Jewish Responsibility For The Cross In Luke-Acts -- By: Jon A. Weatherly

Journal: Tyndale Bulletin
Volume: TYNBUL 44:2 (NA 1993)
Article: Jewish Responsibility For The Cross In Luke-Acts
Author: Jon A. Weatherly


Jewish Responsibility For The Cross In Luke-Acts1

Jon A. Weatherly

Since the appearance of Franz Overbeck’s commentary on Acts in 1870, scholars have struggled to define the role of Judaism in Luke-Acts. Following Overbeck’s lead, much Lukan criticism has either asserted or assumed that Luke regards all Jews as sharing in responsibility for the crucifixion of Jesus and so standing under God’s condemnation. Speech material in Acts ascribing responsibility for the cross to Jews is consequently understood as a Lukan creation, a facet of the wider anti-Jewish polemic which characterises the Lukan corpus. This thesis addresses both of these issues: responsibility for the cross in the wider treatment of Jews in Luke-Acts and the origin of material in Acts ascribing responsibility for the cross to Jews.

Close analysis of the relevant texts indicates that Luke in fact does not directly ascribe responsibility for the cross to all Jews but only to Jerusalem specifically. The Sanhedrin leaders, consistently associated with Jerusalem in Luke and Acts, are the focus of this indictment. In the speeches of Acts, however, the people of Jerusalem are likewise charged. The accusation against the people of Jerusalem is consistent with the actions of the crowd before Pilate in Luke’s Gospel, but the specific identification of the crowd as Jerusalemite is found only in the speeches of Acts. Furthermore, Luke apportions responsibility for the cross to Gentiles as well. Thus, according to Luke not all Jews are responsible for Jesus’ death, and not all those responsible are Jews.

Though Luke does not directly indict all Jews for the death of Jesus, it remains possible that by focusing on Jerusalem and the Sanhedrin Luke assigns responsibility to entities which represent the entire Jewish people. Any indication that Luke regards the Jewish nation as a whole as having rejected Jesus and the gospel or that he regards all Israel

as standing under God’s condemnation could well be related to some form of national responsibility for the crucifixion. Such ideas have indeed been attributed to Luke, but examination of the evidence suggests that his emphasis is otherwise. Generalised expressions (‘the people’, ‘this generation’, ‘the Jews’) are used by Luke to specify particular groups in context, not to condemn Jews generally. The notion that the narrative structure of Luke-Acts indicates a final Jewish rejection of the gospel and the end of the church’s Jewish mission likewise does not bear scrutiny. Rather, Luke regards the Jews’ response to Jesus and the gospel as a divided one. Such a response, in Luke’s rendering, is consistent with Is...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()