From: Over 50 Interpreters Explain the Gospel of
Luke Return to
Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2015
All reproduction of
text in paper, electronic, or computer
form both permitted and encouraged so long as
authorial
and compiler credit is given and the text is
not altered.
CHAPTER
FOUR
Verses
1-22
Books utilized codes at end of chapter
4:1 Translations
Weymouth: Then Jesus,
full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan, and was led about by the
Spirit in the Desert for forty days,
WEB: Jesus,
full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan, and was led by the Spirit
into the wilderness
Young’s: And Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit,
turned back from the Jordan, and was brought in the Spirit to the wilderness,
Conte (RC): And Jesus, filled
with the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan. And he was urged by the Spirit
into the wilderness
4:1 And Jesus being
full of the Holy Ghost.
[“Full of the Holy Ghost”] as the result of that singular endowment
which He had just received at the baptism; for this is to be understood, in
Luke’s order, as following close upon that event. That gift becomes the element, support, and
moving power of His whole life henceforth (see verse 13). [52]
Luke often calls special
attention to the work of the Spirit, 3:22, 4:14; Acts 6:3, 7:55, 11:24. The expression alludes to the outpouring of
the Spirit upon Jesus at His baptism, John 3:34. The narrative should be compared with Matthew
4:1-11; Mark 1:12, 13. John, who
narrates mainly when he had himself seen, omits the temptation. [56]
returned from Jordan. The word “returned” was a favorite
with Luke, who used it thirty-two times out of the thirty-five in which it
occurs in all the New Testament. It
would, here, naturally lead us to the conclusion that Jesus returned to
Galilee, from which he had come; and when we read instead, that “he was led by
the Spirit into the wilderness,” we are left in doubt whether this is related
as an incident and interruption of the journey back, the account of which is
then resumed in verse 14, with a repetition of “and Jesus returned,” etc., or
whether the verb is here used in a different sense, of a separate movement
“toward the wilderness,” equivalent to “turned away.” The former is much more probable. [52]
and was led. According to Mark 1:12,
"immediately the Spirit driveth
Him." The meaning is,
immediately after His baptism. [33]
A
divine impulse led Him to face the hour of peril alone. [56]
by the Spirit. Rather, “in the Spirit,” compare 2:27. The phrase emphasizes the “full of the Holy
Ghost,” and has the same meaning as “in the power of the Spirit,” verse
14. [56]
into the wilderness. The scene of the temptation is supposed to be
the mountain near Jericho, thence called Quarantania. The tradition is not ancient, but the site is
very probable, being rocky, bleak, and repellent—“A pathless desert, dusk with
horrid shades” (Milton). Scripture
everywhere recognizes the need of solitude and meditation on the eve of great
work for God (Exodus 24:2; 1 Kings 19:4; Galatians 1:17), and this would be
necessary to the human nature of our Lord also.
[56]
In depth: Was the
Transfiguration a literal, physical event—or a vision or a parable of Jesus'
internal conflicts [9]? Some have undertaken to regard it is as a
parabolic description of an actual event, others, as a train of thought,
others as a vision or prophetic trance, others still as a myth. But to all these views there are the
following objections:
1. It is an established rule of interpretation,
that in explaining the sacred writings we ought never, without the most
apparent and indispensable necessity, allow ourselves the liberty of departing from
the plain, obvious and literal meaning of the words. And, evidently, no such necessity can be
alleged in the present instance. It is
true there are in this narrative many difficulties, and many extraordinary,
surprising and miraculous incidents; but the whole history of our Saviour is wonderful and miraculous from beginning to end,
and if, whenever we meet with a difficulty or a miracle, we should have recourse
to figure, metaphor, or vision, we should soon reduce a great part of the sacred
writings to nothing else.
2. There is not, in any part of this narrative
of the temptation, the slightest or most distant intimation that it is nothing
more than a parable or a vision. And it
is certain that if any one had meant to describe a real transaction, he could
not have selected any expressions better adapted to that purpose than those
actually made use of by the three Evangelists in the record they have made of
the temptation.
3. The view that the temporal and earthly thought
which constituted the temptations to which Christ was exposed, were the
result of His own reflections, revolts us as an outrage against the Person
of our Lord. Had Jesus cherished such
thoughts in the faintest degree, He had been Christ no longer. We dare not suppose in Him a choice which,
presupposing within Him a tendency for evil, would involve the necessity of His
comparing the evil with the good, and deciding between them.
4. It should be a real and personal conflict
between Christ and Satan. This chief of
the fallen angels has ever been an irreconcilable enemy of the human race. From the very creation of man he has
exercised toward him the most malignant art and subtlety, and, with what
success in leading to acts of folly, stupidity and weakness, we all too well
know and feel. At the time of our Saviour's appearance, the tyranny of this diabolical spirit
seems to have arrived at its utmost height, and to have extended to the bodies
as well as the souls of men, of both of which he took absolute possession.
It was,
therefore, highly probable that our blessed Lord would think it a measure
eminently proper, to begin His ministry with showing a decided superiority over
the great adversary of man, whose empire He was going to abolish, with
manifesting to mankind that the great Captain of their salvation was able to
accomplish the important work He had undertaken, and with setting an example of
virtuous firmness to His followers, which might encourage them to resist the
most powerful temptations that the Prince of Darkness could throw in their
way.
4:2 Translations
Weymouth: tempted all
the while by the Devil. During those days He ate nothing, and at the close of
them He suffered from hunger.
WEB: for forty
days, being tempted by the devil. He ate nothing in those days. Afterward, when
they were completed, he was hungry.
Young’s: forty days being tempted by the Devil,
and he did not eat anything in those days, and they having been ended, he
afterward hungered,
Conte (RC): for forty days, and
he was tested by the devil. And he ate nothing in those days. And when they
were completed, he was hungry.
4:2 Being forty days. [Taken as the
temptations lasting the entire
period:] So that St. Luke, as
also St. Mark, implies that the temptation continued the whole forty days. [15]
The present participle
implies that the temptation was continuous throughout the forty days, though it
reached its most awful climax at their close.
[56]
[The three temptations specifically mentioned refer to
events toward the end of the forty
days in contrast to other temptations that occurred:] This should be joined with the preceding
words, indicating the duration of His stay in the wilderness, not
of His temptation, as A.V., "being forty days tempted." Read as Rev., "in the wilderness during
forty days." [2]
Through forty days He
was tried in various ways by the devil.
The temptations, however, which are recorded by Matthew and Luke did not take place until the forty days were finished. [11]
[Historic
connections of the duration:]
The number was connected in the Jewish mind with notions of seclusion,
and revelation, and peril;--Moses on Sinai, Exodus 34:18; Elijah, 1 Kings 19:8;
the wanderings of the Israelites, Numbers 14:34; Judges 13:1. [56]
tempted. This testing by temptation was also necessary
if He was to come in close touch with man.
"For in that He Himself hath suffered being
tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted" (Heb. 2:18; 5:8). There can be no real sympathy where there is
no common experience; Jesus having entered into this common experience of
temptation of every man is able to sympathize with all men. Most men wage a battle with temptation for
themselves. Jesus was tempted not to succor
Himself but to aid and save men. [21]
Joseph Addison Alexander
says, "Our Lord's susceptibility of
temptation was no more inconsistent with His sinlessness
than that of Adam, and is insisted on in Scripture as essential to His office,
and especially as necessary to a real sympathy between Him and His tempted
people" (Heb. ii. 18). [9]
of the devil.
Variously described in Holy Scripture; each name sets forth some phase
of character or work:
"a
murderer" (John 8:44);
"god
of this world" (2 Corinthians 4:4);
"prince
of the power of the air" (Ephesians 2:2);
"wicked
one" (1 John 2:14);
"roaring
lion" (1 Peter 5:8);
"angel
of light to deceive" (2 Corinthians 11:14);
"liar"
(John 8:44);
"Beelzebub"
(Matthew 12:24);
"Belial" (2
Corinthians 6:15);
"tormentor"
(Matthew 18:34);
"accuser
of our brethren" (Revelation 12:10);
"leviathan"
(Isaiah 27:1);
"Apollyon" (Revelation 9:11);
"dragon
and old serpent" (Revelation 12:9);
"lightning"
(Luke 10:18);
"wolf"
(John 10:12);
"fowler"
(Psalm 91:3);
"dog"
(Psalms 22:16);
"adder
(Psalm 91:13); etc. [7]
The Jews placed in the
wilderness one of the mouths of Gehenna, and there
evil spirits were supposed to have most power (Numbers 16:33; Matthew
12:43). Mark uses the Hebrew form of the
word—“Satan.” Both words mean “the
Accuser,” but the Greek Diabolos is far more
definite than the Hebrew Satan, which is loosely applied to any
opponent, or opposition, or evil influence in which the evil spirit may be
supposed to work (1 Chronicles 21:1; 2 Corinthians 12:7; 1 Thessalonians
2:18). This usage is far more apparent
in the original, where the word rendered “adversary” is often Satan,
Numbers 22:22; 1 Samuel 29:4; 1 Kings 11:14, etc. On the other hand, the Greek word Diabolos is comparatively rare in the New
Testament. (The word rendered “devils”
for the “evil spirits” of demoniac possession is daimonia.) Matthew also calls Satan “the tempter.” [56]
And in those days. During this period of time. [rw]
He did eat nothing. In Acts xxvii. 33.
Paul says, "this is the fourteenth day that you
continue fasting, having taken nothing".
And the historian Appian (as quoted by Doddridge)
speaks of an "army which for twenty days together had neither food nor
sleep"--were without regular food and rest. [34]
Van Oosterzee
thinks that it is shown by Matthew 11:18 that these words need mean only that
he ate nothing outside the fasting diet, namely, of locusts and wild
honey. Yet we need not hesitate to
accept the utmost latitude of their literal meaning. [14]
In seasons of danger or
general affliction it was customary among the Jews to abstain from food as a
religious duty (Josh. vii. 6; Judg. xx. 26); and the
same practice prevailed among individuals when the occasion was personal. (Exod. xxiv. 18; 2
Sam. xii. 16; 1 Kings xix. 8.) Fasts are evidently of Divine authority, and
fasting at the present day may be regarded as one of the outward means which may
be profitably employed to humble and chasten the soul, and train it anew to the
love and pursuit of holy and spiritual joys.
There can be no doubt of its being sanctioned under the Gospel
dispensation. (Matt.
vi. 18; ix. 15; Acts xiii. 3; 1 Cor. vii.
5.) How far or how long a person should
abstain from food depends on circumstances.
The great end to be kept in view is,
humiliation for sin and abstinence from sin. "If," says Marshall,
"abstinence divert our minds, by reason of a
gnawing appetite, then you had better eat sparingly, as Daniel in his greatest fast." (Dan. x. 2-3.) [9]
He afterward hungered. Certainly the first [temptation] was based on
His fasting of forty days and the resultant hunger. [31]
4:3 Translations
Weymouth: Then the Devil
said to Him, "If you are God's Son, tell this stone to become bread."
WEB: The devil
said to him, "If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become
bread."
Young’s: and the Devil said to him, 'If Son thou
art of God, speak to this stone that it may become bread.'
Conte (RC): Then the devil said
to him, "If you are the Son of God, speak to this stone, so that it may be
made into bread."
4:3 And the devil said unto Him. Of course he spoke under no serpentine
or bestial shape. And as Ebrard says, "It was no cloven-footed caricature taken
from German mythology." It was in a
form, to the utmost of his power, able to fascinate by his blandishments or subdue
by menace and terror. [14]
If thou be the
Son of God. In
essence: “Prove it!” [rw]
Doubtless
an allusion to the divine Voice at His baptism (3:22). The words were tauntingly addressed to our
Lord on the Cross (Matthew 27:40). The
Greek strictly means “Assuming that Thou art,” but in Hellenistic
Greek words and phrases are not always used with their earlier delicate
accuracy [= precision]. [56]
command this stone. The Greek
implies that the suggestion called direct attention to a particular stone. In this desert there are loaf-shaped fossils
known to early travelers as lapides judaici, and to geologists as septaria. Some of these siliceous accretions assume the
shape of fruit, and are known as “Elijah’s melons” (Stanley, Sinai and
Palestine, page 154). They were
popularly regarded as petrified fruits of the Cities of the Plain. Such deceptive semblances would intensify the
pangs of hunger, and add to the temptation the additional torture of an excited
imagination. [56]
that it be made bread. Rather,
“that it may become a loaf.” The subtle
malignity of the temptation is indescribable.
It was a temptation to “the lust” (i.e. the desire) “of the flesh;” a
temptation to gratify a natural and blameless appetite; an appeal to free-will
and self-will, closely analogous to the devil’s first temptation of the
race: “You may; you can; it will be
pleasant: why not?” (Genesis 3:1-15). But it did not come in an undisguisedly
sensuous form, but with the suggestive semblance of Scriptural sanctions (1
Kings 19:8; Deuteronomy 8:16; Psalms lxxviii.
19). [56]
4:4 Translations
Weymouth: "It is
written," replied Jesus, "'It is not on bread alone that a man shall
live.'"
WEB: Jesus
answered him, saying, "It is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word of God.'"
Young’s: And Jesus answered him,
saying, 'It hath been written, that, not on bread only shall man live, but on
every saying of God.'
Conte (RC): And Jesus answered
him, "It is written: 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word
of God.' "
4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying. This early
does He begin to indicate His intimacy with the Old Testament, His constant use
of it, and sense of its value as the storehouse and arsenal for the nourishment
and defense of [God’s people]. [52]
It is written. But it is very important to
notice here, that Jesus repelled every temptation of the wicked one, not by
power called into play for the emergency, but simply by, "It is
written." Can you conceive higher
authority placed upon God's holy Word than this? [25]
The perfect gegraptai means “it has been written,” it standeth written as an eternal lesson. Jesus foils the tempter as man for
man. He will not say “I am the Son of
God,” and “does not consider equality with God a prize at which to grasp”
(Philippians 2:6), but seizes “the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of
God” (Ephesians 6:17). [56]
That man shall not live by bread alone. The
quotation is from Deuteronomy 8:3, where Moses tells the people that God has
suffered them to hunger, and fed them with manna, to show them the dependence
of man on God, and the fact that life is something more than the mere living,
and can only be sustained by diviner gifts than those which are sufficient for
man’s lower nature. Bread sustains the
body; but, that we may live, the soul also, and the spirit must be kept
alive. Exodus 16:4,
15. “They did all eat the same spiritual
meat.” 1 Corinthians 10:3. [56]
but by every
word of God. These words, though implied, are
probably added in this place from Matthew 4:4, since they are omitted by
[several major manuscripts] and various versions. “Word” is not in the original Hebrew. The verse conveys a most deep truth, and by
referring to it our Lord meant to say “God will support my needs in His own
way, and the lower life is as nothing in comparison with the higher.” There are many most valuable and instructive
parallels; see John 4:32-34, “I have meat to eat that ye know not of . . . My meat is to do the will of Him that sent
me, and to finish His work.” Job 23:13,
“I have esteemed the words of His mouth more than my necessary food.” Jeremiah 15:16, “Thy words were found, and
I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of my
heart.” Wisdom 16:6, “God’s word nourisheth man.” The
Jewish Rabbis had the remarkable expression, “The just eat of the glory
of the Shechinah.”
[56]
4:5 Translations
Weymouth: The Devil next
led Him up and caused Him to see at a glance all the kingdoms of the world.
WEB: The
devil, leading him up on a high mountain, showed him all the kingdoms of the
world in a moment of time.
Young’s: And the Devil having brought him up to an
high mountain, shewed to him all the kingdoms of the
world in a moment of time,
Conte (RC): And the devil led
him onto a high mountain, and he showed him all the kingdoms of the world in a
moment of time,
4:5 And the devil,
taking him up into an high mountain. How the devil took Him up we are not
told. Scripture, to turn away our thoughts
from the secondary to the essential, knows nothing of those journeys through
the air which we find in Apocrypha and in the “Gospel of the Hebrews.” [56]
shewed unto Him all the kingdoms of the world. Here we may
almost certainly see that it is not intended we should understand a literal
standing place, whether mountain or tower; or an act of physical vision. The readers of the Gospel knew that there
were no mountains in that part of the world to high to give human eyes a view
of more than about two hundred miles diameter.
