Luke 3:11-38

3:11 John ¹  answered them, ²  “The person who has two tunics ³  must share with the person who has none, and the person who has food must do likewise.” 3:12 Tax collectors ⁴  also came to be baptized, and they said to him, “Teacher, what should we do?” 3:13 He told them, “Collect no more ⁵  than you are required to.” ⁶  3:14 Then some soldiers ⁷  also asked him, “And as for us – what should we do?” ⁸  He told them, “Take money from no one by violence ⁹  or by false accusation, ¹⁰  and be content with your pay.”

3:15 While the people were filled with anticipation ¹¹  and they all wondered ¹²  whether perhaps John ¹³  could be the Christ, ¹⁴  3:16 John answered them all, ¹⁵  “I baptize you with water, ¹⁶  but one more powerful than I am is coming – I am not worthy ¹⁷  to untie the strap ¹⁸  of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. ¹⁹  3:17 His winnowing fork ²⁰  is in his hand to clean out his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his storehouse, ²¹  but the chaff he will burn up with inextinguishable fire.” ²² 

3:18 And in this way, ²³  with many other exhortations, John ²⁴  proclaimed good news to the people. 3:19 But when John rebuked Herod ²⁵  the tetrarch ²⁶  because of Herodias, his brother’s wife, ²⁷  and because of all the evil deeds ²⁸  that he had done, 3:20 Herod added this to them all: He locked up John in prison.

The Baptism of Jesus

3:21 Now when ²⁹  all the people were baptized, Jesus also was baptized. And while he was praying, ³⁰  the heavens ³¹  opened, 3:22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. ³²  And a voice came from heaven, “You are my one dear Son; ³³  in you I take great delight.” ³⁴ 

The Genealogy of Jesus

3:23 So ³⁵  Jesus, when he began his ministry, ³⁶  was about thirty years old. He was ³⁷  the son (as was supposed) ³⁸  of Joseph, the son ³⁹  of Heli, 3:24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 3:25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, 3:26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, 3:27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, ⁴⁰  the son of Shealtiel, ⁴¹  the son of Neri, ⁴²  3:28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, 3:29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 3:30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 3:31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, ⁴³  the son of David, ⁴⁴  3:32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, ⁴⁵  the son of Nahshon, 3:33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, ⁴⁶  the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 3:34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, ⁴⁷  the son of Nahor, 3:35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 3:36 the son of Cainan, ⁴⁸  the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 3:37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel, ⁴⁹  the son of Kenan, ⁵⁰  3:38 the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. ⁵¹ 

[3:11]  ¹ tn Grk “he”; the referent (John) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:11]  ² tn Grk “Answering, he said to them.” This construction with passive participle and finite verb is pleonastic (redundant) and has been simplified in the translation to “answered them.”

[3:11]  ³ tn Or “shirt” (a long garment worn under the cloak next to the skin). The name for this garment (χιτών, citwn) presents some difficulty in translation. Most modern readers would not understand what a ‘tunic’ was any more than they would be familiar with a ‘chiton.’ On the other hand, attempts to find a modern equivalent are also a problem: “Shirt” conveys the idea of a much shorter garment that covers only the upper body, and “undergarment” (given the styles of modern underwear) is more misleading still. “Tunic” was therefore employed, but with a note to explain its nature.

[3:12]  ⁴ sn The tax collectors would bid to collect taxes for the Roman government and then add a surcharge, which they kept. Since tax collectors worked for Rome, they were viewed as traitors to their own people and were not well liked. Yet even they were moved by John’s call.

[3:13]  ⁵ tn In the Greek text μηδὲν πλέον (mhden pleon, “no more”) is in an emphatic position.

[3:13]  ⁶ tn Or “than you are ordered to.”

[3:14]  ⁷ tn Grk “And soldiers.”

[3:14]  ⁸ tn Grk “And what should we ourselves do?”

[3:14]  ⁹ tn Or “Rob no one.” The term διασείσητε (diaseishte) here refers to “shaking someone.” In this context it refers to taking financial advantage of someone through violence, so it refers essentially to robbery. Soldiers are to perform their tasks faithfully. A changed person is to carry out his tasks in life faithfully and without grumbling.

[3:14]  ¹⁰ tn The term translated “accusation” (συκοφαντήσητε, sukofanthshte) refers to a procedure by which someone could bring charges against an individual and be paid a part of the fine imposed by the court. Soldiers could do this to supplement their pay, and would thus be tempted to make false accusations.

[3:15]  ¹¹ tn Or “with expectation.” The participle προσδοκῶντος (prosdokwnto") is taken temporally.

[3:15]  ¹² tn Grk “pondered in their hearts.”

[3:15]  ¹³ tn Grk “in their hearts concerning John, (whether) perhaps he might be the Christ.” The translation simplifies the style here.

[3:15]  ¹⁴ tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[3:16]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “answered them all, saying.” The participle λέγων (legwn) is redundant and has not been translated.

[3:16]  ¹⁶ tc A few mss (C D 892 1424 pc it ) add εἰς μετάνοιαν (ei" metanoian, “for repentance”). Although two of the mss in support are early and important, it is an obviously motivated reading to add clarification, probably representing a copyist’s attempt to harmonize Luke’s version with Matt 3:11.

[3:16]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “of whom I am not worthy.”

[3:16]  ¹⁸ tn The term refers to the leather strap or thong used to bind a sandal. This is often viewed as a collective singular and translated as a plural, “the straps of his sandals,” but it may be more emphatic to retain the singular here.

[3:16]  ¹⁹ sn With the Holy Spirit and fire. There are differing interpretations for this phrase regarding the number of baptisms and their nature. (1) Some see one baptism here, and this can be divided further into two options. (a) The baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire could refer to the cleansing, purifying work of the Spirit in the individual believer through salvation and sanctification, or (b) it could refer to two different results of Christ’s ministry: Some accept Christ and are baptized with the Holy Spirit, but some reject him and receive judgment. (2) Other interpreters see two baptisms here: The baptism of the Holy Spirit refers to the salvation Jesus brings at his first advent, in which believers receive the Holy Spirit, and the baptism of fire refers to the judgment Jesus will bring upon the world at his second coming. One must take into account both the image of fire and whether individual or corporate baptism is in view. A decision is not easy on either issue. The image of fire is used to refer to both eternal judgment (e.g., Matt 25:41) and the power of the Lord’s presence to purge and cleanse his people (e.g., Isa 4:4-5). The pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost, a fulfillment of this prophecy no matter which interpretation is taken, had both individual and corporate dimensions. It is possible that since Holy Spirit and fire are governed by a single preposition in Greek, the one-baptism view may be more likely, but this is not certain. Simply put, there is no consensus view in scholarship at this time on the best interpretation of this passage.

[3:17]  ²⁰ sn A winnowing fork is a pitchfork-like tool used to toss threshed grain in the air so that the wind blows away the chaff, leaving the grain to fall to the ground. The note of purging is highlighted by the use of imagery involving sifting though threshed grain for the useful kernels.

[3:17]  ²¹ tn Or “granary,” “barn” (referring to a building used to store a farm’s produce rather than a building for housing livestock).

[3:17]  ²² sn The image of fire that cannot be extinguished is from the OT: Job 20:26; Isa 34:8-10; 66:24.

[3:18]  ²³ tn On construction μὲν οὖν καί (men oun kai), see BDF §451.1.

[3:18]  ²⁴ tn Grk “he”; the referent (John) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:19]  ²⁵ sn Herod refers here to Herod Antipas. See the note on Herod Antipas in 3:1.

[3:19]  ²⁶ sn See the note on tetrarch in 3:1.

[3:19]  ²⁷ tc Several mss (A C K W Ψ 33 565 579 1424 2542 al bo) read τῆς γυναικὸς Φιλίππου τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ (th" gunaiko" Filippou tou adelfou autou, “the wife of his brother Philip”), specifying whose wife Herodias was. The addition of “Philip,” however, is an assimilation to Matt 14:3 and is lacking in the better witnesses.

[3:19]  ²⁸ tn Or “immoralities.”

[3:21]  ²⁹ tn Grk “Now it happened that when.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[3:21]  ³⁰ tn Grk “and while Jesus was being baptized and praying.” The first of these participles has been translated as a finite verb to be more consistent with English style.

[3:21]  ³¹ tn Or “the sky”; the Greek word οὐρανός (ouranos) may be translated “sky” or “heaven,” depending on the context. In this context, although the word is singular, the English plural “heavens” connotes the Greek better than the singular “heaven” would, for the singular does not normally refer to the sky.

[3:22]  ³² tn This phrase is a descriptive comparison. The Spirit is not a dove, but descends like one in some type of bodily representation.

[3:22]  ³³ tn Grk “my beloved Son,” or “my Son, the beloved [one].” The force of ἀγαπητός (agaphtos) is often “pertaining to one who is the only one of his or her class, but at the same time is particularly loved and cherished” (L&N 58.53; cf. also BDAG 7 s.v. 1).

[3:22]  ³⁴ tc Instead of “You are my one dear Son; in you I take great delight,” one Greek ms and several Latin mss and church fathers (D it Ju [Cl] Meth Hil Aug) quote Ps 2:7 outright with “You are my Son; today I have fathered you.” But the weight of the ms testimony is against this reading.

[3:23]  ³⁵ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the summary nature of the statement.

[3:23]  ³⁶ tn The words “his ministry” are not in the Greek text, but are implied. Direct objects were frequently omitted in Greek when clear from the context, but must be supplied for the contemporary English reader.

