Acts 16:17-18

16:17 She followed behind Paul and us and kept crying out, ¹  “These men are servants ²  of the Most High God, who are proclaiming to you the way ³  of salvation.” ⁴  16:18 She continued to do this for many days. But Paul became greatly annoyed, ⁵  and turned ⁶  and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ ⁷  to come out of her!” And it came out of her at once. ⁸ 

Genesis 3:1-5

The Temptation and the Fall

3:1 Now ⁹  the serpent ¹⁰  was more shrewd ¹¹ 

than any of the wild animals ¹²  that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Is it really true that ¹³  God ¹⁴  said, ‘You must not eat from any tree of the orchard’?” ¹⁵  3:2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat ¹⁶  of the fruit from the trees of the orchard; 3:3 but concerning the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the orchard God said, ‘You must not eat from it, and you must not touch it, ¹⁷  or else you will die.’” ¹⁸  3:4 The serpent said to the woman, “Surely you will not die, ¹⁹  3:5 for God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will open ²⁰  and you will be like divine beings who know ²¹  good and evil.” ²² 

Genesis 3:1

The Temptation and the Fall

3:1 Now ²³  the serpent ²⁴  was more shrewd ²⁵ 

than any of the wild animals ²⁶  that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Is it really true that ²⁷  God ²⁸  said, ‘You must not eat from any tree of the orchard’?” ²⁹ 

Genesis 22:21-23

22:21 Uz the firstborn, his brother Buz, Kemuel (the father of Aram), ³⁰  22:22 Kesed, Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph, and Bethuel.” 22:23 (Now ³¹  Bethuel became the father of Rebekah.) These were the eight sons Milcah bore to Abraham’s brother Nahor.

Matthew 8:29-31

8:29 They ³²  cried out, “Son of God, leave us alone! ³³  Have you come here to torment us before the time?” ³⁴  8:30 A ³⁵  large herd of pigs was feeding some distance from them. 8:31 Then the demons begged him, ³⁶  “If you drive us out, send us into the herd of pigs.”

Mark 1:24

1:24 “Leave us alone, ³⁷  Jesus the Nazarene! Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are – the Holy One ³⁸  of God!”

Mark 1:34

1:34 So ³⁹  he healed many who were sick with various diseases and drove out many demons. ⁴⁰  But ⁴¹  he would not permit the demons to speak, ⁴²  because they knew him. ⁴³ 

Mark 5:9-13

5:9 Jesus ⁴⁴  asked him, “What is your name?” And he said, “My name is Legion, ⁴⁵  for we are many.” 5:10 He begged Jesus ⁴⁶  repeatedly not to send them out of the region. 5:11 There on the hillside, ⁴⁷  a great herd of pigs was feeding. 5:12 And the demonic spirits ⁴⁸  begged him, “Send us into the pigs. Let us enter them.” 5:13 Jesus ⁴⁹  gave them permission. ⁵⁰  So ⁵¹  the unclean spirits came out and went into the pigs. Then the herd rushed down the steep slope into the lake, and about two thousand were drowned in the lake.

Luke 4:33-35

4:33 Now ⁵²  in the synagogue ⁵³  there was a man who had the spirit of an unclean ⁵⁴  demon, and he cried out with a loud voice, 4:34 “Ha! Leave us alone, ⁵⁵  Jesus the Nazarene! Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are – the Holy One ⁵⁶  of God.” 4:35 But ⁵⁷  Jesus rebuked him: ⁵⁸  “Silence! Come out of him!” ⁵⁹  Then, after the demon threw the man ⁶⁰  down in their midst, he came out of him without hurting him. ⁶¹ 

