WHERE WE ARE

I am in the process of arguing that the Passion Narrative in the Gospel of Luke is historically unreliable.

The Passion Narrative in Luke is found in Chapters 22 and 23 of the Gospel of Luke. I am beginning my examination Luke’s Passion Narrative with Chapter 23, which contains the following six parts:

• Part 1: Jesus Before Pilate (verses 1-5)
• Part 2: Jesus Before Herod (verses 6-12)
• Part 3: Jesus Sentenced to Death (verses 13-25)
• Part 4: Crucifixion of Jesus (verses 26-43)
• Part 5: Death of Jesus (verses 44-49)
• Part 6: Burial of Jesus (verses 50-56)

In previous posts, I have argued that Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 are historically unreliable.

I am currently focused on an examination of Part 4 of Chapter 23 of the Gospel of Luke (Crucifixion of Jesus). In the previous post about Part 4, I argued that the opening verse of Part 4 (verse 26) was historically unreliable.

In this current post, I will examine verses 27 through 31, verses 32 through 38, and also verses 39 through 42, from Part 4 of Chapter 23, and I will argue that those passages are historically dubious.

SOME WOMEN WAILING FOR JESUS

In Chapter 23, when Jesus is led out to be crucified, a group of Jewish women wail in sorrow for him:

27 A great number of the people followed him [Jesus], and among them were women who were beating their breasts and wailing for him. 28 But Jesus turned to them and said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. 29 For the days are surely coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts that never nursed.’ 30 Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us,’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’ 31 For if they do this when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?”

Luke 23:27-31, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

First of all, this event is not from the Gospel of Mark. Luke adds this event to Mark’s Passion Narrative. That by itself is a reason to doubt the historical reliability of the above passage, according to the Jesus scholar Marcus Borg:

I see Mark’s passion story as the earliest. Matthew and Luke each had a copy of Mark, and I see the additions that they made to Mark’s passion story as imaginative elaborations.

“Why Was Jesus Killed” by Marcus Borg in The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions, p. 86

Furthermore, no other Gospel talks about wailing women following Jesus to the site where he would be crucified. So, there is no corroboration of this event in the other Gospels.

Second of all, Jesus scholar Geza Vermes calls out this specific passage as an example of where Luke has invented an event or a detail that adds an element of pity to Mark’s Passion Narrative:

The compassionate Luke, endeavoring to improve Mark’s version, introduces elements of pity which are no doubt of his own creation. Note among his retouches, in addition to the repentant robber, Jesus’ healing of the wounded slave of the high priest in Gethsemane (Lk 22:51), the lament of the sympathetic women of Jerusalem (Lk 23:27), the multitude of onlookers beating their breasts after the death of Jesus, and the mention of all his acquaintances standing at some distance from the cross (Lk 48-9).

The Passion by Geza Vermes, p.71 (emphasis added)

The scholars of the Jesus Seminar also doubt the historicity of the wailing women following Jesus to his crucifixion. They mark the words in verse 27 about the presence of the wailing women as GRAY (The Acts of Jesus, p.360), meaning that “This information is possible but unreliable. It lacks supporting evidence.” (The Acts of Jesus, p.37). They also point out that the highly respected NT scholar Raymond Brown appears to agree with their conclusion that this event is historically doubtful:

Raymond E. Brown has no way of telling whether Luke has made use of a pre-Lukan tradition about the women lamenting for Jesus (v. 27) or whether he has employed a common motif to supply context for the sayings in vv. 28-31. In any case, “Luke’s hand and mind-set are apparent in almost every line.” Brown might have voted gray on the lamenting women, in concert with the Fellows; his remarks do not suggest a higher ranking.

The Acts of Jesus by Robert Funk and the Jesus Seminar, p.360

A third problem is that some Jesus scholars doubt that the words attributed to Jesus by Luke in this passage actually came from the historical Jesus. The Jesus scholar Gerd Ludemann concludes that:

Jesus never spoke these words, as they are rooted in anti-Jewish polemic. They come from a community situation in which the guilt for the death of Jesus has been foisted on the Jews.

