Thursday, May 11, 2023

Joshua Marshall Stahan on the the Possible Influence of High Christology on Luke 23:34a

  

High Christology. A high Christology might lead to an omission for several reasons. First, a scribe may believe that killing Christ was too heinous to be excusable. Second, the text may seem to contradict Jesus’ words that the ignorant sinner will still receive punishment (Luke 12:48; 19:44). Third, a scribe might also see an inconsistency with 23:29-31 (“For the days are surely coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren . . . ‘”) if he were to interpret these verses as Jesus’ prediction of punishment for the crucifixion. Fourth, since Jerusalem was destroyed, Jesus’ prayer for forgiveness might appear ineffectual or unanswered.

 

Unlike the antiJudaic theory, a high Christology may better account for the omission in the earlier Alexandrian witnesses. For instance, a high Christology is noticeable among early Alexandrians, such as the well-known example of St. Alexander who argues that Jesus was homoousios with the Father in contrast to the rival Alexandrian doctrine of Arianism. More importantly, Parsons—who considers Luke 23:34a unoriginal—elsewhere argues that the following variants of p75 may reflect a high christological tendency: in Luke 16:30-31 εγερθη places πορευθη, which could highlight Jesus’ resurrection and the religious leaders’ guilt; the omission of αυτους in Luke 9:34 may envision only Jesus in the cloud at the Transfiguration; in John 6:19, the scribe corrects the prepositional agreement of θαλασσα so that Jesus clearly walks on the sea, not beside it; and in Luke 24:27, τα περι εαυτου precedes GK which may suggest that Jesus is above the Scriptures, or it may emphasize the extent to which he fulfills them.

 

Nevertheless, p75 is well-recognized as a reliable document. Moreover, one might argue that a high Christology accounts for the longer reading. For instance, Jesus would be practicing his own teachings (Luke 6:35); his grace would contrast with the cursing of other Jewish martyrs (e.g., 2 Macc 7:9, 11, 14, 16-17, 1819, 21-23); and without the prayer, he may appear less gracious than Stephen (Acts 7:60). For these reasons, a high christological tendency cannot prove the text’s originality. Nevertheless, the four reasons listed above, as a scribe would more likely add than omit v. 34a. Once again, the external evidence proves to be ambiguous. (Joshua Marshall Stahan, The Limits of a Text: Luke 23:34a as a Case Study of Theological Interpretation [Journal of Theological Interpretation Supplement 5; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2012], 19-20)

 

 

Blog Archive