Exegesis:

kai ēlthen ‘and he came.’ With this clause the description of the event, already announced by kai idou ‘and behold’ in v. 25 (cf. note there), begins; kai therefore resumes the opening words of v. 25. Hence Knox translates “he now came”.

en tō pneumati ‘in the Spirit,’ i.e. “guided by the Spirit” (New English Bible), not on his own account or initiative.

eis to hieron ‘into the temple,’ i.e. the temple in Jerusalem.

hieron ‘temple’; as compared with naos ‘temple’ (1.9, 21, 22) hieron includes the whole temple with its buildings, courts, etc. and is often used when the scene of action is not the temple building itself.

kai en tō eisagagein tous goneis to paidion Iēsoun ‘and after the parents had brought in the child Jesus,’ scil. eis to hieron ‘into the temple,’ omitted in order to avoid repetition. en with following articular accusative and infinitive in the aorist tense indicates events preceding the event expressed in the main clause (cf. 9.36; 11.37; 14.1; 19.15).

eisagō ‘to bring in,’ or, ‘into.’

tou poiēsai autous kata to eithismenon tou nomou peri autou ‘in order to do concerning him according to the custom of the law.’ tou with following articular infinitive has final force and the clause expresses the purpose of their entering the temple. autous is the subject of the infinitive poiēsai, not expressed in English. peri autou ‘concerning him’ goes with poiēsai; the phrase does not mean that the child Jesus himself is to be submitted to a rite but only that what his parents do, concerns him.

to eithismenon, past participle of ethizō ‘to accustom,’ lit. ‘that which is accustomed’ i.e. ‘that which has become a custom,’ synonymous with to ethos (cf. on 1.8) ‘custom,’ ‘tradition’; to eithismenon tou nomou ‘the custom of the law’ is the custom which the law prescribes.

(V. 28) kai autos ‘and he.’ autos refers to a subject already mentioned, i.e. that of ēlthen ‘he came.’ kai is used here in a redundant way to introduce the apodosis after a subordinate clause (cf. 2.21).

edexato auto eis tas agkalas ‘he received it in his arms.’

dechomai ‘to take,’ ‘to receive.’ The use of this verb here suggests that the initiative is not with Simeon but that the child is handed over to him.

agkalē ‘bent arm,’ usually in order to receive something.

kai eulogēsen ton theon kai eipen ‘and he praised God and said.’ For eulogeō cf. on 1.64. The two verbs of this clause may be taken to refer to two different acts, or to one single act, preferably the latter, cf. The Four Gospels – a New Translation, “blessed God in these words”.

Translation:

Inspired by the Spirit he came into the temple. The activity of the Spirit has also been described as, “impelled by” (The Four Gospels – a New Translation), ‘moved by’ (Ekari), ‘on instruction of’ (Toraja-Sa’dan), ‘on instigation/command of’ (Tamil); or, changing the syntactic pattern, ‘the Holy Spirit led him into, or, caused Simeon to enter’ (Sranan Tongo, Tboli). Spirit may have to be specified, cf. ‘Holy Spirit,’ ‘Spirit of God.’ — The temple (Gr. to hieron, occurring in 2.37, 46; 4.9; 18.10; 19.45, 47; 20.1; 21.5, 37f; 22.52f; 24.53) is preferably to be distinguished in translation from the more specific ho naos (for which see on 1.9). Commonly used descriptive renderings are, ‘Holy/Sacred House,’ ‘Divine Abode,’ ‘House of God.’ In order to indicate the uniqueness of Jerusalem’s temple Balinese has to use ‘Great Temple.’ The Chinese Union Version did not choose the term for the temple of popular religion (in which also the participation of the state was centred), but a word (lit. ‘palace’) indicating the main worship hall of the Buddhists. A similar term is used in Thai to translate ho naos, and an expression built on that term is employed as rendering of to hieron, i.e. ‘environs-of the main-audience-hall’ (preferred to the existing term for a temple compound because of the strong Buddhist connotations of the latter). Some other renderings used (most of them both for hieron and naos) are, ‘God’s compound’ (Zarma), ‘big church of the Jews’ (Otomi), ‘big house on top (i.e. most important)’ (Zapotec of Villa Alta), ‘festival longhouse of God’ (Guhu-Samane), ‘sacrosanct house,’ lit. ‘house where-the-belly-gets-swollen’ (i.e. because taboo is violated) (Toraja-Sa’dan, using a term that is also applied to a Muslim mosque).

The parents brought in the child Jesus. Where ‘parents’ should preferably be possessed one may shift to, ‘the child J. was brought in by his parents’ (Indonesian languages), ‘father and mother of that child J. brought-in him’ (Kituba), or, ‘Jesus’ parents brought in the little one.’ Parents is often rendered by a combination of the words for father and mother, cf. on v. 33. — Brought in, or, ‘brought/carried enter (the temple),’ ‘came in there, carrying’; cf. also on “brought him up” in v. 22. — The child Jesus. This combination of noun and proper name is awkward in some languages; then one may have to say, ‘the young/little one called Jesus,’ or simply, ‘the little one,’ or, ‘Jesus’ (Tboli); or again, shifting to a term for descendant (cf. on 1.7), ‘their child (called Jesus).’

To do for him, or, ‘concerning him,’ ‘with him’; or, ‘to act/perform with regard to him.’ In some languages the very generic character of the clause cannot be maintained. Since it refers backwards to v. 22b, it is defensible in such a case to say ‘to present him (to the Lord).’

According to the custom of the law, ‘as was the custom prescribed by the law,’ ‘as the law had made them accustomed to do’ (Sranan Tongo); or, making the phrase the object of ‘to do,’ “what was customary under the Law” (New English Bible), ‘custom required by the law’ (Tagalog), ‘custom that started from their own commandment/law’ (Tboli). Where ‘custom’ and ‘law’ are incompatible in an expression like this, one may have to shift to, “what the Law required” (Good News Translation), ‘the prescriptions of the Law’; then the rendering may become more similar to, or coincide with, that of “according to the law” in v. 22.

(V. 28) He took him up in his arms. One or both of the pronouns may have to be specified, ‘Simeon’ and ‘the child’ respectively. To take in one’s arms (in some languages expressed by one verb), or, with a slight semantic shift ‘to take/hold-to-one’s-breast’ (Bahasa Indonesia, Javanese). Elsewhere one has to add a verb, cf. ‘he took and held-in-his-arms’ (Toraja-Sa’dan), ‘Simeon took him, held-him-to-his-breast’ (Malay).

Blessed God and said, preferably, ‘praised God, saying (or, in/with these words),’ see on 1.42 sub (2).

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.

Exegesis:

Vv. 1f consist of (a) a series of indications of time, serving to fix the events to be described in vv. 2ff in the setting of world and regional history, the latter both political and religious, and (b) the main clause egeneto rēma theou epi Iōannēn ‘the word of God came to John,’ etc.

en etei de pentekaidekatō tēs hēgemonias Tiberiou Kaisaros ‘in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar.’ de is transitional and serves to introduce a new narrative.

hēgemonia ‘rule,’ here referring to the reign of the Roman emperor but in itself as general a term as the verb hēgemoneuō (used in the next phrase), cf. on 2.2.

Tiberiou Kaisaros ‘of Tiberius Caesar,’ cf. on 2.1.

tēs Ioudaias ‘of Judea,’ cf. on 1.5. Here it is used in an administrative sense, including Samaria but not Galilee, as the next phrase shows.

kai tetraarchountos … Hērōdou ‘and when Herod was tetrarch.’

tetrarcheō ‘to be tetrarch,’ i.e. originally the governor of one of the four provinces of Thessaly, later denoting the ruler of any small country or region who was not a king.

tēs Itouraias kai Trachōnitidos chōras ‘of Ituraea and Trachonitis,’ both going with chōras which admits of many translations, cf. e.g., “district” (Translator’s New Testament), “territory” (Phillips), “country” (Moffatt). Their tetrarch Philippus was Herod’s older brother, of a different mother.

epi archiereōs Hanna kai Kaïapha ‘in the time of the high priest Annas and Caiaphas.’ archiereōs, though in the singular, refers to both names mentioned, and Luke may have thought of Annas and Caiaphas as being a kind of joint high priests.

archiereus ‘high priest.’

egeneto rēma theou epi Iōannēn ‘the word of God happened, or, came to John.’ This phrase occurs frequently in the Septuagint, denoting the divine inspiration of a prophet by God and the entrusting of a divine message or commission (cf. e.g. Gen. 15.1; 1 Sam. 15.10; Jer. 1.2). It implies that the person to whom the word of God comes, comes under the power of that word, not just that the word is communicated to him.

en tē erēmō ‘in the desert’ refers to the same area as hai erēmoi in 1.80.

Translation:

The elaborate way in which Luke states the date of the events to be told has the stylistic function of marking that he now comes to the main part of his narrative. In several languages this can be imitated approximately, but it may be advisable then to divide the one long sentence in small units, introducing the main event (‘the word … came …’) by a recapitulating expression, e.g. “It was the fifteenth year of the rule of Emperor T.; Pontius P. was governor of Judea, Herod was ruler of G…. It was at that time that the word of God came…” (Good News Translation). Other languages may require an introductory word or phrase, such as, ‘To-begin-with’ (Malay; cf. also above on 1.5), ‘What will be told now is this.’ If according to receptor language usage the main event has to be mentioned early in the utterance, the sentence may have to be recast in such a way that first the emperor, next John and what happened to him, and last the secular and religious rulers are referred to (Manobo), whereas in a language as Sateré what happened to John will have to come at the very beginning.

The noun reign may have to be expressed in a clause, e.g. ‘when T. C. had been reigning/ruling, or, had been emperor’; and cf. on 1.33.

Governor, see on 2.2.

Tetrarch. The rendering to be chosen should denote an indigenous ruler that is subject to higher authority, cf. the following renderings of ‘tetrarch’ and ‘emperor’ respectively, ‘prince’—‘king-of-princes’ (cf. Balinese), ‘chief’—‘chief of greatness’ (Kituba), ‘king who has been apportioned a fief,’ i.e. feudal Lord—‘(one who is) on the throne,’ using a well known idiom that expresses sovereiGood News Bibley (Chinese Union Version); in Kekchí the distinction is indicated by a reference to areas of different size, e.g. ‘who had power in Galilee’ (etc.)—‘who had power in all the land.’ A cultural equivalent has been used in, ‘at the time of these four chiefs: Herod in the region G., Phillip in the region I….’ (Batak Toba, adapting an expression employed in several parts of Sumatra for groups of high dignitaries, which are called ‘the four chiefs/grandees,’ even if their number is not complete). Attempts at a literal rendering, often a neologism in the receptor language, usually result in a long and cumbersome phrase, in some cases even a misleading one, suggesting some such meaning as ‘chief over four parts,’ or ‘fourth ruler.’ The renderings of “tetrarch” and “governor” are the same in some languages (e.g. Kituba, Ekari, Sranan Tongo); this is acceptable, because the distinction is of no relevance here (cf. the fact that in Pilate’s case the Greek does not mention his precise rank).

Brother, see below on 6.14.

(V. 2) In the high-priesthood of A. and C., or, ‘when A. and C. were high-priests.’

The word of God came to John. Though the wording of this Hebraistic phrase should preferably be preserved, yet receptor language idiom may compel the translator to the use of more or less radical adjustments. He may have to mark the expression as a simile, e.g. ‘the word of God came, as it were, to/over John’; or to rephrase it so that the connexion between ‘word of God’ and the verb becomes less direct, e.g. by speaking of ‘the power/guidance of God’s word,’ or so that ‘the word of God’ is no longer the agent, e.g. by shifting to a rendering like, ‘John was-commissioned with God’s word’ (Javanese), or, ‘John received the word of God’; or again, he may have to treat the ultimate agent, i.e. God, as subject of the sentence, e.g. ‘God made J. the one to speak his (i.e. God’s) words,’ ‘God made-known his message to him’ (Kituba). ‘God commanded/commissioned/told John to preach.’ — For word of God cf. on 5.1. In some Bantu languages the choice is between two terms for ‘word,’ the one used in contexts of social communication in the meaning voice, ‘word (that is heard and awaits response),’ the other in that of ‘word (as power, or as expression of intention),’ ‘command,’ ‘message’; as the exegesis shows the latter term will usually best fit the present context. — Came to, has been rendered by ‘came over’ (Willibrord), ‘took possession of’ (Schonfield), ‘found’ (Nyakyusa), ‘arrived in the heart of,’ indicating that John is merely an instrument of God in receiving the word (Tzeltal), ‘arrived at/reached’ (Shona 1963, employing a verb that, when given a suffix indicating purpose or aim, is used in ritual contexts of a god, or spirit, that takes possession of a medium).

In such phrases as John the son of Zechariah the appositional phrase functions approximately as does the surname in modern western languages; in some languages it forms a closely knit linguistic unit, signalled as such by a specific term or construction.

