NT3—Study Paper
2007
Brendan Moar
Atonement in Luke-Acts 1. Introduction: All the parts are there, but do they add up to 'Atonement'? Atonement: "to avert punishment, especially the divine anger, by the payment of a kōper, a ransom, which may be of money or which may be of life." (Leon Morris: EDT) The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles clearly speak about the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, and the forgiveness of sins. • • •
Departure: [Lk 9:31] (the transfiguration) looks forwards to Jerusalem as the place where Jesus' departure would be fulfilled. Ascension: [9:51; 24:50-51; Acts 1:2, 11] link the departure with ascension. Death, resurrection and forgiveness: [Lk:44-49] speaks of the Christ suffering and dying, and being raised after 3 days. Repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name, beginning at Jerusalem: i.e. the place of departure.
These are the key elements for a theology of atonement. But does Luke link forgiveness to the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus? Are we supposed to see Jesus' death as averting the divine anger? That is, does Luke present Jesus' death as atoning? The big question then is: Does Luke have a theology of atonement?
2. AGAINST a theology of atonement 2.1. Jesus' Death and our Salvation are unrelated • •
•
Luke attaches no soteriological significance to Jesus' death. [So Conzelmann and F.F. Bruce] Key texts in this argument are: o Lk 22:27 cf Mk 10:45: Lk omits, "give his life as a ransom for many". o The cross is not portrayed as a saving event in the early speeches in Acts, but as a rejection that was overturned by God at Easter. [2:23-24; 3:31-14; 4:10; 7:52; 10:39-40; 13:27-30] o Lk 22:37 and Acts 8 quote the servant song of Isaiah 53, but do not mention aspects relating to the atonement. They omit the notions of bearing the sin/iniquity of many/all and making intercession for them. Counter-arguments: o After Lk 22:27;
Atonement in Luke-Acts
1 of 4
NT3—Study Paper
2007
Brendan Moar
[31-34] Satan's involvement in the passion, and therefore his defeat in the cross is highlighted: defeat of satan is soteriological. • [35-38] Alludes to the Servant of the Lord [Isa 53] who dies an atoning death. (This is on the understanding that reference to part of a passage infers the broader context also) o The pattern of death followed by resurrection is linked with the Servant of Isa 53 (vv11-12). The servant bears sin to bring forgiveness (death), and is vindicated for doing so (raised=sees life?). o The Servant theology is behind Luke's Christology. That is, the theology of Jesus' death, comes from the theology of the Servant of the Lord • Jesus=Servant: baptism Lk 3:22 cf Isa 42:1; theology implicitly evoked. • Lk 22:37=Isa 53:12: in context—at the beginning of the passion—its theology is explicitly evoked. • •
2.2. Jesus' Death and our Salvation are related, but not in the sense of atonement • •
•
The focus of Luke is not atonement, but resurrection/exaltation. [so Kasemann] Jesus' death is presented as an act of martyrdom: an innocent man dies as an example of obedience (to be followed). o Texts are; Lk 9:23 (take up cross and follow) Lk 23 (various affirmations of innocence): Also Acts 3:14 Lk 9:30-31 and 13:33; Jesus is a prophet who dies a martyrs death. Jesus' death is the necessary prelude to the redemptive act of his exaltation. o Texts Lk 9:22: "it is necessary" Lk 24:26: exaltation only after necessary death
3. FOR a theology of atonement 3.1. Jesus' death is atoning • •
•
The last supper [Lk 22:19-20] indicates that Jesus understood his death as substitutionary: "given for you" u`pe.r u`mw/n The use of a 'cup-word' refers to a salvific covenant initiated through the cross. "A new covenant in my blood" c.f. Jer 31:31-43: about forgiveness of sin. Jesus death and salvation are specifically connected. Forgiveness of sin is important to Lk and is presented as consequential to the passion.
Atonement in Luke-Acts
2 of 4
NT3—Study Paper
2007
Brendan Moar
o Lk 3:15 Presents people waiting for the Christ o 4:16-30 quotes Isa 61 [61:1-2; whole is implied]. Presents Jesus as the Servant. He is the one to bring salvation, restore God's people and establish righteousness through an everlasting covenant. o Lk 24:21; the disciples feel their hopes for redemption have been dashed. Jesus explains that his death was necessary for the forgiveness of sin to be achieved [24:44-47]. o Key word is lutro,w. 24:21; disciples hoped Jesus was the redeemer of Israel 1:68; Zechariah's song sees Jesus as the redemption of OT 2:38; Prophetess Anna speaks of the redemption of Israel. Context points to her speaking in response to seeing the child Jesus. 21:28; the lead-up to the crucifixion speaks of the nearness of the day of redemption avpolu,trwsij. o Early speeches in Acts do connect forgiveness of sins as an outcome of the passion: The Kerygmatic Core 5:30-31; Forgiveness is clearly linked with resurrection and exaltation. 10:43; 13:38-39; forgiveness of sins is clearly comes through Jesus. Material close to the Core 20:28; Church obtained through Jesus' blood. A COMMENT: I think the case here isn't as strong as Bolty wants it to be. Only 20:28 clearly implies soteriological significance for the death of Jesus. The others link forgiveness with Jesus, but not as a result of his death. Forgiveness happens after Jesus' death, but only as a necessary pre-cursor to his exaltation, which brings salvation. Bolt may be right, but I don’t see this as strong counter evidence against the claim that the Acts speeches don't attach soteriological significance to Jesus' death. •
Luke's Christology is tied to Jesus' identity as the Servant of the Lord [c.f. Mark's Christology]. o The 'theological achievement of the servant is also expected from Jesus' [Bolt lecture notes]. Forgiveness of sins [Isa 40:1-2] Atoning death [Isa 52:13-53:12]
Conclusion: It is only in the light of Luke's Servant Christology that we see Luke's theology of the atonement. If we did not have this, the evidence would seem to support a 'nonatonement' theology of the cross; Jesus' death is not unrelated to salvation in some sense, but it is not atoning. Without the backing provided by the servant theology, we wouldn't be able to conclusively claim that Luke has a theology of atonement. It is through the lens of this theology that we are able to legitimately make the connections between Jesus' death and the forgiveness of sins in Luke's work. Atonement in Luke-Acts
3 of 4
NT3—Study Paper
2007
Brendan Moar
Appendix Overview of Atonement in Luke Acts The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles clearly speak about the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, and the forgiveness of sins. There is only one text where Jesus' death is explicitly given soteriological significance. There are many texts that give soteriological significance to Jesus' resurrection and exaltation. On the evidence of the text alone, it is difficult to conclude that Luke ties the forgiveness of sins to Jesus' death, and therefore, that he has a theology of atonement. Luke's Christology is built on Isaiah's Servant of the Lord. By quoting parts of the Servant texts, Luke invokes the whole text. The soteriological significance of the atoning death of the servant is foundational to Luke's understanding of Jesus. In the light of this key theological schema, we can legitimately see the implicit connection between Jesus' death and the forgiveness of sins in Luke-Acts. Therefore, we can see that Luke has a theology of atonement, based on his understanding of Jesus as Isaiah's Servant of the Lord.
Atonement in Luke-Acts
4 of 4
