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 'non-
atonement' 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