Jerusalem In Luke-acts

TITLE PAGE

STUDENT ID:

10014453

UNIT:

BS321 – New Testament Three

QUESTION NO.

Four

QUESTION:

How does Jerusalem function in Luke-Acts?

NO. OF WORDS:

3289

DATE DUE:

5th August 2009

DATE SUBMITTED: 5th August 2009

Student Number: 10014453

Page 1 of 18

Synopsis

Within Luke-Acts the city of Jerusalem plays a key role in achieving Luke’s purpose of assuring Theophilus of what he has been taught about God’s work through Jesus. The role of Jerusalem is multifaceted. Jerusalem functions structurally as the narrative is driven forward by Jesus journey’s to the city and ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ progression out from it to the ends of the earth. Jerusalem also functions symbolically as it typifies the expectations and the rejection of Jesus and his witnesses. Finally, Jerusalem functions theologically as Luke demonstrates that the city is replaced by Jesus as the source and location of God’s blessing to his people and all nations.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 2 of 18

When studying Luke it is unmistakable that ‘The city of Jerusalem haunts his Gospel’.1 This becomes even clearer when compared to the other two synoptic gospels.2 The city of Jerusalem is a central figure in both Luke’s Gospel and also in the Acts of the Apostles. Due to Jerusalem’s obvious significance for Luke, it is essential to understand how it functions of within Luke-Acts. In doing so this will further elucidate Luke’s purpose of assuring Theophilus of what he has been taught about the Lord Jesus. As Hastings notes, ‘Once we have grasped the fact of Luke’s preoccupation with Jesus’ going up to Jerusalem we have to ask the reason for it, the significance of it, and hence too the significance of Jerusalem.’3 The function of Jerusalem in achieving this purpose of the narrative is multifaceted. Jerusalem functions structurally in the narrative, it functions symbolically, and finally it functions theologically.

Purpose The purpose of Luke-Acts as a whole can only be spoken of if the deliberate unity and intentionality of the narrative can first be established.4 Despite the challenge of Parsons and Pervo, the scholarly consensus has continued to assert the conclusion that Luke-Acts is a two-part work.5 It seems clear from the texts, particularly the prologues, that as Luke composed his Gospel and Acts they were to be two distinct but

1

W. D. Davies, The Gospel and the Land: Early Christianity and Jewish Territorial Doctrine (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1974). 253. 2 Of the two words for Jerusalem ( Ἰερουσαλήμ and Ἱεροσόλυμα ) they occur fifty-four times in the synoptic gospels and thirty-one of those are in Luke’s Gospel. 3 Adrian Hastings, Prophet and Witness in Jerusalem (Baltimore: Helicon Press, 1958), 103. 4 R. Maddox, The Purpose of Luke-Acts (Edinburgh: Clark, 1982), 4. 5 Mikeal C. Parson and Richard I. Pervo, Rethinking the Unity of Luke and Acts (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993); Luke Timothy Johnson, ‘Luke-Acts, Book of’ Pages 403-20 in vol. 4 of The Anchor Bible Dictionary (eds. David Noel Freedman; 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992), 404.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 3 of 18

closely connected works.6 This essay will proceed on that assumption. Luke-Acts is a two-part work with the Gospel ‘written with at least one eye already on the sequel.’7

Any consideration of the purpose of Luke-Acts must begin with the prologue in Luke 1:1-4 and take into account the obvious pastoral motivation of assurance. Luke was writing so that Theophilus will realise τὴν ἀσφάλειαν (‘stability of an idea, certainty, truth’) of what he has been taught.8 Bock believes the certainty that Luke is assuring Theophilus of is, ‘how God worked to legitimise Jesus and how Jesus proclaimed hope.’9 And by this ‘Luke also wishes to defend God’s faithfulness to Israel and his promises, despite the rejection of the promise by many in the nation.’10 Jerusalem will play a vital role, structurally, symbolically, and theologically, for Luke to achieve his purpose of assuring Theophilus.

