Mazmur 110:1

Psalm 110 ¹ 

A psalm of David.

110:1 Here is the Lord’s proclamation ²  to my lord: ³ 

“Sit down at my right hand ⁴  until I make your enemies your footstool!” ⁵ 

Yesaya 7:14

7:14 For this reason the sovereign master himself will give you a confirming sign. ⁶  Look, this ⁷  young woman ⁸  is about to conceive ⁹  and will give birth to a son. You, young woman, will name him ¹⁰  Immanuel. ¹¹ 

Yesaya 9:6

9:6 For a child has been ¹²  born to us,

a son has been given to us.

He shoulders responsibility

and is called: ¹³ 

Extraordinary Strategist, ¹⁴ 

Mighty God, ¹⁵ 

Everlasting Father, ¹⁶ 

Prince of Peace. ¹⁷ 

Hagai 2:7-9

2:7 I will also shake up all the nations, and they ¹⁸  will offer their treasures; ¹⁹  then I will fill this temple with glory,’ says the Lord who rules over all. 2:8 ‘The silver and gold will be mine,’ says the Lord who rules over all. 2:9 ‘The future splendor of this temple will be greater than that of former times,’ ²⁰  the Lord who rules over all declares, ‘and in this place I will give peace.’” ²¹ 

Lukas 2:11

2:11 Today ²²  your Savior is born in the city ²³  of David. ²⁴  He is Christ ²⁵  the Lord.

Lukas 2:21-32

2:21 At ²⁶  the end of eight days, when he was circumcised, he was named Jesus, the name given by the angel ²⁷  before he was conceived in the womb.

Jesus’ Presentation at the Temple

2:22 Now ²⁸  when the time came for their ²⁹  purification according to the law of Moses, Joseph and Mary ³⁰  brought Jesus ³¹  up to Jerusalem ³²  to present him to the Lord 2:23 (just as it is written in the law of the Lord, “Every firstborn male ³³  will be set apart to the Lord” ³⁴ ), 2:24 and to offer a sacrifice according to what is specified in the law of the Lord, a pair of doves ³⁵  or two young pigeons. ³⁶ 

The Prophecy of Simeon

2:25 Now ³⁷  there was a man in Jerusalem ³⁸  named Simeon who was righteous ³⁹  and devout, looking for the restoration ⁴⁰  of Israel, and the Holy Spirit ⁴¹  was upon him. 2:26 It ⁴²  had been revealed ⁴³  to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die ⁴⁴  before ⁴⁵  he had seen the Lord’s Christ. ⁴⁶  2:27 So ⁴⁷  Simeon, ⁴⁸  directed by the Spirit, ⁴⁹  came into the temple courts, ⁵⁰  and when the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what was customary according to the law, ⁵¹  2:28 Simeon ⁵²  took him in his arms and blessed God, saying, ⁵³ 

2:29 “Now, according to your word, ⁵⁴  Sovereign Lord, ⁵⁵  permit ⁵⁶  your servant ⁵⁷  to depart ⁵⁸  in peace.

2:30 For my eyes have seen your salvation ⁵⁹ 

2:31 that you have prepared in the presence of all peoples: ⁶⁰ 

2:32 a light, ⁶¹ 

for revelation to the Gentiles,

and for glory ⁶²  to your people Israel.”

Lukas 2:38

2:38 At that moment, ⁶³  she came up to them ⁶⁴  and began to give thanks to God and to speak ⁶⁵  about the child ⁶⁶  to all who were waiting for the redemption of Jerusalem. ⁶⁷ 

Lukas 2:46

2:46 After ⁶⁸  three days ⁶⁹  they found him in the temple courts, ⁷⁰  sitting among the teachers, ⁷¹  listening to them and asking them questions.

Lukas 7:19-20

7:19 and sent them to Jesus ⁷²  to ask, ⁷³  “Are you the one who is to come, ⁷⁴  or should we look for another?” 7:20 When ⁷⁵  the men came to Jesus, ⁷⁶  they said, “John the Baptist has sent us to you to ask, ⁷⁷  ‘Are you the one who is to come, or should we look for another?’” ⁷⁸ 

Lukas 19:47

19:47 Jesus ⁷⁹  was teaching daily in the temple courts. The chief priests and the experts in the law ⁸⁰  and the prominent leaders among the people were seeking to assassinate ⁸¹  him,

