Abstract
John Kimbell, Pastor of Preaching and Discipleship at Clifton Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky, has published his dissertation, written under the guidance of Tom Schreiner at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. In it, Kimbell argues that scholars have mistakenly downplayed the emphasis on atonement in their analyses of the portrayal of Jesus’s death in Luke–Acts. Specifically, he maintains, “Luke presents the death of Jesus as an atoning death that brings about the forgiveness of sins” (p. 3). Kimbell argues his case through a historical-critical, redactional, and narrative analysis of Luke–Acts that covers six chapters.
In the first chapter, Kimbell introduces his thesis and methodology; a brief history of scholarship follows in which he details various scholarly arguments on the emphasis the author of Luke–Acts has placed on Jesus’s death. Including atonement, Kimbell describes twelve different positions. In the second chapter, Kimbell analyzes the phrase “breaking of bread” in Luke–Acts (primarily in Jesus’s discourse with his disciples at the Last Supper; Luke 22:19) to argue that Jesus’s impending death is being portrayed as an atoning sacrifice, one which serves as the foundational event to establish a new covenant. Kimbell argues, in chapter 3, that the passion reinforces the conclusion he reached in the previous chapter. Here, Kimbell focuses on Jesus’s use of the word “cup” in his prayer in Luke 22:42, the exchange of the guilty Barabbas for the innocent Jesus, Jesus’s promise of salvation to the repentant thief on the cross, and finally the darkness and tearing of the temple veil that occur at Jesus’s death.
Next, Kimbell argues that Jesus fulfills the portrayal of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah. Here he surveys texts throughout Luke–Acts that either directly mention one of the servant passages in Isaiah or (in Kimbell’s view) allude to the same; he focuses especially on the use of Isa 53:12 in Luke 22:37. His argument in this fourth chapter is that the author of Luke–Acts “points the reader to the conclusion that the eschatological individual figure in Isaiah has found its fulfillment in the person of Jesus” (p. 133; emphasis in original). In the fifth chapter, Kimbell notes various narrative elements within Luke–Acts that reinforce his argument that Jesus’s death is portrayed as one of atonement for sin, establishing a new covenant people. For example, Kimbell considers the need for forgiveness of sin found throughout the narrative, the judgment language Jesus uses in Luke 12, the use of paradidōmi, and Jesus’s being “hung on a tree” (e.g., Acts 5:30). According to Kimbell, these narrative elements work together to support the author’s emphasis on Jesus’s death as an atoning sacrifice for sin. Finally, Kimbell helpfully reviews his argument in a concluding sixth chapter.
As a published dissertation, Kimbell’s book is valuable for the background work he includes, especially the history of scholarship he presents in the first chapter. In his citations and bibliography, he reference a great deal of scholarly work on this topic; this book will benefit anyone wanting to become familiar with the scholarly conversation to this point. There are issues, however. First, Kimbell does not precisely define what he means by “atonement.” From his argument, one can surmise that he argues that Jesus’s death is portrayed as a form of substitutionary penal atonement, but he never explicitly states this. Second, Kimbell does not explain why, if this theme is so pronounced in Luke–Acts, he does not state it in plain terms. Indeed, it seems odd that the author, who is clearly familiar with Isaiah 53, does not include a citation of Isa 53:4–6 in the narrative in order to emphasize Jesus’s death as an atoning sacrifice. Finally, Kimbell also ignores the fact that in Luke 5 and Luke 7, the living Jesus forgives the sin of the paralytic and woman who anoints his feet at Simon the Pharisee’s house.