They were presented to the inward vision as if present to the outward
view. [52]
in a moment of time.
This circumstance is noted by Luke alone and it confirms the opinion
that the whole was an illusion effected "by the prince of the power of the
air" (Ephesians 2:1-2). [20]
Taking Jesus to “a high mountain” made what
was about to occur that much more vivid and impressive than from the middle of
a valley or low lying unused and unfarmable arid
ground. Jesus did not see all the world from the mountain—there is none that
high!—but was “showed” them by Satan.
Since the mount wasn’t essential to do what Satan did, it follows that
it was done as part of the psychological war to break Jesus’ resistance. [rw]
4:6 Translations
Weymouth: And the Devil said to Him, "To you will I give all this
authority and this splendour; for it has been handed
over to me, and on whomsoever I will I bestow it.
WEB: The devil
said to him, "I will give you all this authority, and their glory, for it has been delivered to me; and I give it to whomever I want.
Young’s: and the Devil said to him, 'To thee I
will give all this authority, and their glory, because to me it hath been
delivered, and to whomsoever I will, I do give it;
Conte (RC): and he said to him:
"To you, I will give all this power, and its glory. For
they have been handed over to me, and I give them to whomever I wish.
4:6 And the devil said unto
Him, all this power I will give thee, and the glory of them. "All this is mine, said Satan, speaking
a half-truth which is often but a whole lie; for he was indeed the "prince
of the power of the air," ruling, however, not in absolute kingship, but
as a pretender, a usurper; "and I give it to whom
I will." [35]
He is called afterward
by our Lord “the prince of this world,” or age; but that is said in view of the
voluntary self-subjection of the moral world to him. It may be that he can, and does, so instigate
and direct wicked men that they prove more successful, temporarily, in the
attainment of world advantages. But we
know of nothing to support what he here declares, that the power and glory of all
of the earth have been given [to him]. [52]
for that is
delivered unto me. The original is even stronger, “has been
entrusted to me.” Hence
the expressions, “the prince of this world,” John 12:31, 14:30; “the prince of
the power of the air,” Ephesians 2:2.
Satan is in one sense “a world-ruler of this darkness” (Ephesians
6:12). The Rabbis went even further, and
called him “Lord of this age” and even “another God,” which is Manicheeism; whereas in this verse, by the very admission
of Satan, all Manicheeism is excluded. [56]
The tempter here
confesses that he was not the world's Maker.
Therefore it was not the highest order of worship, that he demanded for himself; and, that no
inferior worship could possibly be paid to any creature, this Jesus shows; and,
much less, paid to Satan. Rev. xix. 10.—Bengel. [36]
We may observe, that the devil was a liar from the beginning. The dominion over the things of the world was
not given to the angels, but to man.
Neither hath he any such power as he pretends to, being not able to do
any thing against Job till he had obtained leave from God, nor to enter into
the swine without license first obtained from Christ. [51]
and to whomsoever
I will I give it. Compare Revelation 13:2, “the dragon gave him
his power, and his seat, and great authority.”
Here however we note the exaggeration of the father of lies. How different was the language of our Lord to
His ambitious disciples (Matthew 20:23).
[56]
4:7 Translations
Weymouth: If therefore
you do homage to me, it shall all be yours.'
WEB: If you
therefore will worship before me, it will all be yours."
Young’s: thou, then, if thou mayest
bow before me -- all shall be thine.'
Conte (RC): Therefore, if you
will worship before me, all will be yours."
4:7 If thou therefore. [Alternate interpretation of the root appeal of the
temptation to Jesus:] The
condition which he attaches to the surrender of his power into the hands of
Jesus has often been presented as a snare far too coarse for it ever to have been
laid by such a crafty spirit. Would not,
indeed, the lowest of the Israelites have rejected such a proposal with
horror? But there is a little word in
the text to be taken into consideration--"therefore"--which puts this
condition in logical connection with the preceding words. It is not as an individual, it is as
the representative of divine authority on this earth, that Satan here
claims the homage of Jesus. The act of
prostration in the East [was] practiced toward every lawful superior, not in
virtue of his personal character, but out of regard for the portion of divine
power of which he is the depository. The
words "if thou wilt worship me" are not therefore an appeal to the
ambition of Jesus: they express the
condition sine qua non laid down by the ancient Master of the world to the
installation of Jesus in the Messianic sovereignty. In speaking thus, Satan deceived himself only
in one point: this was that the kingdom
which was about to commence was in any respect a continuation of his own or
depended on a transmission of power from him.
[13]
wilt worship me. Now it
appears that there is an important condition to the bestowment of that gift
which has been offered so freely. [52]
all shall be thine. I will hold back nothing—not the least. It all will be thine. Not mentioned (but surely intended): Of course since I gave it to you, that means
you will be acting as my emissary and agent.
[rw]
In depth: What order did the temptations come in [14]? Matthew, no doubt, follows the
true historical order of the three temptations--Luke a doctrinal order. Hence, while Matthew's connective phrases
"then," "again," claims to affirm the true order, Luke
cautiously has only "and."
Luke's order is (1)
the appeal to the appetite; (2)
the appeal to the desire for an earthly monarchy; (3) the appeal to the
desire for a dashing supernatural exploitation, a showy triumph over the laws
of nature. In Matthew there is a climax
of faculties, namely, the appetites, the tastes, and the ambition. In Luke the climax is power over personal gratification,
power over men, power over the laws of nature.
Also [56]: That the actual order is that of
Matthew is probable because (1) he alone uses notes of sequence, “then,”
“again;” (2) Christ closes the temptation by “Get thee behind me, Satan” (see
on verse 8); (3) as an actual Apostle he is more likely to have heard the
narrative from the lips of Christ Himself.
But in the chronology of spiritual crises there is little room for the
accurate sequence of “before” and “after.”
They crowd eternity into an hour, and stretch an hour into
eternity. [56]
4:8 Translations
Weymouth: Jesus answered
him, "It is written, 'To the Lord thy God thou shalt do homage, and to Him alone shalt
thou render worship.'"
WEB: Jesus
answered him, "Get behind me Satan! For it is written, 'You
shall worship the Lord your God, and you shall serve him only.'"
Young’s: And Jesus answering him said, 'Get thee
behind me, Adversary, for it hath been written, Thou shalt
bow before the Lord thy God, and Him only thou shalt
serve.'
Conte (RC): And in response,
Jesus said to him: "It is written:
'You shall worship the Lord your God, and you shall
serve him
alone.' "
4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan. In essence:
“Stop this foolishness! You’ve
said more than ever should have been said in the first place”—and proceeds to
quote a scriptural text that proves it.
[rw]
for it is written. This Scripture was evidently cited, not only
as a defense to the Saviour, but a condemnation of
Satan. It may be noticed that the
passage is quoted freely, according to its sense as bearing on the present
case, not according to the letter. [52]
Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve. The
quotation is slightly altered from Deuteronomy 6:13, “Thou shalt
fear the Lord thy God, and serve Him.”
Matthew has the same variation, this being one of his cyclic
quotations (i.e. those common to him with other Evangelists). Since Satan had now revealed himself in his
true character, there was no need for Jesus to tell him of another and a divine
Kingdom over which he had no power. It
was sufficient to reprove his impious blasphemy. [56]
4:9 Translations
Weymouth: Then he
brought Him to Jerusalem and caused Him to stand on the roof of the Temple, and
said to Him, "If you are God's Son, throw yourself down from here; for it
is written,
WEB: He led
him to Jerusalem, and set him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to him,
"If you are the Son of God, cast yourself down from here,
Young’s: And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set
him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to him, 'If the Son thou art of
God, cast thyself down hence,
Conte (RC): And he brought him
to Jerusalem, and he set him on the parapet of the temple, and he said to him:
"If you are the Son of God, cast yourself down from here.
4:9 And he brought him
to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle
of the temple. [Not the
literal “pinnacle” that we might initially think of:] He then set Jesus on a "pinnacle
of the temple." This does not mean
a small tapering spire; the temple was built upon a hill--the roof of the
temple no person was allowed to touch; it was covered with plates of beaten
gold, and surrounded by parapets and sharp spikes, so that no bird, even, might
perch upon it for a single moment. But
it means that He was taken up to one of the porches, or the doors, that
overlooked the valley that was below. [25]
[Taken
literally and being possible due to the temptations being subjective and all
within Jesus’ mind:] In
Luke's order there is substantially but one change of place--form the solitude
of the wilderness to the Temple. As we
have said, the change was probably not one of the Lord's body, but only of the
scenes flashed before His mind's eye.
'The pinnacle of the Temple' may
have been the summit that looked down into the deep valley where the enormous
stones of the lofty wall still stand, and which must have been at a dizzy
height above the narrow glen on the one side and the Temple courts on the
other. There is immense, suppressed rage
and malignity in the recurrence of the sneer, 'If Thou art the Son of God,' and
in the use of Christ's own weapon of defense, the quotation of Scripture. [47]
[The two probable sites:] [“A pinnacle:”] Rather, “the pinnacle,” or
“battlement.” Some well-known
pinnacle of the Temple, either that of the Royal Portico, which looked down
from a dizzy height into the Valley of the Kidron
(Josephus, Antiquities, xv. 11.5); or the Eastern Portico, from which
tradition says that St. James was afterwards hurled (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical
History, ii.23). “Battlement” is
used for the corresponding Hebrew word Canaph
(literal “wing”) in Daniel 9:27. [56]
[The
“royal portico” as the most likely site:]
The part of the great building evidently referred to here was
that magnificent southern wing of the Lord's house constructed by Herod the
Great, which was known as the royal portico.
Josephus calls it "the most remarkable building under the sun"
('Ant.,' xv.
11. 5). One who stood on the roof of
this portion of the temple would look from a dizzy height into the Valley of
the Kidron. Such
a spectator, writes Josephus ('Ant.,' ii. 5), "would be giddy while his
sight could not reach to such an immense depth." To this spot, "whether in the body or out
of the body" we cannot tell, Jesus was taken by the evil spirit. [18]
And said unto him, If thou be the
Son of God, cast thyself down from
hence. This last
temptation was in the sphere of intellectual curiosity. It suggested to Jesus that He should see for
Himself what would be the experience of one who should cast Himself from a
great height and then, by angel hands, be kept from harm. This is the temptation to place oneself
needlessly in a situation of moral peril and then to expect to be delivered by
God's miraculous power. This is not faith, but presumption. [28]
Or: The
first temptation had been to natural appetite and impulse; the second was to
unhallowed ambition; the third is to rash confidence and spiritual pride. It was based, with profound ingenuity, on the
expression of absolute trust with which the first temptation had been
rejected. It asked as it were for a
splendid proof of that trust, and appealed to perverted spiritual
instincts. It had none of the sensuous
elements of the other temptations. It
was at the same time a confession of impotence.
“Cast thyself down.” The
devil may place the soul in peril and temptation, but can never make it
sin. “It is,” as St. Augustine says,
“the devil’s part to suggest, it is ours not to consent.” [56]
4:10 Translations
Weymouth: He will give
orders to His angels concerning thee, to guard thee safely;'
WEB: for it is
written, 'He will put his angels in charge of you, to guard you;'
Young’s: for it hath been written -- To His
messengers He will give charge concerning thee, to guard over thee,
Conte (RC): For it is written
that he has given his Angels charge over you, so that they may guard you,
4:10 For it is written. The citation of scripture by Satan proves
that a creative mind can find a veneer of endorsement within it for just
about anything imaginable. That does not
mean however that the scripture is being rightly used. [rw]
“In
religion / What damned error but some sober brow /
Will bless it and approve it with a text, / Hiding the grossness with fair
ornament?” -- Shakespeare. [56]
He shall give his
angels charge over thee, to keep thee. The
intermediary agency would be angels.
Even God uses agents to accomplish His will. If He didn’t, why would there even be a need
for their existence? [rw]
Or: It is to be noted that the psalm which
Satan quotes as if it applied to our Lord is not appropriate to Him, for it is
only said of creatures that God shall give His angels charge over them. [Deity] does not need the guardianship of angels. It is an insinuation of the devil against the
Master's divinity, perhaps to provoke Him to declare that He is God. [30]
4:11 Translations
Weymouth: and 'On their
hands they shall bear thee up, Lest at any moment thou
shouldst strike thy foot against a stone.'"
WEB: and, 'On
their hands they will bear you up, lest perhaps you dash your foot against a
stone.'
Young’s: and -- On hands they
shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou mayest dash
against a stone thy foot.'
Conte (RC):
and so that they may take you into their hands, lest perhaps you may
hurt your foot against a stone."
4:11 And in their hands they shall bear thee up,
lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. A magnificient
promise—incredibly wide in its scope—and one that the irresponsible could
easily invoke for whatever idiocy they preferred. It is one thing to rely upon Divine
protection. It is something entirely
different to intentionally put oneself into such a situation that the
only way out is Divine intervention. The
first is trusting in the Lord; the second is abusing the Lord’s trust. [rw]
4:12 Translations
Weymouth: The reply of Jesus was, "It is said, 'Thou shalt not put the Lord they God to the proof.'"
WEB: Jesus answering, said to him, "It has been said, 'You shall not
tempt the Lord your God.'"
Young’s: And Jesus answering said to him -- 'It
hath been said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy
God.'
Conte (RC): And in response,
Jesus said to him, "It is said: 'You shall not tempt the Lord your God.'
"
4:12 And Jesus answering said unto him. As in the other cases, He does not leave
Satan unanswered. He not only refuses
and rejects each temptation, but He also gives a reason—a scriptural
reason. Hence showing that, to Jesus,
the scriptures established Divine and absolute truth. [rw]
It is
said.
The reference is to Deuteronomy 6:16. [52]
Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. [Based upon the assumption that the temptations were
subjective phenomena and all at one place in the desert:] What was wrong in the act suggested? There is no reference to the effect on the
beholders, as has often been supposed; and if we are correct in supposing that
the whole temptation was transacted in the desert, there could be none. But plainly the point of it was the suggestion
that Jesus should, of His own accord and needlessly, put Himself in danger,
expecting God to deliver Him. We trust
God when we look to Him to deliver us in perils met in meek acceptance of His
will. We tempt Him when we expect Him to
save us from those encountered on roads that we have picked out for ourselves. [47]
tempt. Tempt--to demand further evidence of what is
already made sufficiently plain. That
this is the purport of the phrase, tempting God, is easy to be seen from
comparing Ex. xcii. 2.7; Num. xiv.
22; Ps. lxxviii. 18, and cvi. 14. If our Lord had cast Himself from the
pinnacle of the temple, He would have demanded a needless miracle, publicly to
prove Himself "the Son of God."
And would have put Himself in expectation of an
interposition for which He had no warrant, and thus would have "tempted
the Lord." [9]
In depth: Does Jesus
hint at His deityship in the way He quotes the Old
Testament passage [13]? For
the third time Jesus borrows the form of His reply from Scripture and, which is
remarkable, again from Deuteronomy (6:16).
This book, which recorded the experience of Israel during the forty
years' sojourn in the desert, had perhaps been the special subject of Jesus'
meditations during His own sojourn in the wilderness. The plural, "ye shall not tempt"
in the Old Testament [text, Deuteronomy 6:16], is changed by Jesus into the
singular, "thou shalt not tempt." Did this change proceed from a double meaning
which Jesus designedly introduced into this passage? While applying it to Himself in His relation
to God, He seems in fact, to apply it at the same time to Satan in relation to
Himself: as if He meant to say, Desist,
therefore, now from tempting Me, thy God.
4:13 Translations
Weymouth: So the Devil,
having fully tried every kind of temptation on Him, left Him for a time.
WEB: When the
devil had completed every temptation, he departed from him until another time.
