The Acts of the Apostles

The Acts of the Apostles The Acts of the Apostles

khazarzar.skeptik.net
from khazarzar.skeptik.net More from this publisher
18.07.2013 Views

286 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES alone,^ but for the Jews this doctrine was only neces- sary in so far as they fell short of the fulfilment of the Law, and therefore, beside and apart from the Law, still required the forgiveness of sins in order to be quite righteous (xiii. 38, 39). On the whole St. Luke, though himself a Gentile, stands nearer than St. Paul to the Law—we may therefore also call his attitude more primitive ; for it is certainly not to be regarded as reactionary, but as the reflexion of the historical conditions of a time when the Jewish Christians still played a very important part, and when the Gentile Christians had not yet lost their reverence for the religio a7itiqua, and had not yet arrived at a distinct self-consciousness of their own in the face of Judaism. Though St. Luke may even give an allegorical interpretation of a passage in the Law, he still regards Law, Temple, and Vow as what they really were, and he values them as such veiy highly. This position of his becomes still more clear as we consider his attitude towards the Jexcish natron. He took over from St. Paul the theory of the predetermined hardening of the heart of the Jewish nation, and he seems here to have gone further than St. Paul, since he does not repeat the Pauline thought that still at last iraq 'la-parjk arcoOrja-erai. But upon closer consideration it will be seen that his judgment of the Jewish people is not sterner than that of St. Paul. In the first place, the disparaging « ol ^lovSaioi " of " St. John '"* is found very rarely in his writings, though it is already coming into use with 1 Yet also this may be disputed with reference to x. 35 {iv iravrl idyei

EXCURSUS IV 287 St. Paul. In spite of the theory of " final hardening," St. Luke does not regard the Jews as a massa proditionis et perditionis, but differentiates between them according to their natural and spiritual quali- ties (vide supra, pp. xxiii.j^.). Again, passages like St. Luke i. 72-79 ; ii. 31, 32, &c., show that he conceived of the Gospel as the " consolation of Israel," and that he recognised in it a twofold function : it both fulfilled the promises given to the people of Abraham Kara a-dpKa, and it was a light to the Gentiles.^ If St. Luke held this view of the Gospel it necessarily follows that a thought like that of Rom. xi. 25 f. could not have been so very far from him, or that he at least cherished similar thoughts. According to him, St. Paul contended for the Resurrection as for a hope that was common to both Jews and Christians. Above all, we must once again (vide supra, pp. 50 /.) point out that " o Xaos " (6 Xaog rov Oeov) is for St. Luke the Jewish nation. Bejbre his eyes Christendom stands in two camps—still, indeed, separate from one another first the Jewish people, that is, the pious Israelites who had accepted Jesus as the Lord ; secondly, the eOpij, who had been cifterwards called to the standard.'^ This Gentile Christian author is still very retiring, and his self-consciousness as a Gentile Christian is still un- developed. He is certain that he and his fellow 1 The canticles in St. Luke i. ii. are, in vocabulary, style, and thought, the property of St. Luke. If, however, it is thought that he received them from elsewhere, we can prove from other passages in the Lukan writings that these conceptions are Lukan. 2 St. Luke nowhere regards Jewish and Gentile Christians as bound together in such unity as is pictured in the Epistle to the Ephesians. Their separation from one another does not disturb him. —

286 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES<br />

alone,^ but for <strong>the</strong> Jews this doctrine was only neces-<br />

sary in so far as <strong>the</strong>y fell short <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> fulfilment <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> Law, and <strong>the</strong>refore, beside and apart from <strong>the</strong> Law,<br />

still required <strong>the</strong> forgiveness <strong>of</strong> sins in order to be<br />

quite righteous (xiii. 38, 39). On <strong>the</strong> whole St. Luke,<br />

though himself a Gentile, stands nearer than St. Paul<br />

to <strong>the</strong> Law—we may <strong>the</strong>refore also call his attitude<br />

more primitive ; for it is certainly not to be regarded<br />

as reactionary, but as <strong>the</strong> reflexion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> historical<br />

conditions <strong>of</strong> a time when <strong>the</strong> Jewish Christians still<br />

played a very important part, and when <strong>the</strong> Gentile<br />

Christians had not yet lost <strong>the</strong>ir reverence for <strong>the</strong><br />

religio a7itiqua, and had not yet arrived at a distinct<br />

self-consciousness <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir own in <strong>the</strong> face <strong>of</strong> Judaism.<br />

Though St. Luke may even give an allegorical interpretation<br />

<strong>of</strong> a passage in <strong>the</strong> Law, he still regards Law,<br />

Temple, and Vow as what <strong>the</strong>y really were, and he values<br />

<strong>the</strong>m as such veiy highly.<br />

This position <strong>of</strong> his becomes still more clear as we<br />

consider his attitude towards <strong>the</strong> Jexcish natron. He<br />

took over from St. Paul <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> predetermined<br />

hardening <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> heart <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Jewish nation,<br />

and he seems here to have gone fur<strong>the</strong>r than St.<br />

Paul, since he does not repeat <strong>the</strong> Pauline thought<br />

that still at last iraq 'la-parjk arcoOrja-erai. But upon<br />

closer consideration it will be seen that his judgment<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Jewish people is not sterner than that <strong>of</strong><br />

St. Paul. In <strong>the</strong> first place, <strong>the</strong> disparaging « ol<br />

^lovSaioi " <strong>of</strong> " St. John '"*<br />

is found very rarely in his<br />

writings, though it is already coming into use with<br />

1 Yet also this may be disputed with reference to x. 35 {iv iravrl<br />

idyei

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!