Twice Led, Not Fed, Well Read

Below is a rough translation and some initial commentary on Luke 4:1-13, the gospel reading for the First Sunday of Lent. I continue to believe that Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s parable, “The Grand Inquisitor” (in the book The Brothers Karamazov) is one of the most profound commentaries on this story anywhere. And, it is interesting! I remember vividly how a youth group was spellbound as I told them this parable and how stunned they were at the ending of it. Please don’t overlook it as a resource this week.

My title, “Twice Led, Not Fed, Well Read” picks up on the dynamics of this story- how Jesus was led by the spirit in the wilderness, then led by the devil to the place of testing; how he hungered and still refused to make a stone into bread; and how the discourse between Jesus and the devil was, in some ways, a wrestling over the heart of the Scriptures. Of course, this is just the rough beginnings of the exegetical process, so I am not developing those ideas to much degree.

Your comments are welcomed. Blessings on your Lenten journey.

¹ Ἰησοῦς δὲ πλήρης πνεύματος ἁγίου ὑπέστρεψεν ἀπὸ τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, καὶ ἤγετο ἐν τῷ πνεύματι ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ

Then Jesus full of a holy spirit returned from the Jordan and was being led by the spirit in the wilderness,

ὑπέστρεψεν: AAI 3s, ὑποστρέφω, 1) to turn back  1a) to turn about  2) to return

ἤγετο: IPI 3s, ἄγω, 1) to lead, take with one

πνεύματος;  ἐν τῷ πνεύματι

1. The phrase ‘of a holy spirit’ is a genitive construction that has no definite article. In Lk.3:22 when Jesus is baptized, Luke writes that ‘the holy spirit’ (τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον) descended on him, using the definite article for that phrase (in the accusative case.) The larger point is that in 3:22, the spirit descends on Jesus; in 4:1 Jesus is full of a holy spirit; and in 4:14 (the beginning of the next pericope) Jesus is again described as being filled with the power of the spirit. What a difference that baptism made!

2. The conjunction δὲ, which often takes the shape of “then” (could be ‘yet’ ‘but’ or ‘and’) in Luke’s gospel, is curious. What precedes this story immediately is the genealogy at the end of Luke 3. The δὲ is a way of getting back to the narrative by connecting this story to the baptism story that ends in 3:22. My suspicion is that the genealogy of 3:23-38 was added later.

3. The verb “led” (ἤγετο) is imperfect, not aorist. The imperfect often takes on the sense of an ongoing past event, while the aorist often takes the sense of a simple past. One expects an aorist here, “was led,” rather than the imperfect, “was being led.” The difference might be that a holy spirit was with him throughout the time in the wilderness, as opposed to having led him to the edge of the wilderness and leaving him there on his own. For more on this, see v.9 below.

5. Luke follows Mark’s lead in granting importance to the wilderness in the story of Jesus.

² ἡμέρας τεσσεράκοντα πειραζόμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου. καὶ οὐκ ἔφαγεν οὐδὲν ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις, καὶ συντελεσθεισῶν αὐτῶν ἐπείνασεν.

forty days being tested by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and in the completing of them, he hungered.

πειραζόμενος: PPPart nsm, πειράζω, 1) to try whether a thing can be done  1a) to attempt, endeavour  2) to try, make trial of, test: 

ἔφαγεν: AAI 3s, ἐσθίω, 1) to eat 

συντελεσθεισῶν: APPart gpf, συντελέω, 1) to end together or at the same time  2) to end completely  2a) bring to an end, finish, complete

ἐπείνασεν: AAI 3s, πεινάω, 1) to hunger, be hungry 

1. “in the completing of them” is very awkward, but I am trying to reflect that συντελεσθεισῶν is a genitive participle.

2. The participial form of συντελέω will come back again in v.13. (That’s a teaser, folks!)

3. This story is the only mention of “the devil” outside of the parable of the sower in Luke. Luke does mention Satan several times (10:18, 11:18, 13:16, 22:3, 22:31) and some less reliable manuscripts have the phrase “Get behind me, Satan!” affixed to v.12 below (following Matthew). As I understand it, ‘devil’ was rooted in Greek and ‘Satan’ was rooted in Hebrew, but, I am not certain that Jesus/Luke used the words “devil” and Satan” interchangeably.

4. “Hungered” is a verb, not an adjective.

³ Εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ διάβολος, Εἰ υἱὸς εἶ τοῦ θεοῦ, εἰπὲ τῷ λίθῳ τούτῳ ἵνα γένηται ἄρτος.

The devil said to him, “Since you are the God’s son, speak to this stone in order that it may become bread.”

Εἶπεν: AAI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak

εἶ: PAI 2s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present

εἰπὲ: AAImpv 2s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak

γένηται: AMSubj 3s, γίνομαι, 1) to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be

1. Paul Achtemeier points out that the Εἰ here should be translated, "Since you are God's son” not “If you are ....” I think it is because the Εἰ is followed by an indicative and not a subjunctive verb. Says Achtemeier, “What is at issue is not whether Jesus is really God's son; even the devil is willing to concede that. The temptation has to do with how God's son should act.”  ¹²¹³

2. The temptation does not say “make this stone into bread,” but “speak this stone into bread.” Is the devil referencing the creation story of Genesis 1, where God speaks creation into being?

3. The first test seems related to the observation that Jesus hungered in v.2 and how someone with God’s power might satiate such hunger.  

⁴ καὶ ἀπεκρίθη πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Γέγραπται ὅτι Οὐκ ἐπ' ἄρτῳ μόνῳ ζήσεται ὁ ἄνθρωπος.

And Jesus answered to him, “It has been written, ‘The human will not live by bread alone.’”

ἀπεκρίθη: API 3s, ἀποκρίνομαι, 1) to give an answer to a question proposed, to answer 

Γέγραπται: PerfPI 3s, γράφω, 1) to write, with reference to the form of the letters

ζήσεται: FMI 3s, ζάω, 1) to live, breathe, be among the living

1. The test is for Jesus, as a son of God, to speak bread into being from a stone. The response speaks to what is proper to ‘the human’ (ὁ ἄνθρωπος). I don’t want to suggest that Jesus and the devil are having a 4^th century argument over the humanity v. the deity of the Christ, but those terms are interesting.

2. And the terms ‘son of God’ v. ‘human’ must mean something. My suspicion is that it is a matter of identity – which identity will Jesus accept, particularly in his weakened state of hunger.

3. Deuteronomy 8:3 reads, “[God] humbled you by letting you hunger, then by feeding you with manna, with which neither you nor your ancestors were acquainted, in order to make you understand that one does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord.” Reading Jesus’ words in this context suggests that for Jesus to act as a son of God and command a stone to become bread would not just be for him to act as something other than human. It would also be a way of not trusting that God will provide.

⁵Καὶ ἀναγαγὼν αὐτὸν ἔδειξεν αὐτῷ πάσας τὰς βασιλείας τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐν στιγμῇ χρόνου:

And having led him up he showed to him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.

ἀναγαγὼν: AAPart nsm, ἀνάγω, 1) to lead up, to lead or bring into a higher place 

ἔδειξεν: AAI 3s, δεικνύω, to show, exhibit

1. According to my resources, the word οἰκουμένης, translated ‘world’ here, refers more to the inhabited or perhaps ‘civilized’ world than to the globe itself. It was used during NT era to name the Greek and then Roman empires, as opposed to ‘barbarian’ lands. At its root is the word ‘house’ (οἰκος) and οἰκουμένης is where we get the word ‘ecumenical’. 

2. Paul Tillich famously distinguished between ‘chronos’ and ‘kairos’ as two different ways of speaking about time – a distinction that corresponds with many lexicons. To wit, chronos signifies linear, measurable time and kairos signifies a specific, propitious time, such as “at the right time.” It is a very helpful distinction for theological reflection, but I am wary of assuming that each NT writer was following that distinction closely. In v.5, chronos is frequently translated as ‘time,’ in the phrase ‘a moment of time.’ In v.13 below, many translations make ‘kairos’ “opportune time.”    

⁶ καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ διάβολος, Σοὶ δώσω τὴν ἐξουσίαν ταύτην ἅπασαν καὶ τὴν δόξαν αὐτῶν, ὅτι ἐμοὶ παραδέδοται καὶ ᾧ ἐὰν θέλω δίδωμι αὐτήν:

And the devil^* said to him, “To you I will give all this authority and their glory, for to me it has been given and I give it to whomever I will.

εἶπεν: AAI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak

δώσω: FAI 1s, δίδωμι, 1) to give

παραδέδοται: PerfPI 3s, παραδίδωμι, 1) to give into the hands (of another) 

θέλω: PASubj 1s, θέλω, 1) to will, have in mind, intend

δίδωμι: PAI 1s, δίδωμι, 1) to give

1. This is quite a political commentary on the empires (the way that βασιλείας from v.5 was most often used in the NT era). They receive their territories and authority from the devil. And it may be quite a theological commentary, suggesting that it is God who gives the devil the power of empire-making.

2. Jesus (and the synoptic gospel writers) will use the term βασιλείας often in the phrase “kingdom of God/heaven.” As Warren Carter points out, this term is one way that the NT writers imitated, and did not simply resist, the Roman Empire. This test, however, is puts a critical distance between Jesus’ embrace of the term βασιλείας and the devilish power behind other empires.

⁷ σὺ οὖν ἐὰν προσκυνήσῃς ἐνώπιον ἐμοῦ, ἔσται σοῦ πᾶσα.

Therefore if you would bow before me, it will all be yours.”

προσκυνήσῃς: AASubj 2s, προσκυνέω, 1) to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence  ...  3) in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage

ἔσται: FMI 3s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present

1. One implication of this offer is that the previous empires had bowed before the devil in order to receive their kingdoms. I would argue that subsequent empires have as well.

2. As a reader of too many bloody Bernard Cornwell novels, it is always a significant moment when a warrior will kneel before a king and pledge his loyalty. It is a sacred bond that puts the warrior at the king’s disposal with the promise of great reward.

⁸καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Γέγραπται, Κύριον τὸν θεόν σου προσκυνήσεις καὶ αὐτῷ μόνῳ λατρεύσεις.

And having answered 5⁶⁷⁸Jesus said to him, “It has been written, ‘Bow to the Lord your God, and serve only him.’”

ἀποκριθεὶς: APPart nsm, ἀποκρίνομαι, 1) to give an answer to a question proposed, to answer 

εἶπεν: AAI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak

Γέγραπται: PerfPI 3s, γράφω, 1) to write, with reference to the form of the letters

προσκυνήσεις: FAI 2s, προσκυνέω, 1) to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence  ...  3) in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage

λατρεύσεις: FAI 2s, λατρεύω, 1) to serve for hire  2) to serve, minister to, either to the gods or men and used  alike of slaves and freemen  2a) in the NT, to render religious service or homage, to worship

1. If the devil were as clever as some other tyrants in history, he would have argued that, since God gave him the authority he has, Jesus would be serving God by serving him. Either the devil is not that clever (which I find hard to believe) or Jesus wasn’t that stupid (which I find easy to believe).

2. Deuteronomy 6:13 reads, “The Lord your God you shall fear; him you shall serve, and by his name alone you shall swear.”