Yohanes 2:14-16

2:14 ⁸² He found in the temple courts ⁸³  those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers sitting at tables. ⁸⁴  2:15 So he made a whip of cords ⁸⁵  and drove them all out of the temple courts, ⁸⁶  with the sheep and the oxen. He scattered the coins of the money changers ⁸⁷  and overturned their tables. 2:16 To those who sold the doves he said, “Take these things away from here! Do not make ⁸⁸  my Father’s house a marketplace!” ⁸⁹ 

[110:1]  ¹ sn Psalm 110. In this royal psalm the psalmist announces God’s oracle to the Davidic king. The first part of the oracle appears in v. 1, the second in v. 4. In vv. 2-3 the psalmist addresses the king, while in vv. 5-7 he appears to address God.

[110:1]  ² tn The word נְאֻם (nÿ’um) is used frequently in the OT of a formal divine announcement through a prophet.

[110:1]  ³ sn My lord. In the psalm’s original context the speaker is an unidentified prophetic voice in the royal court. In the course of time the psalm is applied to each successive king in the dynasty and ultimately to the ideal Davidic king. NT references to the psalm understand David to be speaking about his “lord,” the Messiah. (See Matt 22:43-45; Mark 12:36-37; Luke 20:42-44; Acts 2:34-35).

[110:1]  ⁴ tn To sit at the “right hand” of the king was an honor (see 1 Kgs 2:19). In Ugaritic myth (CTA 4 v. 108-10) the artisan god Kothar-and Khasis is described as sitting at the right hand of the storm god Baal. See G. R. Driver, Canaanite Myths and Legends, 61-62.

[110:1]  sn The Lord’s invitation to the Davidic king to sit down at his right hand reflects the king’s position as the Lord’s vice-regent.

[110:1]  ⁵ sn When the Lord made his covenant with David, he promised to subdue the king’s enemies (see 2 Sam 7:9-11; Ps 89:22-23).

[7:14]  ⁶ tn The Hebrew term אוֹת (’ot, “sign”) can refer to a miraculous event (see v. 11), but it does not carry this sense inherently. Elsewhere in Isaiah the word usually refers to a natural occurrence or an object/person vested with special significance (see 8:18; 19:20; 20:3; 37:30; 55:13; 66:19). Only in 38:7-8, 22 does it refer to a miraculous deed that involves suspending or overriding natural laws. The sign outlined in vv. 14-17 involves God’s providential control over events and their timing, but not necessarily miraculous intervention.

[7:14]  ⁷ tn Heb “the young woman.” The Hebrew article has been rendered as a demonstrative pronoun (“this”) in the translation to bring out its force. It is very likely that Isaiah pointed to a woman who was present at the scene of the prophet’s interview with Ahaz. Isaiah’s address to the “house of David” and his use of second plural forms suggests other people were present, and his use of the second feminine singular verb form (“you will name”) later in the verse is best explained if addressed to a woman who is present.

[7:14]  ⁸ tn Traditionally, “virgin.” Because this verse from Isaiah is quoted in Matt 1:23 in connection with Jesus’ birth, the Isaiah passage has been regarded since the earliest Christian times as a prophecy of Christ’s virgin birth. Much debate has taken place over the best way to translate this Hebrew term, although ultimately one’s view of the doctrine of the virgin birth of Christ is unaffected. Though the Hebrew word used here (עַלְמָה, ’almah) can sometimes refer to a woman who is a virgin (Gen 24:43), it does not carry this meaning inherently. The word is simply the feminine form of the corresponding masculine noun עֶלֶם (’elem, “young man”; cf. 1 Sam 17:56; 20:22). The Aramaic and Ugaritic cognate terms are both used of women who are not virgins. The word seems to pertain to age, not sexual experience, and would normally be translated “young woman.” The LXX translator(s) who later translated the Book of Isaiah into Greek sometime between the second and first century b.c., however, rendered the Hebrew term by the more specific Greek word παρθένος (parqenos), which does mean “virgin” in a technical sense. This is the Greek term that also appears in the citation of Isa 7:14 in Matt 1:23. Therefore, regardless of the meaning of the term in the OT context, in the NT Matthew’s usage of the Greek term παρθένος clearly indicates that from his perspective a virgin birth has taken place.

[7:14]  ⁹ tn Elsewhere the adjective הָרָה (harah), when used predicatively, refers to a past pregnancy (from the narrator’s perspective, 1 Sam 4:19), to a present condition (Gen 16:11; 38:24; 2 Sam 11:5), and to a conception that is about to occur in the near future (Judg 13:5, 7). (There is some uncertainty about the interpretation of Judg 13:5, 7, however. See the notes to those verses.) In Isa 7:14 one could translate, “the young woman is pregnant.” In this case the woman is probably a member of the royal family. Another option, the one followed in the present translation, takes the adjective in an imminent future sense, “the young woman is about to conceive.” In this case the woman could be a member of the royal family, or, more likely, the prophetess with whom Isaiah has sexual relations shortly after this (see 8:3).

[7:14]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “and you will call his name.” The words “young lady” are supplied in the translation to clarify the identity of the addressee. The verb is normally taken as an archaic third feminine singular form here, and translated, “she will call.” However the form (קָרָאת, qara’t) is more naturally understood as second feminine singular, in which case the words would be addressed to the young woman mentioned just before this. In the three other occurrences of the third feminine singular perfect of I קָרָא (qara’, “to call”), the form used is קָרְאָה (qar’ah; see Gen 29:35; 30:6; 1 Chr 4:9). A third feminine singular perfect קָרָאת does appear in Deut 31:29 and Jer 44:23, but the verb here is the homonym II קָרָא (“to meet, encounter”). The form קָרָאת (from I קָרָא, “to call”) appears in three other passages (Gen 16:11; Isa 60:18; Jer 3:4 [Qere]) and in each case is second feminine singular.

[7:14]  ¹¹ sn The name Immanuel means “God [is] with us.”

[9:6]  ¹² tn The Hebrew perfect (translated “has been born” and “has been given”) is used here as the prophet takes a rhetorical stance in the future. See the note at 9:1.

[9:6]  ¹³ tn Or “and dominion was on his shoulders and he called his name.” The prefixed verbs with vav (ו) consecutive are used with the same rhetorical sense as the perfects in v. 6a. See the preceding note. There is great debate over the syntactical structure of the verse. No subject is indicated for the verb “he called.” If all the titles that follow are ones given to the king, then the subject of the verb must be indefinite, “one calls.” However, some have suggested that one to three of the titles that follow refer to God, not the king. For example, the traditional punctuation of the Hebrew text suggests the translation, “and the Extraordinary Strategist, the Mighty God calls his name, ‘Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.’”

[9:6]  ¹⁴ tn Some have seen two titles here (“Wonderful” and “Counselor,” cf. KJV, ASV). However, the pattern of the following three titles (each contains two elements) and the use of the roots פָּלַא (pala’) and יָעַץ (ya’ats) together in Isa 25:1 (cf. כִּי עָשִׂיתָ פֶּלֶא עֵצוֹת מֵרָחוֹק אֱמוּנָה אֹמֶן) and 28:29 (cf. הִפְלִיא עֵצָה) suggest otherwise. The term יוֹעֵץ (yo’ets) could be taken as appositional (genitive or otherwise) of species (“a wonder, i.e., a wonder as a counselor,” cf. NAB “Wonder-Counselor”) or as a substantival participle for which פָּלַא provides the direct object (“one who counsels wonders”). יוֹעֵץ is used as a royal title elsewhere (cf. Mic 4:9). Here it probably refers to the king’s ability to devise military strategy, as suggested by the context (cf. vv. 3-4 and the following title אֵל גִּבּוֹר, ’el gibor). In Isa 11:2 (also a description of this king) עֵצָה (’etsah) is linked with גְּבוּרָה (gÿvurah, the latter being typically used of military might, cf. BDB 150 s.v.). Note also עֵצָה וּגְבוּרָה לַמִּלְחָמָה in Isa 36:5. פֶּלֶא (pele’) is typically used of God (cf. however Lam 1:9). Does this suggest the deity of the messianic ruler? The NT certainly teaches he is God, but did Isaiah necessarily have this in mind over 700 years before his birth? Since Isa 11:2 points out that this king will receive the spirit of the Lord, which will enable him to counsel, it is possible to argue that the king’s counsel is “extraordinary” because it finds its source in the divine spirit. Thus this title does not necessarily suggest that the ruler is deity.