Jerusalem functions structurally According to Conzelmann ‘Luke employs geographical factors for the purpose of setting out his fundamental conception’.11 Jerusalem forms a key structural element to the narrative of Luke-Acts. ‘The structure of this two-volume work centres on Jerusalem, with the city acting as the pivot around which the narrative turns.’12 It is clear that within the Gospel the narrative is driven forward by the expectations 6

I. H. Marshall, ‘Acts and the “Former Treatise”’, in B. W. Winter and A. D. Clarke (eds.), The book of Acts in Its First-Century Setting, Vol. 1: Ancient Literary Setting (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 16382; David G. Peterson, The Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 6-8. 7 Ben Witherington III, The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 8. 8 BDAG, 147. 9 Darrell L. Bock, Luke 1:1-9:50 (2 vols. BECNT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1994), 15. 10 Bock, Luke 1:1-9:50, 15. 11 Hans Conzelmann, The Theology of St. Luke (trans. Geoffrey Buswell, New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1961), 27. 12 Walker, Jesus and the Holy City: New Testament Perspectives on Jerusalem. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 58.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 4 of 18

surrounding Jerusalem and by Jesus journey to Jerusalem. Within Acts, Jerusalem functions as ‘home-base’ for the witnesses as the news about Jesus spreads to the ends of the earth. Despite this it could be argued that Jerusalem’s place within the narrative structure is more about the drive away from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth.

‘Unlike the compositions of the other evangelists, the Lucan Gospel begins and ends in Jerusalem’.13 Almost from the outset of his Gospel, Luke sets up expectations surrounding Jerusalem and the role that it will play in the fulfilment of God’s plans. The narrative opens within Jerusalem as Zechariah is told about the birth of John while ministering in the temple (1:5-25). Expectations are heightened further when Jesus is presented at the temple as a baby. Simeon prophesies that Jesus will ‘cause the falling and rising of many in Israel’ (2:34) and at the same moment the prophetess Anna speaks about Jesus as the child who is expected to bring the ‘redemption of Jerusalem’ (2:38). Luke is unique among the gospel writers as he uses these trustworthy characters to set up the expectation that the future of Jerusalem, Israel and the young Jesus are inextricably linked.14 However, Tannehill notes that ‘Anna’s expectation is expressed in a way that will make its later negation sharp and clear.’15 The anticipation of how this boy might redeem Jerusalem urges the narrative forward.

13

Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Luke (The Anchor Bible; New York: Doubleday, 1981), 165. The beginning and end location of the Gospel is nuanced by some authors who place them specifically within the temple itself. 14 Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 150; Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 58. 15 Robert C. Tannehill, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, A Literary Interpretation, Vol. 1: The Gospel According to Luke. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), 35. Tannehill see this negated by the perceived failure of Jesus to bring about the redemption of Jerusalem in line with the expectations expressed by Anna.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 5 of 18

The major movement of Luke’s Gospel is Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem which begins at the key turning point in 9:51 as Jesus ‘set his face to go to Jerusalem.’16 This travel narrative occupies the central chapters of the Gospel (9:51-19:44) as Jesus journeys to his climactic moment in the Holy City. Robert and Feuillet note that Luke ‘deemphasizes all topographical data except those relating to Jerusalem, and the result is striking.’17 Luke builds the tension and anticipation through the narrative with ‘repeated references to journeying, sometimes with a reminder that Jerusalem is the goal (9:53; 13:22, 33; 17:11; 18:31; 19:11, 28), and repeated references to the rejection, death, and resurrection that will happen there (12:49-50; 13:34-33; 16:31; 17:25; 18:3133; 19:14).’18 According to Tannehill this gives ‘a sense of narrative movement and tension to a long section of Luke’s Gospel that otherwise would become a static collection of teachings.’19