⁹ Ἤγαγεν δὲ αὐτὸν εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ καὶ ἔστησεν ἐπὶ τὸ πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Εἰ υἱὸς εἶ τοῦ θεοῦ, βάλε σεαυτὸν ἐντεῦθεν κάτω:

Then he led him to Jerusalem and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple, saying to him, “Since you are the Son of God, throw yourself down from here,

Ἤγαγεν: AAI 3s, ἄγω, 1) to lead, take with one 

ἔστησεν: AAI 3s, ἵστημι, 1) to cause or make to stand, to place, put, set

εἶπεν: AAI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak

βάλε: AAImpv 2s, βάλλω, 1) to throw or let go of a thing without caring where it falls

1. The devil “led” Jesus to Jerusalem. Luke uses the same verb here that was used of a holy spirit by which Jesus “was being led” into the wilderness in v.1. In v.1, the verb is not only passive but also imperfect, which means ongoing past. Here in v.9, the verb is aorist, meaning simple past. It is conceivable that the holy spirit of v.1 is still leading Jesus, even while the devil of v.9 is momentarily leading Jesus. That coterminous leading is very intriguing.

¹⁰ γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ ἐντελεῖται περὶ σοῦ τοῦ διαφυλάξαι σε,

for it has been written, ‘His angels he will command concerning you, to protect you’,

γέγραπται: PerfPI 3s, γράφω, 1) to write, with reference to the form of the letters

ἐντελεῖται: FMI 3s, ἐντέλλομαι, 1) to order, command to be done, enjoin 

διαφυλάξαι: AAInf, διαφυλάσσω, 1) to guard carefully

1. Psalm 91:11-12 reads, “For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways. On their hands they will bear you up, so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.”

¹¹ καὶ ὅτι Ἐπὶ χειρῶν ἀροῦσίν σε μήποτε προσκόψῃς πρὸς λίθον τὸν πόδα σου.

and ‘On hands they will bear you up, [so that] you may not dash against a stone your foot.’”

ἀροῦσίν: FAI 3p, αἴρω, 1) to raise up, elevate, lift up 

προσκόψῃς: AASubj 2s, προσκόπτω, 1) to strike against  1a) of those who strike against a stone or other obstacle  in the path, to stumble 

1. The stark contrast between casting oneself off of the temple’s pinnacle and ‘dashing one’s foot against a stone’ seems rather dramatic. However, the 91st Psalm is fraught with dangers both humanly contrived (battlefield) and natural (serpents, lions, etc.). It would seem that the temptation is to trust that God will not allow even a minor injury when subjecting oneself to a major, life-threatening act. 

¹² καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς ὅτι Εἴρηται, Οὐκ ἐκπειράσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου.

And having answered, Jesus said to him, “It has been said, ‘You will not test the Lord your God.’”

ἀποκριθεὶς: APPart nsm, ἀποκρίνομαι, 1) to give an answer to a question proposed, to answer 

εἶπεν: AAI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak

Εἴρηται: PerfPI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak  1a) affirm over, maintain 

ἐκπειράσεις: FAI 2s, ἐκπειράζω, 1) to prove, test, thoroughly 

1. Does this reply suggest some priority of things spoken over things written?

2. The words Jesus quotes are not in the imperative voice, as they are often translated. They are indicative in the future tense.

3. The close relationship between the word “test” (ἐκπειράζω) in this verse and the word “test” (πειράζω) in v. 2 is notable. Jesus was tested, but God is not to be tested.

4. Deuteronomy 6:16 reads, “Do not put the Lord your God to the test, as you tested him at Massah.”

¹³ Καὶ συντελέσας πάντα πειρασμὸν ὁ διάβολος ἀπέστη ἀπ' αὐτοῦ ἄχρι καιροῦ.

And having completed all of the tests the devil departed from him until a time.

συντελέσας: AAPart nsm, συντελέω, 1) to end together or at the same time  2) to end completely  2a) bring to an end, finish, complete

ἀπέστη: AAI 3s, ἀφίστημι 1. draw away ... depart from ...  withdraw one's self

1. The participle of συντελέω has returned! In v.2 above this participle signifies the completion of the 40 days of fasting. Here, it signifies the completion of the tests.

2. As I pointed out in a v.5 comment, the word kairos is often translated ‘opportune time’ (NIV, NRSV) or ‘convenient season’ (YLT). There is no adverb for ‘opportune.’ It is a judgment call regarding the meaning of kairos.

9¹⁰¹¹

9¹⁰¹¹