Jesus After 2000 Years by Gerd Ludemann, p.404

Ludemann agrees with the German NT scholar Rudolf Bultmann’s view of the words attributed to Jesus in this passage:

These verses are a Christian prophecy which ‘was put into the mouth of Jesus on the way to the cross’ (Bultmann) here by Luke. It reinforces the anti-Judaism of the Lukan passion story further. The lamentation should not be for Jesus but for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, who will receive a harsh punishment.

Jesus After 2000 Years by Gerd Ludemann, p.404

In other words, after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Jewish temple in Jerusalem, Christians viewed that as divine punishment for the Jewish leaders and Jewish people of Jerusalem who, according to Christians, were responsible for the crucifixion and death of Jesus. These Christians believed this was all part of God’s plan, and thus that Jesus being a prophet and the divine Son of God, must have foreknown that Jerusalem and the people of Jerusalem were going to be in for terrible suffering at the hands of the Romans. Luke took these anti-Jewish views of later Christians and put them into the mouth of Jesus.

The scholars of the Jesus Seminar agree with Ludemann that this passage does not contain the words of the historical Jesus:

The Fellows of the Jesus Seminar could identify nothing in them [the words attributed to Jesus in Luke 23:28-31] that could be traced back to Jesus.

The Five Gospels by Robert Funk, Roy Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar, p.395

So, there are good reasons to doubt the historicity of the presence of the wailing women following Jesus to his execution, and there are good reasons to doubt that the historical Jesus spoke the words that Luke portrays Jesus as speaking to those women. Thus, we have good reason to conclude that verses 27 to 31 of Chapter 23 of the Gospel of Luke are historically unreliable.

THE CRUCIFIXION AND MOCKING OF JESUS

The next few verses of Part 4 include the crucifixion and mocking of Jesus on the cross:

32 Two others also, who were criminals, were led away to be put to death with him. 33 When they came to the place that is called The Skull, they crucified Jesus there with the criminals, one on his right and one on his left. [[34 Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”]][f] And they cast lots to divide his clothing. 35 And the people stood by watching, but the leaders scoffed at him, saying, “He saved others; let him save himself if he is the Messiah of God, his chosen one!” 36 The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him sour wine 37 and saying, “If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!” 38 There was also an inscription over him, “This is the King of the Jews.”

f. 23.34 Other ancient authorities lack the sentence Then Jesus . . . what they are doing

Luke 23:32-38, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

Being crucified with two other people comes from the Gospel of Mark. Jesus saying “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” is NOT from the Gospel of Mark, but is an addition that Luke makes to Mark’s Passion Narrative, and thus (as the Jesus scholar Marcus Borg states) is historically dubious.

Furthermore, as Jesus scholar Geza Vermes points out (see full quote in the previous section), “Luke, endeavoring to improve Mark’s version, introduces elements of pity which are no doubt of his own creation.” Vermes does not point to this specific example, but having Jesus ask God to forgive the Jewish leaders and the Jewish crowd who shouted to have him crucified is clearly another example of an element of pity of his own creation that was added to Mark’s Passion Narrative.

The casting of lots for Jesus’ clothing comes from the Gospel of Mark, so Luke did not invent that event. However, Psalm 22 appears to have been a source for many of the details found in the Passion Narratives of the Gospels. The first generations of Christians believed that the Old Testament contained prophecies that predicted small details of the life and death of Jesus:

…an existing “symbolic tradition” (the Hebrew Bible and Jewish tradition) affects the telling of the story of Jesus’ death. Some details in the story seem to be symbolic, not historical. In the former category are the three-hour darkness of the land and the tearing of the temple curtain. …Are the details in the passion story history remembered or prophecy historicized? In particular cases, it is difficult to know. For example, was there “mocking” of Jesus while he was on the cross? It is not intrinsically unlikely; indeed, it might be regarded as likely. But is mocking mentioned because it was remembered, or does it come from Christian use of Psalm 22? But however difficult the judgment is in particular cases, it seems clear that the development of even our earliest canonical passion story has been affected by Christian use of the Hebrew Bible.

