Abstract
In this book Steve Smith offers a clear and careful reading of passages in Luke-Acts that appear to be critical of the Jerusalem Temple. The main focus of his attention is on Stephen’s speech, since Smith identifies it both as a significant turning point in Luke’s narrative, and as Luke’s final word on the Jerusalem Temple. However, Smith also devotes significant attention to sayings of Jesus, principally those presented in Luke 13:34–35, 19:41–44, 21:20–24 and 23:28–31.
Smith identifies his approach as intratextual and intertextual. Intratextual, in that he wishes to read Stephen’s speech in the context of Luke-Acts as a whole, although with particular reference to other passages that also appear critical of the Temple, most notably Jesus’s laments over Jerusalem. Intratextual, in that he chooses to read it also in the light of texts found in the Greek version of the Jewish Scriptures. This carefully selected range of texts (which Smith claims to be necessary because of the large number of references to the Temple in Luke-Acts) allows him to consider in detail the Temple-critical passages, which he views as the subject of most scholarly debate in attempts to reconstruct a Lukan view of the Temple. This is clearly defensible, but not without cost, since it restricts Smith’s scope to compare Luke’s critical material with his positive material, which limits his capacity to shed light on Luke-Acts as a whole. It also excludes any possibility of showing more clearly what Luke may have been doing by comparing him with other roughly contemporary authors who also had to deal with the destruction of the Temple, whether other followers of Jesus like Matthew or John, or Jewish contemporaries such as the authors of 4 Ezra or 2 Baruch.
Smith’s analysis of the text of Luke-Acts is meticulous, measured, and illuminating, and shows mastery of a wide range of secondary material. His main conclusion is that even in the passages where Luke may appear critical of the Temple he is not critical of the Temple itself, but of the attitudes of its leadership in Jerusalem. Jesus is rejected by the Temple leadership, like other prophets before him, and Luke’s criticism of the Temple may be compared to that of Jewish prophets. Smith refrains from any comments on Luke’s overall view of the Temple, but his nuanced account of Luke’s criticism of the Temple authorities as the key to understanding his ‘apparent temple-criticism’ has clear implications for how Luke’s overall view of the Temple might best be understood.