They Killed Him, but God Raised Him

The earliest description of the death of Jesus, if one takes the texts at face value and as historical records, which means taking Acts 2 seriously as an interpretation of the death of Jesus 50 days after Easter, sees the death of Jesus as (1) appointed by God and (2) an act of injustice that (3) God reversed through the resurrection. In other words, it is God’s design to undo injustice by establishing justice. Here are Peter’s words as found in Acts 2:22-24

“Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.

Most of us jump so quickly to atonement theories that we fail to see the monstrosity of the event and the bald injustice of bringing this faithful Israelite down. Peter points his finger at the Jerusalemites, and here he seems to have in mind the corrupted leadership of Jerusalem, and says You brought him down but God raised him up. That, in fact, is the gospel.

The crucifixion of Jesus, then, is one of those events that marks the entirety of the Christian message and the New Testament. So Warren Carter, in Seven Events That Shaped the New Testament World, sketches the crucifixion of Jesus and he does so from the angle of it as an event, not so much an atonement event.

So who got crucified in Jesus’ world? It was a pitiable death, preceded by torture (whipping, scourging) and it involved mocking and shaming. (Far more serious in a shame-honor world.) It was reserved usually for lower ranked and marginal folks and often used for criminals and rebellious slaves. It was a special punishment for rebellious foreigners. It intimidated and it was public, always public. It is quite likely than Roman perception was that Jesus was crucified as a rebel.

He was crucified with bandits. The titulus was “King of the Jews,” which indicates a perception of rebellion and Jesus’ own self-claims of his role and rule. Carter feasts on this theme to illuminate Jesus “the rebel king.” He proclaimed the kingdom, or “empire,” of God. Kingdom was the claim of Jesus and that meant power and authority and it meant Rome’s appointed kings would be dethroned. Jesus conflicted with Rome’s alliance power: the temple establishment. And Jesus threatened the downfall of Jerusalem, surely something that mattered to Rome’s leadership in Jerusalem.

Of course, the NT interprets the death of Jesus in atoning ways. For Paul it was atoning and removed sin; it was the way of life as well that undermined the ways of power. The curse of the law is undermined, too, by the death of Jesus and Carter explores this in the direction of inclusiveness.