Jerusalem also serves as the climactic setting of the Gospel as Jesus’ arrival in the city is the ‘bringing together (of) the two participants in the drama of the passion, Jesus and Jerusalem’.20 This has been expected throughout the travel narrative (9:51-19:44) and the sense of anticipation is heightened as Jesus approaches the city. Once the reader arrives in Jerusalem with Jesus, this becomes the setting for the rest of the Gospel. With the exception of Jesus arrest at the Mount of Olives (22:39-53) and his resurrection appearance on the road to Emmaus (24:13-35) the final scene of the

16

There are brief mentions of Jerusalem between Luke 3:1-9:51. Jesus’ temptation by Satan (4:9-12); the visitors from Jerusalem making up part of the crowds coming to see or hear Jesus (5:17; 6:17); and in the conversation between Moses, Elijah and Jesus about what is to be fulfilled in Jerusalem (9:31). 17 A. Robert and A. Feuillet, Introduction to the New Testament, trans. P. W. Skehan et. al. (New York: Desclée, 1965), 230. 18 Tannehill, Narrative Unity: Luke, 229. 19 Tannehill, Narrative Unity: Luke, 229. 20 Hastings, Prophet and Witness in Jerusalem, 120.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 6 of 18

Gospel is set within or around the Holy City. Unlike Matthew, Jesus does not appear to the disciples in Galilee but near Jerusalem and under Jesus instructions the disciples remain in there as they anticipate the coming of the Holy Spirit (24:49). ‘The sense of closure is supported by reminders of the birth stories with which the gospel began, for a return to initial themes is a way of rounding off a story. Jesus’ disciples ‘returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple blessing God’ (24:5253).21

Acts picks up where the Gospel left off ‘as focus on Jerusalem and the Temple continues’.22 However, as the Gospel’s narrative thrust was Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem, in Acts the narrative thrust will be the spread of ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ from Jerusalem. Acts 1:8 outlines the programme for this spread that structures the book as ὁ λόγος spreads from Jerusalem, to all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth. ‘Here the mission to all nations is developed as a geographical sequence which partly anticipated the course of the story which follows.’23

As Acts develops the followers of Jesus remain in Jerusalem as his witnesses until the persecution following the death of Stephen causes them to be scattered throughout Judea and Samaria (8:1). This begins the journey of ὁ λόγος out from Jerusalem, although Jerusalem is never abandoned of all the witnesses and the narrative frequently returns to the city.24 Chance rejects the notion that Luke is ‘portraying Christianity as a religion straining to sever its ties with Jerusalem’ by asserting that 21

Tannehill, Narrative Unity: Luke, 300-01. Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 58. 23 Tannehill, Narrative Unity: Luke, 296-97. 24 Acts 8:25; 9:26; 11:2, 22, 30; 15:2; 18:22; 19:21; 21:17. 22

Student Number: 10014453

Page 7 of 18

‘Luke is continually bringing the Church back to Jerusalem.’25 However he does qualify this view, ‘While there is no doubt that the Gentile mission moves centrifugally from Jerusalem, it is doubtful that Luke saw the church as severing its ties with this hub.’26 As the message goes out, although Jerusalem is the origin, it is no longer the goal and is not the place to which narrative is driving.

The function of Jerusalem within the narrative structure aids Luke in achieving the purpose of his narrative. As Carson and Moo note,

Luke-Acts together shows how God has acted in history to fulfil his promises to Israel and to create a world-wide body of believers drawn from both Jews and Gentiles. The focus on Jerusalem in both Luke and Acts conveys this movement. As Luke emphasizes (more than any other gospel) the movement toward Jerusalem (e.g. 9:51; 13:33; 17:11), the book of Acts describes a movement away from Jerusalem.27

Walker also agrees, ‘The structure of Luke’s two volume work shows how salvationhistory has moved towards and then from Jerusalem.’28 This movement assures the reader of the legitimate Jewish roots of the hope in Jesus as well as it now being made available to the nations via his authorised witnesses.

