Luke 13.10-17 A Woman Is Healed by Jesus RCL Proper 16C

Image generated by Microsoft Copilot

Luke 13.10-17 is the story of Jesus healing a disabled woman. It's the text for RCL Proper 16C.

I've attached a document with a number of versions in parallel along with my translation that tries to pay close attention to the nuances in the text, especially for oral presentation. I have notes for each verse that draw attention to details that I think are significant. 

If you don't have time to read all the notes, below is my translation and how I display a text so that I can memorize it. Two main things to note.

• Note that the "look here!" (ιδου in the Greek) is an oral feature that aids both the storyteller and the hearer. In this passage, it also provides a frame for the story with the reference to 18 years. (Cf. the orange highlighting.) Almost every English version omits it.
•  When Jesus speaks to the woman, a somewhat odd word choice (ἀπολέλυσαι) is used to "release" her from her disability. What's important to see, though, is that the root (λύω) is the key to Jesus argument about "unleashing" (λύω) an ox or a donkey in verse 15 and why he asserts it is right to "unleash" her from her disability. I use release / unleash to make the verbal connection. I don't know of any English version that preserves that link in verses 12, 15, and 16 

HERE is the document that compares a variety of versions and has my notes. (I'm using this i my Greek class, so ignore the assigned work!) 

The Eclipse (?) at Jesus’ Crucifixion

With the 8 April 2024 eclipse in view, I am happy to extract and summarize a portion of my dissertation, Psalm 22 (LXX 21) and the Crucifixion of Jesus.

According to Matthew and Mark, the sky darkened for three hours when Jesus was crucified. Luke reports the darkness, but he specifically states, using the correct astronomical term, that it was due to an eclipse. Luke 23.45 states: τοῦ ἡλίου ἐκλιπόντος = tou hēliou eklipontos = while the sun eclipsed.

Luke’s reference to the eclipse was not a natural nor a fortuitous addition to the Passion narrative. Jewish^[1] and pagan opponents of Christianity recognized that the phrase τοῦ ἡλίου ἐκλιπόντος introduces an absurd and difficult problem.  Origen summarizes their argument:

Eclipses always take place at a fixed time when sun and moon come together, when the moon running under intercepts the rays of the sun, and by its intervention cuts off its light. But in the time when Christ suffered it is clear that the sun and the moon did not meet together, since it was the time of the Passover, which is regularly held when the moon is at the full and shines all the night. How then could there be an eclipse of the sun when the moon was full and had the fullness of the sun?^[2]

Not only is the conjunction of sun and moon impossible at this time, there also is the difficulty that Luke has just stated that the darkness lasted for three hours, but an eclipse is only a momentary occurrence. Julius Africanus appears to have been the first to respond to this difficulty. He acknowledges that a true eclipse is impossible, but says, “Let the cosmic portent be supposed to be an eclipse of the sun from the illusion of the sight.”^[3] Origen in his commentary on Matthew, §134, takes greater pains to resolve the problem. He observes that some believers claimed that this impossibility was a necessity for it to be truly recognized as a miracle associated with Jesus’ crucifixion. Origen realizes, however, that such a wonder ought to be recorded in some history but is not. His solution is to suggest that this phrase should be rejected altogether as an unwise substitution by a scribe or, more likely in his opinion, as a malicious alteration by an enemy seeking to discredit the Gospel. He prefers instead the reading he finds in the majority of copies: καὶ ἐσκοτίσθη ὁ ἥλιος.^[4]

Origen’s student, Dionysius of Alexandria, also realized that an eclipse was impossible, but for him, this only goes to show how miraculous and unique the event was.^[5]  Tertullian hedges on the issue.^[6]  Chrysostom, however, emphasizes that it was not an eclipse——lest anyone think that it was simply some naturally occurring event——but learns from this incident that it was a sign of God’s wrath at the Jews.^[7]

Why has Luke inserted this problematic detail right at the point where he omits the cry of dereliction from Psalm 22 (LXX 21).2 from Mark 15.34?

ελωι ελωι λεμα σαβαχθανι; ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον· ὁ θεός μου ὁ θεός μου, εἰς τί ἐγκατέλιπές με; = elōi elōi lema sabachthani? ho estin methermēneuomenon; ho theos mou ho theos mou, eis ti egkatelipes me?

I explain in detail in my dissertation, but the short version of it is that Luke reads Mark’s ελωι (or Matthew ηλι) and from it gets to ηλιος. I.e., ελωι > ηλιο-ς (or ηλι > ηλι-ος). There is further evidence that Luke was not the first to connect the Hebrew word for God in the psalm (אֵלִי = ʾēlı̂; Matthew’s Ἠλὶ = ēli) with the Greek word for the sun (ἥλιος = ēlios) which coheres with the numerous pagan solar deities.

Next, rather than Mark’s ἐγκατέλιπές = egkatelipes = “you abandoned,” Luke extracts the shared root from ἐγκατέλιπές (ἐγκατα-λείπω) and gets to ἐκλιπόντος (ἐκ-λείπω).

My conclusion: It was more reasonable for Luke to report the astronomical impossibilty that the sun eclipsed (τοῦ ἡλίου ἐκλιπόντος) than to think that God abandoned the Son (ὁ θεός μου ὁ θεός μου, εἰς τί ἐγκατέλιπές με).

 

---

^[1]  Cf. Acts of Pilate 11.2 where the Jews respond to Pilate’s question about what had happened by saying that it was an ordinary eclipse.  Pilate responds incredulously by noting what time of the lunar month it was.

^[2]  Origen, Commentary on Matthew §134, transl. by Harold Smith in Ante-Nicene Exegesis of the Gospels, 68-69.

^[3] Fragment 1 (= Chronikon 5.50) in Routh (ed. 2.297), transl. by Smith, ibid. 67-68. Julius Africanus wrote ca. 221 CE.

^[4] This reading is also preserved in the Old Latin and Vulgate (obscuratus est sol) and the Peshitta (ושמשא חשך). Cf. the critical apparatus to Luke 23:45 I provide on Table 3. Also cf. the Gospel of Nicodemus (Acts of Pilate) 11.1 which states: “And it was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the land until the ninth hour, for the sun was darkened. (... Sole autem obscurante ecce.) Cf. R. M. Grández, “Las tinieblas en la muerte de Jesús. Historia de la exégesis de Lc 23,44-45a (Mt 27,45; Mc 15,33),” EstBib 47 (1989), 177-223.

^[5] Cited in Smith, ibid., 73-73.

^[6] Cf. his Apology 11: At the time of Jesus’ death, “in the same hour the light of day was withdrawn, when the sun at the very time was in his meridian blaze.  [The allusion is to Amos 8:9.]  Those who were not aware that this had been predicted about Christ, no doubt thought it an eclipse.”

^[7] Homily 88: “... That darkness was a token of [God’s] anger at their [the Jews] crime.  For that it was not an eclipse, but both wrath and indignation, is not hence alone manifest, but also by the time, for it continued three hours, but an eclipse takes place in one moment of time...”

Luke 24.13-35

Caravaggio (Wikipedia CC: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/1602-3_Caravaggio%2CSupper_at_Emmaus_National_Gallery%2C_London.jpg)

Luke 24.13-35 Jesus and the Travelers to Emmaus: 

This is the appointed text for the coming Sunday, 23 April 2023. I've composed an introduction to the passage and also am sharing my translation of the text. The translation stays close to the Greek text, but it is intended to be 'performed' and heard. A few things to keep in mind:

1. Cleopas is named, but who was the other person? It could well have been his wife.
2. Why didn't the two recognize Jesus? The text says that their eyes were 'held back' from recognizing him. Similarly, after Jesus breaks the bread, their eyes were opened to recognize him. I.e., in/sight are withheld or given by God. It is not simply a matter of a person having the right understanding.
3. While Luke in general has a higher literary standard than the other gospels, this Emmaus story 'sounds' more like an oral telling. (E.g., there is a much higher use of και / "and" as compared to δε than is usual for Luke.) This is a fun story to tell, and the biblical storyteller should be able to lean into it with a range of expression.
4. Luke twice uses a 'biblisch' type of Greek that imitates the Hebrew > Greek style of the Septuagint. In the KJV, it gets rendered with "And it came to pass..." (verses 15 and 30) Most modern English versions think that sounds old-fashioned, so it usually gets translated as "When..." That totally misses Luke's intent of wanting the story to sound scriptural. In my translation, I use, "And so it happened..." Not as 'biblisch' as the KJV, but it does reflect the Greek well.
5. When I translate the gospel of Mark, I find that the 'casualness' of the Greek reflecting its oral background leaves room for a lot of differences between English translations. Even in this Lukan story in which I hear oral echoes, Luke's better grammar does make for more consistency between my translation and other ones.
6. I think it is a disservice to have a gospel reading without providing some context. I also think it is unhelpful to have an introduction that tells you what the reading is 'about.' (After all, if you tell me what it's about, why should I bother to listen to the reading?) You can see how I try only to set the stage for the reading.

I hope this helps. Anything you find striking in my translation? Let's have a discussion here!

Download the file here: https://ltsg-my.sharepoint.com/:w:/g/personal/mhoffman_uls_edu/EX7YAFtSGalIiidiD8sX7pcBYiMjqCoAEvndtK2nvvg3dQ?e=ewCenn

Luke 18.9-14 Translations and notes (Judge and Widow: Lectionary 30, 20th Sunday after Pentecost, Year C)

The Revised Common Lectionary gospel text for Lectionary 30 (on 23 October 2022) is Luke 18.9-14, the parable told be Jesus commonly known as "The Pharisee and the Tax Collector." There are some interesting word choices that need to be made (just- or right- cognates? exalt / lift up / promote <> humble / bring down?), so you may want to check my translation and notes. 

We have had all these parables lately in the lectionary, and one resource I recommend is Robert Farrar Capon's Kingdom, Grace, Judgment: Paradox, Outrage, and Vindication in the Parables of Jesus. (Affiliate link) I really think he has the right idea about how the parables work. You may not always agree with him, but he's always provocative in a way that I have found him to be a good conversation partner with this parables. For this Pharisee and tax collector parable, check out this short reflection. (It's from a 1983 interview on the Chicago Sunday Evening Club and 30 Good Minutes. The original transcript is no longer on the web, but the link is to where someone preserved it.) He gets right to the heart of why it should not be easy to preach this parable. Are you just hoping for the tax collector coming back and being able to humble-brag pray like the Pharisee? "The answer is we fear salvation that is so cheap that it saves everyone in his or her death." And to see just how hard it is for people to hear this, check out the interview that followed Capon's presentation HERE. The interviewer just can't get his head around it despite Capon's insistence the parable is about death and resurrection, not about being a better person.

• Luke 18.9-14 mgvh notes and translation

 One other resource to note if you are not familiar with it is the GoTell website. Lots of excellent stuff. Check under the Stories header to find comments on specific texts. Here is the page for Luke 18.9-14.

Luke 18.1-8 Translations and notes (Judge and Widow: Lectionary 29, 19th Sunday after Pentecost, Year C)

https://www.progressiveinvolvement.com/.a/6a00d8341c3e3953ef0240a4ba489d200d-320wi

The Revised Common Lectionary gospel text for Lectionary 29 (on 16 October 2022) is Luke 18.1-8. It seems to be a simple enough parable that Luke explains for the reader in verse 1: Always pray and don't get discouraged. That's good advice, but there is lots more going on in the parable than that. 

When I go over this parable in my classes, I don't have people look at the text, and I start and just read the parable in verses 2-5. When you do so, the judge is clearly the focus. I then include verses 6-7 which also reinforce that interest in the judge, but the logic here is from lesser to greater, a typical pattern: If a bad judge can do good, how much more so a good God. Okay, that works, but it is an odd way to think about God's actions as simply being better than a bad example.

But now when I include verse 1, the focus switches to the widow. The word typically used to describe the widow is "persistent," and that is reflected in her actions of keeping on coming and keeping on pestering the judge. (The verbs are present tense with the sense of a repeated or ongoing action.) Okay, that's fine, but I think the key is not just about persistence but also about not getting discouraged.

Then, I add verse 8 to the reading. Suddenly we have introduced the Child of Humanity and the issue of faith. Further, reference is made to the Child of Humanity "when he comes." Here we should note that the verb used twice to describe the widow is the same "coming" verb. What if... the God / Jesus figure in the parable is the widow and not the judge? In that case, this parable functions similarly to the Luke 15 parables where the shepherd persists in finding the lost sheep, the woman persists in searching for her lost coin, the father persists in trying to bring home both his sons. And if we are to think about ourselves in this parable, I suspect we are closer to the judge by not regarding God properly and thinking about ourselves more than others. 

While it's good advice to always pray and not get discouraged, this parable is also one of grace. Does it matter whether the judge ends up doing right even for the wrong reason? The parable points to a persistent God who will not stop until the unjust do the just thing. In the end, that's what really matters.

If you want to study further, here is my collection of translations and notes. I also include my own translation. If you go to the end you will see how I have highlighted themes in the parable. The parable also has a nice oral quality to it that I try to capture in my translation.

• Luke 18.1-8 mgvh notes
  

Luke 17.11-19 Translations and notes (Ten "Lepers": Lectionary 28, 18th Sunday after Pentecost, Year C)

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/pittsdia/1712BiblA/00002521.jpg

The Revised Common Lectionary gospel text for Lectionary 28 (on 9 October 2022) is Luke 17.11-19, the well-known story of the ten "lepers." (Persons with a leprous skin disease would be a better description. The NRSVue uses "defiling skin disease.") There is lots of odd stuff going on in the story:

• Where is "the midst of Samaria and Galilee"?
• Jesus only indirectly heals by simply telling them to go
• 1 out of 10
• One is a Samaritan

 With this in mind, I think it is more helpful to read this story as a parable instead of a healing miracle. I did a rhyming sermon once upon a time when this text was the regular text for Thanksgiving services. You'll see that I take it in the direction of a parabolic reading that makes it more than a simply scolding about remembering to say "Thank you." HERE is the sermon. You are welcome to use / adapt it for a non-Thanksgiving context. (I would appreciate a reference to my CrossMarks.com site if you do.)

I also have accumulated a variety of translations and added notes and my own translation you can consult. As one gets used to an author's style, this one is typical Luke in some ways, but it also strikes me that one can still hear echoes of how this story was orally presented and not literarily improved.

• Luke 17.11-19 mgvh notes
  

Luke 16.19-31 Translations and notes (Rich Man and Lazarus: Lectionary 26, 16th Sunday after Pentecost, Year C)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_man_and_Lazarus#/media/File:Gustave_Dore_Lazarus_and_the_Rich_Man.jpg

The Revised Common Lectionary gospel text for Lectionary 26 (on 25 September 2022) is Luke 16.19-31, the well-known parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Lots going on in the parable, and even in Luke's improved Greek style, it 'sounds' like an orally told story.  Here is a collection of translations with my notes and my own translation: Luke 16.19-31 mgvh notes 

For a couple examples of historic takes on this parable:

• Frederick Douglass
• Martin Luther King

 And check out this Virtual Museum of artistic interpretations of the parable. 

Luke 15.1-10 Translations and Notes (Lectionary 24, 14th Sunday after Pentecost, Year C)

Good Shepherd; Corinth, 4th CE; Christian Byzantine Museum (Athens) mgvh

The Revised Common Lectionary gospel text for Lectionary 24 (on 11 September 2022) is Luke 15.1-10. These are the first two parables that really set the stage for the parable of the lost son/s in 15. It's important to keep in mind that the reason for these parables is that the Pharisees and Law experts were grumbling about Jesus welcoming and eating with tax collectors. Even without the final parable in the series, these two provide a challenge to the religious authorities both asking them to identify with low status characters like a shepherd and a poor woman while also appealing to their awareness of God's role in seeking to reclaim all people. In the end, the issue is less about sinners repenting and more about the 'righteous' rejoicing that sinners are restored to God's family.

A collection of translations and my notes and translation:

• Luke 15.1-10 mgvh notes

Luke 6.17-26 Translations and Notes (RCL 6th Sunday after Epiphany Year C)

View from Sea of Galilee with Tabgha in foreground and traditional Mount of Beatitudes up the hill.

Luke 6.17-26 is the designated Revised Common Lectionary Text for the 6th Sunday after Epiphany in Year C which occurs on February 13, 2022. It is the well-known Sermon on the Plain with Jesus' blessings and woes. It is parallel to Matthew's Sermon on the Mount. The similarities and differences between them are striking and worth comparing.

There are many decisions that need to be made in translating the text, beginning even with how one translates makarios = blessed, happy, fortunate, honored, blissful... There is a mix of present rewards (the dominion of God) and future ones. It's unclear who exactly the audience is (just disciples? everyone?) and the text switches between who "you" and "they" are.

My notes and translation comparisons and my own translation may help you sort things out.

• Luke 6.17-26 mgvh notes and translation
  

Luke 5.1-11 Translations and Notes (RCL 5th Sunday after Epiphany Year C)

Shoreline of Lake of Gennesaret = Sea of Galilee at Capernaum looking SW to the Arbel

Luke 5.1-11 is the designated Revised Common Lectionary Text for the 5th Sunday after Epiphany in Year C which occurs on February 6, 2022. It recounts Jesus' calling of his first disciples (Simon, James, and John), but Luke has decided to reorder the story he inherits from Mark considerably. Luke put Jesus' 'inaugural' address first at 4.16-30, an event that doesn't happen until chapter 6 in Mark. Then Luke 4.31-37 picks up Mark 1.21-28 where Jesus casts out an unclean spirit in the Capernaum synagogue followed by Jesus' stay at Simon's house with the healings he performs there and the subsequent Galilean ministry. (Mark 1.29-39 // Luke 4.38-44) Note that in Mark, Jesus called Simon, Andrew, James, and John before he did anything in Capernaum. In Luke, Jesus has already stayed at Simon's house before he calls him as a disciple! Why would Luke do this? In Mark, Jesus calls the first disciples, and they mysteriously begin to follow him without any explanation why. In Luke, they have already seen Jesus perform a number of miracles, including the catch of fish in the story at hand, and so when he calls them to follow him, it does make good sense.

