Neville Review of Luke's Jewish Eschatology by Isaac Oliver JGAR

Contents 3 Editorial: Conversations about Ancient Texts 7 Adam Z. Wright, The Historical Jesus and Mythology: An Evaluation of Mythicist Thought 21 Hans M. Moscicke, Jesus’ Three-Day Journey in the Belly of the Sea Monster: Jonah Typologies and Traditions in Matthew’s Passion Narrative 39 Bart B. Bruehler, Jesus’ Mission of Proclamation and The Problem of Popularity: A Pragmatic Dimension to the Secrecy Elements in the Gospel of Mark 59 John A. Davies, The Markan Alphabet Theory Examined 71 Elizabeth E. Shively, ‘As it is Written in Isaiah The Prophet’ (Mark 1:2): Mark’s Opening Citation and Unfettered Allusiveness in Second Temple-period Exegetical Practice 91 Christoph Stenschke, ‘Loosening the Pangs of Death’ (Acts 2:24): Dying and death, Preservation from Death and its Defeat in the Book of Acts Book Reviews 113 David Wenham and Steve Walton, Exploring the New Testament I: A Guide to the Gospels and Acts. 115 Walter T. Wilson, The Gospel of Matthew. Volume 1: Matthew 1–13. Volume 2: Matthew 14–28. 117 Jonathan Rivett Robinson, Markan Typology: Miracles, Scripture and Christology in Mark 4:35—6:45. 119 Denise Powell, Who Are the Righteous? The Narrative Function of the Dikaioi in the Gospel of Luke. 120 Isaac W. Oliver, Luke’s Jewish Eschatology: The National Restoration of Israel in Luke-Acts. 123 Kiyoshi Mineshige, Ruka Fukuinsho: 1 Shō~9 Shō 50 Setsu (The Gospel of Luke: Chap. 1–9:50). 126 Gregory E. Sterling, Shaping the Past to Define the Present: LukeActs and Apologetic Historiography. 129 Wally Cirafesi, John Within Judaism: Religion, Ethnicity, and the Shaping of Jesus-Oriented Jewishness in the Fourth Gospel. 132 Schröter, Jens, and Christine Jacobi, eds., The Jesus Handbook. BOOK REVIEWS Isaac W. Oliver. Luke’s Jewish Eschatology: The National Restoration of Israel in LukeActs. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2021. xix + 279 pp. ISBN 9780197530580 (hardcover). $AU167.95. I saac Oliver’s earlier monograph in the WUNT series, Torah Praxis after 70 ce: Reading Matthew and Luke-Acts as Jewish Texts (Mohr Siebeck, 2013), signalled his determination to interpret Luke-Acts within a Jewish frame of reference. Although this reading stance contrasts with much scholarship on Luke-Acts, it is defended in this volume on Luke’s eschatology, which in Oliver’s view retains hope for the national restoration of Israel as part of Luke’s more generally recognised universal eschatological expectations. The introductory chapter to Oliver’s book indicates that it is occupied with the concern expressed by disciples of Jesus in Acts 1:6, ‘Lord, at this time will you restore the kingdom to Israel?’ In one section of his introduction, Oliver contests standard interpretations of Acts 1:6–8 according to which Luke was unconcerned about the national restoration of Israel. Even those who have recognised that Israel’s restoration is an important theme in Luke-Acts have not, in Oliver’s view, addressed 120 this topic with the insight and precision that comes from studying Luke and Acts as Jewish texts written by an author well versed in Jewish Scripture and tradition. Oliver also addresses Luke’s universal outlook, which is often contrasted with an alleged Jewish particularism. Quite apart from the general point that much depends on how terms such as ‘universalism’ and ‘particularism’ are defined, Oliver advises that this monograph aims to demonstrate that ‘Luke entertained, even maintained, a “bilateral eschatology” that would bring the restoration of the kingdom of Israel (Acts 1:6) along with the cosmic renewal of all things (Acts 3:21). Theser two realizations are not mutually exclusive but complementary’ (16). Chapter 2 attends to expressions of hope for Israel’s restoration in Luke 1–2, the infancy narrative generally recognised as Jewish in linguistic style, settings, and characters, quite apart from its grounding in Jewish Scripture and tradition. Regarding the soteriological vocabulary that appears in Luke 1–2, Oliver argues that all such terms evince the hope of Israel’s national-political liberation. This is not at the expense of salvation for non-Jews, however; God’s salvation, through Messiah Jesus, is characterised by Simeon as light for the purpose of revelation to the nations and glory for God’s people Israel (Luke 2:32). Here Oliver sounds a theme that is developed in subsequent chapters: Luke does not envisage the salvation of the nations as occurring instead of the restoration of Israel but rather as integral to the process of leading to Israel’s restoration. The focus of Chapter 3 is christological, its burden being to demonstrate that ‘Luke presents Jesus as the Davidic anointed one sent to rescue and rule over Israel’ (42). Luke’s infancy narrative affirms not only Jesus’ Davidic ancestry but also the throne of King David as his enduring inheritance. Luke also depicts Jesus as Son of God, but Oliver detects an inseparable connection between Jesus as Son of David and as Son of God. Indeed, so central to Jesus’ identity is his Davidic OCTOBER 2023 BOOK REVIEWS messiahship that Luke envisages his heavenly exaltation in terms of a Davidic enthronement. Jesus is many things for Luke, but most, if not all, facets of his identity relate to his role as Davidic Messiah. For Oliver, Jesus’ baptism constitutes his royal anointing, which empowers him to take on the role of Israel’s Davidic Messiah, even though rejection by his people and suffering must precede his heavenly enthronement. In a fascinating discussion of Jesus’ genealogy in Luke 3:23–38, Oliver contends that ‘the genealogy affirms Jesus’s divine sonship as one who descends from David’ (56). Recognising that Davidic dimensions of Jesus’ identity do not feature strongly between the genealogy of Jesus and the blind man’s appeal to Jesus as ‘Son of David’ near Jericho (Luke 