25

J. Bradley Chance, Jerusalem, the Temple and the New Age in Luke-Acts (Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1988), 101. 26 Chance, Jerusalem, the Temple and the New Age, 101. 27 D. A. Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament (2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 202. 28 Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 57.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 8 of 18

Jerusalem functions symbolically As well as functioning structurally for the narrative, Jerusalem also functions symbolically. Jerusalem begins as a symbol for the hopes and expectations that God will redeem his people. As the opposition increases, Jerusalem increasingly becomes a symbol of opposition to God and his Messiah. It is the place where Jesus must go to die. It begins to represent the rejection of Israel as Jerusalem rejects God’s Messiah and then his witnesses. This continues through and increases throughout Acts as Jerusalem becomes increasingly hostile to the witnesses of Jesus.

Luke-Acts begins with high expectations for Jerusalem with its anticipation and acceptance of Jesus as a baby. This is exemplified by Zechariah, Elizabeth, Simeon and Anna who ‘are modelled after great figures of old Testament piety.’29 The birth and infancy narratives (Luke 1-2) exhibit a city and its people who are willing to embrace Jesus as the redeemer of Jerusalem and of Israel from the subjugation of Rome. As Hastings remarks, ‘We find Jerusalem and the temple faithfully accepting its newborn Lord. […] In the temple Simeon takes Jesus in his arms, Anna gives thanks, the learned doctors listen with amazement to the answers of Jesus. […] This is how Jerusalem should have received its Lord.’30

Indications of the coming conflict with Jerusalem are anticipated as those from Jerusalem appear within the crowds that oppose Jesus (5:17).31 Block argues that the phrase τὸ πρόσωπον ἐστήρισεν τοῦ πορεύεσθαι is a Hebrew idiom that ‘indicates a determination to accomplish a task’ anticipating opposition much like the prophets of 29

Chance, Jerusalem, the Temple and the New Age, 48. Hastings, Prophet and Witness in Jerusalem, 120-21. 31 Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 69. 30

Student Number: 10014453

Page 9 of 18

old.32 Luke is already pre-empting the opposition that awaits Jesus in Jerusalem. The first explicit mention of the hostility that awaits Jesus in Jerusalem occurs in his lament for the children of the city in Luke 13:32-35. Jesus identifies with God’s desire to care for and protect the city and it’s people but the city was not willing to accept him.33 As a result, Jerusalem will live up to its reputation as the city that kills the messengers of God and will be left desolate as a consequence. 34

From this point Jerusalem takes the lead in the opposition and rejection of Jesus as he travels towards his inevitable death. Upon approaching Jerusalem, Jesus shares the Parable of the Ten Minas anticipating his rejection (19:11-27). The poignant condemnation comes as Jesus concludes in the words of the King, ‘But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me’ (19:27). Now is the time when Jesus will come as King. God will see what his servants have done with what he has given them as in the parable. Immediately following this Jesus enters Jerusalem and as Tannehill points out,

Luke, in contrast to Matthew and Mark, specifies that it is the “multitude of disciples” who rejoice at Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem and say, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.” […] Jerusalem does not join in this and so does not “see” Jesus in the crucial sense. The disciples also proclaim

32

Darrell L. Bock, Luke 9:51-24:53 (2 vols. BECNT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1996), 968. David W. Pao and Eckhard J. Schnabel, ‘Luke’, Pages 251-414 in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson eds. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007, p. 336. 34 Bock, Luke 9:51-24:53, 1249. 33

Student Number: 10014453

Page 10 of 18

Jesus as “the king” in 19:38. Jerusalem […] does not join in this proclamation.35