“The Historical Study of Jesus and Christian Origins” by Marcus Borg in Jesus at 2000, p.142

Psalm 22 specifically mentions lots being cast for the clothing of a suffering man:

18 they divide my clothes among themselves,
and for my clothing they cast lots.

Psalm 22:18, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

So, it is quite possible that this alleged event that the author of Luke borrowed from the Gospel of Mark was not history remembered but was prophecy historicized. In other words, an early Christian storyteller who was familiar with Psalm 22 and who believed that Psalm to be a prophecy about the death of Jesus, used verse 18 of Psalm 22 as a source of information about this alleged event. There may well have been no historical evidence supporting the occurrence of this alleged event. If so, then the casting of lots for the clothing of Jesus was a FICTIONAL event that Luke borrowed from the Gospel of Mark.

As indicated in the above quote from Jesus scholar Marcus Borg, the alleged mocking of Jesus on the cross is also a detail that might well have been based on Psalm 22:

6 But I am a worm and not human,
scorned by others and despised by the people.
7 All who see me mock me;
they sneer at me; they shake their heads;
8 “Commit your cause to the Lord; let him deliver—
let him rescue the one in whom he delights!”

Psalm 22:6-8, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

These verses from Psalm 22 line up well with the description of the mocking of Jesus on the cross in Chapter 23 of Luke:

35 And the people stood by watching, but the leaders scoffed at him, saying, “He saved others; let him save himself if he is the Messiah of God, his chosen one!” 36 The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him sour wine 37 and saying, “If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!”

Luke 23:35-37, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

Once again, because these events line up well with Psalm 22, it might well be the case that the original source of information about the alleged mocking of Jesus on the cross, the information used by an early Christian storyteller, was not eyewitness testimony but was above quoted verses of Psalm 22. These alleged events might well be prophecy historicized rather than history remembered. In that case, the mocking of Jesus on the cross was a FICTIONAL event in Chapter 23 of the Gospel of Luke.

The offer of sour wine to Jesus on the cross was an event borrowed by Luke from the Gospel of Mark (Mark 15:34-37). But that event also appears to be based on an Old Testament passage, namely Psalm 69:

19 You know the insults I receive
and my shame and dishonor;
my foes are all known to you.
20 Insults have broken my heart,
so that I am in despair.
I looked for pity, but there was none;
and for comforters, but I found none.
21 They gave me poison for food,
and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.

Psalm 69:19-21, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

Thus, the alleged event of soldiers offering sour wine to Jesus on the cross might well have been prophecy historicized rather than history remembered. An early Christian storyteller may have used Psalm 69 as a source of information about the death of Jesus, and thus the alleged offering of sour wine to Jesus might well be a FICTIONAL event. Luke did not make this event up, but borrowed it from the Gospel of Mark, and this event in Mark might well be based on Psalm 69 and thus be FICTIONAL.

CONCLUSIONS SO FAR ABOUT PART 4

So far, here are my conclusions about Part 4 (Crucifixion of Jesus) of Chapter 23 of the Gospel of Luke:

• 23:26 about Jesus being handed over to the Jews to be crucified is unhistorical (see my previous post on Part 4)
• 23:27-31 about women in Jerusalem wailing and following Jesus to his crucifixion is historically dubious
• 23:32-38 about Jesus being mocked and offered sour wine is historically dubious

There are just a few more verses to examine in Part 4 (Crucifixion of Jesus) of Chapter 23 of the Gospel of Luke.

THE TWO CRUCIFIED CRIMINALS

Here are the remaining verses of Part 4 (Crucifixion of Jesus):

39 One of the criminals who were hanged there kept deriding him and saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed have been condemned justly, for we are getting what we deserve for our deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come in your kingdom.” 43 He replied, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

Luke 23:39-43, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

Although the Gospel of Mark does indicate that Jesus was crucified with two other men, there is nothing in the Gospel of Mark indicating that one of the crucified men rebuked the other, nor does Mark have Jesus say anything to either of the crucified men. So, these are elements added by the author of the Gospel of Luke to Mark’s Passion Narrative. As Jesus scholar Marcus Borg indicates, the additions that Luke makes to Mark’s Passion Narrative are historically dubious. So, we have at least one reason to doubt these events.

