Luke 2:39

2:39 So ¹  when Joseph and Mary ²  had performed ³  everything according to the law of the Lord, ⁴  they returned to Galilee, to their own town ⁵  of Nazareth. ⁶ 

Luke 2:22

Jesus’ Presentation at the Temple

2:22 Now ⁷  when the time came for their ⁸  purification according to the law of Moses, Joseph and Mary ⁹  brought Jesus ¹⁰  up to Jerusalem ¹¹  to present him to the Lord

[2:39]  ¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the conclusion of the topic.

[2:39]  ² tn Grk “when they”; the referents (Joseph and Mary) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:39]  ³ tn Or “completed.”

[2:39]  ⁴ sn On the phrase the law of the Lord see Luke 2:22-23.

[2:39]  ⁵ tn Or “city.”

[2:39]  ⁶ map For location see Map1 D3; Map2 C2; Map3 D5; Map4 C1; Map5 G3.

[2:22]  ⁷ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.

[2:22]  ⁸ 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]  ⁹ tn Grk “they”; the referents (Joseph and Mary) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:22]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:22]  ¹¹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.