Recentering Christianity on the Resurrection: my thoughts on the Book of Acts

Introduction

My purpose here is to recenter Christianity on the Resurrection of Jesus and away from the Crucifixion by examining the book of Acts.  It is my contention that evangelical theology has put way too much focus on the Crucifixion and that this has damaged both evangelical theology and evangelical praxis.  The book of Acts is, I think, a superb example of the relative importance of the Resurrection of Jesus vis-a-vis the Crucifixion.

Luke's Summaries

Luke summarizes his gospel's presentation by noting that Jesus "presented himself living, after he suffered."  Peter states that Jesus' suffering fulfilled what was foretold in the prophets (3:18).  Similarly, Paul uses scripture to show that it was necessary for Jesus to suffer (17:2-3).  In fact, in Luke's gospel, Jesus also says that "it has been written that the Messiah is to suffer and to rise from the dead on the third day" (Lk 24:26).  No doubt, Jesus death comes under the rubric of suffering but the word suffering seems to go beyond mere crucifixion.  These summaries are small clues that the focus of Luke (and Peter, Paul, and Jesus) was not the crucifixion.

Choosing the Twelve

Peter says something interesting when he claims that the twelfth disciple must be a witness to the resurrection (1:22).  Notice he does not mention that the twelfth must be a witness to the death of Jesus.  The theme of being a witness to Jesus' resurrection is found in other passages in Acts:
     2:32: This Jesus God raised of which we are all witnesses
     3:15: the Author of life you killed, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses
     4:33: with great power the apostles were giving testimony of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus
     10:40-41: this one God raised up...and granted him to be visible...to witnesses...
     13:30-31:  God raised him up...to those who are now witnesses of him to the people.
The notion of being a witness to Jesus' crucifixion is entirely absent.

Peter's Pentecost Sermon

Peter's Pentecost sermon highlights Jesus' resurrection: "God raised him up, having destroyed the birth pains of death, because it was impossible for him to be held in its power" (2:24).  After noting that David had died and was buried, he goes on to quote a psalm where David alludes to the resurrection of Jesus: "For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One experience corruption" (2:31, quoting Psalm 16:10).  Peter does mention Jesus' death but only to mention the role taken by his audience: "this man...you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men" (2:23).  Most of the references to Jesus' death are stated to implicate his killers: 3:15; 4:10; 7:52; 10:39; 13:28.

Another theme in Peter's sermon is Jesus' exaltation, a direct result of his resurrection (and not his crucifixion).  "This Jesus God raised up...being therefore exalted at the right hand of God."  David is again used as a foil (2:34) and a Psalm is quoted (2:34-35, quoting Psalm 110:1).  Jesus' exaltation also appears many times in Acts, passages often referred to as exhibiting "Resurrection Christology."  Besides 2:32-36, we have:  5:31: "God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior that he might give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins."  Note that the notion of Jesus as Savior and of the forgiveness of sins is not at all connected with Jesus' crucifixion, but with Jesus' resurrection/exaltation.  Another exaltation passage is 7:55-56 and another "Resurrection Christology" passage is 13:32-33: "And we bring you the good news that what God promised to our ancestors he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising Jesus; as it is written in the second psalm, 'You are my Son; today I have begotten you.'"

Peter's Speech at Solomon's Portico
As quoted above (3:15), Peter says that Jesus is the Author of life.  There is some question as to the exact meaning of the greek word for "author" but is may have to do with Jesus as the firstfruits of the resurrection.

Peter's and John's Arrest

We are told that what annoyed the priests, the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, was that Peter and John were proclaiming that in Jesus there is the resurrection of the dead (4:2).  Interestingly, Peter describes Jesus as a Nazarene whom his audience crucified but that God raised him from the dead (4:10).  No mention is made of the crucifixion as a theologically significant event.  Similarly, at his second arrest, Peter and the apostles open their defense with a direct reference to Jesus' resurrection:  "The God of our ancestors raised up Jesus, whom you killed by hanging on a tree" (5:30).

Peter's speech in Caesarea

Peter offers a summary of Jesus earthly life to Cornelius and again refers to Jesus' resurrection: They put him to death by hanging him on a tree; but God raised him on the third day..." (10:39-40).

Paul at Athens

In Athens we are told that Paul was said to be a proclaimer of strange divinities, because he was preaching Jesus and the Resurrection (17:18, it seems it was thought that "Resurrection" was the name of a god/goddess).  Paul also states that God "has fixed a day on which he will have the world judged in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead" (17:31-32).

Paul's Arrest and Defense

When he was before the Sanhedrin, Paul says he was "on trial concerning the hope of the resurrection of the dead" (23:6).  Paul says the same thing at a later trial (24:21).  At the trial before Felix, Paul says he has a hope in God that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and unrighteous.  Before Agrippa and Bernice, Paul says: "I stand on trial on account of my hope in the promise made by God to our ancestors, a promise that our twelve tribes hope to attain, as they earnestly worship day and night.  It is for this hope, your excellency, that I am accused by Jews!  Why is it incredible by any of you that God raises the dead" (16:6-8)?

