¹ tn Or “who chews”; Grk ὁ τρώγων (ho trōgōn). The alternation between ἐσθίω (esthiō, “eat,” v. 53) and τρώγω (trōgō, “eats,” vv. 54, 56, 58; “consumes,” v. 57) may simply reflect a preference for one form over the other on the author’s part, rather than an attempt to express a slightly more graphic meaning. If there is a difference, however, the word used here (τρώγω) is the more graphic and vivid of the two (“gnaw” or “chew”).

¹ sn The author doesn’t tell why Jesus chose to set out once more for Galilee. Some have suggested that the Pharisees turned their attention to Jesus because John the Baptist had now been thrown into prison. But the text gives no hint of this. In any case, perhaps Jesus simply did not want to provoke a confrontation at this time (knowing that his “hour” had not yet come).

¹ tn Or “a certain Judean.” Here BDAG 478 s.v. ᾿Ιουδαίος 2.a states, “Judean (with respect to birth, nationality, or cult).” If the emphasis is simply on the individual’s origin, “Judean” would be preferable since it designates a nationality or place of origin. However, the mention of ceremonial washing in the context suggests the dispute was religious in nature, so “Jew” has been retained in the translation here.

² sn Luke tells the story of the empty tomb with little drama. He simply notes that when they arrived the stone had been rolled away in a position where the tomb could be entered. This large stone was often placed in a channel so that it could be easily moved by rolling it aside. The other possibility is that it was merely placed over the opening in a position from which it had now been moved.

⁴ sn The bill was halved (sit down quickly, and write 50). What was the steward doing? This is debated. 1) Did he simply lower the price? 2) Did he remove interest from the debt? 3) Did he remove his own commission? It is hard to be sure. Either of the latter two options is more likely. The goal was clear: The manager would be seen in a favorable light for bringing a deflationary trend to prices.

³ sn The edge of his cloak may simply refer to the edge or hem of the garment, but it could refer to the kraspedon, the tassel on the four corners of the garment, two in front and two behind, that served to remind the wearer of God’s commands (Num 15:37-41; Deut 22:12; D. L. Bock, Luke [BECNT], 1:794). The woman thus touched the very part of Jesus’ clothing that indicated his ritual purity.

¹ tn Or “people.” The use of ἔθνος (ethnos, “nation”) here instead of “God” probably meant the man was not a full proselyte, but that he had simply been supportive of the Jews and their culture. He could have been a God-fearer. The Romans saw a stable religious community as politically helpful and often supported it (Josephus, Ant. 16.6.2 [16.162-165], 19.6.3 [19.300-311]).

³ sn Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and don’t do what I tell you? Respect is not a matter of mere words, but is reflected in obedient action. This short saying, which is much simpler than its more developed conceptual parallel in Matt 7:21-23, serves in this form to simply warn and issue a call to hear and obey, as the last parable also does in vv. 47-49.

³ tc Most later mss (A C D Θ Ψ [ƒ¹³] M lat) read ἐν σαββάτῳ δευτεροπρώτῳ (en sabbatō deuteroprōtō, “a second-first Sabbath”), while the earlier and better witnesses have simply ἐν σαββάτῳ (P⁴ א B L W ƒ¹ 33 579 1241 2542 it sa). The longer reading is most likely secondary, though various explanations may account for it (for discussion, see TCGNT 116).

³ sn There was no place for them in the inn. There is no drama in how this is told. There is no search for a variety of places to stay or a heartless innkeeper. (Such items are later, nonbiblical embellishments.) Bethlehem was not large and there was simply no other place to stay. The humble surroundings of the birth are ironic in view of the birth’s significance.

² tn Traditionally, “Mary, his betrothed.” Although often rendered in contemporary English as “Mary, who was engaged to him,” this may give the modern reader a wrong impression, since Jewish marriages in this period were typically arranged marriages. The term ἐμνηστευμένῃ (emnēsteumenē) may suggest that the marriage is not yet consummated, not necessarily that they are not currently married. Some mss read “the betrothed to him wife”; others, simply “his wife.” These readings, though probably not autographic, may give the right sense.

