I’m happy to say my Secular Frontier blog post of my interview with Ed looks like it will be in this month’s Biblical Studies Carnival: ** you do not have permission to see this link **
Basically what I’m arguing is that I think Jesus’ words from the cross in Luke are really informative: “Father forgive them. They don’t know what they are doing (Luke 23:34).” So, from that quote, (i) the one point is that the issue is about forgiving sins rather than punishing them. And, (ii) the other point is that the people can’t see that they are sinful, so the veils over their eyes need to be lifted so they can truly see themselves for what they are and repent. Forgiveness is powerless without repentance, like a wife who continually forgives a spouse who won’t stop cheating. This is basically what I’m trying to argue against the penal substitution interpretation of the cross that says Jesus died in our place to pay our sin debt.
Dr. Ehrman comments:
- It is easy to see Luke’s own distinctive view by considering what he has to say in the book of Acts, where the apostles give a number of speeches in order to convert others to the faith. What is striking is that in none of these instances (look, e.g., in chapters 3, 4, 13), do the apostles indicate that Jesus’ death brings atonement for sins. It is not that Jesus’ death is unimportant. It’s extremely important for Luke. But not as an atonement. Instead, Jesus death is what makes people realize their guilt before God (since he died even though he was innocent). Once people recognize their guilt, they turn to God in repentance, and then he forgives their sins. (ehrmanblog, 2017)
I’ve always been attracted to the possibility that the author of Luke might have been a proselyte to Judaism before becoming a Christian. Not proof, of course, but worth considering the possibility.
An interesting idea considering the problems Paul had with gentile converts who seem to have had no previous familiarity with Judaism. I’ve always been curious about Mark. The scholarly consensus is that Mark is most likely a gentile but his main theme is to redefine Messianic expectations. Perhaps only a gentile would feel able to do that but where did Mark get his understanding of Messianic expectation in the first place?
Regarding the “paying sin debt” interpretation of the cross vs “moral influence” interpretation, we are having an interesting conversation of whether Moral Influence is compatible with the Christ Myth Theory over at the Internet Infidels Discussion Board. Come check the thread out and share your thoughts: ** you do not have permission to see this link **
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert