¹ tc Most mss (A B* C D W Θ Ψ ƒ^1,13 M it) read “Jesus” instead of “the Lord” here, but κύριος (kurios, “Lord”) has the support of some weighty papyri, majuscules, and other witnesses (P^3,[45],75 א B² L 579 892 lat sa).

² tc There is a difficult textual problem here and in v. 17, where the number is either “seventy” (א A C L W Θ Ξ Ψ ƒ^1,13 M and several church fathers and early versions) or “seventy-two” (P⁷⁵ B D 0181 lat as well as other versions and fathers). The more difficult reading is “seventy-two,” since scribes would be prone to assimilate this passage to several OT passages that refer to groups of seventy people (Num 11:13-17; Deut 10:22; Judg 8:30; 2 Kgs 10:1 et al.); this reading also has slightly better ms support. “Seventy” could be the preferred reading if scribes drew from the tradition of the number of translators of the LXX, which the Letter of Aristeas puts at seventy-two (TCGNT 127), although this is far less likely. All things considered, “seventy-two” is a much more difficult reading and accounts for the rise of the other. Only Luke notes a second larger mission like the one in 9:1-6.

³ tc Most mss (A C W Θ Ψ ƒ¹³ 33 M) add κύριε (kurie, “Lord”) here, but scribes were prone to add to the text, especially appellations for the Lord. The shorter reading also enjoys significant ms support (P^45,75 א B D L Ξ ƒ¹ lat co).

¹ tn The Greek text reads here ἄνδρες (andres)—that is, adult males. The actual count would be larger, since the use of this Greek term suggests that women and children were not included in this number (see the parallel in Matt 14:21).

⁴ tc Many mss (א A L Ψ ƒ¹ 33 565 579 1241 2542 pm it co) read “for him,” but “for them” also has good ms support (B D K W Γ Δ Θ ƒ¹³ 700 892 1424 pm lat). From an internal standpoint the singular pronoun looks like an assimilation to texts like Matt 27:55 and Mark 15:41.

² tc ‡ Although most mss begin the verse with καί (kai, “and”), beginning the sentence without a conjunction is both a harder reading and is found in early and significant witnesses (P^4,75vid א² B 579 700 892 1241). NA²⁸ puts the word in brackets indicating doubts as to its authenticity.

¹ sn The reference to the son of God here is not to a divine being, but to one directly formed by the hand of God. He is made in God’s image, so this phrase could be read as appositional (“Adam, that is, the son of God”). See Acts 17:28-29.

³ tc Instead of “You are my one dear Son; in you I take great delight,” one Greek ms and several Latin mss and church fathers (D it Ju [Cl] Meth Hil Aug) quote Ps 2:7 outright with “You are my Son; today I have fathered you.” But the weight of the ms testimony is against this reading.

³ tc Several mss (A C K W Ψ 33 565 579 1424 2542 al bo) read τῆς γυναικὸς Φιλίππου τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ (tēs gunaikos Philippou tou adelphou autou, “the wife of his brother Philip”), specifying whose wife Herodias was. The addition of “Philip,” however, is an assimilation to Matt 14:3 and is lacking in the better witnesses.

² tc A few mss (C D 892 1424 it) add εἰς μετάνοιαν (eis metanoian, “for repentance”). Although two of the mss in support are early and significant, it is an obviously motivated reading to add clarification, probably representing a copyist’s attempt to harmonize Luke’s version with Matt 3:11.

¹ tc Most mss (A Θ Ψ ƒ^1,13 33 M) read πνεύματι (pneumati, “in spirit”) after “became strong,” but this looks like an assimilation to Luke 1:80. The better witnesses (א B D L N W lat co) lack the word.

² tc The translation follows most mss, including early and significant 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 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 (autēs) 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.

¹ tn Grk “From where this to me?” The translation suggests the note of humility and surprise that Elizabeth feels in being a part of these events. The ἵνα (hina) clause which follows explains what “this” is. A literal translation would read “From where this to me, that is, that the mother of my Lord comes to visit me?”

¹ tc Again, as in v. 16, the name “Jesus” is supplied before “Barabbas” in Θ ƒ¹ 700* sy^s Or^mss (Θ 700* lack the article τόν [ton] before Βαραββᾶν [Barabban]). The same argument for accepting the inclusion of “Jesus” as the earlier reading in the previous verse applies here as well.

² tn The Greek text reads here μεταμέλομαι (metamelomai): “to change one’s mind about something, with the probable implication of regret” (L&N 31.59); cf. also BDAG 639 s.v. The idea in this context involves more than just a change of mind, for the son regrets his initial response. The same verb is used in v. 32.

³ tc A majority of witnesses read σου (sou, “your”) here, perhaps as a clarifying addition. At the same time, it is possible that the pronoun dropped out through haplography or was excised because of perceived redundancy (there are two other such pronouns in the verse) by א B. All things considered, σου is most likely authentic.

¹ tc Most mss (א² C W Γ 579 1241 M lat bo) have “Jesus, the Christ” (᾿Ιησοῦς ὁ Χριστός, Iēsous ho Christos) here, while D has “Christ Jesus” (ὁ Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς). On the one hand, this is a much harder reading than the mere Χριστός because the name Jesus was already well known for the disciples’ master—both to them and to others. Whether he was the Messiah is the real focus of the passage. But the addition of “Jesus” is surely too hard a reading: There are no other texts in which the Lord tells his disciples not to disclose his personal name. Further, it is plainly a motivated reading in that scribes had the proclivity to add ᾿Ιησοῦς to Χριστός or to κύριος (kurios, “Lord”), regardless of whether such was appropriate to the context. In this instance it clearly is not, and it only reveals that scribes sometimes, if not often, did not think about the larger interpretive consequences of their alterations to the text. Further, the shorter reading is well supported by א* B L Δ Θ ƒ^{1, 13} 565 700 1424 it sa.

¹ tc The logic of v. 5 would seem to demand that both father and mother are in view in v. 6. Indeed, the majority of mss (C L N W Γ Δ Θ 0106 ƒ¹ 1424 M) have “or his mother” (ἢ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ, ē tēn mētera autou) after “honor his father” here. However, there are significant witnesses that have variations on this theme (καὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ [kai tēn mētera autou, “and his mother”] in Φ 565 1241 bo and ἢ τὴν μητέρα [“or mother”] in 073 ƒ¹³ 33 579 700 892), which is usually an indication of a predictable addition to the text rather than an authentic reading. Further, the shorter reading (without any mention of “mother”) is found in early and significant witnesses (א B D a e sy^c sa). Although it is possible that the shorter reading came about accidentally (due to the repetition of—ερα αὐτοῦ), the evidence more strongly suggests that the longer readings were intentional scribal alterations.

² tc The Western codex D and a few other mss (0233 1424 sy^c) read “Jesus” here instead of “Christ.” This is not likely to be original because it is not found in the earliest and most important mss, nor in the rest of the ms tradition.

² tc Most witnesses (C L N Γ Θ 0233 ƒ¹³ 565 579 700 M) have ἐθαύμασαν (ethaumasan; “marveled, were amazed”) instead of ἐφοβήθησαν (ephobēthēsan) here, effectively turning the fearful reaction into one of veneration. But the harder reading is well supported by א B D W 0281 ƒ¹ 33 892 1424 lat co and thus is surely authentic.