Lukas 1:8

1:8 Now ¹  while Zechariah ²  was serving as priest before God when his division was on duty, ³ 

Lukas 6:16

6:16 Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, ⁴  who became a traitor.

Lukas 8:40

Restoration and Healing

8:40 Now when Jesus returned, ⁵  the crowd welcomed him, because they were all waiting for him.

Lukas 17:11

The Grateful Leper

17:11 Now on ⁶  the way to Jerusalem, ⁷  Jesus ⁸  was passing along ⁹  between Samaria and Galilee.

Lukas 18:23

18:23 But when the man ¹⁰  heard this he became very sad, ¹¹  for he was extremely wealthy.

Lukas 21:22

21:22 because these are days of vengeance, ¹²  to fulfill ¹³  all that is written.

Lukas 23:45

23:45 because the sun’s light failed. ¹⁴  The temple curtain ¹⁵  was torn in two.

[1:8]  ¹ tn Grk “Now it happened that.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[1:8]  ² tn Grk “he”; the referent (Zechariah) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:8]  ³ tn Grk “serving as priest in the order of his division before God.”

[1:8]  sn Zechariah’s division would be on duty twice a year for a week at a time.

[6:16]  ⁴ sn There is some debate about what the name Iscariot means. It probably alludes to a region in Judea and thus might make Judas the only non-Galilean in the group. Several explanations for the name Iscariot have been proposed, but it is probably transliterated Hebrew with the meaning “man of Kerioth” (there are at least two villages that had that name). For further discussion see D. L. Bock, Luke (BECNT), 1:546; also D. A. Carson, John, 304.

[8:40]  ⁵ tn This is a temporal infinitival clause in contrast to Mark’s genitive absolute (Mark 5:21).

[8:40]  sn Here the author notes that Jesus returned to the western shore of the Sea of Galilee after his brief excursion into Gentile territory (8:26-39; cf. also Mark 5:21).

[17:11]  ⁶ tn Grk “Now it happened that on.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[17:11]  ⁷ sn This is another travel note about Jesus going to Jerusalem in Luke 9:51-19:48, the so-called “Jerusalem journey” section of Luke’s Gospel. It is not a straight line journey, because to travel along the Galilean and Samaritan border is to go east or west, not south to Jerusalem.

[17:11]  map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[17:11]  ⁸ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[17:11]  ⁹ tn Or “was traveling about.”

[18:23]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “he”; the referent (the man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[18:23]  ¹¹ tn Or “very distressed” (L&N 25.277).

[21:22]  ¹² tn Or “of punishment.” This is a time of judgment.

[21:22]  ¹³ tn The passive construction with the infinitive πλησθῆναι (plhsqhnai) has been translated as an active construction for simplicity, in keeping with contemporary English style.

[23:45]  ¹⁴ tc The wording “the sun’s light failed” is a translation of τοῦ ἡλίου ἐκλιπόντος/ ἐκλείποντος (tou Jhliou eklipontos/ ekleipontos), a reading found in the earliest and best witnesses (among them Ì⁷⁵ א B C*^vid L 070 579 2542 pc) as well as several ancient versions. The majority of mss (A C³ [D] W Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 Ï lat sy) have the flatter, less dramatic term, “the sun was darkened” (ἐσκοτίσθη, eskotisqe), a reading that avoids the problem of implying an eclipse (see sn below). This alternative thus looks secondary because it is a more common word and less likely to be misunderstood as referring to a solar eclipse. That it appears in later witnesses rather than the earliest ones adds confirmatory testimony to its inauthentic character.

[23:45]  sn This imagery has parallels to the Day of the Lord: Joel 2:10; Amos 8:9; Zeph 1:15. Some students of the NT see in Luke’s statement the sun’s light failed (eklipontos) an obvious blunder in his otherwise meticulous historical accuracy. The reason for claiming such an error on the author’s part is due to an understanding of the verb as indicating a solar eclipse when such would be an astronomical impossibility during a full moon. There are generally two ways to resolve this difficulty: (a) adopt a different reading (“the sun was darkened”) that smoothes over the problem (discussed in the tc problem above), or (b) understand the verb eklipontos in a general way (such as “the sun’s light failed”) rather than as a technical term, “the sun was eclipsed.” The problem with the first solution is that it is too convenient, for the Christian scribes who, over the centuries, copied Luke’s Gospel would have thought the same thing. That is, they too would have sensed a problem in the wording and felt that some earlier scribe had incorrectly written down what Luke penned. The fact that the reading “was darkened” shows up in the later and generally inferior witnesses does not bolster one’s confidence that this is the right solution. But second solution, if taken to its logical conclusion, proves too much for it would nullify the argument against the first solution: If the term did not refer to an eclipse, then why would scribes feel compelled to change it to a more general term? The solution to the problem is that ekleipo did in fact sometimes refer to an eclipse, but it did not always do so. (BDAG 306 s.v. ἐκλείπω notes that the verb is used in Hellenistic Greek “Of the sun cease to shine.” In MM it is argued that “it seems more than doubtful that in Lk 23⁴⁵ any reference is intended to an eclipse. To find such a reference is to involve the Evangelist in a needless blunder, as an eclipse is impossible at full moon, and to run counter to his general usage of the verb = ‘fail’…” [p. 195]. They enlist Luke 16:9; 22:32; and Heb 1:12 for the general meaning “fail,” and further cite several contemporaneous examples from papyri of this meaning [195-96]) Thus, the very fact that the verb can refer to an eclipse would be a sufficient basis for later scribes altering the text out of pious motives; conversely, the very fact that the verb does not always refer to an eclipse and, in fact, does not normally do so, is enough of a basis to exonerate Luke of wholly uncharacteristic carelessness.

[23:45]  ¹⁵ tn The referent of this term, καταπέτασμα (katapetasma), is not entirely clear. It could refer to the curtain separating the holy of holies from the holy place (Josephus, J. W. 5.5.5 [5.219]), or it could refer to one at the entrance of the temple court (Josephus, J. W. 5.5.4 [5.212]). Many argue that the inner curtain is meant because another term, κάλυμμα (kalumma), is also used for the outer curtain. Others see a reference to the outer curtain as more likely because of the public nature of this sign. Either way, the symbolism means that access to God has been opened up. It also pictures a judgment that includes the sacrifices.