to come had broken into the present age through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.

In Dodd's reading, the main burden of the kerygma is precisely this: "The unprecedented has happened: God has visited and redeemed His people." The apostles were not predicting a future event; they were announcing a present reality. The prophecies were fulfilled. The Messiah had come. The Spirit, the eschatological gift promised by the prophets for "the last days," had been poured out. The age to come was here.

Dodd acknowledged that the kerygma included some reference to a future consummation (element 5 in his outline), but he argued that this element received less emphasis than scholars had assumed. Examining the Acts speeches, he observed that explicit reference to the second coming is relatively rare: "The apostolic Preaching as recorded in Acts does not, contrary to a commonly held opinion, lay the greatest stress upon the expectation of a second advent of the Lord. It is only in Acts 3:20–21 that this expectation is explicitly and fully set forth." The center of gravity falls not on what God will do but on what God has done. [3]

This aspect of Dodd's reconstruction has been both his most influential and his most controversial contribution. Later scholars, particularly George Eldon Ladd and Oscar Cullmann, argued for an "already/not yet" framework that preserves both the realized and the futurist elements of the kerygma. Even Dodd himself modulated his position in later works. In The Coming of Christ (1951), he conceded that the Johannine formula "the hour is coming and now is" (John 5:25) better captured the eschatological tension than a purely realized eschatology. Whether one follows Dodd's original emphasis or the later "already/not yet" consensus, however, the basic kerygmatic claim remains: the decisive act of God has already taken place in Jesus Christ. Everything else, including whatever remains to be consummated, flows from that accomplished reality. [4]

---

VII. Criticisms of Dodd and Their Limits

Dodd's reconstruction has been subjected to sustained criticism on several fronts. Honesty requires acknowledging these criticisms, but fairness also requires noting their limits.

1. Over-Reliance on Acts

The most common criticism is that Dodd relied too heavily on the Acts speeches as historical evidence for early preaching. If the speeches are Lukan compositions, then the "convergence" between Paul and Acts may simply reflect Luke's familiarity with Pauline theology, not independent testimony to a common kerygma.

This is a genuine concern, but it is mitigated by two factors. First, the Acts speeches contain archaic, pre-Lukan material: christological titles, theological patterns, and scriptural citations that are at home in the earliest Palestinian community, not in Luke's own theology. Second, even if Luke shaped the speeches literarily, the structural and theological parallels with Paul's letters are too deep to be explained by surface imitation. Luke would have needed access to genuinely primitive kerygmatic traditions to produce speeches with these particular features. The material may be transmitted by Luke, but it was not invented by Luke.

2. The Rigidity of the Outline

Some have argued that Dodd's six-point outline made the kerygma look more fixed and formulaic than it actually was, and that this encouraged an "inflexible understanding of the kerygma in terms of supposedly primitive and relatively stereotyped confessional formulae." [1]

But Dodd himself was less rigid than this criticism suggests. He wrote: "In this survey of the apostolic Preaching and its developments two facts have come into view: first, that within the New Testament there is an immense range of variety in the interpretation that is given to the kerygma; and, secondly, that in all such interpretation the essential elements of the original kerygma are steadily kept in view." Dodd did not claim that every sermon repeated the same six points in the same order. He claimed that the six points represent the structural framework within which the early preaching operated, a framework flexible enough to accommodate different emphases and audiences but stable enough to be recognizable across the tradition. [1]

3. The Preaching/Teaching Distinction

Dodd's sharp distinction between kerygma and didache has been challenged on the grounds that the New Testament itself does not maintain a clean separation. Paul "teaches" outsiders; the Acts preachers "teach" about Jesus' ministry. The categories overlap.

This criticism has force, but it does not undo Dodd's fundamental insight. The distinction between an initial announcement of saving events and subsequent instruction for the converted community is not artificial; it is a natural feature of any movement that expands through public proclamation. That the two categories bleed into each other in practice does not mean they are identical in principle. A wedding announcement is not the same thing as marriage counseling, even if the same person delivers both.

