variant that has eudokia (a nominative) instead of eudokias (a genitive). The genitive has stronger textual support among the more reliable manuscripts.
61. Priene Inscription (OGIS 458), cited in Evans 2005: 313. See also Porter 2000: 533.
62. See p. 66, n. 12.
63. The Greek participle kechrēmatismenon (2:26) carries a sense of command. Simeon is ordered by the Holy Spirit to recognize Jesus as the embodiment of God’s salvation. His role is to recognize and bear witness to Jesus. See Soards 1990: 403.
64. See García-Serrano 2014: 468–69 and Thurston 2001: 49–50.
65. If there is symbolism in the number 84, García-Serrano (2014: 470) notes that Anna “lived a perfect married life (seven years) and an even more perfect widowhood (seven times twelve years).”
66. Thurston 2001: 50–52.
67. Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 1.7 (Apollonius of Tyana); Plutarch Alex. 4.4—5.5 (Alexander); Diogenes Laertius 10.14 (Epicurus); Herodotus Hist. 1.114–16 (Cyrus). Billings (2009: 70–89) thinks that Luke’s inclusion of the childhood story of Jesus anticipates the presentation of the adult Jesus as superior to Augustus.
68. In Deut 16:16 these feasts are referred to as Unleavened Bread, Weeks, and Booths, respectively. Passover was immediately followed by the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which lasted a week (Lev 23:5–6; Deut 16:1–4). By the time of Jesus, the names of these two feasts were used interchangeably. See Ferguson 2003: 557–59.
69. Hannah went up to Jerusalem “year by year” with her husband Elkanah (1 Sam 1:3, 7, 21; 2:19), although the text does not specific which feast.
70. Keener 2014: 186.
71. According to the School of Hallel, younger children were permitted to attend the three pilgrimage feasts as long as they could hold their father’s hand and walk from Jerusalem up to the Temple Mount (m. Ḥag. 1:1).
72. See also Pss. Sol. 17:37; 1 En. 49:1–4.
73. The language implies a sense of betrayal. Cf. Gen 12:18; 29:25; Exod 14:11; Num 23:11; Judg 15:11.
74. ESV, NASB, NIV, NRSV.
75. Or “my Father’s business” (NKJV).
76. 4:43; 9:22; 13:33; 17:25; 19:5; 21:9; 22:37; 24:7, 44.
77. Both senses are found in Luke. Worrying will not extend one’s age or lifespan (12:25) and Zacchaeus is short in stature (19:3).
Luke 3
Baptism of John (3:1–20)
The narrative is fast-forwarded by several decades as John, the prophet of the Most High, reenters the narrative stage. Among the prophetic books of the OT, God’s prophets are often introduced by a formulaic statement, “the word of the lord came to [Prophet A] during the reign of [King B].”78 Identifying the sitting monarch allows the reader to situate the proclamation of the prophet within the history of Israel and the people’s spiritual condition in that period. Luke reflects this convention in 3:1–2 by listing seven names that belong to the powers that be. Collectively these figures of authority contribute to the tension-filled picture of the religio-political landscape in the Jewish milieu of John and Jesus.
Tiberius succeeded Augustus as Roman emperor in 14 CE, so the fifteenth year of his reign would be 29 CE when John began his baptizing activities.79 After the death of Herod the Great in 4 BCE, his territory was divided between his sons. Both Herod Antipas and his half-brother Herod Philip II were minor princes carrying the title of tetrarch. Antipas ruled over Galilee until 39 CE and Philip over Trachonitis and Iturea until 34 CE. One of Antipas’s claims to infamy was his beheading of John (3:19; cf. Josephus Ant. 18:116–19).80 Lysanius controlled Abilene. Herod Archelaus, another son of Herod the Great, was ethnarch of Judea for ten years until he was deposed in 6 CE. After that Rome sent procurators to oversee the region, among whom was Pontius Pilate, who became governor or prefect of Judea in 26 CE. In extrabiblical Jewish and Roman writings of the time, Pilate was described as greedy, unjust, hot-tempered, and oblivious to Jewish sensitivities. He was finally recalled to Rome in 36 CE.81 On the religious front, Luke’s mention of “the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (3:2; cf. Acts 4:6) requires some clarification, for at any given time there could only be one high priest. Caiaphas held this office from 18 to 37 CE, but his father-in-law, Annas, who was high priest from 6 to 15 CE, continued to exert tremendous influence after leaving office.
Together these seven names represent the political, religious, social, and economic setting in which the remainder of the narrative is situated. Palestine was an insignificant outpost at the far reaches of the Roman Empire. Those invested with political and religious responsibilities were marked by cruelty and incompetence on the one hand, and manipulation and self-interest on the other. The temple leadership and pro-Roman Jewish vassal kings colluded with the Romans to maintain a delicate symbiotic relationship of mutual benefit. In spite of the piety exhibited by Zechariah, Elizabeth, Mary, Joseph, Simeon, and Anna in the first two chapters, we must not be naïve about the negotiations and compromises behind the scenes. The families of Annas and Caiaphas must have exhibited a high level of political prowess to stay in power for three decades, holding the Romans at bay while solidifying their dynastic base among the Jews. The power struggle at the top resulted in oppression of those at the bottom. Such was the world of suffering and tension that John encountered as he emerged from his years of seclusion to begin proclaiming “a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” in the region near the Jordan (1:80; 3:3).
Luke identifies the voice crying in the wilderness in Isaiah with John who “[prepares] the way of the lord” (3:4; Isa 40:3). In the context of Isaiah, “the lord” refers to YHWH, for Israel is expecting God to return to Zion. Luke transfers the reference onto Jesus, as John is the forerunner of the Messiah. Whereas the Isaianic quotation ends with 40:3 in Mark 1:3 and Matt 3:3, Luke includes two more verses, culminating in the declaration that “all flesh shall see the salvation of God” (3:5–6; Isa 40:4–5). This extended citation brings out Luke’s universalism and echoes Simeon’s prayer that God’s salvation is for Israel and the nations (2:31–32; cf. Acts 1:8).
The substance of John’s proclamation implies that Israel is far from ready to receive the Messiah. This prophet must issue an urgent call to repentance like his