When name and apposition do not form such a unit one should make clear that in the wilderness does not go with Zechariah, but with John, cf. ‘then God’s voice found J., the son of Z., it found him in the woods’ (Nyakyusa), .’.. to John there in the wilderness. This J. was the child of Z.’ (Manobo); cf. also, ‘at that time Z.’s son J. was in the desert (and) the word of God came down to him’ (Chinese Union Version, locative clauses in Chinese normally preceding that part they qualify) for wilderness.

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.

Exegesis:

Main clause to the two absolute genitives of v. 15 (prosdokōntos tou laou ‘as people were in expectation,’ and dialogizomenōn pantōn ‘as all were wondering’) is the first clause of v. 16, apekrinato … Iōannēs, ‘John answered.’ The relationship of the two absolute genitives to one another depends on the interpretation of the first one, see next note.

(V. 15) prosdokōntos de tou laou ‘as people were in expectation.’ de, which has not been translated, marks the beginning of a new development. The participle prosdokōntos which has no object, is best understood in an absolute sense as e.g. in Revised Standard Version. People were “in a great state of expectation” (Phillips), because of John’s message. The clause describes the result of John’s preaching, cf. An American Translation, “as all this aroused people’s expectations”. Then laos does not refer to the people of Israel in general but to the people that came out to listen to John. For prosdokaō cf. on 1.21.

dialogizomenōn pantōn ‘as all were wondering,’ describes a further and more specific result of John’s preaching; pantes refers to the same people as laos in the preceding clause. For dialogizomai cf. on 1.29.

en tais kardiais autōn ‘in their hearts,’ or, “in their minds” (Translator’s New Testament), or, “inwardly” (Phillips).

mēpote autos eiē ho Christos ‘whether perhaps he was the Messiah.’ autos is unemphatic ‘he,’ referring back to John’s name in the preceding clause. The optative eiē has no special function. Instead of ‘the Messiah’ Revised Standard Version and several other translations have “the Christ”, a transliteration of the Greek rendering of the Hebrew word. This must be regarded as a second best rendering.

(V. 16) apekrinato legōn pasin ho Iōannēs ‘John answered saying to all,’ cf. on 1.60.

egō men hudati baptizō humas ‘As to me, I am baptising you with water.’ egō is emphatic and men suggests that a contrast is to follow. hudati ‘with water,’ instrumental dative. The present tense baptizō is habitual, ‘I practise water-baptism.’

erchetai de ho ischuroteros mou ‘but the one who is mightier than I is coming.’ de corresponds to men in the preceding clause but the clause which corresponds materially with it (‘he will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and with fire’) does not come until its subject, i.e. the mightier one, is properly identified in his relationship to John. The clause introduces the mightier one as someone who is known, though no previous reference has occurred.

ischuros ‘strong,’ ‘mighty.’

hou … autou ‘whose … of him.’ The relative pronoun at the beginning of the clause and the personal pronoun at the end both go with ton himanta tōn hupodēmatōn ‘the thong of the sandals’ and are therefore to be rendered only once. This is probably a semitism but also not unknown in Greek.

hikanos of things ‘adequate,’ ‘considerable,’ of persons ‘fit,’ ‘competent,’ here with the connotation ‘worthy for something,’ and followed by a complementing infinitive.

lusai ton himanta tōn hupodēmatōn ‘to untie the thong of the sandals.’ This was considered to be the task of a slave.

luō ‘to loose,’ ‘to untie,’ ‘to set free.’

himas ‘thong,’ or ‘strap’ on sandals.

hupodēma ‘sandal,’ “a leather sole that is fastened to the foot by means of straps”.

autos humas baptisei en pneumati hagiō ‘he will baptise you with Holy Spirit.’ autos ‘he’ is emphatic and contrasts with egō at the beginning of the verse. humas ‘you’ does, of course, not imply that this baptism will be limited to those who have previously received John’s baptism with water, just as humas in the first clause of this verse does not mean that John only baptised those to whom he talked at the moment.

en pneumati hagiō ‘with,’ rather than ‘in the Holy Spirit.’ The phrase ‘to baptise with the Holy Spirit,’ occurs only in connection with, and contrast to, John’s baptism with water (Mt. 3.11; Mk. 1.8; Lk. 3.16; Jn. 1.33; Acts 1.5; 11.16) and not as an independent expression. It is therefore best understood as an analogy to the baptism with water and to be interpreted along the same lines as that phrase.

kai puri ‘and with fire.’ This addition also in Matthew but not in Mark. There are two interpretations: (1) the fire is the fire of judgment (Klostermann, Zahn) because of the mentioning of the fire in vv. 9 and 17 both in a picture that refers to the coming judgment; (2) the fire is the fire of purification (Plummer, Lagrange). Interpretation (1) is preferable. This implies a disjunctive relationship between pneuma hagion and pur.