[9:6]  ¹⁵ tn גִּבּוֹר (gibbor) is probably an attributive adjective (“mighty God”), though one might translate “God is a warrior” or “God is mighty.” Scholars have interpreted this title is two ways. A number of them have argued that the title portrays the king as God’s representative on the battlefield, whom God empowers in a supernatural way (see J. H. Hayes and S. A. Irvine, Isaiah, 181-82). They contend that this sense seems more likely in the original context of the prophecy. They would suggest that having read the NT, we might in retrospect interpret this title as indicating the coming king’s deity, but it is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way. Ps 45:6 addresses the Davidic king as “God” because he ruled and fought as God’s representative on earth. Ancient Near Eastern art and literature picture gods training kings for battle, bestowing special weapons, and intervening in battle. According to Egyptian propaganda, the Hittites described Rameses II as follows: “No man is he who is among us, It is Seth great-of-strength, Baal in person; Not deeds of man are these his doings, They are of one who is unique” (See Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 2:67). According to proponents of this view, Isa 9:6 probably envisions a similar kind of response when friends and foes alike look at the Davidic king in full battle regalia. When the king’s enemies oppose him on the battlefield, they are, as it were, fighting against God himself. The other option is to regard this title as a reference to God, confronting Isaiah’s readers with the divinity of this promised “child.” The use of this same title that clearly refers to God in a later passage (Isa 10:21) supports this interpretation. Other passages depict Yahweh as the great God and great warrior (Deut 10:17; Jer. 32:18). Although this connection of a child who is born with deity is unparalleled in any earlier biblical texts, Isaiah’s use of this title to make this connection represents Isaiah’s attempt (at God’s behest) to advance Israel in their understanding of the ideal Davidic king for whom they long.

[9:6]  ¹⁶ tn This title must not be taken in an anachronistic Trinitarian sense. (To do so would be theologically problematic, for the “Son” is the messianic king and is distinct in his person from God the “Father.”) Rather, in its original context the title pictures the king as the protector of his people. For a similar use of “father” see Isa 22:21 and Job 29:16. This figurative, idiomatic use of “father” is not limited to the Bible. In a Phoenician inscription (ca. 850-800 b.c.) the ruler Kilamuwa declares: “To some I was a father, to others I was a mother.” In another inscription (ca. 800 b.c.) the ruler Azitawadda boasts that the god Baal made him “a father and a mother” to his people. (See ANET 499-500.) The use of “everlasting” might suggest the deity of the king (as the one who has total control over eternity), but Isaiah and his audience may have understood the term as royal hyperbole emphasizing the king’s long reign or enduring dynasty (for examples of such hyperbolic language used of the Davidic king, see 1 Kgs 1:31; Pss 21:4-6; 61:6-7; 72:5, 17). The New Testament indicates that the hyperbolic language (as in the case of the title “Mighty God”) is literally realized in the ultimate fulfillment of the prophecy, for Jesus will rule eternally.

[9:6]  ¹⁷ tn This title pictures the king as one who establishes a safe socio-economic environment for his people. It hardly depicts him as a meek individual, for he establishes peace through military strength (as the preceding context and the first two royal titles indicate). His people experience safety and prosperity because their invincible king destroys their enemies. See Pss 72 and 144 for parallels to these themes.

[2:7]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “all the nations.”

[2:7]  ¹⁹ tn Though the subject here is singular (חֶמְדַּה, khemdah; “desire”), the preceding plural predicate mandates a collective subject, “desired (things)” or, better, an emendation to a plural form, חֲמֻדֹת (khamudot, “desirable [things],” hence “treasures”). Cf. ASV “the precious things”; NASB “the wealth”; NRSV “the treasure.” In the OT context this has no direct reference to the coming of the Messiah.

[2:9]  ²⁰ tn Heb “greater will be the latter splendor of this house than the former”; NAB “greater will be the future glory.”

[2:9]  ²¹ tn In the Hebrew text there is an implicit play on words in the clause “in this place [i.e., Jerusalem] I will give peace”: in יְרוּשָׁלַיִם (yÿrushalayim) there will be שָׁלוֹם (shalom).

[2:11]  ²² sn The Greek word for today (σήμερον, shmeron) occurs eleven times in the Gospel of Luke (2:11; 4:21; 5:26; 12:28; 13:32-33; 19:5, 9; 22:34, 61; 23:43) and nine times in Acts. Its use, especially in passages such as 2:11, 4:21, 5:26; 19:5, 9, signifies the dawning of the era of messianic salvation and the fulfillment of the plan of God. Not only does it underscore the idea of present fulfillment in Jesus’ ministry, but it also indicates salvific fulfillment present in the church (cf. Acts 1:6; 3:18; D. L. Bock, Luke [BECNT], 1:412; I. H. Marshall, Luke, [NIGTC], 873).

