Luke 5:17

Healing and Forgiving a Paralytic

5:17 Now on ¹  one of those days, while he was teaching, there were Pharisees ²  and teachers of the law ³  sitting nearby (who had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem), ⁴  and the power of the Lord was with him ⁵  to heal.

Luke 5:21

5:21 Then ⁶  the experts in the law ⁷  and the Pharisees began to think ⁸  to themselves, ⁹  “Who is this man ¹⁰  who is uttering blasphemies? ¹¹  Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Luke 7:29-30

7:29 (Now ¹²  all the people who heard this, even the tax collectors, ¹³  acknowledged ¹⁴  God’s justice, because they had been baptized ¹⁵  with John’s baptism. 7:30 However, the Pharisees ¹⁶  and the experts in religious law ¹⁷  rejected God’s purpose ¹⁸  for themselves, because they had not been baptized ¹⁹  by John. ²⁰ ) ²¹ 

Luke 7:34

7:34 The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him, ²²  a glutton and a drunk, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ ²³ 

Luke 7:39

7:39 Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, ²⁴  he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, ²⁵  he would know who and what kind of woman ²⁶  this is who is touching him, that she is a sinner.”

Luke 15:1-2

The Parable of the Lost Sheep and Coin

15:1 Now all the tax collectors ²⁷  and sinners were coming ²⁸  to hear him. 15:2 But ²⁹  the Pharisees ³⁰  and the experts in the law ³¹  were complaining, ³²  “This man welcomes ³³  sinners and eats with them.”

Luke 18:11

18:11 The Pharisee stood and prayed about himself like this: ³⁴  ‘God, I thank ³⁵  you that I am not like other people: ³⁶  extortionists, ³⁷  unrighteous people, ³⁸  adulterers – or even like this tax collector. ³⁹ 

Luke 19:7

19:7 And when the people ⁴⁰  saw it, they all complained, ⁴¹  “He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner.” ⁴² 

Isaiah 65:5

65:5 They say, ‘Keep to yourself!

Don’t get near me, for I am holier than you!’

These people are like smoke in my nostrils,

like a fire that keeps burning all day long.

Matthew 21:28-32

The Parable of the Two Sons

21:28 “What ⁴³  do you think? A man had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ 21:29 The boy answered, ⁴⁴  ‘I will not.’ But later he had a change of heart ⁴⁵  and went. 21:30 The father ⁴⁶  went to the other son and said the same thing. This boy answered, ⁴⁷  ‘I will, sir,’ but did not go. 21:31 Which of the two did his father’s will?” They said, “The first.” ⁴⁸  Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, ⁴⁹  tax collectors ⁵⁰  and prostitutes will go ahead of you into the kingdom of God! 21:32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him. But the tax collectors and prostitutes did believe. Although ⁵¹  you saw this, you did not later change your minds ⁵²  and believe him.

Mark 7:3

7:3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they perform a ritual washing, ⁵³  holding fast to the tradition of the elders.

[5:17]  ¹ tn Grk “And it happened that on.” 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.

[5:17]  ² sn Pharisees were members of one of the most important and influential religious and political parties of Judaism in the time of Jesus. There were more Pharisees than Sadducees (according to Josephus, Ant. 17.2.4 [17.42] there were more than 6,000 Pharisees at about this time). Pharisees differed with Sadducees on certain doctrines and patterns of behavior. The Pharisees were strict and zealous adherents to the laws of the OT and to numerous additional traditions such as angels and bodily resurrection.

[5:17]  ³ tn That is, those who were skilled in the teaching and interpretation of the OT law. These are called “experts in the law” (Grk “scribes”) in v. 21.

[5:17]  ⁴ sn Jesus was now attracting attention outside of Galilee as far away as Jerusalem, the main city of Israel.

[5:17]  ⁵ tc Most mss (A C D [K] Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï latt bo) read αὐτούς (autous) instead of αὐτόν (auton) here. If original, this plural pronoun would act as the direct object of the infinitive ἰᾶσθαι (iasqai, “to heal”). However, the reading with the singular pronoun αὐτόν, which acts as the subject of the infinitive, is to be preferred. Externally, it has support from better mss (א B L W al sa). Internally, it is probable that scribes changed the singular αὐτόν to the plural αὐτούς, expecting the object of the infinitive to come at this point in the text. The singular as the harder reading accounts for the rise of the other reading.

[5:21]  ⁶ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.

[5:21]  ⁷ tn Or “Then the scribes.” The traditional rendering of γραμματεύς (grammateu") as “scribe” does not communicate much to the modern English reader, for whom the term might mean “professional copyist,” if it means anything at all. The people referred to here were recognized experts in the law of Moses and in traditional laws and regulations. Thus “expert in the law” comes closer to the meaning for the modern reader.

[5:21]  ⁸ tn Or “to reason” (in a hostile sense). See G. Schrenk, TDNT 2:97.

[5:21]  ⁹ tn The participle λέγοντες (legontes, “saying”) has not been translated because it is redundant in contemporary English.

[5:21]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “this one” (οὗτος, Joutos).

[5:21]  ¹¹ sn Uttering blasphemies meant to say something that dishonored God. To claim divine prerogatives or claim to speak for God when one really does not would be such an act of offense. The remark raised directly the issue of the nature of Jesus’ ministry.

[7:29]  ¹² tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the parenthetical nature of the comment by the author.

[7:29]  ¹³ sn See the note on tax collectors in 3:12.

[7:29]  ¹⁴ tn Or “vindicated God”; Grk “justified God.” This could be expanded to “vindicated and responded to God.” The point is that God’s goodness and grace as evidenced in the invitation to John was justified and responded to by the group one might least expect, tax collector and sinners. They had more spiritual sensitivity than others. The contrastive response is clear from v. 30.

[7:29]  ¹⁵ tn The participle βαπτισθέντες (baptisqente") has been translated as a causal adverbial participle.

[7:30]  ¹⁶ sn See the note on Pharisees in 5:17.

[7:30]  ¹⁷ tn That is, the experts in the interpretation of the Mosaic law (see also Luke 5:17, although the Greek term is not identical there, and Luke 10:25, where it is the same).

[7:30]  ¹⁸ tn Or “plan.”

[7:30]  ¹⁹ tn The participle βαπτισθέντες (baptisqente") has been translated as a causal adverbial participle; it could also be translated as means (“for themselves, by not having been baptized”). This is similar to the translation found in the NRSV.

[7:30]  ²⁰ tn Grk “by him”; the referent (John the Baptist) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[7:30]  ²¹ sn Luke 7:29-30 forms something of an aside by the author. To indicate this, they have been placed in parentheses.

[7:34]  ²² tn Grk “Behold a man.”

[7:34]  ²³ sn Neither were they happy with Jesus (the Son of Man), even though he was the opposite of John and associated freely with people like tax collectors and sinners. Either way, God’s messengers were subject to complaint.

[7:39]  ²⁴ tn The word “this” is not in the Greek text, but is implied. Direct objects were frequently omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[7:39]  ²⁵ tn This is a good example of a second class (contrary to fact) Greek conditional sentence. The Pharisee said, in effect, “If this man were a prophet (but he is not)…”

[7:39]  ²⁶ sn The Pharisees believed in a form of separationism that would have prevented them from any kind of association with such a sinful woman.

[15:1]  ²⁷ sn See the note on tax collectors in 3:12.

[15:1]  ²⁸ tn Grk “were drawing near.”

[15:2]  ²⁹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context.

[15:2]  ³⁰ sn See the note on Pharisees in 5:17.

[15:2]  ³¹ tn Or “and the scribes.” See the note on the phrase “experts in the law” in 5:21.

[15:2]  ³² tn Or “grumbling”; Grk “were complaining, saying.” The participle λέγοντες (legontes) is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[15:2]  ³³ tn Or “accepts,” “receives.” This is not the first time this issue has been raised: Luke 5:27-32; 7:37-50.

[18:11]  ³⁴ tn Or “stood by himself and prayed like this.” The prepositional phrase πρὸς ἑαυτόν (pros eauton, “to/about himself”) could go with either the aorist participle σταθείς (staqeis, “stood”) or with the imperfect verb προσηύχετο (proshuceto, “he prayed”). If taken with the participle, then the meaning would seem at first glance to be: “stood ‘by himself’,” or “stood ‘alone’.” Now it is true that πρός can mean “by” or “with” when used with intransitive verbs such as ἵστημι ({isthmi, “I stand”; cf. BDAG 874 s.v. πρός 2.a), but πρὸς ἑαυτόν together never means “by himself” or “alone” in biblical Greek. On the other hand, if πρὸς ἑαυτόν is taken with the verb, then two different nuances emerge, both of which highlight in different ways the principal point Jesus seems to be making about the arrogance of this religious leader: (1) “prayed to himself,” but not necessarily silently, or (2) “prayed about himself,” with the connotation that he prayed out loud, for all to hear. Since his prayer is really a review of his moral résumé, directed both at advertising his own righteousness and exposing the perversion of the tax collector, whom he actually mentions in his prayer, the latter option seems preferable. If this is the case, then the Pharisee’s mention of God is really nothing more than a formality.

[18:11]  ³⁵ sn The Pharisee’s prayer started out as a thanksgiving psalm to God, but the praise ended up not being about God.