Jerusalem has not recognised Jesus’ coming to them as king. ‘In 1:78-79 Zechariah prophesied that “a dawning from on high will visit (ἐπισκέψεται) us […] to guide our feet into a way of peace.” But now Jerusalem fails to recognise the crucial time of “visitation” or the things that lead to “peace”.’36 Jerusalem’s failure to recognise Jesus turns into overt rejection. This leads to clearer announcements of judgement and condemnation upon Jerusalem (Luke 21:20-24; 23:27-31) as it grows into its role as a symbol of Jewish rejection of God’s Messiah. ‘Jerusalem turns Jezabel [sic] and the central theme of the third gospel is the clash of Jesus and Jerusalem.’37 As Brawley concludes,

Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem leads up to one of the most negative characterisations of God in connection with the Jewish people (Luke 19:4244). With antecedents in 13:35 and elaborations in 21:20-24, Jesus announces the devastation of Jerusalem and its populace as a consequence of the city’s failure to recognize the things that make for peace. The crowds on the descent from the Mount of Olives recognize Jesus as God’s ἐπισκοπή

35

Tannehill, Narrative Unity: Luke, 158-59. Tannehill, Narrative Unity: Luke, 159. 37 Hastings, Prophet and Witness in Jerusalem, 98. 36

Student Number: 10014453

Page 11 of 18

(“visitation”). Who then does not recognise Jerusalem’s ἐπισκοπή? It is possible for Jerusalem to stand synecdochically for Israel as a whole.38

According to Tannehill, ‘the ending of Luke left another unresolved issue: the rejection of Jesus by the people of Jerusalem and their leaders.’39 Despite the call to repent throughout the speeches in Jerusalem (Acts 2:31-40; 3:19-23; 4:10-12; 5:30-32; 7:51-53; 22:14-16), their rejection of God’s Messiah continues throughout Acts as Luke portrays Jerusalem’s hostility to the message and witnesses of Jesus (Acts 6:9; 7:54-8:3; 9:2; 12:1-10). As Walker notes,

From the time of Stephen, Jerusalem becomes a perilous place for Jesus' followers […]. When Paul is arrested in Acts 21 it is clear that, despite the valiant presence of the Jerusalem church, Jerusalem as a whole wants nothing further to do with this new ‘way’: ‘all the city’ was ‘aroused . . . and dragged him out of the Temple’; ‘all Jerusalem was in an uproar’ (21:30-31; cf. Luke 23:1, 18, 25). Effectively Jesus had been rejected once again by Jerusalem.40

The on going rejection of Jerusalem is well illustrated by the way that Paul’s journey to Jerusalem (Acts 19:21-21-16) echoes Jesus journey in the Gospel (Luke 9:51-19:44).41 Paul must endure the rejection of Jerusalem as the city becomes a symbol of the

38

Robert L. Brawley, ‘The God of Promises and the Jews in Luke-Acts’, pages 279-296 in Literary Studies in Luke-Acts: Essays in Honour of Joseph B. Tyson. (eds. Richard P. Thompson and Thomas E. Phillips. Marcon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1998), 285. 39 Robert C. Tannehill, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, A Literary Interpretation: Vol. 2: The Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1994), 6. 40 Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 90. 41 David G. Peterson, The Acts of the Apostles (The Pillar New Testament Commentary, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 543.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 12 of 18

ongoing rejection of the Messiah.42 The place that Jerusalem plays in its rejection of Jesus and his messengers functions in Luke-Acts as an apologetic to achieve Luke’s purpose. It validates the witnesses as true followers of Jesus as they experience the same rejection as Jesus. It also vindicates God’s judgement on Israel and his faithfulness to his promises as it is Jerusalem who have rejected Jesus and his messengers rather than God abandoning his people.