[2:11]  ²³ tn Or “town.” See the note on “city” in v. 4.

[2:11]  ²⁴ tn This is another indication of a royal, messianic connection.

[2:11]  ²⁵ tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[2:11]  sn The term χριστός (cristos) was originally an adjective (“anointed”), developing in LXX into a substantive (“an anointed one”), then developing still further into a technical generic term (“the anointed one”). In the intertestamental period it developed further into a technical term referring to the hoped-for anointed one, that is, a specific individual. In the NT the development starts there (technical-specific), is so used in the gospels, and then develops in Paul to mean virtually Jesus’ last name.

[2:21]  ²⁶ tn Grk “And when eight days were completed.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[2:21]  ²⁷ sn Jesus’ parents obeyed the angel as Zechariah and Elizabeth had (1:57-66). These events are taking place very much under God’s direction.

[2:22]  ²⁸ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.

[2:22]  ²⁹ tc The translation follows most mss, including early and important ones ({א A B L}). Some copyists, aware that the purification law applied to women only, produced mss ({76 it^pt vg} [though the Latin word eius could be either masculine or feminine]) that read “her purification.” But the extant evidence for an unambiguous “her” is shut up to one late minuscule ({codex 76}) and a couple of patristic citations of dubious worth ({Pseudo-Athanasius} whose date is unknown, and the {Catenae in euangelia Lucae et Joannis}, edited by J. A. Cramer. The Catenae is a work of collected patristic sayings whose exact source is unknown [thus, it could come from a period covering hundreds of years]). A few other witnesses (D pc lat) read “his purification.” The KJV has “her purification,” following Beza’s Greek text (essentially a revision of Erasmus’). Erasmus did not have it in any of his five editions. Most likely Beza put in the feminine form αὐτῆς (auths) because, recognizing that the eius found in several Latin mss could be read either as a masculine or a feminine, he made the contextually more satisfying choice of the feminine. Perhaps it crept into one or two late Greek witnesses via this interpretive Latin back-translation. So the evidence for the feminine singular is virtually nonexistent, while the masculine singular αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”) was a clear scribal blunder. There can be no doubt that “their purification” is the authentic reading.

[2:22]  tn Or “when the days of their purification were completed.” In addition to the textual problem concerning the plural pronoun (which apparently includes Joseph in the process) there is also a question whether the term translated “purification” (καθαρισμός, kaqarismo") refers to the time period prescribed by the Mosaic law or to the offering itself which marked the end of the time period (cf. NLT, “it was time for the purification offering”).

[2:22]  sn Exegetically the plural pronoun “their” creates a problem. It was Mary’s purification that was required by law, forty days after the birth (Lev 12:2-4). However, it is possible that Joseph shared in a need to be purified by having to help with the birth or that they also dedicated the child as a first born (Exod 13:2), which would also require a sacrifice that Joseph would bring. Luke’s point is that the parents followed the law. They were pious.

[2:22]  ³⁰ tn Grk “they”; the referents (Joseph and Mary) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:22]  ³¹ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:22]  ³² map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[2:23]  ³³ tn Grk “every male that opens the womb” (an idiom for the firstborn male).

[2:23]  ³⁴ sn An allusion to Exod 13:2, 12, 15.

[2:24]  ³⁵ sn The offering of a pair of doves or two young pigeons, instead of a lamb, speaks of the humble roots of Jesus’ family – they apparently could not afford the expense of a lamb.

[2:24]  ³⁶ sn A quotation from Lev 12:8; 5:11 (LXX).

[2:25]  ³⁷ tn Grk “And behold.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic. The Greek word ἰδού (idou) at the beginning of this statement has not been translated because it has no exact English equivalent here, but adds interest and emphasis (BDAG 468 s.v. 1).

[2:25]  ³⁸ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[2:25]  ³⁹ tn Grk “This man was righteous.” The Greek text begins a new sentence here, but this was changed to a relative clause in the translation to avoid redundancy.

[2:25]  ⁴⁰ tn Or “deliverance,” “consolation.”

[2:25]  sn The restoration of Israel refers to Simeon’s hope that the Messiah would come and deliver the nation (Isa 40:1; 49:13; 51:3; 57:18; 61:2; 2 Bar 44:7).

[2:25]  ⁴¹ sn Once again, by mentioning the Holy Spirit, Luke stresses the prophetic enablement of a speaker. The Spirit has fallen on both men (Zechariah, 1:67) and women (Elizabeth, 1:41) in Luke 1–2 as they share the will of the Lord.