Lack of Crucifixion Atonement Theology

Forgiveness of sins in Acts mostly is dependent upon repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus (see 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 11:18; 22:16; 26:18).  The only possible exceptions are 8:32-33 and 20:28.  20:28 reads as follows: "...the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son."  However, blood here may just be another term for life because Paul uses the same word a couple of verses prior: "I am innocent of the blood of all" (20:26).  Isaiah 53 is proof-texted in 8:32-33 but the section quoted stops just short of the part about being put to death for the transgressions of others.

Conclusion

I have tried to show the importance of the resurrection as a theological category and how it overshadows any crucifixion theology.  This is true in Paul's letters (as I have argued elsewhere) and especially true in Acts.  It's time for us evangelicals to follow suit.

Meaning of "Hallowed be thy name"

Hallowed be Thy Name

I want to point out that there is a sense of “Hallowed be thy name” in the Lord’s Prayer that is probably original but is not the usual sense given to that phrase.

The archaic English word “hallowed” means to sanctify or to make holy. In the OT, there are two basic senses of hallowing: 1) humans hallow God’s name or do not profane God’s name by being rightly related to God; 2) God sanctifies his own self or name. The first is the more usual sense given to “hallowed” and so on this reading the phrase in question is really a pious exclamation. The second sense, however, is the more common one in the OT, and it is this sense that I want to claim is the one Jesus meant. On this reading, Jesus is asking God to sanctify his own name. God does this by manifesting his Godly qualities. This is especially true in Ezekiel (20:41; 28:22, 25; 36:23; 38:16, 23; 39:27).

One argument for the second sense is to analyze the structure of the Lord’s Prayer which is certainly obscured in English translations (I’ll take Matthew’s version):

Our Father, the one in the heavens,

     Let be revered the name of you

     Let come the kingdom of you

     Let be done the will of you

As in heaven also on earth

The three middle phrases all share a similar grammatical structure and all are not connected by the word “and”. These facts help tie together the three phrases. Once the three phrases are treated on par, then it is easy to take the sense of hallowing as something God himself does. If Jesus is asking God to rule as king and to do his will, then it is likely that he is asking God to sanctify his name. The last phrase most likely pertains to all three middle phrases and not just to the last as is commonly thought. Jesus is asking God for the eschatological realities to be realities in the here-and-now.

Another argument for the second sense of hallowed comes from the Gospel of John 12:28 where Jesus says “Father, glorify your name.” Note the use of “Father”, which is all we find in Luke’s version of the Lord’s Prayer. It is clear that Jesus is asking God to glorify his own name.

Good Friday 4/15/22

Judgment Seat of Christ

It is common among evangelicals to separate the "judgment seat of Christ" (as used by Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:10) from the last, Great White Throne judgment. The logic of this separation is backed up by the concept stated in Romans 8:1 that in Christ there is no condemnation, so that the "judgment seat of Christ" must be a sort of sham kangaroo court for Christians where no judgment is really rendered. The Great White Throne judgment is for non-Christians, where the judgment is always in the negative.

I think there are at least three devastating arguments against this separation.
Argument 1: Analysis of Romans 8:1
This argument undercuts most of the rationale for having two separate judgments. In Romans 8:1, Paul says that "There is now then no condemnation to the ones in Christ Jesus." The key to this verse is the phrase "in Christ". To be "in Christ" for Paul is to be incorporated with Christ so as to share things that are of Christ. A natural reading of Romans 8 would be to take this "in Christ" as a sort of eschatological ideal. Those who walk in the Spirit are those "in Christ". However, we are not told if there is any tension within a person that doesn't totally walk in the Spirit but also walks in the flesh. It is in this double walking case, which includes everyone, and not the eschatological ideal of Romans 8:1, that calls for judgment.

Argument 2: Romans 14:10
This argument relies on a sister-wording "judgment seat of God" which in context clearly includes Christians. Therefore, the special wording "judgment seat of Christ" may not be of much significance. This reminds me of an error Mormans make in interpreting the doublets of Hebrew poetry. Just because there are two different words used (for example: "Zion" and "Jerusalem"), does not mean that two different locations are in mind.

Argument 3: Jesus' Parables do not allude to a Kangaroo Court
When Jesus speaks of judgment, it always seems to involve one process. A prime example of this is the parable of the wheat and weeds in Matthew 13:24-30 where clearly one judgment is in mind.

I believe these arguments show that the "judgment seat of Christ" as a sham judgment is itself a sham. It is motivated by a theological picture that ignores any mention of good/bad works and how that is judged.