Commenting on the relationship between justification, the forgiveness of sins, and the resurrection of Jesus, Brandon Crowe wrote:
[H]ow does the
resurrection related to the forgiveness of sins and the law of Moses in
13:38-39? Does Luke’s account of Paul’s speech shed light on the doctrine of
justification, perhaps even in a way that is consistent with Paul’s letters? In
verses 38-39 Luke speaks of being justified by faith in Jesus (en toutō pas ho pisetuōn dikaioutai), in
contrast to what it was not possible to be justified (dikaiōthēnai) from (apo)
by the law of Moses. Despite the preference
of many modern English translations, the language of dikaioō in verses 38-39 is best translated in terms of being
justified, rather than being freed. From
what is a person justified? It must be from sin. Paul uses similar language
in Romans 6:7: “For the one who has died has been justified [dedikaiōtai] from [apo] sin.” The Lukan Paul in Acts 13 correlates justification
by faith (v. 39) with the forgiveness of sins (v. 38). Significantly, this good
news derives from Paul’s exposition of the resurrection, which is apparent from
oun and dia touto in Acts 13:38. These refer back to Jesus, who was raised
and did not see decay (vv. 36-37).
But how close is
the Pisidian Antioch speech in Acts to the Pauline doctrine of justification?
Has Luke misunderstood, or only half understood Paul? Although Paul does speak
of justification in contrast to the law of Moses (e.g., Gal. 2:16; 3:11; 5:4),
it is objected that Paul speaks less clearly about the correlation of
forgiveness of sins to justification. However, if the “we” passages in Luke are
taken at face value to indicate that Luke accompanied Paul on some of his
travels (which remains the best view), then it beggars belief to think that
Luke has misunderstood this key theological emphasis of an apostle he knew
personally. A better view is that Acts 13:38-39 provides another angle on the (“Pauline”)
doctrine of justification and one that supports the “older” perspective on Paul—namely,
that one’s right standing before God does not depend on one’s adherence to the
law of Moses and that justification entails the forgiveness of sins.
Particularly
pertinent for the present discussion is the relationship in Acts 13 between
justification and Jesus’s resurrection. The casual link between Jesus’s
resurrection and believers’ justification in Paul’s Pisidian Antioch sermon
recalls similar connections in Paul’s letters. For example, in Romans 4:24-25 believers are justified because of Jesus’ resurrection. Thus Romans speaks of justification
on the basis of Christ’s resurrection, in addition to justification on the
basis of Christ’s death (cf. 3:24-25). This variety of emphasis in Paul further
encourages readers of Acts not to misconstrue Luke’s understanding of the
atoning work of Christ—justification is not based upon either the death of Christ or
his resurrection; it is based on Christ’s entire work.
It is also noteworthy
that Paul relates the resurrection of Christ to Adam in both Romans 5 and 1
Corinthians 15. In both cases, the obedience of the last Adam leads to life for
those with faith in Christ (Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:20-49). These passages
relate the obedience of Christ to his resurrection, which Luke also does. Not
only does Luke clearly view Christ as a new Adam (cf. Luke 3:38), but Jesus is
consistently identified as the Holy and Righteous One (using the dik- word group; see Luke 23:47; Acts
3:14-15) who did not see decay. Jesus’s resurrection in Acts is predicated in
large measure upon his perfect obedience (see the use of Ps. 16 in Acts 2:24-36;
13:34-37; cf. 13:22), which is similar to Paul’s Adam Christology (Rom. 5:18-19;
1 Cor. 15:21-22). Luke and Paul agree
that justification comes through the resurrection of the perfectly righteous
one. (Brandon D.
Crowe, The Hope of Israel: The
Resurrection of Christ in the Acts of the Apostles [Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Baker Academic, 2020], 63-64, emphasis in bold added)
The above is important for many reasons, including (1) it refutes the naïve
Protestant understanding of John 19:30 and (2) by linking Acts 13:38-39 with
Rom 6:7 vis-à-vis the meaning of δικαιοω, it provides further support to the Latter-day Saint understanding of
the relationship between justification and sanctification. For more on these
issues, see:
