Luke 2:22

Jesus’ Presentation at the Temple

2:22 Now ¹  when the time came for their ²  purification according to the law of Moses, Joseph and Mary ³  brought Jesus ⁴  up to Jerusalem ⁵  to present him to the Lord

Luke 2:43

2:43 But ⁶  when the feast was over, ⁷  as they were returning home, ⁸  the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. His ⁹  parents ¹⁰  did not know it,

Luke 13:4

13:4 Or those eighteen who were killed ¹¹  when the tower in Siloam fell on them, ¹²  do you think they were worse offenders than all the others who live in Jerusalem? ¹³ 

Luke 13:33

13:33 Nevertheless I must ¹⁴  go on my way today and tomorrow and the next day, because it is impossible ¹⁵  that a prophet should be killed ¹⁶  outside Jerusalem.’ ¹⁷ 

Luke 23:7

23:7 When ¹⁸  he learned that he was from Herod’s jurisdiction, ¹⁹  he sent him over to Herod, ²⁰  who also happened to be in Jerusalem ²¹  at that time.

[2:22]  ¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.

[2:22]  ² tc The translation follows most mss, including early and important ones ({א A B L}). Some copyists, aware that the purification law applied to women only, produced mss ({76 it^pt vg} [though the Latin word eius could be either masculine or feminine]) that read “her purification.” But the extant evidence for an unambiguous “her” is shut up to one late minuscule ({codex 76}) and a couple of patristic citations of dubious worth ({Pseudo-Athanasius} whose date is unknown, and the {Catenae in euangelia Lucae et Joannis}, edited by J. A. Cramer. The Catenae is a work of collected patristic sayings whose exact source is unknown [thus, it could come from a period covering hundreds of years]). A few other witnesses (D pc lat) read “his purification.” The KJV has “her purification,” following Beza’s Greek text (essentially a revision of Erasmus’). Erasmus did not have it in any of his five editions. Most likely Beza put in the feminine form αὐτῆς (auths) because, recognizing that the eius found in several Latin mss could be read either as a masculine or a feminine, he made the contextually more satisfying choice of the feminine. Perhaps it crept into one or two late Greek witnesses via this interpretive Latin back-translation. So the evidence for the feminine singular is virtually nonexistent, while the masculine singular αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”) was a clear scribal blunder. There can be no doubt that “their purification” is the authentic reading.

[2:22]  ³ tn Grk “they”; the referents (Joseph and Mary) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:22]  ⁴ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:22]  ⁵ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[2:43]  ⁶ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated contrastively in keeping with the context. This outcome is different from what had happened all the times before.

[2:43]  ⁷ tn Grk “when the days ended.”

[2:43]  ⁸ tn The word “home” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied for clarity.

[2:43]  ⁹ tn Grk “And his.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[2:43]  ¹⁰ tc Most mss, especially later ones (A C Ψ 0130 ˹³ Ï it), read ᾿Ιωσὴφ καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ (Iwshf kai Jh mhthr aujtou, “[both] Joseph and his mother”), a reading evidently intended to insulate the doctrine of the virgin conception of our Lord. But א B D L W Θ Ë¹ 33 579 1241 pc lat sa read οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ (Joi gonei" autou, “his parents”) as in the translation. Such motivated readings as the former lack credibility, especially since the better witnesses affirm the virgin conception of Christ in Luke 1:34-35.

[13:4]  ¹¹ tn Grk “on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them.” This relative clause embedded in a prepositional phrase is complex in English and has been simplified to an adjectival and a temporal clause in the translation.

[13:4]  ¹² sn Unlike the previous event, when the tower in Siloam fell on them, it was an accident of fate. It raised the question, however, “Was this a judgment?”

[13:4]  ¹³ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[13:33]  ¹⁶ tn This is the frequent expression δεῖ (dei, “it is necessary”) that notes something that is a part of God’s plan.

[13:33]  ¹⁷ tn Or “unthinkable.” See L&N 71.4 for both possible meanings.

[13:33]  ¹⁸ tn Or “should perish away from.”

[13:33]  ¹⁹ sn Death in Jerusalem is another key theme in Luke’s material: 7:16, 34; 24:19; Acts 3:22-23. Notice that Jesus sees himself in the role of a prophet here. Jesus’ statement, it is impossible that a prophet should be killed outside Jerusalem, is filled with irony; Jesus, traveling about in Galilee (most likely), has nothing to fear from Herod; it is his own people living in the very center of Jewish religion and worship who present the greatest danger to his life. The underlying idea is that Jerusalem, though she stands at the very heart of the worship of God, often kills the prophets God sends to her (v. 34). In the end, Herod will be much less a threat than Jerusalem.

[23:7]  ²¹ tn Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[23:7]  ²² sn Learning that Jesus was from Galilee and therefore part of Herod’s jurisdiction, Pilate decided to rid himself of the problem by sending him to Herod.

[23:7]  ²³ sn Herod was Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great. See the note on Herod in 3:1.

[23:7]  ²⁴ sn Herod would probably have come to Jerusalem for the feast, although his father was only half Jewish (Josephus, Ant. 14.15.2 [14.403]). Josephus does mention Herod’s presence in Jerusalem during a feast (Ant. 18.5.3 [18.122]).