God” (3:38). Second, the parenthetical note at the beginning of the list, that Jesus was “the son (as was thought) of Joseph” (3:23), makes a distinction between the reader’s knowledge of Jesus’ divine conception and the ignorance of many in the narrative (4:22). It is as though the author was winking at his readers, saying, “That’s what people think, but you know who Jesus’ real Father is!” Third, on the human level, in spite of the many unrecognizable names in Luke’s genealogy, the naming of Abraham and David supports both Jesus’ Jewish identity and his royal pedigree (3:31, 34). Finally, by taking the names beyond Abraham all the way back to Adam (3:38), Luke situates Jesus in the family of Israel within all humanity. This speaks to Luke’s universalism, that Jesus is Messiah of Israel and Savior of the world.
78. Jer 1:1–3; Ezek 1:1–3; Mic 1:1; Hag 1:1; Zech 1:1.
79. Tiberius co-ruled with Augustus starting 11/12 CE, so John could have begun his ministry as early as 26/27 CE (Garland 2011: 151). On Tiberius, see Grant 1975: 83–107.
80. Jesus calls Herod Antipas a fox (13:32). Antipas disrespected Jewish sensitivities, built the city of Tiberius on a graveyard (Josephus Ant. 18.36–38), and installed pagan images in public places (Josephus Life 65–66).
81. On Pilate, see Philo Embassy 299–305; Josephus Ant. 18.35, 55–62, 85–89; Tacitus Ann. 15.44.
82. Cf. Isa 31:6; Jer 15:19; Ezek 14:6; 18:30.
83. See Job 20:16; Isa 14:29; 59:5.
84. Keener 2005: 6–7.
85. See Zeph 1:14–15; 2:1–2; Mal 3:2–3.
86. Cf. Ps 1:1–3; Jer 17:7–8; Luke 6:43–44.
87. The image of a tree being cut down denotes divine judgment. See Isa 10:33–34; Ezek 31:10–12; Dan 4:14.
88. E.g., Isa 58:7; Ezek 18:7; Tob 1:17. Cf. Acts 4:34–35.
89. Corbin-Reuschling 2009: 71–72.
90. Tax collectors are often mentioned together with sinners (5:27–30; 7:29, 34; 15:1; 18:10–14; 19:1–10). Next to murderers and thieves, tax collectors represent the class that all Jews, even those of low status, would write off as disgraceful, unclean, and irredeemable. See Edwards 2015: 111–12.
91. Guesses include Jewish soldiers tasked to protect tax collectors or Herod Antipas (Nolland 1989: 150; Marshall 1978: 143), or non-Jewish troops from Syria working for the Romans (Keener 2014: 188).
92. See p. 21, n. 20.
93. Deut 18:18–19 (a prophet like Moses); Mal 3:1–3; 4:5–6 (an eschatological Elijah). See Collins 2010: 128–31.
94. See p. 22.
95. Isa 32:15; 44:3; Ezek 36:27; 37:14; Joel 2:28–29.
96. Isa 1:25; Zech 13:9; Mal 3:2–3.
97. Klassen-Wiebe (1994: 398) distinguishes between John’s traditional understanding of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and fire as an event at the end of time (Isa 4:4), and Luke’s interpretation that this eschatological event has been fulfilled when the Spirit is given at Pentecost (Acts 2:1–4).
98. Dunn 1972: 86.
99. Prov 20:8, 26; Isa 41:16; Jer 15:7; 51:2.
100. Webb (1991: 103–11) argues that the Greek noun ptuon refers to a winnowing shovel and not a winnowing fork (thrinax). The specific farming action in 3:17 is not winnowing (the separating of the grain from the chaff) but the clearing of the threshing floor afterwards. Even though the end result is the same, that the wheat will still go into the barn (salvation) and the chaff will be burned (destruction), this shift from a winnowing fork to a winnowing shovel makes Jesus the sweeper of the threshing floor and John the winnower of the grains. In my opinion, Webb is splitting hairs. Both the ministries of John and Jesus serve to separate the penitent from the impenitent. It is not necessary to insist that one holds the fork and the other the shovel.
101. Josephus claims that Herod imprisoned John to preempt a political unrest among John’s followers (Ant. 18.118).
102. Matt 3:13–15 implies that Jesus goes to John for baptism “to fulfill all righteousness,” as an act of solidarity with the penitent among Israel.
103. Ezek 1:1; Acts 7:56; 10:11.
104. The format of the Matthean genealogy, which starts from the ancestor going down the generations, is more common. Cf. Gen 5:1–32; 11:10–26; 1 Chr 1:1–42.
105. These names appear in both genealogies between Abraham and David: Isaac, Jacob, Perez, Hezron, Arni/Aram, Amminadab, Narshon, Sala/Salmon, Boaz, Obed, and Jesse.
106. Brown 1993: 84–94.
Luke 4
Testing of Jesus (4:1–13)
We are accustomed to viewing Jesus’ encounters with the devil as temptations. It is as appropriate to consider them as tests. Whereas Luke presents three incidents in which Jesus is tempted by the devil, the broader interpretive canvas is the preparation of the Messiah (3:21—4:13). By placing the accounts of Jesus’ baptism, genealogy, and testing one after the other, Luke attends to the identity, legitimacy, empowerment, and training of the Son of God before his public ministry begins in earnest. The Greek verb peirazō can mean “to test” or “to tempt,” leaving room for competing perspectives. Accordingly, the noun peirasmos can be translated as “test,” “trial,” or “temptation.” God puts his Son’s fidelity and obedience to the test by allowing the devil to present these tests as temptations.
In