Young’s: And having ended all
temptation, the Devil departed from him till a convenient season.
Conte (RC): And when all the
temptation was completed, the devil withdrew from him, until a time.
4:13 And when the devil
had ended all the temptation, he departed from Him. Matthew adds, “And lo!
Angels came and began to minister unto Him.” We do not again meet with angels in a visible
form till the agony in Gethsemane. It
must not be imagined that our Lord was only tempted at this crisis. He shared temptation with us, as the common
lot of our humanity. We may however
infer from the Gospels that henceforth His temptations were rather the negative
ones caused by suffering, than the positive ones caused by
allurement. See Matthew 27:40 (like the
first temptation); John 7:3, 4 (analogous to the second in Matthew’s order);
John 7:15 (like the third). See too
22:3, 53; Matthew 16:22; John 14:30; 8:44.
[56]
for a season. For a season, literally, until an opportunant
season, or a convenient time. Such an occasion was furnished in the hour of
darkness (chap. xxii. 53), when our Lord's "soul was sorrowful, even unto
death." (See
Matt. xxvi. 38; John xiv. 30.) [9]
Satan renewed his
attacks by means of wicked men, who were his agents, and in the hour of our
Lord's greatest trial again appeared in the person of Judas (ch. xxii. 3), and possibly otherwise. John xiv. 30. If Satan tempted Jesus,
more surely will he tempt us, and we may learn from Him, how by constant
resistance to subdue temptation.
Usually the temptations of the evil one are more severe at the beginning
of a Christian life; if then resisted they become feebler. No temptation can meet the believer, but he
may conquer it by grace. 1 Cor. x. 13; 1 John iii. 8-9. [4]
The devil ceases to
tempt us only for a season, in order to lull us asleep: it is therefore a great folly not to watch
continually. He assaults with open force
those whom he has not been able to overcome by his stratagems, or by the
allurements of the world. Thus he acted
with respect to our blessed Lord in the latter part of His life. [27]
In depth: Could Jesus
have yielded to the temptations [52]?
There are three views on the subject:
(1) Christ had no volitional power to obey temptation. This the old
Calvinistic view. (2) The man Jesus had
such volitional power. This is the old Arminian view. (3)
The eternal Logos had the volitional power to sin, having concentrated and
reduced Himself down to finite and human conditions. This is a German view not yet fully brought
[in the mid-nineteenth century] before the American Church. [14]
The
doubt, not infrequently expressed, “whether the Son of God was really capable
of being tempted to evil,” is sufficiently answered by reference to Hebrews
4:15—“but was in all points tempted like we are.” The fact is beyond question. If the inquiry be, “how could this be
true?” we have to admit there is a mystery no mere man can reasonably pretend
to fully explain. But any special
difficulty in the thought of His liability to temptation seems to be obviated
by the consideration that, whatever He was more, He was truly and
completely a man. As such is the power
of choice between good and evil conduct.
4:14 Translations
Weymouth: Then Jesus
returned in the Spirit's power to Galilee; and His fame spread through all the
adjacent districts.
WEB: Jesus
returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee, and news about him spread
through all the surrounding area.
Young’s: And Jesus turned back in the power of the
Spirit to Galilee, and a fame went forth through all the region round about
concerning him,
Conte (RC): And Jesus returned,
in the power of the Spirit, into Galilee. And his fame spread throughout the
entire region.
4:14 Introduction:
In-depth—Events omitted by Luke that occur between verses 13 and 14 [18]. Between the events of the temptation and the
preaching at Nazareth here related, some considerable time had intervened. St. John, in his Gospel, gives a somewhat
detailed account of this period whish St. Luke omits. Shortly after the temptation
took place the concluding incidents in the Baptist's career, which St. Luke
summarized in his brief statement (ch. iii. 19, 20),
when he tells us of the arrest and imprisonment of the fearless preacher by the
Tetrarch Herod. St. John tells
how the Sanhedrin sent some special envoys to the Baptist, asking him formally "who
he really was."
After this
questioning, John in his Gospel mentions the calling of Andrew, Simon, Philip,
and Nathanael, and then records the first miracle of
Jesus at Cana in Galilee, and how the Lord visited
Capernaum. He then proceeds to relate
some of the circumstances which took place at the Passover at Jerusalem, and
how the Lord drove out the men who profaned his Father's house. He writes down, too, the particulars of
Nicodemus the Pharisee's visit to Jesus by night.
The Master
then proceeded, as is here related by St. Luke, "in the power of the
Spirit," who descended on him formally at his baptism, into Galilee, and
on his journey thither tarried at Samaria, resting on the well there, and
talking with the woman in those memorable words recorded by St. John at length
in his fourth chapter (verses 4-42).
Rapidly the report of what he had done at Cana,
the fame of his marvelous words at Jerusalem, Samaria, and other places, spread
through all the central districts of the Holy Land.
And Jesus returned in
the power of the Spirit. By the influence or
direction of the Spirit. [11]
into Galilee. This
district was the starting-point and main centre of our Lord’s ministry, Acts
10:37, “which was published throughout all Judaea, and
began from Galilee.” Luke 23:5, “He stirreth up the people beginning from Galilee.” [56]
and there went out
a fame [news, NKJV] of him through all the region round about. Immediately,
as it would seem, the popular mind began to be exercised about His teachings
and acts, probably also by tidings of the testimony of John the Baptist to Him
as the “one greater than he,” whom was to come after him (John 1:34). The miracles, also, which He performed in the
neighborhood (John 2:1ff; 4:46ff), and His extraordinary conduct at Jerusalem
(John 2:15, 23), would be talked about. [52]
4:15 Translations
Weymouth: And He proceeded to teach in their synagogues, winning
praise from all.
WEB: He taught
in their synagogues, being glorified by all.
Young’s: and he was teaching in their synagogues,
being glorified by all.
Conte (RC): And he taught in
their synagogues, and he was magnified by everyone.
4:15 And He taught. As a custom—expresses in one word what
Mark expands into “preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,” etc. Matthew adds that He said, “Repent”
(4:17). Instruction and persuasion
regarding the relations into which men are brought toward God by the coming of
Christ, with the consequent privileges and obligations—this was the preaching
of the gospel. Luke says nothing of
miracles wrought as yet; but from John 4:54, we may conclude that the healing
of the centurion’s son took place before his first visit to Nazareth. [52]
The word “He” is
emphatic. “He
Himself,” in contrast with the rumor about Him. [56]
in their
synagogues. The synagogues, which rose among the Jews in answer
to religious wants deeply felt, after the return from the exile, corresponded
in many points to the churches of Christian times. The word was indeed ambiguous, like “church,”
denoting primarily the religious assembly, for whose use the house
existed. [52]
being glorified of all. That
is, admired and honoured. [51]
Being praised by all His hearers, who listened to all His doctrines and
saw His miracles. [4]
4:16 Translations
Weymouth: He came to
Nazareth also, where He had been brought up; and, as was His custom, He went to
the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read.
WEB: He came
to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. He entered, as was his custom, into
the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read.
Young’s: And he came to Nazareth, where he hath
been brought up, and he went in, according to his custom, on the sabbath-day, to the synagogue, and stood up to read;
Conte (RC): And he went to
Nazareth, where he had been raised. And he entered into the synagogue,
according to his custom, on the Sabbath day. And he rose up to read.
4:16 And he came to
Nazareth, where he had been brought up. Informing
us that Nazareth was His hometown and that His family had been residents there
since His childhood. [rw]
and, as His custom was. It is almost certain that this was the first
public preaching of our Lord in Nazareth.
For although the Evangelist says "as His custom was, He went into
the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up for to read," we may
properly take the words, "as His custom was," to refer only to His attendance
in the synagogue, Sabbath by Sabbath. It
opens up to us a picture of the devotion of our Lord all through those thirty
years of His quiet life in Nazareth, that from the time was old enough to go He regularly attended
the Sabbath services. [30]
He went into the synagogue. We hear of them after the return from the Captivity, and probably they
existed long before. Some think that in
Ps. lxxiv. 8 there is a reference to them. [18]
[“The:”] The article shows that the little village
only possessed a single synagogue. [56]
on the Sabbath day. Observe the divine sanction thus given to the
ordinance of weekly public worship. [56]
and stood up for to read. He
stood up to read, to teach us reverence in reading and hearing the word of
God. When Ezra opened the book of the
Law, "all the people stood up" (Nehemiah 8:5); so did Christ here,
when He read in the book of the prophets.