[3:23]  ³⁷ tn Grk “of age, being.” Due to the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, the participle ὤν (wn) has been translated as a finite verb with the pronoun “he” supplied as subject, and a new sentence begun in the translation at this point.

[3:23]  ³⁸ sn The parenthetical remark as was supposed makes it clear that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus. But a question still remains whose genealogy this is. Mary is nowhere mentioned, so this may simply refer to the line of Joseph, who would have functioned as Jesus’ legal father, much like stepchildren can have when they are adopted by a second parent.

[3:23]  ³⁹ tc Several of the names in the list have alternate spellings in the ms tradition, but most of these are limited to a few mss. Only significant differences are considered in the notes through v. 38.

[3:27]  ⁴⁰ sn On Zerubbabel see Ezra 2:2.

[3:27]  ⁴¹ sn Grk and KJV Salathiel. Most modern English translations use the OT form of the name (Shealtiel, Ezra 3:2).

[3:27]  ⁴² sn Shealtiel, the son of Neri. 1 Chr 3:17 identifies Jeconiah as the father of Shealtiel. The judgment on Jeconiah’s line (Jer 22:30) may be reflected here.

[3:31]  ⁴³ sn The use of Nathan here as the son of David is different than Matthew, where Solomon is named. Nathan was David’s third son. It is not entirely clear what causes the difference. Some argue Nathan stresses a prophetic connection, but it is not clear how (through confusion with the prophet Nathan?). Others note the absence of a reference to Jeconiah later, so that here there is a difference to show the canceling out of this line. The differences appear to mean that Matthew’s line is a “royal and physical” line, while Luke has a “royal and legal” line.

[3:31]  ⁴⁴ sn The mention of David begins a series of agreements with Matthew’s line. The OT background is 1 Chr 2:1-15 and Ruth 4:18-22.

[3:32]  ⁴⁵ tc The reading Σαλά (Sala, “Sala”) is found in the best and earliest witnesses (Ì⁴ א* B sy^s sa). Almost all the rest of the mss (א² A D L Θ Ψ 0102 [Ë^1,13] 33 Ï latt sy^p,h bo) have Σαλμών (Salmwn, “Salmon”), an assimilation to Matt 1:4-5 and 1 Chr 2:11 (LXX). “In view of the early tradition that Luke was a Syrian of Antioch it is perhaps significant that the form Σαλά appears to embody a Syriac tradition” (TCGNT 113).

[3:33]  ⁴⁶ tc The number and order of the first few names in this verse varies greatly in the mss. The variants which are most likely to be original based upon external evidence are Amminadab, Aram (A D 33 565 [1424] pm lat); Amminadab, Aram, Joram (K Δ Ψ 700 2542 pm); Adam, Admin, Arni (Ì^4vid א* 1241 pc sa); and Amminadab, Admin, Arni (א² L X [Γ] ˹³ pc). Deciding between these variants is quite difficult. The reading “Amminadab, Aram” is the strongest externally since it is represented by Alexandrian, Western, and Byzantine witnesses, although it is significantly weaker internally because it disrupts the artistic balance of the number of generations and their groups that three names would preserve (see TCGNT 113, fn. 1 for discussion). In this case, the subtle intrinsic arguments that would most likely be overlooked by scribes argues for the reading “Amminadab, Admin, Arni,” although a decision is quite difficult because of the lack of strong external support.

[3:34]  ⁴⁷ sn The list now picks up names from Gen 11:10-26; 5:1-32; 1 Chr 1:1-26, especially 1:24-26.

[3:36]  ⁴⁸ tc It is possible that the name Καϊνάμ (Kainam) should be omitted, since two key mss, Ì^75vid and D, lack it. But the omission may be a motivated reading: This name is not found in the editions of the Hebrew OT, though it is in the LXX, at Gen 11:12 and 10:24. But the witnesses with this reading (or a variation of it) are substantial: א B L ˹ 33 (Καϊνάμ), A Θ Ψ 0102 ˹³ Ï (Καϊνάν, Kainan). The translation above has adopted the more common spelling “Cainan,” although it is based on the reading Καϊνάμ.

[3:37]  ⁴⁹ sn Here the Greek text reads Mahalaleel. Some modern English translations follow the Greek spelling (NASB, NRSV) while others (NIV) use the OT form of the name (Gen 5:12, 15).

[3:37]  ⁵⁰ sn The Greek text has Kainam here. Some modern English translations follow the Greek spelling more closely (NASB, NRSV Cainan) while others (NIV) use the OT form of the name (Kenan in Gen 5:9, 12).

[3:38]  ⁵¹ sn The reference to the son of God here is not to a divine being, but to one directly formed by the hand of God. He is made in God’s image, so this phrase could be read as appositional (“Adam, that is, the son of God”). See Acts 17:28-29.