² tn Grk “Him—be crucified!” The third person imperative is difficult to translate because English has no corresponding third person form for the imperative. The traditional translation “Let him be crucified” sounds as if the crowd is giving consent or permission. “He must be crucified” is closer, but it is more natural in English to convert the passive to active and simply say “Crucify him.”

² sn In this pericope the author uses a term for being healed (Grk “saved”) that, while referring to the woman’s physical healing, would have spiritual significance to his readers. It may be a double entendre (cf. the parallel in Mark 5:28 which uses the same term), since elsewhere the evangelist uses verbs that simply mean “heal”: If only the readers would “touch” Jesus, they too would be “saved.”

³ tn Grk “people.” The plural of ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos) usually indicates people in general, but the singular is used in the expression “Son of Man.” There is thus an ironic allusion to Jesus’ statement in v. 6: His self-designation as “Son of Man” is meant to be unique, but the crowd regards it simply as meaning “human, person.” To maintain this connection for the English reader the plural ἀνθρώποις (anthrōpois) has been translated here as “men” rather than as the more generic “people.”

² tn There is some question as to whether מַלְאָכִי (malʾakhi) should be understood as a personal name (so almost all English versions) or as simply “my messenger” (the literal meaning of the Hebrew). Despite the fact that the word should be understood in the latter sense in 3:1 (where, however, it refers to a different person), to understand it that way here would result in the book being of anonymous authorship, a situation anomalous among all the prophetic literature of the OT.

¹ tn The Hebrew word תְּרָפִים (t^erafim, “teraphim”) refers to small images used as means of divination and in other occult practices (cf. Gen 31:19, 34-35; 1 Sam 19:13, 16; Hos 3:4). A number of English versions transliterate the Hebrew term (cf. ASV, NAB, NASB, NRSV) or simply use the generic term “idols” (so KJV, NIV, TEV).

² sn Religious banquets. This refers to the מַרְזֵחַ (marzeakh), a type of pagan religious banquet popular among the upper class of Israel at this time and apparently associated with mourning. See P. King, Amos, Hosea, Micah, 137-61; J. L. McLaughlin, The “Marzeah” in the Prophetic Literature (VTSup). Scholars debate whether at this banquet the dead were simply remembered or actually venerated in a formal, cultic sense.

² tc The MT reads מִפְּנֵיהֶם (mipp^enehem, “from them”; preposition + masculine plural noun + third person masculine plural suffix); so KJV, ASV, and NASB. However, the LXX and Syriac reflect an alternate Hebrew textual tradition of מִפָּנַי הֵם (mippanay hem, “they [went away] from me”; preposition + masculine plural noun + first person common singular suffix, followed by third person masculine plural independent personal pronoun); cf. NAB, NIV, and NRSV. The textual variant was caused simply by faulty word division.

² tc The MT preserves the enigmatic כְּמוֹ תַנּוּר בֹּעֵרָה מֵ (k^emo tannur boʿerah me, “Like a burning oven, from…?”). The adjectival participle בֹּעֵרָה (“burning”) is feminine while the noun תַנּוּר (tannur, “oven”) that it modifies is masculine. The BHS editors solve this problem by simply redividing the words: כְּמוֹ תַנּוּר בֹּעֵר הֵם (k^emo tannur boʿer hem, “they are like a burning oven”). This solution is followed by many English versions (e.g., NCV, NRSV, NLT).

³ tn Heb “The Lord has stirred up the spirit of…” The verb is rendered here as a prophetic perfect. The rendering “arouse a spirit of hostility” is an attempt to render some meaning to the phrase and not simply ignore the word “spirit,” as many of the modern English versions do. For a fuller discussion, including cross references, see the translator’s note on v. 1.