Luke 4:1-13

This passage is found in the RCL, Lent 1, Year C (Most recently: March 9, 2025)

Summary:  I'd like to propose an understanding of this reading that I think is fairly Lutheran.  (Shocking, I know).  I was struck by the idea that Jesus is full of the Spirit.  What does this mean?  It means he is filled with the Word in order to combat the devil.  The Word and the Spirit go together; to be Spiritual means you know the Word well enough that it becomes part of you, so that you might draw on it in time of temptation.

Pastoral note:  I think this is what sanctification actually looks like, that the Word has become so a part of us that we can actually draw on it.  In my experience, when people go through challenging times, the immediate reaction of the Christian is not much different than a pagan.  However, the Christian, when she or he hears the promise, either in a verse or hymn, has something resonate in his or her soul that revives them.  The pagan does not. The Word, like daily bread, has a shelf life, but it also eventually converts itself into muscle that can be called on for great strength.

Key Words
πληρης ("filled", 4.1)  This adjective means filled.  This is straight forward; interestingly the only other time in Luke's Gospel this word occurs it refers to someone filled with leprosy.  Also interesting is that leprosy normally entailed banishment, which is what Jesus is suffering here in the wilderness.  Even without the leprosy connection, Luke and the synoptic Gospels make it clear: to be baptized means to be led by the Spirit which entails confronting evil.  Once again, we see how in Scripture the Spirit and Word work together.

αγω ("lead", 4.1, 9)  Intensifying this connection between the work of the Spirit into confronting evil:  The Spirit "leads" Jesus into the wilderness; later, the Devil "leads" Jesus to a high mountain

πειραζω ("tempt", 4.2)  but really:  "μενος" (this is not a word, but is the ending of a word.  Greek participles are complicated, but when you see this five letter suffix, you know you have an present, passive participle; 4.2.)  In this case, the verb for "tempt" is a present, passive participle. This means two things. First, that the temptation was on-going. Second, because "being tempted" is a present participle, this action occurred concurrently with the action of the main verb.  In this case the main or governing verb is "being led" by the Spirit.  (which is a passive and imperfect verb). So while he is continually being led by the Spirit, he is continually being tempted by the Devil. The two are on-going and concurrent actions. This may imply that the entire 40 days included temptation (similar to Mark 1:13).

Further, the word here for "test" (4.12) is essentially the same word as tempt (the word has a little preposition to intensify its meaning). Jesus here tells the Devil to stop tempting him basically -- do not put the Lord, ie, me, to the test!

παραδιδομι ("betray" or "give over", 4:6)  The word for "given over" is paradido-mi, which also means "handed over" as in "betrayed."  This suggests that perhaps the devil is not fully honest in his description that all things have been handed over to him.  If they have, it is through betrayal, where people thought they gained someone for themselves only to have the devil take it back.

καιρός and χρόνος  ("time", 4:13 and 4:5)  Greek has two standard words for time:  καιρός (kairos) and χρόνος (chronos).  Kairos has a more metaphorical meaning, as in "I had the time of my life"; chronos typically refers to a more linear sense of time.  (The devil showed him all the kingdoms of the world at the same time, 4:5).  Luke is letting us know that at the end of this story the devil is waiting for a time -- as the NRSV puts it, "a more opportune time" to tempt Jesus.  This is deeply haunting.  First, it suggests the devil isn't going away.  Second, it suggests that evil is watching, waiting for us to be weak.

Grammar:  Since you are the son of God!

ει ("if" or "since", 4:3) The Greek for "if" here (ει) does not necessary translate as "if." Normally, the decision to translate "ει" as "if" or "since" depends on the mood of the verb; if the corresponding verb is indicative, then one translates it as "since." In this sentence, the corresponding verb, "to be" is in the indicative. This means "if" could, if not should, read "Since you are the son of God..."

Another grammar tid-bit:
4:4 "Man does not live by bread alone." Interesting here is that the Greek takes this Hebrew imperfect (which connotes it as on-going or future) and puts it in the future: "Man will not live by bread alone." Making it a promise more than a given reality!

Chiasm for the day

I would like to make a soft argument that Luke employs a chiastic structure here

A.  Jesus is filled with the Holy Spirit

  B.  Forty Days are complete (συντελέω)

     C.  First temptation:  Devil speaks truth to Jesus in his temptation, uses "if" construction, Jesus responds with Bible quote

        D.  Second temptation:  Devil lies to Jesus in his temptation, Jesus responds with quote

     C'.  Third temptation:  Devil speaks truth to Jesus in his temptation, uses "if" construction, Jesus responds with Bible quote

  B'.  Temptations are complete (συντελέω)

A'.  Jesus is now in the power of the Holy Spirit (vs 14)

Chiasms reach a high point, have a transformational moment in the middle and then unwind.  In this story, the high point is literal and metaphorical.  Jesus is taken up to see all the kingdoms of the world.   Why might this second temptation be the main one?  Perhaps the second temptation is the temptation to avoid the cross altogether?  Perhaps what Luke wants to drive home is less about Jesus and more about the devil, he is the one that lies.  In so doing, Jesus shows that the story turns when Jesus -- perhaps for the first time in human history -- stands up to the devil and his lies.

Luke 4:21-30

This passage is found in the RCL, Epiphany, Year C.  (Most recently February 2, 2025)

Summary:  Here is my preaching nugget based on the Greek.  Luke 4 begins with Jesus led out into the wilderness, where he is tempted at a high point to have all the power in the world.  He overcomes this.  Luke 4 ends with Jesus again cast out, this time to another high point.  Here the crowd is tempted to hoard God's love for themselves.  And they fail.  I think there is something here to play off Jesus' overcoming temptation to love only himself and the crowd's utter failure.  The church, time and time again, has succumbed to this temptation to love only ourselves.

2025 comment:  This year, the new US presidential administration is waging war on DEI (diversity, education and inclusion) initiatives across the government, and frankly, society.  This story here is a reminder that even the best teachers are rarely ever able to help people accept that God's love is bigger than their tribe.  Talking about the benefits of diversity can have the opposite effect, and lead to a strong counter reaction, as it does in Luke 4.  Yet, there are times in the Bible when people "get it."  It is worth asking, what leads them through this transition?  It is not simply faith or time with Jesus -- this did not alone covert Peter and the first Jesus followers into "Christ is also gentiles" kind of people!  A post for another day...

χαριτος ("grace", from χαρις, 4:21)  The better translation here is "words of grace" rather than gracious words.  In fact, the literal translation is beautiful here:  "The words of grace walking out of his mouth."  What an image of Jesus: A bus station of grace!  It is also worth noting that the angriest people get with Jesus is when he preaches (or manifests) grace; it seems preaching God's abundant love may be more upsetting than preaching God's judgment.

δεκτος ("honor"/"welcome/"favor"", 4:24)  Jesus words here have become a famous adage, "A prophet is without honor in his hometown."  Translating δεκτος as honor covers up the connection to early in chapter 4, when Jesus proclaims the year of the Lord's favor (also δεκτος).  Jesus has defeated Satan to proclaim the year of the Lord's δεκτος.  The people here do not ascribe to him δεκτος.

εξεβαλον ("cast out", from εκβαλλω, 4:29).  This word interestingly parallels what happens to Jesus in his temptation, where he is cast out into the wilderness (admittedly, Luke does not use the word "cast out"; Mark does)  This word brings up a broader point that in Luke 4, there are two clashes:  Jesus and the devil and Jesus and the crowd.  I would say, and not in a sermon, that Jesus functions like an adversary in Luke 4, pushing the people, perhaps even instigating them.  I would say, and in a sermon, that the people fail, Jesus doesn't.  The word of grace will go on.

ωκοδομητο ("build upon" from οικοδομεω, 4:29) The town was built on a cliff.  This should already speak volumes.  But later on Jesus will exorcise demons off a cliff side.  Again, the crowd is literally trying to exorcise Jesus here.

διελθων ("pass through", 4:30)  Nothing profound here, but it is worth noting that Jesus could escape the crowds here.  Jesus choice to die was always his own choice.  (See also John 10:39)

Grammar "fun" - Transliteration of names

Names rarely stay the same in different languages.  Like Robert becomes Roberto in Spanish, adding the "o" for a masculine name and rolling "r."  Even in languages where the spelling is the same (say German and English can both have "Robert") the pronunciation is very different.  When alphabets are entirely different, the changes in names across languages can be pretty striking.  A dramatic example of this is where the same root name is Hebrew (Yahweh saves) comes into English as "Jesus" and "Joshua"!  

In this case, we have the two great prophets mentioned by Jesus.  (This is the only time in the New Testament that Elisha is mentioned.)  It is strange to see how their names move across Hebrew and Greek into English

Elijah:   in Hebrew is (transliterated):  el-ee-yahu.  In Greek this becomes ηλιου, in which the η is pronounced more like an "a" in "ate" and the ι is like a double "ee" sound.  So its almost like aleeo-oo

Elisha:  in Hebrew is (transliterated):  Eleesh(ay).  The last letter in Hebrew is ayin (ע), technically a guttural stop (open your mouth wide and cut your breath for split second), which is something we don't have in English (or other indo-European languages, really).  The Greek got at this with a whole bunch of vowels at the end:  Ελισαιος.  Even more bizarrely, the Septuagint and New Testament spelling of his name are different (there is not ending "s" in the Septuagint).

What to make of all this:  Not to much!  But just interesting.  I have also heard that some scholars will use the Septuagint transliterations of names as a clue to how the ancient Hebrews pronounced their vowels, as we have more knowledge about ancient Greek pronunciation than Hebrew pronunciation!

Grammar review: ουχι and question words
This word ουχι is used when a "yes" is expected.   In 4:22, the people are saying, "Isn't this Jesus..." Using ουχι to start the question means they are expecting a "yes."
My mneumonic is this:
μη (mh) gets a "no"
and ου/ουχι/ουχ get a "yes"
It is alphabetical order:  If the question starts with m, it will be an "n"o; if with "ou" then "y"es

Luke 4:14-21 and Isaiah 61

This passage is found in the RCL, Epiphany Season, Year C (Most recently: January 2025)  It is also found in the narrative lectionary year of Luke.

Summary:  I think I can make a "Home run" point here, but it will take a full count to get there...

Most times the New Testament quotes from the Greek version of the Old Testament.  On rare, rare occasions, the New Testament writers seem to be quoting from the Old Testament Hebrew in their own translations (Proverbs 10:12 vs 1 Peter 4:8 e.g.).  In Luke 4, Jesus seems neither to be translating directly from the Old Testament Hebrew, nor is he reading directly from the Greek.  He is intentionally adding to the Word of God.  This is a bold move.  He does so, I would argue, out of a Trinitarian conception of his mission, whereby the people will be brought into the mission of God.  (If you are saying to yourself, this is too much for a sermon, the basic point remains:  The Spirit of the Lord on Jesus is also the Spirit of the Lord on the church!)

Three little Greek appetizers before the main course:
φημη (pheme, meaning "fame," 4:14)   The word for "news" is "pheme" or perhaps better in English "fama." This is the root of our word fame. Jesus is famous!

δοξαζομενος (from δοξαζω, doxaz-oo, meaning "praise", 4:15)  The people "praise" Jesus.  This is the only instance of Jesus being praised in the Gospels.  The only other person praised in the Gospels is God.

δυναμις ("dynamis" meaning "power") and εδιδασεν (from διδασκω, meaning "teach", 4:15):  Luke tells us that Jesus began to teach; what I want to draw attention to is that the POWER of the Spirit is fueling Jesus' teaching ministry.  One cannot truly separate the teaching of the faith -- the ministry of the Word, from the Spirit.  This is good theology -- the Spirit enables the teaching and proclaiming of the Word.  (Lutheran theology heavily focuses on the proclamation of the Word.  Unfortunately, it often leaves it implicit rather than explicit that the Spirit drives proclamation.  But here Luke focuses on the POWER of the Spirit.   δυναμις (power) comes into English as dynamic or dynamite.  Is our teaching dynamic and dynamite?  A teaching ministry should be fueled by the Spirit and provide power for the rest of the ministry.

Digging into 4:18-19 vs Isaiah 61:1-2

What is common in both the Old Testament and what Jesus reads:

Where does Jesus power come from?  The Spirit!

- Jesus' words and the OT begin the same. The Spirit of the Lord (πνενμα κυριου) is upon me; he has anointed (εχρισεν, ie "Christed") me.  Quick Hebrew review:

• Ruach Adonai (רוח אדני) for Spirit of the Lord 
• Messiah (משך) for anoint.

Who is the ministry for:  The downtrodden!

- "captive."  The Greek word for this is "αιχμαλωτος" which means "spear." Literally, those who are speared. This word is only used once in the New Testament. In the Old Testament it is used quite often in conjunction with those who were forced into the Babylonian exile.  See note at the end

- "oppressed" (τεθραυσμενους, participle form of θραυω) is only used once in the NT and literally means "shattered." I wonder who in our congregations feels speared and shattered?  All of these blessings Jesus intends to bestow focus on the downtrodden.  Also, all of the blessings have an obvious material/physical aspect.