Luke 8:28-32

8:28 When he saw ⁶²  Jesus, he cried out, fell ⁶³  down before him, and shouted with a loud voice, “Leave me alone, ⁶⁴  Jesus, Son of the Most High ⁶⁵  God! I beg you, do not torment ⁶⁶  me!” 8:29 For Jesus ⁶⁷  had started commanding ⁶⁸  the evil ⁶⁹  spirit to come out of the man. (For it had seized him many times, so ⁷⁰  he would be bound with chains and shackles ⁷¹  and kept under guard. But ⁷²  he would break the restraints and be driven by the demon into deserted ⁷³  places.) ⁷⁴  8:30 Jesus then ⁷⁵  asked him, “What is your name?” He ⁷⁶  said, “Legion,” ⁷⁷  because many demons had entered him. 8:31 And they began to beg ⁷⁸  him not to order ⁷⁹  them to depart into the abyss. ⁸⁰  8:32 Now a large herd of pigs was feeding there on the hillside, ⁸¹  and the demonic spirits ⁸²  begged Jesus ⁸³  to let them go into them. He gave them permission. ⁸⁴ 

[16:17]  ¹ tn Grk “crying out, saying”; the participle λέγουσα (legousa) is redundant in English and has not been translated. The imperfect verb ἔκραζεν (ekrazen) has been translated as a progressive imperfect.

[16:17]  ² tn Grk “slaves.” See the note on the word “servants” in 2:18. The translation “servants” was used here because in this context there appears to be more emphasis on the activity of Paul and his companions (“proclaiming to you the way of salvation”) than on their status as “slaves of the Most High God.”

[16:17]  ³ tn Or “a way.” The grammar of this phrase is a bit ambiguous. The phrase in Greek is ὁδὸν σωτηρίας (Jodon swthria"). Neither the head noun nor the genitive noun has the article; this is in keeping with Apollonius’ Canon (see ExSyn 239-40). Since both nouns are anarthrous, this construction also fits Apollonius’ Corollary (see ExSyn 250-54); since the genitive noun is abstract it is most naturally qualitative, so the head noun could either be definite or indefinite without being unusual as far as the grammar is concerned. Luke’s usage of ὁδός elsewhere is indecisive as far as this passage is concerned. However, when one looks at the historical background it is clear that (1) the woman is shut up (via exorcism) not because her testimony is false but because of its source (analogous to Jesus’ treatment of demons perhaps), and (b) “the way” is a par excellence description of the new faith throughout Acts. It thus seems that at least in Luke’s presentation “the way of salvation” is the preferred translation.

[16:17]  ⁴ sn Proclaiming to you the way of salvation. The remarks were an ironic recognition of Paul’s authority, but he did not desire such a witness, possibly for fear of confusion. Her expression the Most High God might have been understood as Zeus by the audience.

[16:18]  ⁵ tn Grk “becoming greatly annoyed.” The participle διαπονηθείς (diaponhqei") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style. The aorist has been translated as an ingressive aorist (entry into a state or condition). See BDAG 235 s.v. διαπονέομαι.

[16:18]  ⁶ tn Grk “and turning.” The participle ἐπιστρέψας (epistreya") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[16:18]  ⁷ tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[16:18]  ⁸ tn BDAG 1102-3 s.v. ὥρα 2.c has “at that very time, at once, instantly” for the usage in this verse.

[3:1]  ⁹ tn The chapter begins with a disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + predicate) that introduces a new character and a new scene in the story.

[3:1]  ¹⁰ sn Many theologians identify or associate the serpent with Satan. In this view Satan comes in the disguise of a serpent or speaks through a serpent. This explains the serpent’s capacity to speak. While later passages in the Bible may indicate there was a satanic presence behind the serpent (see, for example, Rev 12:9), the immediate context pictures the serpent as simply one of the animals of the field created by God (see vv. 1, 14). An ancient Jewish interpretation explains the reference to the serpent in a literal manner, attributing the capacity to speak to all the animals in the orchard. This text (Jub. 3:28) states, “On that day [the day the man and woman were expelled from the orchard] the mouth of all the beasts and cattle and birds and whatever walked or moved was stopped from speaking because all of them used to speak to one another with one speech and one language [presumed to be Hebrew, see 12:26].” Josephus, Ant. 1.1.4 (1.41) attributes the serpent’s actions to jealousy. He writes that “the serpent, living in the company of Adam and his wife, grew jealous of the blessings which he supposed were destined for them if they obeyed God’s behests, and, believing that disobedience would bring trouble on them, he maliciously persuaded the woman to taste of the tree of wisdom.”

[3:1]  ¹¹ tn The Hebrew word עָרוּם (’arum) basically means “clever.” This idea then polarizes into the nuances “cunning” (in a negative sense, see Job 5:12; 15:5), and “prudent” in a positive sense (Prov 12:16, 23; 13:16; 14:8, 15, 18; 22:3; 27:12). This same polarization of meaning can be detected in related words derived from the same root (see Exod 21:14; Josh 9:4; 1 Sam 23:22; Job 5:13; Ps 83:3). The negative nuance obviously applies in Gen 3, where the snake attempts to talk the woman into disobeying God by using half-truths and lies.

[3:1]  ¹² tn Heb “animals of the field.”

[3:1]  ¹³ tn Heb “Indeed that God said.” The beginning of the quotation is elliptical and therefore difficult to translate. One must supply a phrase like “is it true”: “Indeed, [is it true] that God said.”

[3:1]  ¹⁴ sn God. The serpent does not use the expression “Yahweh God” [Lord God] because there is no covenant relationship involved between God and the serpent. He only speaks of “God.” In the process the serpent draws the woman into his manner of speech so that she too only speaks of “God.”

[3:1]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “you must not eat from all the tree[s] of the orchard.” After the negated prohibitive verb, מִכֹּל (mikkol, “from all”) has the meaning “from any.” Note the construction in Lev 18:26, where the statement “you must not do from all these abominable things” means “you must not do any of these abominable things.” See Lev 22:25 and Deut 28:14 as well.

[3:2]  ¹⁶ tn There is a notable change between what the Lord God had said and what the woman says. God said “you may freely eat” (the imperfect with the infinitive absolute, see 2:16), but the woman omits the emphatic infinitive, saying simply “we may eat.” Her words do not reflect the sense of eating to her heart’s content.

[3:3]  ¹⁷ sn And you must not touch it. The woman adds to God’s prohibition, making it say more than God expressed. G. von Rad observes that it is as though she wanted to set a law for herself by means of this exaggeration (Genesis [OTL], 86).

[3:3]  ¹⁸ tn The Hebrew construction is פֶּן (pen) with the imperfect tense, which conveys a negative purpose: “lest you die” = “in order that you not die.” By stating the warning in this way, the woman omits the emphatic infinitive used by God (“you shall surely die,” see 2:17).

[3:4]  ¹⁹ tn The response of the serpent includes the infinitive absolute with a blatant negation equal to saying: “Not – you will surely die” (לֹא מוֹת תִּמֻתען, lo’ mot tÿmutun). The construction makes this emphatic because normally the negative particle precedes the finite verb. The serpent is a liar, denying that there is a penalty for sin (see John 8:44).

[3:5]  ²⁰ tn Or “you will have understanding.” This obviously refers to the acquisition of the “knowledge of good and evil,” as the next statement makes clear.

[3:5]  ²¹ tn Or perhaps “like God, knowing.” It is unclear how the plural participle translated “knowing” is functioning. On the one hand, יֹדְעֵי (yodÿ’e) could be taken as a substantival participle functioning as a predicative adjective in the sentence. In this case one might translate: “You will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil.” On the other hand, it could be taken as an attributive adjective modifying אֱלֹהִים (’elohim). In this case אֱלֹהִים has to be taken as a numerical plural referring to “gods,” “divine beings,” for if the one true God were the intended referent, a singular form of the participle would almost certainly appear as a modifier. Following this line of interpretation, one could translate, “You will be like divine beings who know good and evil.” The following context may favor this translation, for in 3:22 God says to an unidentified group, “Look, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” It is probable that God is addressing his heavenly court (see the note on the word “make” in 1:26), the members of which can be called “gods” or “divine beings” from the ancient Israelite perspective. (We know some of these beings as messengers or “angels.”) An examination of parallel constructions shows that a predicative understanding (“you will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil,” cf. NIV, NRSV) is possible, but rare (see Gen 27:23, where “hairy” is predicative, complementing the verb “to be”). The statistical evidence strongly suggests that the participle is attributive, modifying “divine beings” (see Ps 31:12; Isa 1:30; 13:14; 16:2; 29:5; 58:11; Jer 14:9; 20:9; 23:9; 31:12; 48:41; 49:22; Hos 7:11; Amos 4:11). In all of these texts, where a comparative clause and accompanying adjective/participle follow a copulative (“to be”) verb, the adjective/participle is attributive after the noun in the comparative clause.

[3:5]  ²² sn You will be like divine beings who know good and evil. The serpent raises doubts about the integrity of God. He implies that the only reason for the prohibition was that God was protecting the divine domain. If the man and woman were to eat, they would enter into that domain. The temptation is to overstep divinely established boundaries. (See D. E. Gowan, When Man Becomes God [PTMS], 25.)

[3:1]  ²³ tn The chapter begins with a disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + predicate) that introduces a new character and a new scene in the story.

[3:1]  ²⁴ sn Many theologians identify or associate the serpent with Satan. In this view Satan comes in the disguise of a serpent or speaks through a serpent. This explains the serpent’s capacity to speak. While later passages in the Bible may indicate there was a satanic presence behind the serpent (see, for example, Rev 12:9), the immediate context pictures the serpent as simply one of the animals of the field created by God (see vv. 1, 14). An ancient Jewish interpretation explains the reference to the serpent in a literal manner, attributing the capacity to speak to all the animals in the orchard. This text (Jub. 3:28) states, “On that day [the day the man and woman were expelled from the orchard] the mouth of all the beasts and cattle and birds and whatever walked or moved was stopped from speaking because all of them used to speak to one another with one speech and one language [presumed to be Hebrew, see 12:26].” Josephus, Ant. 1.1.4 (1.41) attributes the serpent’s actions to jealousy. He writes that “the serpent, living in the company of Adam and his wife, grew jealous of the blessings which he supposed were destined for them if they obeyed God’s behests, and, believing that disobedience would bring trouble on them, he maliciously persuaded the woman to taste of the tree of wisdom.”

[3:1]  ²⁵ tn The Hebrew word עָרוּם (’arum) basically means “clever.” This idea then polarizes into the nuances “cunning” (in a negative sense, see Job 5:12; 15:5), and “prudent” in a positive sense (Prov 12:16, 23; 13:16; 14:8, 15, 18; 22:3; 27:12). This same polarization of meaning can be detected in related words derived from the same root (see Exod 21:14; Josh 9:4; 1 Sam 23:22; Job 5:13; Ps 83:3). The negative nuance obviously applies in Gen 3, where the snake attempts to talk the woman into disobeying God by using half-truths and lies.

[3:1]  ²⁶ tn Heb “animals of the field.”

[3:1]  ²⁷ tn Heb “Indeed that God said.” The beginning of the quotation is elliptical and therefore difficult to translate. One must supply a phrase like “is it true”: “Indeed, [is it true] that God said.”

[3:1]  ²⁸ sn God. The serpent does not use the expression “Yahweh God” [Lord God] because there is no covenant relationship involved between God and the serpent. He only speaks of “God.” In the process the serpent draws the woman into his manner of speech so that she too only speaks of “God.”

[3:1]  ²⁹ tn Heb “you must not eat from all the tree[s] of the orchard.” After the negated prohibitive verb, מִכֹּל (mikkol, “from all”) has the meaning “from any.” Note the construction in Lev 18:26, where the statement “you must not do from all these abominable things” means “you must not do any of these abominable things.” See Lev 22:25 and Deut 28:14 as well.

[22:21]  ³⁰ sn This parenthetical note about Kemuel’s descendant is probably a later insertion by the author/compiler of Genesis and not part of the original announcement.

[22:23]  ³¹ tn The disjunctive clause gives information that is important but parenthetical to the narrative. Rebekah would become the wife of Isaac (Gen 24:15).

[8:29]  ³² tn Grk “And behold, they cried out, saying.” The Greek word ἰδού (idou) has not been translated because it has no exact English equivalent here, but adds interest and emphasis (BDAG 468 s.v. 1). The participle λέγοντες (legontes) is redundant and has not been translated.

[8:29]  ³³ tn Grk “what to us and to you?” (an idiom). The phrase τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί (ti Jhmin kai soi) is Semitic in origin, though it made its way into colloquial Greek (BDAG 275 s.v. ἐγώ). The equivalent Hebrew expression in the OT had two basic meanings: (1) When one person was unjustly bothering another, the injured party could say “What to me and to you?” meaning, “What have I done to you that you should do this to me?” (Judg 11:12, 2 Chr 35:21, 1 Kgs 17:18). (2) When someone was asked to get involved in a matter he felt was no business of his own, he could say to the one asking him, “What to me and to you?” meaning, “That is your business, how am I involved?” (2 Kgs 3:13, Hos 14:8). These nuances were apparently expanded in Greek, but the basic notions of defensive hostility (option 1) and indifference or disengagement (option 2) are still present. BDAG suggests the following as glosses for this expression: What have I to do with you? What have we in common? Leave me alone! Never mind! Hostility between Jesus and the demons is certainly to be understood in this context, hence the translation: “Leave us alone….”

[8:29]  ³⁴ sn There was an appointed time in which demons would face their judgment, and they seem to have viewed Jesus’ arrival on the scene as an illegitimate change in God’s plan regarding the time when their sentence would be executed.

[8:30]  ³⁵ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[8:31]  ³⁶ tn Grk “asked him, saying.” The participle λέγοντες (legontes) is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[1:24]  ³⁷ tn Grk “What to us and to you?” This is an idiom meaning, “We have nothing to do with one another,” or “Why bother us!” The phrase τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί (ti Jhmin kai soi) is Semitic in origin, though it made its way into colloquial Greek (BDAG 275 s.v. ἐγώ). The equivalent Hebrew expression in the OT had two basic meanings: (1) When one person was unjustly bothering another, the injured party could say “What to me and to you?” meaning, “What have I done to you that you should do this to me?” (Judg 11:12, 2 Chr 35:21, 1 Kgs 17:18). (2) When someone was asked to get involved in a matter he felt was no business of his own, he could say to the one asking him, “What to me and to you?” meaning, “That is your business, how am I involved?” (2 Kgs 3:13, Hos 14:8). Option (1) implies hostility, while option (2) merely implies disengagement. BDAG suggests the following as glosses for this expression: What have I to do with you? What have we in common? Leave me alone! Never mind! Hostility between Jesus and the demons is certainly to be understood in this context, hence the translation: “Leave me alone….” For a very similar expression see Lk 8:28 and (in a different context) John 2:4.

[1:24]  ³⁸ sn The confession of Jesus as the Holy One here is significant, coming from an unclean spirit. Jesus, as the Holy One of God, who bears God’s Spirit and is the expression of holiness, comes to deal with uncleanness and unholiness.

[1:34]  ³⁹ tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of previous action(s) in the narrative.

[1:34]  ⁴⁰ sn Note how the author distinguishes healing from exorcism here, implying that the two are not identical.

[1:34]  ⁴¹ tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context.

[1:34]  ⁴² sn Why Jesus would not permit the demons to speak is much discussed. Two possibilities are (1) the mere source of the testimony (demonic) and (2) that the title, with its political implications, may have had elements that Jesus wished to avoid until the full nature of his mission was clarified.

[1:34]  ⁴³ tc The mss vary on what is read at the end of v. 34. Some have “they knew him to be the Christ,” with various Greek constructions (ᾔδεισαν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν εἶναι [hdeisan auton Criston einai] in B L W Θ Ë¹ 28 33^vid 565 2427 al; ᾔδεισαν τὸν Χριστὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι [hdeisan ton Criston auton einai] in [א²] C [˹³ 700] 892 1241 [1424] pc); codex D has “they knew him and he healed many who were sick with various diseases and drove out many demons,” reproducing exactly the first half of the verse. These first two longer readings are predictable expansions to an enticingly brief statement; the fact that there are significant variations on the word order and presence or absence of τόν argues against their authenticity as well. D’s reading is a palpable error of sight. The reading adopted in the translation is supported by א* A 0130 Ï lat. This support, though hardly overwhelming in itself, in combination with strong internal evidence, renders the shorter reading fairly certain.

[5:9]  ⁴⁴ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[5:9]  ⁴⁵ sn The name Legion means “thousands,” a word taken from a Latin term for a large group of soldiers. The term not only suggests a multiple possession, but also adds a military feel to the account. This is a true battle.

[5:10]  ⁴⁶ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[5:11]  ⁴⁷ tn Grk “mountain,” but this might give the English reader the impression of a far higher summit.

[5:12]  ⁴⁸ tn Grk “they”; the referent (the demonic spirits) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[5:13]  ⁴⁹ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[5:13]  ⁵⁰ 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.

[5:13]  ⁵¹ tn Here δέ (de) has been translated as “so” to indicate a conclusion and transition in the narrative.

[4:33]  ⁵² tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a specific example of how Jesus spoke with authority (v. 32).

[4:33]  ⁵³ sn See the note on synagogues in 4:15.

[4:33]  ⁵⁴ tn Grk “having an unclean, demonic spirit,” that is, an evil spirit. This is the only place Luke uses this lengthy phrase. Normally he simply says an “unclean spirit.”

[4:34]  ⁵⁵ tn Grk “What to us and to you?” This is an idiom meaning, “We have nothing to do with one another,” or “Why bother us!” The phrase τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί (ti Jhmin kai soi) is Semitic in origin, though it made its way into colloquial Greek (BDAG 275 s.v. ἐγώ). The equivalent Hebrew expression in the Old Testament had two basic meanings: (1) When one person was unjustly bothering another, the injured party could say “What to me and to you?” meaning, “What have I done to you that you should do this to me?” (Judg 11:12; 2 Chr 35:21; 1 Kgs 17:18). (2) When someone was asked to get involved in a matter he felt was no business of his, he could say to the one asking him, “What to me and to you?” meaning, “That is your business, how am I involved?” (2 Kgs 3:13; Hos 14:8). Option (1) implies hostility, while option (2) merely implies disengagement. BDAG suggests the following as glosses for this expression: What have I to do with you? What have we in common? Leave me alone! Never mind! Hostility between Jesus and the demons is certainly to be understood in this context, hence the translation: “Leave me alone….” For a very similar expression, see Luke 8:28 and (in a different context) John 2:4.

[4:34]  ⁵⁶ sn The confession of Jesus as the Holy One here is significant, coming from an unclean spirit. Jesus, as the Holy One of God, who bears God’s Spirit and is the expression of holiness, comes to deal with uncleanness and unholiness.

[4:35]  ⁵⁷ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast involved in Jesus’ reply.

[4:35]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “rebuked him, saying.” The participle λέγων (legwn) is redundant in English and has not been translated.

[4:35]  ⁵⁹ sn The command Come out of him! is an example of Jesus’ authority (see v. 32). Unlike other exorcists, Jesus did not use magical incantations nor did he invoke anyone else’s name.

[4:35]  ⁶⁰ tn Grk “him”; the referent (the man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[4:35]  ⁶¹ sn The departure of the evil spirit from the man without hurting him shows Jesus’ total deliverance and protection of this individual.

[8:28]  ⁶² tn Grk “And seeing.” The participle ἰδών (idwn) has been taken temporally. Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[8:28]  ⁶³ tn Grk “and fell,” but καί (kai) has not been translated since English normally uses a coordinating conjunction only between the last two elements in a series of three or more.

[8:28]  ⁶⁴ tn Grk “What to me and to you?” (an idiom). The phrase τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί (ti emoi kai soi) is Semitic in origin, though it made its way into colloquial Greek (BDAG 275 s.v. ἐγώ). The equivalent Hebrew expression in the OT had two basic meanings: (1) When one person was unjustly bothering another, the injured party could say “What to me and to you?” meaning, “What have I done to you that you should do this to me?” (Judg 11:12; 2 Chr 35:21; 1 Kgs 17:18). (2) When someone was asked to get involved in a matter he felt was no business of his own, he could say to the one asking him, “What to me and to you?” meaning, “That is your business, how am I involved?” (2 Kgs 3:13; Hos 14:8). These nuances were apparently expanded in Greek, but the basic notions of defensive hostility (option 1) and indifference or disengagement (option 2) are still present. BDAG suggests the following as glosses for this expression: What have I to do with you? What have we in common? Leave me alone! Never mind! Hostility between Jesus and the demons is certainly to be understood in this context, hence the translation: “Leave me alone….”

[8:28]  ⁶⁵ sn On the title Most High see Luke 1:35.

[8:28]  ⁶⁶ sn The demons’ plea “do not torment me” is a recognition of Jesus’ inherent authority over evil forces. The request is that Jesus not bother them. There was an appointed time in which demons would face their judgment, and they seem to have viewed Jesus’ arrival on the scene as an illegitimate change in God’s plan regarding the time when their sentence would be executed.

[8:29]  ⁶⁷ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[8:29]  ⁶⁸ tc ‡ Although the external evidence favors the aorist παρήγγειλεν (parhngeilen, “he commanded”; Ì⁷⁵ B Θ Ξ Ψ Ë¹³ 579 700 1241 1424 2542 pm), the internal evidence favors the imperfect παρήγγελλεν (parhngellen, here translated “he had started commanding”; א A C K L W Γ Δ 1 33 565 892 pm). The aorist is suspect because it can more easily be taken as a single command, and thus an immediate exorcism. The imperfect would most likely be ingressive (BDF §§328; 329; 331), suggesting that Jesus started to command the evil spirit to depart, and continued the command.

[8:29]  ⁶⁹ tn Grk “unclean.”

[8:29]  ⁷⁰ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so,” introducing a clause that gives the result of the man being seized by the demon.

[8:29]  ⁷¹ tn Or “fetters”; these were chains for the feet.

[8:29]  ⁷² tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context.

[8:29]  ⁷³ tn Grk “into the deserts.” The plural use here has been translated as “deserted places,” that is, uninhabited areas.

[8:29]  ⁷⁴ sn This is a parenthetical, explanatory comment by the author.

[8:30]  ⁷⁵ tn Grk “And Jesus.” Here δέ (de) has been translated as “then” to pick up the sequence of the narrative prior to the parenthetical note by the author.

[8:30]  ⁷⁶ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[8:30]  ⁷⁷ sn The name Legion means “thousands,” a word taken from a Latin term for a large group of soldiers. The term not only suggests a multiple possession, but also adds a military feel to the account. This is a true battle.

[8:31]  ⁷⁸ tn One could also translate the imperfect tense here with a repetitive force like “begged him repeatedly.”

[8:31]  ⁷⁹ tn Or “command.”

[8:31]  ⁸⁰ tn This word, ἄβυσσος (abusso"), is a term for the place where the dead await the judgment. It also could hold hostile spirits according to Jewish belief (Jub. 5:6-7; 1 En. 10:4-6; 18:11-16).

[8:32]  ⁸¹ tn Grk “mountain,” but this might give the English reader the impression of a far higher summit.

[8:32]  ⁸² tn Grk “they”; the referent (the demonic spirits) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[8:32]  ⁸³ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[8:32]  ⁸⁴ 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.