The Paradox of Salvation

It is frequently alleged that Luke has no theologia crucis, or, at best, a weakened one. Examination of three distinctive, interrelated elements at the heart of the Lukan passion narrative strongly suggests that this is a mistaken assessment and that Luke does have a clear, coherent understanding of Jesus' death within God's salvation plan, and not merely as a prelude to resurrection. This examination takes seriously the pervasive Lukan insistence on ‘fulfilment’ and finds a key interpretative element in Wisdom's δίκαιος-model; the case for this is developed throughout part II and extended in chapter 7. Although this examination originally worked with the two-document hypothesis and explored Luke's redaction of Mark, because its argument stands without recourse to that hypothesis the work has been rewritten to examine Luke–Acts in its own right. One element in the original presentation has, however, been retained: the argument assumes throughout that Luke's purposes are directed to building up a mixed Christian community and not to developing a political apologetic.

Luke is alleged to have no theologia crucis

What, precisely, is the nature of this widespread complaint against Luke? It is alleged that in Luke–Acts Jesus' death is ‘played down’. Kiddle (1935, p. 273) was sure that Luke systematically diminished the tragic, momentous colouring of the passion as it is recorded in Matthew and Mark. According to Kiddle, for Luke, Jesus' death is ‘more political’ and ‘less religious’ (1935, p. 272).