Jerusalem functions theologically The final function of Jerusalem within Luke-Acts is theological. The theological function of Jerusalem is clearly the most controversial amongst scholars and typically reveals their prior theological convictions about how God has been, or will be, faithful to his promises to the nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem. Although the future of Jerusalem as a city seems clear in the destruction prophesied by Jesus, Luke alludes to the hopes of Jerusalem being fulfilled in Jesus himself. As Wright suggests, ‘when Jesus came to Jerusalem he came embodying a counter-system. He and the city were both making claims to be the place where the living God, Israel’s God, was at work to heal, restore and regroup his people.’43

As has been demonstrated, Luke’s Gospel begins with great hopes that through Jesus God will bring about the fulfilment of his promises and save his people Israel and restore Jerusalem (Luke 1:32-33, 46-55, 67-79; 2:11, 28-33, 38, 52). This optimism anticipates that Jesus’ ministry will be the city’s finest hour and will result in blessing 42

Tannehill, Narrative Unity: Acts, 240. Tom Wright, ‘Jerusalem in the New Testament’, Pages 53-77 in Jerusalem: Past and Present in the Purposes of God (P. W. L. Walker eds. Cambridge: Tyndale House, 1992), 59. 43

Student Number: 10014453

Page 13 of 18

going to the nations.44 That said, the Gospel ends with Jerusalem seemingly unchanged and no great outpouring of blessings to nations. However, Jerusalem’s place in salvation-history has shifted considerably. Jerusalem has rejected God’s Messiah and therefore rejected God (Luke 13:34-35; 19:44). As a consequence, God has passed judgement on the city (Luke 21:20-24; 23:27-31) and the only hope of restoration will be spiritual through repentance and trust in Jesus (Acts 2:38-39; 3:1921; 4:12; 5:30-32; 7:51-53; 22:14-16). This is articulated most clearly in Stephen’s speech as he clarifies the place of the temple in the purposes and presence of God.45 This speech begins a discernible shift in Acts away from the temple and Jerusalem with it no longer featuring significantly in the narrative until Paul arrives in Acts 21:26.46

Jerusalem is no longer the gathering point for those who want to be in the presence of God or experience his salvation. The preaching of the disciples throughout Acts calls people to come to Jesus, not to Jerusalem (Acts 2:38-39; 3:19-21; 4:12; 5:30-32; 7:5153; 22:14-16). As Wright acknowledges, ‘His death would therefore be the means of drawing to its climax the wrath of God against the nation, forging a way through that wrath and out the other side; as a result, all who wanted to do so could follow his way, be joined to his people, and find rescue from the great imminent disaster’.47

44

Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 77; Ron C. Fay. ‘The Narrative Function of the Temple in LukeActs’. Trinity Journal. 27.2, (2006) 255-270. 261. 45 Peterson, Acts, 262. 46 Although Jerusalem and the Temple are not synonymous in Luke-Acts it can be argued that there is a particularly tight connection between them in the opening sections Acts. See Fay. ‘Narrative Function of the Temple’, 268. 47 Wright, ‘Jerusalem in the New Testament’, 63.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 14 of 18

Luke’s theological presentation of Jerusalem is that of a place that is embodied and replaced by Jesus himself. Hastings remarks that the concept of Jerusalem as a place where humans can meet God is now ‘realized not in a place but in a person, the Lord Jesus […]. There is a new Jerusalem not made by hands, and within it Jesus is the temple.’48 Jesus is now the place where salvation is found. Jesus’ own body was the place where judgement was exercised and God’s wrath poured out. Through repentance and trust in Jesus all people, Jews and Gentiles can experience the salvation and blessing of God.

Not all observers share this optimistic theological assessment of Jesus fulfilling the hopes and expectations of the city. Tannehill concludes,

‘That the close of Acts is not a triumphant but tragic and anguished in tone becomes clear when we compare this scene with the purposes of God announced earlier in Luke-Acts. […] God’s purposes have been blocked by human resistance, at least temporarily. Paul’s commission indicates that he shares in the failure. He was sent to both the Jews and Gentiles “to open their eyes” so that they might share in the “light” that the Messiah brings (Acts 26:17-18, 23). Now he must confirm that the people have closed their eyes. To this extent his mission is a failure. […] the chief emphasis of the end of Acts is on the unresolved problem of Jewish rejection.’49