---

VIII. Dodd's Enduring Significance

Despite these criticisms, Dodd's contribution remains foundational. "However incomplete Dodd's assessment of the early kerygma may have been, it showed that there is a very high degree of uniformity running through the speeches or sermons attributed to Peter in the early part of the Acts. More recent studies have only served to underline this fact." [1]

More than any other scholar of his era, Dodd demonstrated that behind the New Testament's theological diversity lies a common proclamation, a message about what God had done in Jesus of Nazareth, rooted in Old Testament fulfillment, centered on the death and resurrection, and calling for the response of repentance and faith. This proclamation was not invented by Paul, nor was it a Lukan construction. It was the shared possession of the apostolic community from the earliest days, a community that included both Paul and the Jerusalem pillars, and that recognized, in Paul's own words, that "whether I or they, so we preach and so you believed."

The kerygma, in Dodd's hands, is not a creed to be recited but an announcement to be proclaimed: the herald's cry that the king has come, that the age has turned, and that a response is required. In a world cluttered with theological systems and denominational distinctions, Dodd's achievement was to cut through to the bedrock: What did the apostles actually say? His answer, careful, textually grounded, and remarkably persuasive, continues to shape how we read the New Testament nearly a century later.

---

References

[1] "Gospel Preaching in Acts: Analysis and Conclusions" (review of Dodd's contribution and its reception). https://loveintruth.com/amf-docs/gpia-conclusions.htm

[2] Dodd, C.H. The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments. Preterist Archives, collection of excerpts and secondary commentary. https://preteristarchives.org/c-h-dodd/

[3] Dodd, C.H. The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments. Excerpts and analysis, The PostBarthian. https://postbarthian.com/2012/10/15/the-apostolic-preaching-and-its-developments-by-c-h-dodd/

[4] "Dodd, Charles Harold (1884–1973), Biblical Scholar." Dictionary of Welsh Biography. https://biography.wales/article/s6-DODD-HAR-1884

[5] Dodd, C.H. The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1936. Full text available at: https://media.sabda.org/alkitab-2/Religion-Online.org%20Books/Dodd,%20C.%20H.%20-%20The%20Apostolic%20Preaching%20and%20Its%20Developments.pdf

[6] "Realized Eschatology." Bible.org. https://bible.org/article/realized-eschatology

[7] Sanders, Fred. "C.H. Dodd and Realized Eschatology." The Scriptorium Daily. https://scriptoriumdaily.com/c-h-dodd-and-realized-eschatology/

[8] "Kerygma." Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerygma

[9] "Kerygmata AO1." Educational summary of Dodd's six elements. http://resource.download.wjec.co.uk.s3.amazonaws.com/vtc/2016-17/16-17_2-19/_eng/_eduqas/kerygmata-ao1.html

[10] The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments. Religion Online, chapter summary. https://www.religion-online.org/book/the-apostolic-preaching-and-its-developments/

[11] "The Unifying Kerygma of the New Testament." Cambridge University Press. https://resolve.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/past-of-jesus-in-the-gospels/unifying-kerygma-of-the-new-testament/E81906D401E0080C1FE4B7B5B874DB0E

Unitarian Questions Regarding our "Relationship with Jesus"

Intro

Someone in a Unitarian Facebook group posted the following questions: 

• What is the nature of your relationship with Jesus now?
• If we are to pray to Father alone as God, what role does Jesus have in your daily life?
• Is he just a name you tack on to the end of your prayers or do you actually have an intimate, personal fellowship with him?
• If you are not supposed to pray to him or worship him as God, “what shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?”

The person who raised these concerns followed up by stating:

"Biblical unitarians need to be able to clearly express not only who Jesus was and is, but also what role he now plays in our worship services, our prayer lives, in our daily walk. It's not enough to be able to explain that the Father alone is God and that Jesus is His human Messiah...  biblical unitarians struggle with what to do with Jesus now that we freely acknowledge that he is the Son of God, the human Messiah, but not God himself."

Overview of Apostolic Testimony

We are to model our life after Jesus. https://Jesusisthemodel.com addresses many ways that Jesus is a model for us. Most especially, we are to mirror the spiritual walk of Jesus as affirmed by the most reliable Gospel witness of Luke-Acts. (https://lukeprimacy.com) The emphasis of Jesus' ministry is the importance of prayer, and he demonstrated a dependence on prayer (https://prayerisnecessary.com). Jesus would continue all night in prayer to God (Luke 6:12) At times he took disciples with him to the mountain to pray (Luke 9:28) When Jesus was under great distress, he prayed to the Father, not my will but yours be done (Luke 22:39-46) Jesus gave his disciples instructions on how to pray to the Father in Luke 11:1-4 To Jesus, prayer was a process of humbling yourself before God, being under the influence and sanctified by the Holy Spirit, receiving revelation and empowerment from God, remaining in a state of forgiveness, and averting temptation.

Jesus implied that we should seek from prayer the Holy Spirit and that it is the Father's will to give the gift of the Holy Spirit to them that ask him. (Luke 11:13)  What happens when one receives and prays in the Holy Spirit? The answer is that when one utters mysteries in the Spirit, one speaks not to men but to God. (1 Cor 14:1) The Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. (Rom 8:26) The Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. (Rom 8:28) Thus, praying in the Holy Spirit, corresponds to praying how we ought, according to the will of God, and this involves speaking “not to men but to God.”

Paul was clear that we shouldn't be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, let our requests be made known to God. (Phil 4:6). Paul prayed to God. (1Cor 13:7) When he wanted others to be saved, it was his heart's desire and prayer to God. (Rom 10:1) When Paul prayed for others, he always thanked God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Col 1:3) Thus, we should bring our needs before the one God and Father, Just as Jesus and Paul did and Paul instructed.

When Peter was kept in prison, prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him (Acts 12:5) When Paul and Silas were in jail they were “praying and singing hymns to God” (Acts 16:25)  When the apostles were persecuted, they prayed for boldness. This is recorded in Acts 4:23-30.

Acts 4:23-30 (ESV)

24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them,

25 who through the mouth of our father David, your servant,1 said by the Holy Spirit, “‘Why did the Gentiles rage, and the peoples plot in vain? 26  The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers were gathered together, against the Lord and against his Anointed’

27 for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, 28 to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place. 

29 And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness, 30 while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus.”

We can see from the above passages that prayers were directed to the one God and Father who created all things. In Acts 4:23-30, Jesus is referenced in the second person. Clearly, prayer should be directed toward the one God and Father.

What about John?

To justify doctrines involving prayer to Jesus or prayer to saints, one has to go outside the New Testament or read things into a verse in the Gospel of John where Jesus is claimed to have said to his disciples “If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it,” in reference to Jesus's going to the Father. (John 14:14) We know that John is highly metaphorical, and many things are not intended to be understood literally. Later in John 15:16 and John 16:23, Jesus speaks of asking the Father in Jesus' name, that the Father may do it. Jesus also speaks of the day when his disciples will ask nothing of him:

John 15:16 (ESV) 

  ¹⁶ You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.

John 16:23 (ESV) 

  ²³ In that day you will ask nothing of me. Truly, truly, I say to you, whatever you ask of the Father in my name, he will give it to you.

According to the Gospel of John, Jesus helped the disciples by praying for them, but there would be a day when Jesus would not need to ask of the Father on their behalf because the Father himself loves them. The implication of John 16:25-27 is that they would no longer be in need of an intercessor, that is, relying on Jesus to ask or pray on their behalf: 

 John 16:25-27 (ESV) 

²⁵ “I have said these things to you in figures of speech. The hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figures of speech but will tell you plainly about the Father. ²⁶ In that day you will ask in my name, and I do not say to you that I will ask the Father on your behalf; ²⁷ for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.

Furthermore, in Jesus' prayer of John 17 to the Father, he requested that those who would believe in him through the word of his disciples would have the same oneness with the Father that Jesus had with the Father. Again, the implication of John, is that believers would have direct access to the father as Jesus did: 

John 17:20-23 (ESV) 

  ²⁰ “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, ²¹ that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. ²² The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, ²³ I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.

Although the Fourth Gospel reflects a later tradition that is not historically reliable and is also the cause of much misunderstanding, it still indicates that prayer to Jesus would not be necessary. This is considering our status with the Father of being one with the Father and loved by the Father as he was. Some try to use the esoteric language in John to suggest certain notions about Jesus. John, however, has been the source of much confusion and misunderstanding through the centuries. It is best to not depart from the clear and straightforward apostolic testimony of Luke-Acts + Paul. 

Of the few things in John that are explicit, it is that Jesus prays to the one God and Father and confesses the Father as the only True God after Jesus told his disciples that “I am leaving the world and going to the Father.” (John 16:28)

 John 17:1-3 (ESV) 

¹ When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, ² since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. ³ And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.

Few other verses in John are as explicit as this. Another one is at the end, where the author expresses his motivation. 

John 20:31 (ESV) 

³¹ but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Thus, salvation comes down to believing in Jesus being God's chosen Messiah. There is no indication here of maintaining a personal relationship with Jesus as if he were, himself, God. 

What about Stephen?

After preaching the Gospel in Acts 7, Steven gazed into heaven and “saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God” and he said “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56) After this those in the council he was speaking to rushed at him and cast him out of the city and stoned him. As they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” (Acts 2:59) And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep. (Acts 7:60). 

Some claim that Stephen addressed the Lord Jesus asking him to receive his spirit. That this is akin to praying to Jesus and identifying Jesus as God (the one who receives spirits). In this case, however, Stephen has an open vision in which he sees Jesus. In this vision, there is a distinction between Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and the Glory of God. Thus, Jesus is distinguished from God in the vision. “Receive my spirit” is another way of saying “receive my life” in the context of Stephen showing allegiance and dying for the Lord Jesus. It is not an indication that Jesus is God in any ontological sense. 

The reason this is not a normative case of prayer is that it is in the context of an open vision of Jesus being within view. Paul also had a direct encounter with Jesus on his road to Damascus experience. Despite encountering Jesus, and receiving instruction from him, he continued to pray to God and did not give any indications in his many letters that others are to pray to Jesus. Paul's instructions on prayer being what we have covered in the Overview of Apostolic Testimony section above. 

Specific Answers

• What is the nature of your relationship with Jesus now?

We acknowledge him as Messiah (Christ) and confess him as Lord. This includes acknowledging him as King of Kings and maintaining our allegiance toward him as God's chosen one. We acknowledge Jesus and confess him as the blessed one, the most favored over all creation, the Son of God.

• If we are to pray to Father alone as God, what role does Jesus have in your daily life?

We constantly affix our hope on the coming kingdom of Christ's reign. We bring to remembrance Jesus' example and his sacrifice. Furthermore, we model our lives after him, following his example and teachings. We abide in the same love he abided in. Our hearts and attitudes are aligned with his.

• Is he just a name you tack on to the end of your prayers or do you actually have an intimate, personal fellowship with him?

Does one have an intimate, personal fellowship with a king? People are to love and revere their king, devoting themselves to his service. However, not everyone interacts with the king on a daily basis, although they may constantly bring themselves to the remembrance of their sovereign by saying such things as “God save the King” and affirming their allegiance. So, there is to be an emotional attachment and affinity toward Messiah, but our prayer life should be directed toward God, as was the prayer life of Jesus and the Apostles. 

• If you are not supposed to pray to him or worship him as God, “what shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?”

We pray to the Father and worship him alone as the only true God. We worship as Jesus the servant of God, “The Lamb” who is worthy to receive power, wealth, wisdom, might, honor, glory, and blessing:

Revelation 5:12 (ESV) 

“Worthy is the Lamb who was slain,

to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might

and honor and glory and blessing!”

He was slain and by his blood, he ransomed people for God, from every tribe and language and people and nations, and made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth. (Rev 5:9-10)  Amen!

Conclusion

Luke-Acts + Paul provides a clear answer to this question as to what is normative in Apostolic Christianity with regard to prayer being directed to the Father. Even according to John, Jesus indicates that we can pray to the Father directly, having the same oneness with God that he had, without needing Jesus to ask for us. (John 16;26-27) Although it is apparent that many today would prefer to pray to Jesus, this is a different approach than Jesus and his Apostles of praying to God. Jesus is the model for us! (https://jesusisthemodel.com)

For more on Prayer, see https://prayerisnecessary.com

For more on issues with John, see, https://issueswithjohn.com

For more on Luke-Acts Primacy, see https://lukeprimacy.com

Love, The Greatest Commandment

The greatest commandment is to acknowledge the one God and to love the Lord your God. (Deut 6:4-5) Jesus affirmed that the most important commandment is, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:28-31) To love God and to love one’s neighbor as oneself is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. (Mark 12:33) This prospective brings us close to the kingdom of God. (Mark 12:34) We should understand what it means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice’ for Jesus came not to call the righteous but sinners. (Mat 9:13) To inherit eternal life, we should read the law as, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your strength and all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” (Luke 10:25-28) Jesus said, “Do this, and you will live.” (Luke 10:28) The new commandment that Jesus gave us is that we love one another: just has he has loved us, we should also love one another. (John 13:34) This is how we are identified as his disciples, that we love one another. (John 3:35)

By th,is it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother. (1John 3:10) For this is the message that you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. (1John 3:11) The commandment of God is that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus and love one another, just as he commanded us. (1John 3:23) In Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. (Gal 5:6) Through love, we are to serve one another – for the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Gal 5:13-14) Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. (Rom 13:8) The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Rom 13:9) Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. (Rom 13:10) If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. (Jam 2:8)

For more, see the website Love First. https://lovefirst.faith

Essential Gospel Message, Jesus is God's Salvation (not God)

 The Good news (Gospel) is that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah) and that, through him, we have a place in God's Kingdom.

• Through Christ Jesus, we proclaim the resurrection from the dead (Acts 2:22-36, Acts 4:2)
• The Gospel of the kingdom (Acts 18:12, 20:25, 32)
• Christ (Messiah) is Jesus (Acts 5:30-32, 5:42, Acts 9:20 Acts 10:36-46, Acts 13:30-35 Acts 17:3)
• The new covenant is established with his blood. (Luke 22:20, Acts 20:28)
• Through Jesus, we are reconciled to God (Acts 4:10-12, Acts 5:30-32, Acts 13:36-41)
• Through Jesus, we receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:32-33, Acts 11:5-18, Acts 19:2-6)
• Through Jesus, we receive an inheritance in the Kingdom of God. (Acts 8:12, Acts 20:32)
• Justification is by entering into the new covenant through repentance and faith. (Acts 2:38, Acts 13:36-40, Acts 14:22, Acts 15:8-11)
• We are cleansed by faith and saved by grace—not by unnecessary burdens in following the law of Moses. (Acts 15:5-11, Acts 15:28-29)

For more on the essential Gospel message, see https://essentialgospel.faith and https://gospelofacts.com

Jesus is my Lord and Savior, He is the provision for salvation from God our Savior. God uses agents to implement his plan and purposes. https://biblicalagency.com/ As the one mediator between God and man, Jesus is also Lord and Savior under the framework for salvation from the one God and Father, the ultimate cause of salvation.

"The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree.  God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins." (Acts 5:30-31 ) 

Indeed there is no salvation apart from God. The one God and Father is the ultimate cause and Jesus Christ our Lord is the proximate cause. Jesus gave himself according to the will of our God and Father (Gal 1:4)  The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified his servant Jesus (Acts 3:13) God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom was crucified (Acts 2:36).

Integrity Syndicate—For the restoration of 1st Century Christianity https://integritysyndicate.com

Integrity Syndicate YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/IntegritySyndicate

Integrity Syndicate Discord: https://discord.gg/wM7HtbeQeX

Baptism in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

 At first, when the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit was invoked in baptism or in other contexts it was not affirming a belief in later Trinitarian dogma but was an affirmation of the old roman symbol (a primitive version of the apostle's creed). It is not making a statement that these are three persons of one God, but that these three are critical aspects of our confession of faith. 

[The Father]

 I believe in God the Father almighty;

[The Son]

and in Christ Jesus His only Son, our Lord,

Who was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary,

Who under Pontius Pilate was crucified and buried,

on the third day rose again from the dead,

ascended to heaven,

sits at the right hand of the Father,

whence he will come to judge the living and the dead;

[The Holy Spirit]

and in the Holy Spirit,

[Other confessions of faith]

the holy Church,

the remission of sins,

the resurrection of the flesh

the life everlasting.

Early Christians, who were baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit were just making an affirmation of the Apostles Creed (not a belief in the doctrine of the Trinity): As you can see we have Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the creed—but no conflation of the three.  Jesus is the name of the Son, by which we are reconciled to the Father and receive the Holy Spirit. According to Acts 2:38, if we repent (towards God the Father), and are baptized in the name of Jesus (the Son), we will have the forgiveness of our sins and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 

Acts 2:38 - Revised Standard Version (RSV)

<38> And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

This is the meaning harmonized with Matthew 28:19.

For more on why baptism is in the name of Jesus, see https://baptisminjesusname.com

integrity Syndicate—For the restoration of 1st Century Christianity https://integritysyndicate.com

Integrity Syndicate YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/IntegritySyndicate

Integrity Syndicate Discord: https://discord.gg/wM7HtbeQeX