Translation:

It is often better not to render v. 15 as a subordinate clause, but as one separate sentence, formed by two co-ordinated clauses with or without connective, or as two such sentences.

The people, here virtually the same as ‘the crowd.’

Were in expectation, or, if the expression requires an object, ‘were expecting something,’ ‘were believing that things of importance would come to pass’ (Kituba).

All men, or, “they … all” (An American Translation), ‘everyone (amongst them),’ referring to the subject of the first clause, cf. also, ‘the multitudes,’ partly repeating ‘the multitude of people (i.e. the crowds)’ (Lü Zhenzhong).

Questioned in their hearts, or, ‘inquired in their minds’ (Dravidian languages), ‘were asking-themselves in heart of them’ (Kituba), the qualifying word or phrase being required to show that no discussion with others is meant; or again, ‘wondered (lit. guessed and doubted)’ (Chinese Union Version), ‘were-thinking’ (Marathi, Manobo), without such a qualification.

Concerning John, whether perhaps he were the Christ may have to be restructured, e.g. .’.. whether perhaps J. were the Messiah,’ or, if the verb is to be followed by direct discourse, “Is John (or, this man, or, he) perhaps the Messiah?”, “What? Might he be Christ?” (Marathi).

(V. 16) Answered. Revised Standard Version‘s rendering of Gr. apokrinomai by a form of ‘to answer’ here (and in 5.22, 31; 7.40a; 8.50; 9.49; 11.45; 13.15) is rather unidiomatic because it does not introduce a person’s reaction upon a request or statement that has been addressed to him. As a rule it is preferable in these cases to shift to another verb, e.g. ‘to speak up,’ ‘to start speaking,’ ‘to address’; or ‘to interpose’; or a combination of ‘to say/ speak to’ with such expressions as ‘on his part,’ ‘to this,’ ‘again,’ ‘then,’ ‘thereupon,’ ‘but,’ ‘however,’ as required by the context; hence here e.g. ‘But John said to them.’ Such renderings have been used by Revised Standard Version itself for similar occurrences of apokrinomai (e.g. 1.60, cf. also 13.14; 17.17, 37; 22.51), but some other translations have used ‘to answer/reply’ for nearly all occurrences even though decidedly unidiomatic in the language concerned. Their example is not to be followed.

I, or more emphatically, ‘as for me (lit. to me), I’ (Kituba, similarly Kannada), ‘I indeed’ (Marathi).

He who is mightier, etc. is to be applied to the Messiah, although his name is not explicitly mentioned; hence in the references to his person and acts in vv. 16f the use of honorifics may be required in languages like Balinese and Javanese. — Comparative forms of adjectives may not be available in the receptor language. Then it is usually possible to circumscribe the comparison by ‘he surpasses me (or, he is ahead) in might/power,’ or to use a positive-negative contrast, ‘he is (really) mighty, I am not mighty.’ For mighty, or, ‘powerful,’ cf. on “power” in 1.35.

The function of the clause the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie is to give the measure of the difference in might between John and Jesus; hence, “I am not good enough even to untie his sandals” (Good News Translation), ‘mightier than I so that (or, so much mightier than I that) I am unworthy to untie-for-him….’ — Thong, or, ‘tie,’ ‘straps’; in some cases not rendered by a separate term but implied in the verb for ‘untie.’ Chuukese has to use a descriptive phrase, ‘covering-of his-foot.’ — I am not worthy to, i.e. I have not sufficient worth/value/excellence to. In Trukese, Pohnpeian, and some Indonesian languages one says, ‘it is not fitting that I ….’

With the Holy Spirit and with fire. The rendering of this phrase should be modelled on that of ‘with water,’ where necessary marking a shift from metaphor to simile by adding a clue like, ‘as it were.’ The disjunctive relationship between the two nouns may be suggested by using ‘or’ instead of ‘and’ (Kituba), or expressed more explicitly by saying, ‘some of you with the Holy Spirit, others with fire,’ cf. ‘some of you he will baptise with the H. Sp. and the rest he will baptise with fire’ (Manobo).

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.