¹ sn The necessity that the Son of Man suffer is the particular point that needed emphasis, since for many 1st century Jews the Messiah was a glorious and powerful figure, not a suffering one.

⁴ sn The description of the Son of Man being rejected…killed, and…raised is the first of six passion summaries in Luke: son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">9:44; 17:25; 18:31-33; 24:7; 24:46-47.

¹ sn How one responds now to Jesus and his teaching is a reflection of how Jesus, as the Son of Man who judges, will respond then in the final judgment.

² sn This divine endorsement is like Luke 3:22 at Jesus’ baptism. One difference here is the mention of the Chosen One, a reference to the unique and beloved role of the regal, messianic Son.

² sn Jesus’ reply is simply this: Does the man understand the rejection he will be facing? Jesus has no home in the world (the Son of Man has no place to lay his head).

¹ sn This verse has been noted for its conceptual similarity to teaching in John’s Gospel (son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">10:15; 17:2). The authority of the Son and the Father are totally intertwined.

² sn Jesus commends the reply (you have answered correctly). What is assumed here, given the previous context, is that he will respond to Jesus’ message, as to love God is to respond to his Son; see v. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">22.

¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the result of the son’s decision to return home. Greek style often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” but English style generally does not.

⁴ tn Grk “he fell on his neck,” an idiom for showing special affection for someone by throwing one’s arms around them. The picture is of the father hanging on the son’s neck in welcome.

² sn This is another graphic description. The younger son’s consumption had been like a glutton. He had both figuratively and literally devoured the assets which were given to him.

³ sn Do not go out or chase after them. There will be no need to search for the Son of Man at his coming, though many will falsely claim its arrival.

¹ tn Grk “David thus calls him ‘Lord.’ So how is he his son?” The conditional nuance, implicit in Greek, has been made explicit in the translation (cf. Matt 22:45).

⁶ sn That he obtained with the blood of his own Son. This is one of only two explicit statements in Luke-Acts highlighting the substitutionary nature of Christ’s death (the other is in Luke 22:19).

¹ sn Appointed the Son-of-God-in-power. Most translations render the Greek participle ὁρισθέντος (Jorisqentos, from ὁρίζω, Jorizw) “declared” or “designated” in order to avoid the possible interpretation that Jesus was appointed the Son of God by the resurrection. However, the Greek term ὁρίζω is used eight times in the NT, and it always has the meaning “to determine, appoint.” Paul is not saying that Jesus was appointed the “Son of God by the resurrection” but “Son-of-God-in-power by the resurrection,” as indicated by the hyphenation. He was born in weakness in human flesh (with respect to the flesh, v. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">3) and he was raised with power. This is similar to Matt 28:18 where Jesus told his disciples after the resurrection, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.”

² sn God’s grace can be poured out on believers only because of what Christ has done for them. Hence, he bestows his grace on us because we are in his dearly loved Son.

¹ tn The Greek puts an emphasis on the quality of God’s final revelation. As such, it is more than an indefinite notion (“a son”) though less than a definite one (“the son”), for this final revelation is not just through any son of God, nor is the emphasis specifically on the person himself. Rather, the focus here is on the nature of the vehicle of God’s revelation: He is no mere spokesman (or prophet) for God, nor is he merely a heavenly messenger (or angel); instead, this final revelation comes through one who is intimately acquainted with the heavenly Father in a way that only a family member could be. There is, however, no exact equivalent in English (“in son” is hardly good English style).

¹ sn The Greek correlative conjunctions μέν and δέ (men and de) emphasize the contrastive parallelism of vs. 7 (what God says about the angels) over against vv. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">8-9 and vv. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">10-12 (what God says about the son).

³ tn Or possibly, “Your throne is God forever and ever.” This translation is quite doubtful, however, since (1) in the context the Son is being contrasted to the angels and is presented as far better than they. The imagery of God being the Son’s throne would seem to be of God being his authority. If so, in what sense could this not be said of the angels? In what sense is the Son thus contrasted with the angels? (2) The μέν…δέ (men…de) construction that connects v. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">7 with v. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">8 clearly lays out this contrast: “On the one hand, he says of the angels…on the other hand, he says of the Son.” Thus, although it is grammatically possible that θεός (qeos) in v. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">8 should be taken as a predicate nominative, the context and the correlative conjunctions are decidedly against it. Hebrews 1:8 is thus a strong affirmation of the deity of Christ.

¹ sn The parallel phrases to which of the angels in vv. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">5 and 13 show the unity of this series of quotations (vv. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">5-14) in revealing the superiority of the Son over angels (v. son%27s&tab=notes" ver="">4).

¹ tn This ὅτι (Joti) almost certainly introduces a causal clause, giving the reason why the “testimony of God” is greater than the “testimony of men”: “because this is God’s testimony that he has testified concerning his Son.”