[32]
The custom was to read
the Scripture standing. There was no
recognized or ordained ministry for the synagogues. The functions of Priest and Levites were
confined to the Temple, and the various officers of the synagogue were more
like our churchwardens. Hence it was the
custom of the Ruler or Elders to invite any one to read or preach who was known
to them as a distinguished or competent person (Acts 13:15). [56]
This synagogue was far from perfect but Jesus was still a
worshipper there: And in the clause,
He stood up for to read, there is more than every one observes. He preached in other synagogues; but
He read in none, but this ; for he, that read in the synagogue, was a member of the synagogue;
and He, by reading, showed that He owned Himself, and was owned to be, one of this. Now, what
a kind of people the congregation
of Nazareth was we may somewhat guess from that
passage, "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?”
[John 1:46] . . . And yet did He keep
Himself, till then, to that congregation, owned Himself a member of it, read in it, as a member of it;
till His function called Him, and the fear of His life forced Him, thence.—Dr. Lightfoot.
In depth: the first
century synagogue [22]. (1) Origin. During the Captivity where
no Temple Service was possible.
(2) Universality. Wherever ten heads of families could be
found, there a Synagogue would be established, in and outside of Palestine. (Diaspora.) In Jerusalem were 460, and every nationality
had its own (Acts 6:9).
(3) Arrangement: It contained (a) An "arc"--a chest for the
sacred rolls, placed in the end of the building toward Jerusalem. (b) Chief Seats, elevated, near and around the
arc for the elders and leading men.
(c) Platform and reading
desk. (d) Places carefully graded according to
rank. Gentile visitors were allowed near
the door. (e) Lattice gallery where women could worship
without being seen.
(4) Officers: (a) 3 rulers of the Synagogue (one of whom
was the ruler) who conducted the worship and possessed limited judicial
authority. (b) The servant (Luke 4:20), who united the
functions of sexton, schoolmaster and constable, to pass judgment on
offenders.
(5) Services: Held on Saturday, Monday and Thursday. They consisted of prayer, reading and
remarks. The selections were from the
Law and the Prophets, according to an appointed order (Acts 15:21), called Parashim and Haphtharim, like our
church pericopes.
In depth: How many
times was Jesus rejected at Nazareth [14]?
Luke sees a true propriety in selecting the first manifestation of the
Lord at Nazareth, as the opening of his history of the great ministry. It was initial, ominous, typical. Here, pre-eminently, "he came to his
own, and his own received him not."
It is strenuously
maintained by some commentators that there was but one visit and rejection at
Nazareth. This is argued from the fact
that in both accounts the same proverb is adduced, and the same reference to
Jesus' relatives is made. But that a
repetition of the unwelcome visit should awaken similar trains of thought and
language is perfectly natural. On the
contrary, it seems scarcely probable that in Matthew and Mark the most exciting
part of the affair, the attempt to hurl Jesus from the precipice, should be
omitted.
4:17 Translations
Weymouth: And there was handed to Him the book of the Prophet Isaiah,
and, opening the book, He found the place where it was written,
WEB: The book
of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. He opened the book, and found the
place where it was written,
Young’s: and there was given over to him a roll of
Isaiah the prophet, and having unfolded the roll, he found the place where it
hath been written:
Conte (RC): And the book of the
prophet Isaiah was handed to him. And as he unrolled the book, he found the
place where it was written:
4:17 And there was delivered
unto Him. By the
minister of the synagogue or the keeper of the sacred books. They were kept in an ark or chest and the
minister gave them to whomsoever he chose, to read
them publicly. [11]
Literally, “There was further
handed to Him.” The expression means that
after He, or another, had read the Parashah,
or First Lesson, which was always from the Pentateuch, the clerk handed to him
the Roll of Isaiah, which contained the Haphtarah, or Second
Lesson. [56]
the book of the prophet Esias [Isaiah,
NKJV]. There can be no doubt that the
passage in Isaiah had a principal reference to the Messiah. Our Savior directly applies it to Himself,
and it is not easily applicable to any other prophet. Its first application might have been
to the restoration of the Jews from Babylon; but the language of prophecy is
often applicable to two similar events, and the secondary event is often the most
important. In this case the prophet uses
most striking poetic images to depict the return from Babylon; but the same
images also describe the appropriate work of the Son of God. [11]
and when He had opened the book. Literally, when he had
"unrolled" the book.
Books among the ancients were written on parchment or vellum--i.e., skins
of beasts--and were rolled together on two rollers, beginning at each end; so that
while reading they rolled off from one to the other. When used, the reader unrolled the manuscript
as far as the place which he wished to find, and kept before him just so much
as he would read. [11]
Opening consisted in unrolling
the scroll, until the passage became visible.
There were other forms of books sometimes found, but this was the most common. [4]
He found. The word heure
leaves it uncertain whether the “finding” was what man calls “accidental,” or
whether it was the regular haphtarah of the day. It is now the Second Lesson for the great day of Atonement; but according to Zunz
(the highest Jewish authority on the subject) the present order of the Lessons
in the Synagogue worship belongs to a later period than this. [56]
Or: Possibly they gave Him the book of Isaiah,
on order to hear from Him something concerning His claim to be the Messiah, who
was to fulfill its prophecies. If so,
Jesus rebukes that carnal ambition of their hearts, which thus early began to
look for signs of temporal power, and teaches them that His kingdom is not of
this world, nor confined to His relations after the flesh. [4]
the place where it was written. By revolving the roll so as
to reach it. No place could be
more appropriate. The passage is in
Isaiah 61:1-2. [14]
The passage, as here
quoted, does not exactly accord either to the Hebrew or to the Septuagint, yet
it does not vary materially from either.
[20]
Our Lord, according to
the custom of the Synagogue, must have read the passage in Hebrew, and
then—either by Himself, or by an interpreter (Methurgeman)—it
must have been translated to the congregation in Aramaic or Greek, since Hebrew
was at this time a dead and learned language.
The quotation is here freely taken by the Evangelist from the LXX,
possibly from memory, and with reminiscences, intentional or otherwise, of
other passages. [56]
4:18 Translations
Weymouth: "The
Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has anointed me to proclaim Good News
to the poor; He has sent me to announce release to the prisoners of war and
recovery of sight to the blind: to send away free those whom tyranny has
crushed,
WEB: "The
Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to
the poor. He has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim release to the
captives, recovering of sight to the blind, to deliver those who are crushed,
Young’s: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
Because He did anoint me; To proclaim good news to the poor, Sent me to heal
the broken of heart, To proclaim to captives deliverance, And to blind
receiving of sight, To send away the bruised with deliverance,
Conte (RC): "The Spirit of
the Lord is upon me; because of this, he has anointed me. He has sent me to
evangelize the poor, to heal the contrite of heart,
4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me. Or, I speak
by Divine appointment; I am Divinely inspired to
speak. [11]
He thus asserts His
designation to the prophetic office and His qualifications for it. [8]
because. In
order to accomplish properly and fully the task of preaching set before
Him. [rw]
He hath anointed me. This is the meaning of the word
"Christ" in the Greek and the word "Messiah" in the
Hebrew. Here He declares His claim to
the official title, and that He was the Christ and the Messiah promised. Not that He was literally anointed as were
the kings and priests, who were the types of His office, but that He had what
that anointing signified--a baptism and consecration of the Holy Ghost. It was not only an act of consecration, but a
symbol of the spiritual influence by which the recipient was qualified and
designated for his work. 1 Samuel 10:1,
6; 16:3. [8]
to preach the gospel. The
"gospel" means good news--the good news of salvation. [11]
to the poor. By the poor are meant all
those who are destitute of the comforts of this life and who, therefore, may be
more readily disposed to seek treasures in heaven; all those who are sensible
of their sins or are poor in spirit (Matthew 5:3). The Pharisees and Sadducees despised the
poor. Ancient philosophers neglected
them. But the gospel seeks to bless
them. The poor feel their need of
some sources of comfort that the world cannot give, and accordingly our Savior
met with His greatest success among the poor.