I have a compilation of translations of Luke 5.1-11 including my own. Though Luke is usually precise with his grammar, this story evidences a strong oral character. There are incomplete sentences, brief exclamations, explanatory asides... Again, most English translations smooth it all so that it reads well, but I encourage you to look at my translation which I think 'sounds' in English much more like the Greek actually 'sounds.' Let me know what you think!

• Luke 5.1-11 mgvh translations and notes
  

Luke 3.15-22 Translations and Notes (RCL Baptism of Our Lord; First Sunday after Epiphany Year C)

Fresco in St. John The Baptist Roman Church at Bethany Beyond the Jordan

The appointed RCL text for the Baptism of Our Lord = First Sunday after Epiphany Year C is Luke 3.15-17, 21-22. I'm guessing they wanted to focus just on the baptism part, but it makes no sense to me to omit verses 18-20, so I'm sharing Luke 3.15-22 here.

A few things worth noting from a close reading of the text:

• Clearly there was some speculation that John the Baptist was a messianic figure. In Luke's depiction of him (especially in contrast to Matthew and Mark), his role is downplayed. He is locked up in prison apparently before Jesus is baptized! My suspicion is that this is part of Luke’s plan to minimize John’s role and separate him from Jesus. (Cf. John 3.30!) Note that the execution of John is never detailed except for a passing reference in Luke 9.9. Also note the ongoing influence of John the Baptist in Acts 18.24-28 and 19.1-10 over against the community of Jesus followers. Apparently there continued to be speculation whether John or Jesus was the more important figure.
• In verse 18, how are John's "exhortations" understood to be the "gospel / good news"? 
• The Greek is rather clunky in this passage. Verses 15-17 are one sentence, and John's quote in verses 16-17 is especially complicated. Greek admired a long subordinated sentence, but I think this stretches matters. Verses 19-20 and 21-22 are similarly complicated and need help to get into English.

Here are my collection of translations and my notes on translating.

• Luke 3.15-22 mgvh notes
  

Luke 3.7-18 Translations and Notes (RCL 3rd Sunday of Advent Year C)

St. John The Baptist Roman Church, Jordan River Baptismal Site, Jordan
αὐτὸς δὲ ὑμᾶς βαπτίσει ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ

Luke 3.7-18 is the appointed text for the Third Sunday of Advent in Year C of the Revised Common Lectionary. It continues the reading from the previous Sunday.

What is it about John’s preaching that is so powerful that it causes not just the Jewish people but even tax collectors and soldiers to seek his advice? The question posed by all of them is, “What then are we supposed to do?” That question still lingers. Where is the "good news" in all of John's "exhortations"?

A collection of translations, including my own, and notes:

• Luke 3.7-18 translations and notes

Luke 3.1-6 Translations and Notes (RCL 2nd Sunday of Advent Year C)

Jordan River valley wilderness looking east from Jordan to the river and the traditional baptism site of Jesus.

Luke 3.1-6 is the appointed text for the Second Sunday of Advent in Year C of the Revised Common Lectionary. Luke had already introduced the story of John the Baptist's and Jesus' births and described some events in Jesus' childhood. Turning to John's ministry, Luke locates it within Roman political history, eastern Mediterranean geography, and Scripture.
Luke cites Isaiah 40.3-5 which concludes, “… every mortal shall see the salvation of God.” Was this a past reality fulfilled in the time of John and Jesus? Is this still a future reality? What does the salvation of God look like today?

A collection of translations, including my own, and notes:

• Luke 3.1-6 translations and notes
  

Luke 21.25-36 Translations and Notes (RCL 1st Sunday of Advent Year C)

"Look at the fig tree..." (Luke 21.29) - Sycamore fig tree on the Arbel looking west

Luke 21.25-36 is the appointed text for the First Sunday of Advent in Year C of the Revised Common Lectionary. It's a bit odd to have a text that is focused on Jesus's second coming in the season when we are looking ahead to his first coming. It does raise a good question, though: How is thinking about Jesus' second coming helpful in preparing for his first coming?

The file here provides a collection of translations and my notes on translating along with my own suggested translation. There are always nuances in the text worth considering, and attending to the small details often helps us see the big picture.

• Luke 21.25-36 translations and notes