[18:11]  ³⁶ tn Here the plural Greek term ἀνθρώπων (anqrwpwn) is used as a generic and can refer to both men and women (NASB, NRSV, “people”; NLT, “everyone else”; NAB, “the rest of humanity”).

[18:11]  ³⁷ tn Or “swindlers” (BDAG 134 s.v. ἅρπαξ 2); see also Isa 10:2; Josephus, J. W. 6.3.4 [6.203].

[18:11]  ³⁸ sn A general category for “sinners” (1 Cor 6:9; Lev 19:3).

[18:11]  ³⁹ sn Note what the Pharisee assumes about the righteousness of this tax collector by grouping him with extortionists, unrighteous people, and adulterers.

[19:7]  ⁴⁰ tn Grk “they”; the referent is unspecified but is probably the crowd in general, who would have no great love for a man like Zacchaeus who had enriched himself many times over at their expense.

[19:7]  ⁴¹ tn This term is used only twice in the NT, both times in Luke (here and 15:2) and has negative connotations both times (BDAG 227 s.v. διαγογγύζω). The participle λέγοντες (legonte") is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[19:7]  ⁴² sn Being the guest of a man who is a sinner was a common complaint about Jesus: Luke 5:31-32; 7:37-50; 15:1-2.

[21:28]  ⁴³ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[21:29]  ⁴⁴ tn Grk “And answering, he said.” This is somewhat redundant and has been simplified in the translation. Here the referent (“the boy”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:29]  ⁴⁵ tn The Greek text reads here μεταμέλομαι (metamelomai): “to change one’s mind about something, with the probable implication of regret” (L&N 31.59); cf. also BDAG 639 s.v. The idea in this context involves more than just a change of mind, for the son regrets his initial response. The same verb is used in v. 32.

[21:30]  ⁴⁶ tn “And he”; here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[21:30]  ⁴⁷ tn Grk “And answering, he said.” This is somewhat redundant and has been simplified in the translation. Here δέ (de) has not been translated. Here the referent (“this boy”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:31]  ⁴⁸ tc Verses 29-31 involve a rather complex and difficult textual problem. The variants cluster into three different groups: (1) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. The second son is called the one who does his father’s will. This reading is found in the Western mss (D it). But the reading is so hard as to be nearly impossible. One can only suspect some tampering with the text, extreme carelessness on the part of the scribe, or possibly a recognition of the importance of not shaming one’s parent in public. (Any of these reasons is not improbable with this texttype, and with codex D in particular.) The other two major variants are more difficult to assess. Essentially, the responses make sense (the son who does his father’s will is the one who changes his mind after saying “no”): (2) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. But here, the first son is called the one who does his father’s will (unlike the Western reading). This is the reading found in (א) C L W (Z) 0102 0281 ˹ 33 Ï and several versional witnesses. (3) The first son says “yes” but does not go, and the second son says “no” but later has a change of heart. This is the reading found in B Θ Ë¹³ 700 and several versional witnesses. Both of these latter two readings make good sense and have significantly better textual support than the first reading. The real question, then, is this: Is the first son or the second the obedient one? If one were to argue simply from the parabolic logic, the second son would be seen as the obedient one (hence, the third reading). The first son would represent the Pharisees (or Jews) who claim to obey God, but do not (cf. Matt 23:3). This accords well with the parable of the prodigal son (in which the oldest son represents the unbelieving Jews). Further, the chronological sequence of the second son being obedient fits well with the real scene: Gentiles and tax collectors and prostitutes were not, collectively, God’s chosen people, but they did repent and come to God, while the Jewish leaders claimed to be obedient to God but did nothing. At the same time, the external evidence is weaker for this reading (though stronger than the first reading), not as widespread, and certainly suspect because of how neatly it fits. One suspects scribal manipulation at this point. Thus the second reading looks to be superior to the other two on both external and transcriptional grounds. But what about intrinsic evidence? One can surmise that Jesus didn’t always give predictable responses. In this instance, he may well have painted a picture in which the Pharisees saw themselves as the first son, only to stun them with his application (v. 32).

[21:31]  ⁴⁹ tn Grk “Truly (ἀμήν, amhn), I say to you.”

[21:31]  ⁵⁰ sn See the note on tax collectors in 5:46.

[21:32]  ⁵¹ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[21:32]  ⁵² sn The word translated change your minds is the same verb used in v. 29 (there translated had a change of heart). Jesus is making an obvious comparison here, in which the religious leaders are viewed as the disobedient son.

[7:3]  ⁵³ tn Grk “except they wash the hands with a fist,” a ceremonial washing (though the actual method is uncertain).