And as Jesus scholar Geza Vermes indicates, Luke tends to “introduce elements of pity which are no doubt of his own creation” to the Passion Narrative in the Gospel of Mark. The repentant crucified man is specifically called out by Vermes as an example of this tendency:

The compassionate Luke, endeavoring to improve Mark’s version, introduces elements of pity which are no doubt of his own creation. Note among his retouches, in addition to the repentant robber, Jesus’ healing of the wounded slave of the high priest in Gethsemane (Lk 22:51), the lament of the sympathetic women of Jerusalem (Lk 23:27), the multitude of onlookers beating their breasts after the death of Jesus, and the mention of all his acquaintances standing at some distance from the cross (Lk 48-9).

The Passion by Geza Vermes, p.71 (emphasis added)

Not only is the repentant crucified man an addition made by Luke to the Passion Narrative from the Gospel of Mark, but it constitutes a favorite theme of the author of the Gospel of Luke: elements of pity.

Furthermore, Luke does not merely ADD this event to Mark’s account, because Mark’s Passion Narrative states that BOTH of the two other crucified men mocked Jesus:

31 In the same way the chief priests, along with the scribes, were also mocking him among themselves and saying, “He saved others; he cannot save himself. 32 Let the Messiah, the King of Israel, come down from the cross now, so that we may see and believe.” Those who were crucified with him also taunted him.

Mark 15:31-32, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition (emphasis added)

The Gospel of Matthew agrees with the Gospel of Mark on this point:

41 In the same way the chief priests also, along with the scribes and elders, were mocking him, saying, 42 “He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down from the cross now, and we will believe in him. 43 He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he wants to, for he said, ‘I am God’s Son.’ ” 44 The rebels who were crucified with him also taunted him in the same way.

Matthew 27:41-44, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition (emphasis added)

Thus, the Gospel of Luke actually CONTRADICTS both the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Matthew on this point. This raises significant doubt about the historicity of the story of the repentant crucified man found in Luke 23:39-43.

Finally, the words attributed to Jesus in Luke 23:43 are not found in any other Gospel, and thus were added by the author of the Gospel of Luke to the Passion Narrative in the Gospel of Mark:

42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come in your kingdom.” 43 He [Jesus] replied, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

Luke 23:39-43, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

Furthermore, this clearly fits the pattern of Luke adding FICTIONAL events and details to the Passion Narrative in the Gospel of Mark that constitute “elements of pity”, elements that are historically dubious according to Jesus scholar Geza Vermes.

It should also be noted that Jesus never uses the term “paradise” anywhere else in any of the four Gospels, making it even more doubtful that these words were spoken by the historical Jesus.

CONCLUSIONS ABOUT PART 4 OF CHAPTER 23

I divided Part 4 (Crucifixion of Jesus) of Chapter 23 of the Gospel of Luke into four sub-sections:

• Luke 23:26 => Pilate hands Jesus over to the Jewish leaders and Jewish crowd to be crucified
• Luke 23:27-31 => Women in Jerusalem Wail for Jesus and follow him to his crucifixion, and Jesus predicts the destruction of Jerusalem
• Luke 23:32-38 => Jesus is mocked on the cross, soldiers cast lots for his clothing, Jesus prays for the forgiveness of the Jews, and soldiers offer him sour wine
• Luke 23:39-42 => The repentant crucified man rebukes the other crucified man, and Jesus promises the repentant man that he will be in paradise that day

I have shown that there are good reasons to doubt the historical reliability of each one of these four subsections, so it is clear that Part 4 (Crucifixion of Jesus) of Chapter 23 of the Gospel of Luke is historically unreliable.