[2:26]  ⁴² tn Grk “And it.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[2:26]  ⁴³ tn The use of the passive suggests a revelation by God, and in the OT the corresponding Hebrew term represented here by κεχρηματισμένον (kecrhmatismenon) indicated some form of direct revelation from God (Jer 25:30; 33:2; Job 40:8).

[2:26]  ⁴⁴ tn Grk “would not see death” (an idiom for dying).

[2:26]  ⁴⁵ tn On the grammar of this temporal clause, see BDF §§383.3; 395.

[2:26]  ⁴⁶ tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[2:26]  sn The revelation to Simeon that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Christ is yet another example of a promise fulfilled in Luke 1-2. Also, see the note on Christ in 2:11.

[2:27]  ⁴⁷ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the consequential nature of the action.

[2:27]  ⁴⁸ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Simeon) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:27]  ⁴⁹ tn Grk “So in the Spirit” or “So by the Spirit,” but since it refers to the Spirit’s direction the expanded translation “directed by the Spirit” is used here.

[2:27]  ⁵⁰ tn Grk “the temple.”

[2:27]  sn The temple courts is a reference to the larger temple area, not the holy place. Simeon was either in the court of the Gentiles or the court of women, since Mary was present.

[2:27]  ⁵¹ tn Grk “to do for him according to the custom of the law.” See Luke 2:22-24.

[2:28]  ⁵² tn Grk “he”; the referent (Simeon) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:28]  ⁵³ tn Grk “and said.” The finite verb in Greek has been replaced with a participle in English to improve the smoothness of the translation.

[2:29]  ⁵⁴ sn The phrase according to your word again emphasizes that God will perform his promise.

[2:29]  ⁵⁵ tn The Greek word translated here by “Sovereign Lord” is δεσπότης (despoth").

[2:29]  ⁵⁶ sn This short prophetic declaration is sometimes called the Nunc dimittis, which comes from the opening phrase of the saying in Latin, “now dismiss,” a fairly literal translation of the Greek verb ἀπολύεις (apolueis, “now release”) in this verse.

[2:29]  ⁵⁷ tn Here the Greek word δοῦλος (doulos, “slave”) has been translated “servant” since it acts almost as an honorific term for one specially chosen and appointed to carry out the Lord’s tasks.

[2:29]  sn Undoubtedly the background for the concept of being the Lord’s slave or servant is to be found in the Old Testament scriptures. For a Jew this concept did not connote drudgery, but honor and privilege. It was used of national Israel at times (Isa 43:10), but was especially associated with famous OT personalities, including such great men as Moses (Josh 14:7), David (Ps 89:3; cf. 2 Sam 7:5, 8) and Elijah (2 Kgs 10:10); all these men were “servants (or slaves) of the Lord.”

[2:29]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “now release your servant.”

[2:30]  ⁵⁹ sn To see Jesus, the Messiah, is to see God’s salvation.

[2:31]  ⁶⁰ sn Is the phrase all peoples a reference to Israel alone, or to both Israel and the Gentiles? The following verse makes it clear that all peoples includes Gentiles, another key Lukan emphasis (Luke 24:47; Acts 10:34-43).

[2:32]  ⁶¹ tn The syntax of this verse is disputed. Most read “light” and “glory” in parallelism, so Jesus is a light for revelation to the Gentiles and is glory to the people for Israel. Others see “light” (1:78-79) as a summary, while “revelation” and “glory” are parallel, so Jesus is light for all, but is revelation for the Gentiles and glory for Israel. Both readings make good sense and either could be correct, but Luke 1:78-79 and Acts 26:22-23 slightly favor this second option.

[2:32]  ⁶² sn In other words, Jesus is a special cause for praise and honor (“glory”) for the nation.

[2:38]  ⁶³ tn Grk “at that very hour.”

[2:38]  ⁶⁴ tn Grk “And coming up.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style. The participle ἐπιστᾶσα (epistasa) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[2:38]  ⁶⁵ tn The imperfect ἐλάλει (elalei) here looks at a process of declaration, not a single moment. She clearly was led by God to address men and women about the hope Jesus was. The testimony of Luke 1—2 to Jesus has involved all types of people.