[11]
Isaiah spake first to a nation of poor
captive Jews, the figures of the wretched sons of want every where, who are led
captive of Satan at his will. The Savior
preached to the poor, in both senses of the word. See note, Matt. v. 3. Many poor are not blessed because of pride
and unbelief; and many are disposed to vaunt themselves upon their mere
poverty, as if it commended them to God.
Let rich and poor remember that God looks to the heart and is not a
respecter of persons. [4]
He hath sent Me to heal the
broken-hearted. To
console those who are deeply afflicted, or whose hearts are broken by external
calamities or by a deep sense of their sinfulness. [11]
to preach deliverance to the captives. This is a figure originally applicable
to those in captivity in Babylon. They
were miserable. To grant deliverance to
them and restore them to their country; to grant deliverance to those who are
in prison, and restore them to their families; to give liberty to the slave,
and restore him to freedom, was to confer the highest benefit and impart the
richest favor: So the gospel imparts favor. It does not literally open the doors
of prisons, but it releases the mind, captive under sin. [11]
Relationship of such deliverance to the recovery of sight
that is mentioned next: It
was common in the East to put out the eyes of prisoners. Judges xvi. 21; 2
Kings xxvi. 7. [4]
and recovering of sight. The corresponding phrase in the Hebrew reads literally,
"and to the bound, open opening"--i.e., of the eyes, or of the
prison. From the usage, however, the
terms must refer rather to the opening of the eyes than of the prison, and so
the phrase which is not clear in the Hebrew, is made plain by our Lord's use of
it. And this sense agrees entirely with
the Old Testament sense of the terms, as referring to spiritual blindness and
illumination. [Isaiah] 42:7; 50:10. [8]
to the blind.
Jesus brings the most helpful form of revelation: the capacity to see truth for themselves. [26]
to set at liberty them that are
bruised. Though this clause does not occur in the
[Hebrew Isaiah] passage with the rest, it is found in Isaiah 58:6, as rendered
by the Greek version. [8]
Another class among
captives were those, who had been cruelly treated in hard
labor or by severe punishments. The
Gospel comes to many such, to release them from the pressure of their burdens,
and give them grace to bear the woes, which their own or others' sins have
brought upon them. [4]
4:19 Translations
Weymouth: to proclaim the year of acceptance with the Lord."
WEB: and
to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord."
Young’s: To
proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.'
Conte (RC): to
preach forgiveness to captives and sight to the blind, to release the broken
into forgiveness, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord and the day of
retribution."
4:19 To preach the acceptable
year of the Lord. The time when God is willing to accept or receive sinners coming to
Him. [11]
A literal
interpretation of the word year gave rise among some of the Christian
fathers to the theory that our Lord's ministry lasted but a single year. [2]
Or: There is manifest allusion here to the year
of Jubilee, which occurred every fiftieth year among the Jews [Leviticus
25:10], when slaves were set at liberty, and the possessions that were sold,
reverted to their original owners. [17]
4:20 Translations
Weymouth: And rolling up
the book, He returned it to the attendant, and sat down--to speak. And the eyes
of all in the synagogue were fixed on Him.
WEB: He closed
the book, gave it back to the attendant, and sat down. The eyes of all in the
synagogue were fastened on him.
Young’s: And having folded the
roll, having given it back to the officer, he sat down, and the eyes of all in
the synagogue were gazing on him.
Conte (RC): And when he had
rolled up the book, he returned it to the minister, and he sat down. And the
eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fixed on him.
4:20 And he closed the
book. Notice how the quotation stops when it comes
to the fearful sentence, “and the day of vengeance of our God.” John the Baptist would hardly have left it
out. [Furthermore] the section
ordinarily read would be much longer than that here quoted. Either the narrative is intended to show
merely where the passage is found and how it begins, of which Jesus then read
as much as He pleased, or (and this is the common view) that He stopped here of
His own authority, having read as much as was necessary. It is not at all unlikely that, in the course
of His reading, or the following remarks, Jesus referred to other passages of
Isaiah which, in the [lesson], became blended with the one first read. [52]
and he gave it again to the minister [attendant, NKJV]. Hand copied manuscripts were inherently
expensive and when one considers the length of the book of Isaiah, even more so
in cases of such books. Hence the appointment of someone to take care of the synagogue’s
manuscripts. [rw]
and sat down. This did not mean that He had nothing
to say, but it showed the contrary. For the custom in the synagogue was to stand in reading the Scripture,
and to sit down for explanation of it.
This led them to fix their eyes on Him in eager expectation. He was to preach now from a text. [8]
The Lord on other occasions taught sitting,
e.g., Matt. 5:1, Mark 4:1, 13:3. [25]
And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were
fastened on Him.
Were intently fixed on Him, waiting to see what explanation He would give
of the words. [11]
[“Fastened:”]
A favorite word of Luke, who uses it eleven times; elsewhere it is only found
in 2 Corinthians 3:7, 13. [56]
4:21 Translations
Weymouth: Then He
proceeded to say to them, "To-day is this Scripture fulfilled in your
hearing."
WEB: He began
to tell them, "Today, this Scripture has been fulfilled in your
hearing."
Young’s: And he began to say unto them -- 'To-day
hath this writing been fulfilled in your ears;'
Conte (RC): Then he began to say
to them, "On this day, this scripture has been fulfilled in your
hearing."
4:21 And He began to say unto them. Implying that this is only
a part or abstract of the discourse. [8]
This day is this scripture fulfilled. It is coming to pass; the thing originally
intended by it is about to be accomplished.
[11]
Made good; shown to be
true in their spiritual meaning. [4]]
in your ears. In
your hearing; or you hear, in my preaching, the fulfillment of this
prophecy. [11]
4:22 Translations
Weymouth: And they all spoke well of Him, wondering at the sweet words
of kindness which fell from His lips, while they asked one another, "Is not
this Joseph's son?"
WEB: All
testified about him, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of
his mouth, and they said, "Isn't this Joseph's son?"
Young’s: and all were bearing testimony to him,
and were wondering at the gracious words that are coming forth out of his
mouth, and they said, 'Is not this the son of Joseph?'
Conte (RC): And everyone gave
testimony to him. And they wondered at the words of grace that proceeded from
his mouth. And they said, "Is this not the son of Joseph?"
4:22 And all bare Him witness. Their reason and conscience approved of it, and
they were constrained to admit the force and propriety of it; and on this account
they wondered. [11]
Their
meetings were not bound to silence on the part of the congregation, as are
ours. They, with one
consent, gave, in their comments to each other, honorable testimony to
the excellence of His discourse. This
implies and almost proves that He spoke at some length. [52]
and wondered at
the gracious words. Rather, “words of grace.” The word grace does not here mean mercy or
favor, but beauty and attractiveness.
This verse and John 7:46 are the chief proofs that there was in our
Lord’s utterance an irresistible majesty.
Compare Psalms xlv. 2 ; John 1:14. [56]
which proceeded out
of his mouth. From
someone else—someone who had a reputation as a public speaker—the effectiveness
of the message would not be surprising.
What was surprising was both its effectiveness and how it
came out of the mouth of one they would never have been
suspected to have such a well developed teaching gift. [rw]
And they said, Is not this Joseph's son? In their mouths, this meant: “How is it possible for a man of His birth
and education to speak in this way, and to urge such claims for Himself?” There was
not merely wonder in their question, but a shade of unbelief and refusal. What inference may we draw from their
admiring surprise in regard to the change which Jesus had undergone through His
baptism, the reception of the Spirit thereupon, and the disciple of the
temptation? It is almost certain that He
had often taken part in their synagogue services before [but now He is so, so
different!] [52]
Books Utilized
(with
number code)
1 = Adam Clarke. The New
Testament . . . with a Commentary and
Critical Notes.