18:38–39), Oliver postpones his discussion of Jerusalem-related aspects of Luke’s narrative and concludes his third chapter with a discussion of three speeches in Acts 2:14–39, 13:16–41, and 15:13–21, each of which implies the restoration of David’s throne by the risen and ascended Jesus. It is also within this chapter that Oliver weighs in on Luke’s stance toward Roman imperial rule. Luke is neither pro-Roman nor overtly anti-imperial in the sense of encouraging resistance against Roman hegemony, but he is counter-imperialistic by presenting Jesus as the true peace-establishing lord and lifesaver of which Octavian and the Flavian emperors were but pretentious antitypes. Moreover, according to Oliver, nothing about Luke’s attitude toward Roman imperial rule should be taken to imply that salvation in Luke-Acts is solely spiritual, not political and/ or national. Oliver’s fourth chapter focuses on the eschatological significance of Jerusalem in Luke’s Gospel. By attending to Lukan references to Jerusalem from the transfiguration account through the central section of the Gospel concerned with Jesus’ lengthy journey to Jerusalem and on to the eschatological discourse in Luke 21, Oliver presents Luke’s attitude toward Jerusalem as essentially Jewish, albeit with refinements associated with his christological convictions, one being that, by contrast with eschatological expectations in contemporaneous Jewish texts, ‘the conversion of gentiles precedes Israel’s final restoration’ (99). Throughout this chapter, Oliver argues that despite Luke’s awareness of Jerusalem’s destruction and his theological interpretation of this event in terms of divine judgement for failing to acknowledge Jesus as Israel’s Messiah, he nevertheless held out hope for the restoration of Israel centred on a repentant and rehabilitated Jerusalem. Oliver’s readings of Lukan passages are invariably illuminating, casting many in a new light by virtue of his Jewish interpretative stance. For example, he suggests that Jesus’ ‘exodus’ (Luke 9:31) Oliver’s might well encompass his readings are invariably anticipated future return to Jerusalem, not only his illuminating. crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension, which concluded his historical mission in Jerusalem. Also eye-opening is his discussion of several pericopes in Luke 13, especially 13:31–35. Although Jesus’ plaintive evocation of Psalm 118:26a in Luke 13:35b is not realised when Jesus reaches Jerusalem, except on the lips of disciples (19:38), Oliver provides reasons for thinking that Luke envisaged a more welcoming reception of Jesus by Jerusalem at some point in the future, namely, at the eschatological return of Jesus as the Son of Man. Though brief, Oliver’s discussion of Luke 21:5–36 demonstrates how much of the content of this eschatological discourse parallels eschatological expectations found in Jewish texts from around the same period. Perhaps the least compelling part of this chapter is the discussion of the parable in Luke 19:11–28. I say this not because Oliver detects in this parable Luke’s view that the kingdom of God, and with it the restoration of Israel, was not divinely scheduled to be realised when Jesus JOURNAL OF GOSPELS AND ACTS RESEARCH VOL. 7 121 BOOK REVIEWS initially reached Jerusalem but rather when the risen and ascended Jesus returns to Jerusalem. Although the traditional correlation of the nobleman-king with Jesus enables Oliver to draw parallels between Luke 19:11–28 and other Jewish eschatological texts, one wonders whether an interpretation in line with Jewish restoration eschatology is dependent on the nobleman-king representing Jesus. In any case, by the end of Luke’s Gospel, hope for Israel’s restoration remains alive, according to Oliver, and the fifth and final chapter of the body of this book is devoted to demonstrating that such hope is maintained in Acts. In Chapter 5 Oliver offers a detailed discussion of Pentecost, comparing the depiction in Acts 2 both to Sinai and to Babel and bringing out both its particular (Jewish) and universal features. In his view, there is A welcome sufficient evidence challenge to in Luke-Acts that its Lukan studies. author anticipated the eventual restoration of the twelve tribes of Israel, beginning with the Samaritans (Acts 8:4–25), a development regarded by Oliver as consistent with the larger Lukan presentation of Samaritans. Oliver also addresses the Lukan accusation in Acts that the Jewish people are culpable for the crucifixion of Jesus, as well as the troubling note on which Acts ends (28:23–28). 122 Oliver’s concluding chapter recapitulates the argument of his book but also reconsiders scholarly assumptions outlined in his introductory chapter and challenged by his overarching argument. Regarding Luke’s eschatology, he reiterates its predominantly future orientation: ‘In response to those who over-realize Luke’s eschatology, I wish to underrealize it: parousia, future resurrection, final judgment, and restoration of the kingdom of Israel are all events whose fulfillment still lies in the future’ (146; cf. 68). Oliver’s book is a welcome challenge to Lukan studies. Time and again, he draws attention to Jewish texts roughly contemporaneous with Luke-Acts to demonstrate that Luke’s views are not merely comparable to Jewish views but are themselves essentially Jewish. Whether Luke is as clear as Oliver claims him to be about aligning the hope of future resurrection with the national restoration of Israel is open to question, but Oliver has composed a strong argument for recognising the essentially Jewish content and character of Luke’s eschatology. Although the use of endnotes rather than footnotes hinders readability to some degree, this book deserves a wide-ranging and respectful reception. David Neville St Mark’s National Theological Centre Charles Sturt University, Canberra OCTOBER 2023