⁴ tn The expression ἐν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ὑμῶν ἀποθανεῖσθε (en tē hamartia humōn apothaneisthe) is similar to an expression found in the LXX at Ezek 3:18, 20 and Prov 24:9. Note the singular of ἁμαρτία (the plural occurs later in v. 24). To die with one’s sin unrepented and unatoned would be the ultimate disaster to befall a person. Jesus’ warning is stern but to the point.

¹ sn They did not understand…about his Father is a parenthetical note by the author. This type of comment, intended for the benefit of the reader, is typical of the “omniscient author” convention adopted by the author, who is writing from a postresurrection point of view. He writes with the benefit of later knowledge that those who originally heard Jesus’ words would not have had.

³ sn You people do not know where I came from or where I am going. The ignorance of the religious authorities regarding Jesus’ origin works on two levels at once: First, they thought Jesus came from Galilee (although he really came from Bethlehem in Judea) and second, they did not know that he came from heaven (from the Father), and this is where he would return. See further John 7:52.

² sn You people have never heard his voice nor seen his form at any time. Cf. Deut 4:12. Also see Deut 5:24 ff., where the Israelites begged to hear the voice no longer—their request (ironically) has by this time been granted. How ironic this would be if the feast is Pentecost, where by the 1st century a.d. the giving of the law at Sinai was being celebrated.

¹ tn Since this is a prohibition with a present imperative, the translation “stop sinning” is sometimes suggested. This is not likely, however, since the present tense is normally used in prohibitions involving a general condition (as here) while the aorist tense is normally used in specific instances. Only when used opposite the normal usage (the present tense in a specific instance, for example) would the meaning “stop doing what you are doing” be appropriate.

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 They began to accuse him. There were three charges: (1) disturbing Jewish peace; (2) fomenting rebellion through advocating not paying taxes (a lie—20:20-26); and (3) claiming to be a political threat to Rome, by claiming to be a king, an allusion to Jesus’ messianic claims. The second and third charges were a direct challenge to Roman authority. Pilate would be forced to do something about them.

² sn Generally the feast of Unleavened Bread would refer to Nisan 15 (Friday), but the following reference to the sacrifice of the Passover lamb indicates that Nisan 14 (Thursday) was what Luke had in mind (Nisan = March 27 to April 25). The celebration of the Feast of Unleavened Bread lasted eight days, beginning with the Passover meal. The celebrations were so close together that at times the names of both were used interchangeably.

³ tn Here the term “brother” means “fellow believer” or “fellow Christian” (cf. BDAG 18 s.v. ἀδελφός 2.a, contra BDAG 19 s.v. 2.c), but with a familial connotation. It refers equally to men, women, or children. However, because of the familial connotations, “brother” has been retained in the translation here in preference to the more generic “fellow believer” (“fellow Christian” would be anachronistic in this context).

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.

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.

¹ sn For rhetorical reasons, Jesus’ statement is deliberately paradoxical (seeming to state the opposite of Matt 10:13, for example, where the messengers are to bring peace). The conflict implied by the division (the parallel in Matt 10:34 has “sword”) is not primarily eschatological in this context, however, but immediate, and concerns the hostility and discord even among family members that a person’s allegiance to Jesus would bring (vv. 52-53).

² tc Most mss (P⁴⁵ A D¹ Q W Θ 070 ƒ^1,13 33 M lat sy) read τοῦ θεοῦ (tou theou, “of God”) instead of αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”; found in א B D* L Ψ 579 892 co). But such a clarifying reading is suspect. αὐτοῦ is superior on both internal and external grounds. P⁷⁵ includes neither and as such would support the translation above since the article alone can often be translated as a possessive pronoun.

² tc The translation follows the reading that has Luke’s normal imperfect here (ἐκωλύομεν, ekōluomen; found in P^75vid א B L Ξ 579 892 1241). Most mss, however, have an aorist (ἐκωλύσαμεν, ekōlusamen; found in A C D W Θ Ψ ƒ^1,13 33 M co), which would be translated “we forbade him.” The imperfect enjoys the best external and internal support.

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.

² sn No explanation for the command not to tell this to anyone is given, but the central section of Luke, chapters 9-19, appears to reveal a reason. The disciples needed to understand who the Messiah really was and exactly what he would do before they were ready to proclaim Jesus as such. But they and the people had an expectation that needed some instruction to be correct.

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.

⁴ sn Many have discussed why Jesus gave them permission, since the animals were destroyed. However, this is another example of a miracle that is a visual lesson. The demons are destructive: They were destroying the man. They destroyed the pigs. They destroy whatever they touch. The point was to take demonic influence seriously, as well as Jesus’ power over it as a picture of the larger battle for human souls. There would be no doubt how the man’s transformation had taken place.

¹ sn A sower went out to sow. The background for this well-known parable is a field through which a well-worn path runs in the Palestinian countryside. Sowing would occur in late fall or early winter (October to December) in the rainy season, looking for sprouting in April or May and a June harvest. The use of seed as a figure for God’s giving life has OT roots: Isa 55:10-11.

⁵ sn Luke’s use of the term “house” probably alludes to the original promise made to David outlined in the Nathan oracle of 2 Sam 7:12-16, especially in light of earlier connections between Jesus and David made in Luke 1:32. Further, the mention of Bethlehem reminds one of the promise of Mic 5:2, namely, that a great king would emerge from Bethlehem to rule over God’s people.