Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T17:18:43.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Kyrios” As Designation for the Oral Tradition Concerning Jesus (Paradosis and Kyrios)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2009

Oscar Cullmann
Oscar Cullmann
Affiliation:
Basel and Paris
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The work of the form-critics on the Gospel has directed our A attention more than ever before to the historical development of the material of the tradition, which took place before the fixing of our Gospels in writing. Collections of single or several words of Jesus, and narratives about Jesus, were establishing themselves already in the early Church, and were passed on by it. How far this tradition was already in part written down, or, as with the oldest Jewish traditions, was only orally transmitted, is not a question of importance for us here, but in any case it could never be solved with certainty. That is also true, as M. Dibelius has rightly stressed, of the much quoted “Q source”. It is indeed very probable that already before the composition of our Gospels, there were smaller writings, above all collections of words of Jesus, but it is in no way possible to define or demarcate them more exactly. On principle, this whole stream of tradition, whether it is transmitted in written or oral fashion, in so far as it is not yet channelled in our Gospels, can and must be handled as a unit. When in the title we speak of an “oral” tradition concerning Jesus, we mean simply the tradition concerning Jesus which existed before the Gospels. Similarly, in the Jewish tradition of the Old Testament law, the interpretations of the law were at first orally handed down from Rabbi to pupil, and then later written, but neither the fact of this taking place, nor the time when it took place, are of any fundamental importance for this Jewish tradition.

Type
Research Article
Information
Scottish Journal of Theology , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , May 1950 , pp. 180 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 1950

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Page 180 note 2 Dibelius, M., Die Formgeschichte des Evangeliums, 2nd edn., 1933, pp. 234 ff.Google Scholar

Page 181 note 1 Godet, F., Commentaire sur la Ière ep. aux Corinthiens, vol. 2, 1887, pp. 160 ff.Google Scholar

Page 181 note 2 Loisy, A., Les origines de la Cène eucharistique. Congres d'Histoire du Christianisme, vol. I, p. 77 ff.Google Scholar

Page 181 note 3 Heitmüller, W., Zum Problem Paulus und Jesus (Z.N.W., 1912), p. 321.Google Scholar

Page 182 note 1 Couchoud, P. L., Le mystère de Jésus, 1924, p. 141.Google Scholar

Page 182 note 2 Alfaric, P., Le Jésus de Paul (Revue d'Histoire des Religions, 1927), pp. 276 ff.Google Scholar

Page 182 note 3 Lietzmann, H., An die Korinther, 1–2 (Handbuch zum N.T.), 4th edit, by W. G. Kümmel, 1949, p. 57Google Scholar; see also the footnote added by W. G. Kümmel, p. 185.

Page 182 note 4 Weiss, John, Der erste Korintherbrief (Krit. exeg, Kommentar N. T.), 1919, p. 283.Google Scholar

Page 182 note 5 Allo, E. B., Première épître aux Corinthiens, 2nd edit., 1934.Google Scholar

Page 182 note 6 Héring, J., La première épître de S. Paul aux Corinthiens (Commentaire du N.T.), 1949, P. 100.Google Scholar

Page 182 note 7 Bultmann, R., Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 1948, pp. 148 f.Google Scholar

Page 182 note 8 Goguel, M., La relation du dernier repas de Jésus dans I Cor. 11 et la tradition historique chez l'apôtre Paul (Revue d'Histoire et de Philos, rel., 1930, pp. 61 f.)Google Scholar

Page 184 note 1 On the expression øυλάττειν παραθήκην (I Tim. 6.20; 2 Tim. 1.14) see Spicq, P. C., S. Paul et la loi des dépôts (Revue biblique, 1931), pp. 481 ff.Google Scholar

Page 184 note 2 Norden, E., Agnostos Theos, 1913, pp. 267 f.Google Scholar

Page 185 note 1 See Jeremias, J., Die Abendmahlsworte Jesu, 2nd edn., 1949, pp. 95 f.Google Scholar

Page 185 note 2 op. cit., p. 311.

Page 185 note 3 op. cit., p. 96.

Page 185 note 4 op. cit., p. 75.

Page 185 note 5 op. cit., p. 149.

Page 187 note 1 On this see Carrington, P., The Primitive Christian Catechism, 1940, pp. 67 f.Google Scholar

Page 187 note 2 Jeremias, J., op. cit., p. 97Google Scholar, for example, thinks of the tradition of 1 Cor. 11.23 f. as that of the community in Antioch; Hering, J., op. cit., p. 100, as that of the community in Damascus.Google Scholar

Page 189 note 1 op. cit., p. 57. See also Messe und Herrenmahl, 1926, p. 255.Google Scholar

Page 190 note 1 Molland, E., Das paulinische Evangelium, 1934, p. 100.Google Scholar

Page 190 note 2 Schniewind, J., Die Begriffe Wort und Evangelium bei Paulus, 1910, p. 110.Google Scholar See also Euanggelion. Ursprung und erste Gestalt des Begriffs Evangelium, 1927.Google Scholar

Page 191 note 1 Kümmel, W. G., Jesus und der jüdische Traditionsgedanke (Z.N.W., 1934), pp. 105 ff.Google Scholar

Page 191 note 2 Davies, W. D., Paul and Rabbinic Judaism, 1948. See especially pp. 147 ff.Google Scholar

Page 192 note 1 Windisch, H., Der Sinn der Bergpredigt, 1929Google Scholar, erroneously opposes Matthew to St. Paul on this point.

Page 192 note 2 Dodd, C. H., History and the Gospel, 1943, pp. 55 f. has seen this very clearly. See also The Apostolic Preaching and its Development, 1936, passim.Google Scholar