[2:38]  ⁶⁶ tn Grk “him”; the referent (the child) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:38]  ⁶⁷ tc A few mss (1216 pc) read ᾿Ισραήλ (Israhl, “Israel”) or ἐν τῷ ᾿Ισραήλ (en tw Israhl, “in Israel”), but this reading does not have enough ms support to be considered authentic. More substantial is the reading ἐν ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ (en Ierousalhm, “in Jerusalem”; found in A D L Θ Ψ 0130 ˹³ 33 Ï), though the preposition was almost surely added to clarify (and perhaps alter) the meaning of the original. The simple ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ, without preposition, is found in א B W Ξ 1 565* lat co.

[2:38]  map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[2:46]  ⁶⁸ tn Grk “And it happened that after.” 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. Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[2:46]  ⁶⁹ sn Three days means there was one day out, another day back, and a third day of looking in Jerusalem.

[2:46]  ⁷⁰ tn Grk “the temple.”

[2:46]  ⁷¹ tn This is the only place in Luke’s Gospel where the term διδάσκαλος (didaskalo", “teacher”) is applied to Jews.

[7:19]  ⁷² tc ‡ Although most mss (א A W Θ Ψ Ë¹ Ï it sy bo) read πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν (pro" ton Ihsoun, “to Jesus”), other important witnesses (B L Ξ Ë¹³ 33 pc sa) read πρὸς τὸν κύριον (pro" ton kurion, “to the Lord”). A decision is difficult in this instance, as there are good witnesses on both sides. In light of this, that “Jesus” is more widespread than “the Lord” with almost equally important witnesses argues for its authenticity.

[7:19]  ⁷³ tn Grk “to Jesus, saying,” but since this takes the form of a question, it is preferable to use the phrase “to ask” in English.

[7:19]  ⁷⁴ sn Aspects of Jesus’ ministry may have led John to question whether Jesus was the promised stronger and greater one who is to come that he had preached about in Luke 3:15-17.

[7:20]  ⁷⁵ tn Grk “And when.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[7:20]  ⁷⁶ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[7:20]  ⁷⁷ tn Grk “to you, saying,” but since this takes the form of a question, it is preferable to use the phrase “to ask” in English.

[7:20]  ⁷⁸ tn This question is repeated word for word from v. 19.

[19:47]  ⁷⁹ tn Grk “And he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[19:47]  ⁸⁰ tn Grk “and the scribes.” See the note on the phrase “experts in the law” in 5:21.

[19:47]  ⁸¹ tn Grk “to destroy.”

[19:47]  sn The action at the temple was the last straw. In their view, if Jesus could cause trouble in the holy place, then he must be stopped, so the leaders were seeking to assassinate him.

