Discovery Box| (0.01) | (Luk 14:24) | 2 sn None of those individuals who were invited. This is both the point and the warning. To be a part of the original invitation does not mean one automatically has access to blessing. One must respond when the summons comes in order to participate. The summons came in the person of Jesus and his proclamation of the kingdom. The statement here refers to the fact that many in Israel will not be blessed with participation, for they have ignored the summons when it came. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 14:20) | 2 sn I just got married, and I cannot come. There is no request to be excused here; just a refusal. Why this disqualifies attendance is not clear. The OT freed a newly married man from certain responsibilities such as serving in the army (Deut 20:7; 24:5), but that would hardly apply to a banquet. The invitation is not respected in any of the three cases. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 14:12) | 3 tn The meaning of the two terms for meals here, ἄριστον (ariston) and δεῖπνον (deipnon), essentially overlap (L&N 23.22). Translators usually try to find two terms for a meal to use as equivalents (e.g., lunch and dinner, dinner and supper, etc.). In this translation “dinner” and “banquet” have been used, since the expected presence of rich neighbors later in the verse suggests a rather more elaborate occasion than an ordinary meal. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 14:5) | 2 tc Here “son,” found in P45,75 (A) B W M, is the preferred reading. The other reading, “donkey” (found in א K L Ψ ƒ1,13 33 579 892 1241 2542 al lat bo), looks like an assimilation to Luke 13:15 and Deut 22:4; Isa 32:20, and was perhaps motivated by an attempt to soften the unusual collocation of “son” and “ox.” The Western ms D differs from all others and reads “sheep.” |
| (0.01) | (Luk 12:22) | 5 tc Most mss (P45 Ψ 070 ƒ13 33 M) supply the pronoun ὑμῶν (humōn, “your”) here, although several significant and early witnesses omit it (P75 א A B D L Q W Θ ƒ1 700 2542 al lat). Externally, the shorter reading is superior. Internally, the pronoun looks to be a scribal clarification. In context the article can be translated as a possessive pronoun anyway (ExSyn 215), as it has been done for this translation. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 12:2) | 2 sn I.e., be revealed by God. The passive voice verbs here (“be revealed,” be made known”) see the revelation as coming from God. The text is both a warning about bad things being revealed and an encouragement that good things will be made known, though the stress with the images of darkness and what is hidden in vv. 2-3 is on the attempt to conceal. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 11:47) | 1 sn The effect of what the experts in the law were doing was to deny the message of the prophets and thus honor their death by supporting those who had sought their removal. The charge that this is what previous generations did shows the problem is chronic. As T. W. Manson said, the charge here is “The only prophet you honor is a dead prophet!” (The Sayings of Jesus, 101). |
| (0.01) | (Luk 11:2) | 2 sn God is addressed in terms of intimacy (Father). The original Semitic term here was probably Abba. The term is a little unusual in a personal prayer, especially as it lacks qualification. Although it is a term of endearment used in the family circle, it is not the exact equivalent of “Daddy” (as is sometimes popularly suggested). However, it does suggest a close, familial relationship. See also the note on Abba at Rom 8:15. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 10:22) | 1 sn This verse, frequently referred to as the “bolt from the Johannine blue,” has been noted for its conceptual similarity to statements in John’s Gospel (10:15; 17:2). The authority of the Son and the Father are totally intertwined. The statement here also occurs in Matt 11:27, and serves as a warning against drawing a simplistic dichotomy between Jesus’ teaching in the synoptic gospels and Jesus’ teaching in the Gospel of John. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 9:49) | 2 tc The translation follows the reading that has Luke’s normal imperfect here (ἐκωλύομεν, ekōluomen; found in P75vid א B L Ξ 579 892 1241). Most mss, however, have an aorist (ἐκωλύσαμεν, ekōlusamen; found in A C D W Θ Ψ ƒ1,13 33 M co), which would be translated “we forbade him.” The imperfect enjoys the best external and internal support. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 9:43) | 4 tc Most mss, especially the later ones (A C W Θ Ψ 0115 ƒ13 33 892 M al), actually supply ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς (ho Iēsous, “Jesus”) here. Since the earliest and best witnesses, along with many others (P75 א B D L Ξ ƒ1 579 700 1241 2542 lat), lack the name, and since scribes were unlikely to intentionally omit it, the shorter reading is preferred as the reading of the initial text. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 9:23) | 2 sn Here them all could be limited to the disciples, since Jesus was alone with them in v. 18. It could also be that by this time the crowd had followed and found him, and he addressed them, or this could be construed as a separate occasion from the discussion with the disciples in 9:18-22. The cost of discipleship is something Jesus was willing to tell both insiders and outsiders about. The rejection he felt would also fall on his followers. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 8:39) | 3 sn Jesus instructs the man to declare what God has done for him, in contrast to the usual instructions (e.g., 8:56; 9:21) to remain silent. Here in Gentile territory Jesus allowed more open discussion of his ministry. D. L. Bock (Luke [BECNT], 1:781) suggests that with few Jewish religious representatives present, there would be less danger of misunderstanding Jesus’ ministry as political. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 7:10) | 2 tc Most mss, especially later ones (A C [D] Θ Ψ ƒ13 33 M), have “the sick slave” here instead of “the slave.” This brings out the contrast of the healing more clearly, but this reading looks secondary both internally (scribes tended toward clarification) and externally (the shorter reading is well supported by a variety of witnesses: P75 א B L W ƒ1 579 700 892* 1241 2542 it co). |
| (0.01) | (Luk 7:5) | 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]). |
| (0.01) | (Luk 6:4) | 3 sn Jesus’ response to the charge that what his disciples were doing was not lawful is one of analogy: ‘If David did it for his troops in a time of need, then so can I with my disciples.’ Jesus is clear that on the surface there was a violation here. What is not as clear is whether he is arguing a “greater need” makes this permissible or that this was within the intention of the law all along. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 5:33) | 2 tc Most mss (א*,2 A C D Θ Ψ ƒ1,13 M latt sy) read διὰ τί (dia ti, “Why do John’s…?”) here, turning the statement into a question. But such seems to be a motivated reading, assimilating the text to Mark 2:18 and Matt 9:14. The reading represented in the translation is supported by P4 א1 B L W Ξ 33 892* 1241 sa. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 5:22) | 2 tn Grk “reasonings.” This is the noun form of the infinitive διαλογίζεσθαι (dialogizesthai, “began to reason to themselves”) used in v. 21. Jesus’ reply to them in the latter part of the present verse makes clear that these reasonings were mental and internal, so the translation “thoughts” was used here. On the hostile or evil nature of these thoughts, see G. Schrenk, TDNT 2:97. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 5:21) | 6 sn Uttering blasphemies in the NT has a somewhat broader meaning than mere exclamations or pronouncements. It could mean to say something that dishonored God, but it could also involve claims to divine prerogatives (in this case, to forgive sins on God’s behalf). Such claims were viewed as usurping God’s majesty or honor. The remark here raised directly the issue of the nature of Jesus’ ministry, and even more importantly, the identity of Jesus himself as God’s representative. |
| (0.01) | (Luk 5:21) | 2 tn Or “Then the scribes.” The traditional rendering of γραμματεύς (grammateus) as “scribe” does not communicate much to the modern English reader, for whom the term might mean “professional copyist,” if it means anything at all. The people referred to here were recognized experts in the law of Moses and in traditional laws and regulations. Thus “expert in the law” comes closer to the meaning for the modern reader. |