Now, let's get into the differences.

A quick comparison shows that Jesus is not reading right from the Septuagint or the Hebrew.  Here is a literal translation, in each case I have underlined what is different in each version, not due to any linguistically subtle changes.

Luke 4:18-19 (Greek)
a) The Spirit of the Lord is upon me
b)  because he has anointed me
c)  to bring good news to the poor.
d)  He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
e)  and recovery of sight to the blind
f)  to send the oppressed in freedom,
g)  to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."

Isaiah 61:1-2 (Hebrew)
a)  The spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me
b)  because the LORD has anointed me
c)  to bring good news to the oppressed/poor
??)  and bind up the brokenhearted
d) to proclaim release to the captives
f') to release to the prisoners/bound up (from darkness?)
g) to proclaim the year of the LORD's favor,

To summarize:  If Jesus were reading from the Hebrew, he has

• added in "recover of the sight of the blind"
• taken out binding up the brokenhearted
• changed "release the prisoners/bound up" to "sending the oppressed in freedom"
  

Isaiah 61:1-2 (LXX, Greek translation of Hebrew)
a) The spirit of the Lord is upon me,
b)  because the LORD has anointed me
c) to bring good news to the poor
??) he has sent me to heal the crushed in spirit/heart
d)  to proclaim release to the captives,
e)  and recovery of sight to the blind
g) to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor

To summarize, if Jesus is reading from the Septuagint, he has

• added in "sending the oppressed in freedom"
  
• taken out "binding up the brokenhearted"
• changed the order

This presents an obvious textual problem -- what is Jesus actually reading?  I am not sure we can ever answer this question, so I am going to make a few assumptions:  Jesus, Luke and many early Christians would have been aware that Jesus is changing the Scripture.  Given Jesus love for the written Word, this cannot be taken lightly.  Why then?  Let's ponder the changes:

A) In the OT Hebrew, Isaiah never talks about sight to the blind. Jesus does (the Septuagint does also).

B) Isaiah (in both the Hebrew and LXX) plays on the idea of binding -- the broken-hearted are bound; those bound are released. Jesus alters this image.  Jesus focuses on "freeing the captives" and "letting the oppressed go free." Jesus, thus, seems to by-pass the image of repairing/releasing the broken-hearted, instead choosing to include the idea of sending the oppressed.  This actually comes from Isaiah 58:6 where the prophet says, "To send the oppressed in freedom."

C) Jesus inserts the concept that he is sent to send others.  The word send in fact, appears twice, "He sent me...to send."  The phrase "to let the oppressed go free" literally reads, "to send those shattered, in forgiveness; to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor." The translators are combining the phrase "send in forgiveness" into a single verb "free."  This makes sense in that to free someone is to send them in release.  But I think this misses something going on in the Greek.  The Father has sent the Son, who through the Spirit is sending others.  In fact, depending on how one links the infinitives, one could argue that those who are sent out are those sent to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.  Regardless of these grammar dynamics, the overarching theme of Luke's Gospel is that Jesus has come to send those who are oppressed, in forgiveness, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor. 

Again, this whole grammar translation may seem to technical for a sermon.  But it fits more broadly into the case Luke makes in Luke-Acts, that the work of the Spirit is to bring us into the triune Mission of God.  It also changes the way that we can and should understand the work of the Messiah.  He is the commissioner in chief, not the one who himself will do all the work.  (If we press to far here we get in lots of problems thinking that we are big Christs instead of little Christs.)  But the BIG Christ has sent us, as little Christs, out into the world.

D) Jesus drops the line immediately following this passage in Isaiah (...a year of the Lord's favor and day of vengeance). Here the LXX does not use such striking language, but in any case, Jesus avoids this idea all together.

What do we make of all of this?  Jesus is Lord of Scripture.  The Spirit is inspiring him.  The fulfillment of the old means something new!  Let me know what you think!

 ***

More on captives:  αιχμαλωτος typically refers to those in Exile (mostly it appears in Isaiah and Exile).  However, the Hebrew word 'underneath' αιχμαλωτος refers to both those in exile and those in other places who were captured in battle.  Regardless of whether one wants to focus on the exile or more broadly any time of military produced captivity, the word prisoners would likely have a modern connotation (someone who has gone through a criminal justice system) that would not be a helpful translation at this point. ...Unless someone wanted to make a point about the criminal justice system!