[2:14]  ⁸² sn John 2:14-22. Does John’s account of the temple cleansing describe the same event as the synoptic gospels describe, or a separate event? The other accounts of the cleansing of the temple are Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; and Luke 19:45-46. None are as long as the Johannine account. The fullest of the synoptic accounts is Mark’s. John’s account differs from Mark’s in the mention of sheep and oxen, the mention of the whip of cords, the Greek word κερματιστῆς (kermatisths) for money changer (the synoptics use κολλυβιστῆς [kollubisths], which John mentions in 2:15), the scattering of the coins (2:15), and the command by Jesus, “Take these things away from here!” The word for overturned in John is ἀναστρεφω (anastrefw), while Matthew and Mark use καταστρεφω (katastrefw; Luke does not mention the moneychangers at all). The synoptics all mention that Jesus quoted Isa 56:7 followed by Jer 7:11. John mentions no citation of scripture at all, but says that later the disciples remembered Ps 69:9. John does not mention, as does Mark, Jesus’ prohibition on carrying things through the temple (i.e., using it for a shortcut). But the most important difference is one of time: In John the cleansing appears as the first great public act of Jesus’ ministry, while in the synoptics it is virtually the last. The most common solution of the problem, which has been endlessly discussed among NT scholars, is to say there was only one cleansing, and that it took place, as the synoptics record it, at the end of Jesus’ ministry. In the synoptics it appears to be the event that finalized the opposition of the high priest, and precipitated the arrest of Jesus. According to this view, John’s placing of the event at the opening of Jesus’ ministry is due to his general approach; it was fitting ‘theologically’ for Jesus to open his ministry this way, so this is the way John records it. Some have overstated the case for one cleansing and John’s placing of it at the opening of Jesus’ public ministry, however. For example W. Barclay stated: “John, as someone has said, is more interested in the truth than in the facts. He was not interested to tell men when Jesus cleansed the Temple; he was supremely interested in telling men that Jesus did cleanse the Temple” (John [DSBS], 94). But this is not the impression one gets by a reading of John’s Gospel: The evangelist seems to go out of his way to give details and facts, including notes of time and place. To argue as Barclay does that John is interested in truth apart from the facts is to set up a false dichotomy. Why should one have to assume, in any case, that there could have been only one cleansing of the temple? This account in John is found in a large section of nonsynoptic material. Apart from the work of John the Baptist – and even this is markedly different from the references in the synoptics – nothing else in the first five chapters of John’s Gospel is found in any of the synoptics. It is certainly not impossible that John took one isolated episode from the conclusion of Jesus’ earthly ministry and inserted it into his own narrative in a place which seemed appropriate according to his purposes. But in view of the differences between John and the synoptics, in both wording and content, as well as setting and time, it is at least possible that the event in question actually occurred twice (unless one begins with the presupposition that the Fourth Gospel is nonhistorical anyway). In support of two separate cleansings of the temple, it has been suggested that Jesus’ actions on this occasion were not permanent in their result, and after (probably) 3 years the status quo in the temple courts had returned to normal. And at this time early in Jesus’ ministry, he was virtually unknown. Such an action as he took on this occasion would have created a stir, and evoked the response John records in 2:18-22, but that is probably about all, especially if Jesus’ actions met with approval among part of the populace. But later in Jesus’ ministry, when he was well-known, and vigorously opposed by the high-priestly party in Jerusalem, his actions might have brought forth another, harsher response. It thus appears possible to argue for two separate cleansings of the temple as well as a single one relocated by John to suit his own purposes. Which then is more probable? On the whole, more has been made of the differences between John’s account and the synoptic accounts than perhaps should have been. After all, the synoptic accounts also differ considerably from one another, yet few scholars would be willing to posit four cleansings of the temple as an explanation for this. While it is certainly possible that the author did not intend by his positioning of the temple cleansing to correct the synoptics’ timing of the event, but to highlight its significance for the course of Jesus’ ministry, it still appears somewhat more probable that John has placed the event he records in the approximate period of Jesus’ public ministry in which it did occur, that is, within the first year or so of Jesus’ public ministry. The statement of the Jewish authorities recorded by the author (this temple has been under construction for forty-six years) would tend to support an earlier rather than a later date for the temple cleansing described by John, since 46 years from the beginning of construction on Herod’s temple in ca. 19 b.c. (the date varies somewhat in different sources) would be around a.d. 27. This is not conclusive proof, however.

[2:14]  ⁸³ tn Grk “in the temple.”

[2:14]  sn The merchants (those who were selling) would have been located in the Court of the Gentiles.

[2:14]  ⁸⁴ tn Grk “the money changers sitting”; the words “at tables” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.

[2:15]  ⁸⁵ tc Several witnesses, two of which are quite ancient (Ì^66,75 L N ˹ 33 565 892 1241 al lat), have ὡς (Jws, “like”) before φραγέλλιον (fragellion, “whip”). A decision based on external evidence would be difficult to make because the shorter reading also has excellent witnesses, as well as the majority, on its side (א A B Θ Ψ Ë¹³ Ï co). Internal evidence, though, leans toward the shorter reading. Scribes tended to add to the text, and the addition of ὡς here clearly softens the assertion of the evangelist: Instead of making a whip of cords, Jesus made “[something] like a whip of cords.”

[2:15]  ⁸⁶ tn Grk “the temple.”

[2:15]  ⁸⁷ sn Because of the imperial Roman portraits they carried, Roman denarii and Attic drachmas were not permitted to be used in paying the half-shekel temple-tax (the Jews considered the portraits idolatrous). The money changers exchanged these coins for legal Tyrian coinage at a small profit.

[2:16]  ⁸⁸ tn Or (perhaps) “Stop making.”

[2:16]  ⁸⁹ tn Or “a house of merchants” (an allusion to Zech 14:21).

[2:16]  sn A marketplace. Zech 14:20-21, in context, is clearly a picture of the messianic kingdom. The Hebrew word translated “Canaanite” may also be translated “merchant” or “trader.” Read in this light, Zech 14:21 states that there will be no merchant in the house of the Lord in that day (the day of the Lord, at the establishment of the messianic kingdom). And what would Jesus’ words (and actions) in cleansing the temple have suggested to the observers? That Jesus was fulfilling messianic expectations would have been obvious – especially to the disciples, who had just seen the miracle at Cana with all its messianic implications.