48 49

Hastings, Prophet and Witness in Jerusalem, 179. Tannehill, Narrative Unity: Acts, 348-49.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 15 of 18

It is difficult to agree with Tannehill’s assessment of the tone at the conclusion of Acts. Despite the ongoing rejection and opposition to Jesus and his followers symbolised by Jerusalem, the concluding note of Acts is positive. Jesus has achieved his purpose of sending his witnesses to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8). Now away from Jerusalem Paul was able to preach ‘the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ— with all boldness and without hindrance’ (Acts 28:31). Jesus has fulfilled the hopes and expectations established at the beginning of the gospel. Luke communicates this theological by establishing that Jesus has replaced Jerusalem as the source of God’s blessing to the nations.

‘Luke’s plot centres on Jerusalem not Galilee, and far from giving a still picture it presents us with a powerful and tragic drama.’50 As has been demonstrated, Jerusalem’s function in Luke-Acts is multifaceted. Luke employs the Holy City as a narrative device to structure his presentation of Jesus’ fulfilment of the hopes of the city. Jerusalem also functions as a symbol of the hope but also rejection of Jesus and his messengers. Finally, the city functions theologically as Luke demonstrates that Jesus fulfils the hope and expectations of Jerusalem and replaces it as the source of salvation and blessing. These three functions of Jerusalem all serve Luke’s purpose of assuring his reader of the certainty of what had been taught about how God brought salvation through Jesus.

50

Hastings, Prophet and Witness in Jerusalem, 98.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 16 of 18

Bibliography of Sources Cited Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, (BDAG). Third Edition. Edited and revised by Frederick William Danker. Chicago; University of Chicago Press, 2001. Bock, Darrell L. Luke 1:1-9:50. 2 vols. BECNT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1994. _____. Luke 9:51-24:53. 2 vols. BECNT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1996. _____. Acts. BECNT. Grand Rapids: Baker Publishing, 2007. Carson, D. A. and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. Second Edition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005. Chance, J. Bradley. Jerusalem, the Temple and the New Age in Luke-Acts. Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1988. Conzelmann, Hans. The Theology of St. Luke. Translated by Geoffrey Buswell. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1961. Davies, W. D. The Gospel and the Land: Early Christianity and Jewish Territorial Doctrine. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1974. Fay, Ron C. ‘The Narrative Function of the Temple in Luke-Acts’. Trinity Journal. 27.2, (2006) 255-270. Fitzmyer, Joseph A. Luke. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1981. Green, Joel B. The Gospel of Luke. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997. Hastings, Adrian. Prophet and Witness in Jerusalem. Baltimore: Helicon Press, 1958. Johnson, Luke Timothy. ‘Luke-Acts, Book of’. Pages 403-20 in Vol. 4 of The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992. Maddox, R. The Purpose of Luke-Acts. Edinburgh: Clark, 1982.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 17 of 18

Marshall, I. H. ‘Acts and the “Former Treatise” ’. Pages 163-82 in The Book of Acts in Its First-Century Setting, Vol. 1: Ancient Literary Setting. Edited by B. W. Winter and A. D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993. Pao, David W. and Eckhard J. Schnabel. ‘Luke’, Pages 251-414 in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson eds. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007, Parson, Mikeal C., and Richard I. Pervo. Rethinking the Unity of Luke and Acts. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. Peterson, David G. The Acts of the Apostles. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. Robert, A., and A. Feuillet. Introduction to the New Testament. Translated by P. W. Skehan et. al. New York: Desclée, 1965. Tannehill. Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, A Literary Interpretation, Vol. 1: The Gospel According to Luke. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986. _____. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, A Literary Interpretation: Vol. 2: The Acts of the Apostles. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1994. Walker, P. W. L. Jesus and the Holy City: New Testament Perspectives on Jerusalem. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996. Witherington III, Ben. The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.

Student Number: 10014453

Page 18 of 18