Volume I: Matthew to the Acts. Reprint, Nashville,
Tennessee: Abingdon Press.
2 = Marvin R. Vincent. Word Studies in the New Testament. Volume I:
The Synoptic Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, Epistles
of Peter, James,
and Jude. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1887;
1911 printing.
3 = J. S. Lamar. Luke.
[Eugene S. Smith, Publisher; reprint, 1977 (?)]
4 = Charles H. Hall. Notes,
Practical and Expository on the Gospels;
volume two: Luke-John. New York:
Hurd and Houghton, 1856,
1871.
5 = John Kitto.
Daily Bible Illustrations. Volume II:
Evening Series:
The Life and Death of Our Lord. New
York: Robert Carter and
Brothers, 1881.
6 = Thomas M. Lindsay. The Gospel According to St. Luke. Two
volumes. New York: Scribner & Welford,
1887.
7 = W. H. van Doren. A Suggestive Commentary on the New
Testament:
Saint Luke. Two volumes. New
York: D. Appleton and Company,
1868.
8 = Melancthon W. Jacobus.
Notes on the Gospels, Critical and
Explanatory: Luke and John. New York:
Robert Carter &
Brothers, 1856; 1872 reprint.
9 = Alfred Nevin.
Popular Expositor of the Gospels and Acts: Luke.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:
Ziegler & McCurdy, 1872.
10 = Alfred Nevin.
The Parables of Jesus. Philadelphia:
Presbyterian
Board of Publication, 1881.
11 = Albert Barnes.
"Luke." In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament.
Reprint, Kregel Publications,
1980.
12 = Alexander B. Bruce. The Synoptic Gospels.
In The Expositor's
Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. Reprint, Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
13 = F. Godet.
A Commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke. Translated
from the Second French Edition by E. W. Shalders
and M. D. Cusin.
New York: I. K. Funk &
Company, 1881.
14 = D. D. Whedon.
Commentary on the Gospels:
Luke-John. New
York: Carlton & Lanahan, 1866; 1870 reprint.
15 = Henry Alford. The
Greek Testament. Volume
I: The Four Gospels.
Fifth Edition. London: Rivingtons, 1863.
16 = David Brown. "Luke"
in Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and
David Brown, A
Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the
Old and New Testaments.
Volume II: New Testament. Hartford:
S. S. Scranton Company, no date.
17 = Dr. [no first name provided] MacEvilly. An Exposition of the Gospel
of St. Luke. New York: Benziger Brothers,
1886.
18 = H. D. M. Spence. “Luke.”
In the Pulpit Commentary, edited by H. D.
M. Spence. Reprinted by Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company,
1950.
19 = John Calvin. Commentary on a
Harmony of the Evangelists,
Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Translated by William Pringle. Reprint,
Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company.
20 = Thomas Scott. The Holy Bible
. . . with Explanatory Notes (and)
Practical Observations. Boston: Crocker and Brewster.
21 = Henry T. Sell. Bible Studies
in the Life of Christ: Historical and
Constructive. New
York: Fleming H. Revell
Company, 1902.
22 = Philip Vollmer. The Modern Student's Life of Christ. New York:
Fleming H. Revell Company, 1912.
23 = Heinrich A. W. Meyer. Critical
and Exegetical Handbook to the
Gospels of Mark and Luke.
Translated from the Fifth German
Edition by Robert Ernest Wallis. N.
Y.: Funk and Wagnalls,
1884; 1893 printing.
24 = John Albert Bengel. Gnomon
of the New Testament. A New
Translation
by Charlton T. Lewis and Marvin R. Vincent.
Volume One. Philadelphia: Perkinpine & Higgins,
1860.
25 = John Cummings. Sabbath
Evening Readers on the New Testa-
ment:
St. Luke. London: Arthur Hall, Virtue & Co,1854.
26 = Walter F. Adeney, editor. The Century Bible: A Modern
Commentary--Luke. New
York: H. Frowdey,
1901. Title page
missing from copy.
27 = Pasquier Quesnel.
The Gospels with Reflections on Each Verse.
Volumes I and II. (Luke
is in part of both). New York: Anson
D. F. Randolph, 1855; 1867 reprint.
28 = Charles R. Erdman. The Gospel
of Luke: An Exposition.
Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1921; 1936 reprint.
29 = Elvira J. Slack. Jesus: The Man of Galilee. New York:
National
Board of the Young Womens
Christian Associations, 1911.
30 = Arthur Ritchie. Spiritual Studies in St. Luke's Gospel. Milwaukee:
The Young Churchman Company, 1906.
31 = Bernhard Weiss. A Commentary on the New Testament. Volume
Two: Luke-The Acts. New York:
Funk & Wagnalls Company,1906.
32 = Matthew Henry. Commentary on the Whole Bible. Volume V:
Matthew to John. 17--. Reprint, New
York: Fleming H. Revell
Company, no date.
33 = C. G. Barth.
The Bible Manual: An Expository
and Practical
Commentary on the Books of Scripture. Second Edition.
London: James Nisbet and Company, 1865.
34 = Nathaniel S. Folsom. The Four
Gospels: Translated . . . and with
Critical and Expository Notes. Third Edition.
Boston: Cupples,
Upham, and Company, 1871; 1885 reprint.
35 = Henry Burton. The Gospel
according to Luke. In the Expositor's
Bible series. New
York: A. C. Armstrong and Son,
1895.
36 = [Anonymous]. Choice Notes on
the Gospel of S. Luke, Drawn from
Old and New Sources.
London: Macmillan & Company, 1869.
37 = Marcus Dods.
The Parables of Our Lord. New York:
Fleming H.
Revell Company, 18--.
38 = Alfred
Edersheim. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.
Second Edition. New
York: Anson D. F. Randolph and Company,
1884.
39 = A. T. Robertson. Luke the Historian in the Light of Research.
New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1920; 1930 reprint.
40 = James R. Gray. Christian
Workers' Commentary on the Old and
New Testaments. Chicago: Bible Institute Colportage Associat-
ion/Fleming H. Revell Company, 1915.
41 = W.
Sanday. Outlines of the Life of Christ. New York:
Charles
Scribner's Sons, 1905.
42 = Halford E. Luccock. Studies in the Parables
of Jesus. New York:
Methodist Book Concern, 1917.
43 = George
H. Hubbard. The
Teaching of Jesus in Parables.
New
York: Pilgrim Press, 1907.
44 = Charles S. Robinson. Studies in Luke's Gospel. Second Series.
New York:American
Tract Society, 1890.
45 = John
Laidlaw. The Miracles of Our Lord. New York:
Funk &
Wagnalls Company, 1892.
46 = William
M. Taylor. The
Miracles of Our Saviour. Fifth Edition.
New York:
A. C. Armstrong & Son, 1890; 1903 reprint.
47 = Alexander
Maclaren. Expositions
of Holy Scripture: St. Luke.
New York: George H. Doran
Company, [no date].
48 = George
MacDonald. The
Miracles of Our Lord. New
York:
George Routledge
& Sons, 1878.
49 = Joseph
Parker. The People's Bibles: Discourses upon Holy Scrip-
ture—Mark-Luke. New
York: Funk & Wagnalls
Company, 18--.
50 = Daniel
Whitby and Moses Lowman. A Critical Commentary and
Paraphrase on the New Testament:
The Four Gospels and the Acts
of the Apostles.
Philadelphia: Carey & Hart,
1846.
51 = Matthew
Poole. Annotations
on the Holy Bible. 1600s.
Computerized.
52 = George
R. Bliss. Luke. In An American Commentary on the New
Testament. Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society,
1884.
53 = J.
W. McGarvey and Philip Y. Pendleton. The Fourfold Gospel.
1914. Computerized.
54 = John Trapp. Commentary on the Old
and New Testaments. 1654.
Computerized.
55 = Ernest D. Burton and Shailer Matthews. The Life of Christ.
Chicago, Illinois: University of
Chicago Press, 1900; 5th reprint,
1904.
56 = Frederic W. Farrar. The Gospel According to
St. Luke. In “The
Cambridge
Bible for Schools and Colleges” series. Cambridge:
At
the
University Press, 1882.