Luke

22:1-6

Culmination of Messiah's mission, 19:45-24:53

2. The meaning of Messiah's death, 22:1-23:5

i] The plot to kill Jesus

Synopsis

Luke now provides us with a change in setting; it is the time of the feast of the Passover in the city of Jerusalem. The religious authorities have finally decided to dispose of Jesus, given their fear of his ever-increasing popularity. Judas comes to their aid, offering to provide them with an opportune time when they can arrest Jesus.

 
Teaching

They intended it for evil, but God intends it for good.

 
Issues

i] Context: See 19:45-20:18. The second six-layered Lukan sandwich in the major section The culmination of Messiah's mission, 19:45-24:53, addresses the topic The meaning of Messiah's death, 22:1-23:25. In this section, Jesus "consecrates himself to death in the conviction that it is the will of God .... and that it, like the passover long ago, will deliver Israel from death to life", Ellis.

The first episode concerns Jesus' betrayal, 22:1-6, and is followed by the account of the last supper with its passover / sacrifice focus, a truth with which the disciples must identify, v7-38. Then follows Jesus' time of prayer on the Mount of Olives, v39-46, and his arrest, v47-53, representing his determined will to take the path of suffering, rather than glory. The denial of Peter, v54-62, and the trial of Jesus, 22:63-23:25, follows, both serving to further illustrate that Jesus stands alone without an advocate, for alone he must suffer and die if he is to claim victory over the powers of darkness.

 

ii] Structure: The plot to kill Jesus:

The plot to murder Jesus, v1-2;

Setting, v1;

Israel's religious leaders look to murder Jesus, v2;

The betrayal of Judas, v3-6;

Judas succumbs to temptation, v3-4;

The religious leaders offer payment for treachery, v5;

Judas bides his time, v6.

 

iii] Interpretation:

Jesus' temple ministry is coming to an end, and so the focus of the gospel now moves from the temple to the city of Jerusalem and the events surrounding Jesus' passion. It is the time for the celebration of the Passover, and Jesus is preparing to offer himself as the willing victim for his people Israel. Evil is in the ascendency; the religious authorities have determined to murder Jesus, given their fear of his popularity, and one of Jesus' own disciples has given himself over to the Tempter's taunts. Yet, the sovereign grace of God is not necessarily thwarted as long as his messiah, the suffering Son of Man, sticks to the cosmic pathway of sacrifice, rather than glorious messianic superiority.

"The account shows that the events surrounding Jesus' ministry are part of a larger, comic drama between great spiritual powers. Heaven and hell are interested in the fate of Jesus. In the great chess match, this is Satan's major move to remove Jesus from the game", Bock.

 

iv] Synoptics:

See 3:1-20. It is generally argued that Luke has used Mark as his source for the Passion narrative, although both Taylor, Passion Narrative, and Jeremias argue that he uses his own source tradition as well as Mark. Given the fixed nature of the passion narrative in oral tradition, Luke may not have needed any source other than the tradition available to him at the time.

The contextual setting of the feast of the Passover, and the plot by the religious authorities, is recorded by Mark in 22:1-2 and by Matthew in 26:1-5. Luke's account is the shortest, while Matthew's is the longest, providing a detailed account of the setting and plot.

The betrayal by Judas is given a similar treatment by all three synoptists, along with the usual range of differences, cf., Mark 14:10-11 and Matthew 26:14-16. Luke adds the statement that "Satan entered Judas" (cf., John 13:27), and like Mark, he couches the narrative in indirect discourse, rather than Matthew's direct discourse.

It is interesting to note that Luke does not record the anointing, an important element in the passion narrative recorded by Matthew, Mark and John. For Matthew and Mark, the story is recorded between the plot to murder Jesus and the betrayal of Judas. Luke does record an earlier anointing (7:36-50), so maybe he questions the accuracy of the story, given that he understands that the anointing of Jesus body is a significant element of the events surrounding Jesus' burial.

 
Text - 22:1

The plot to murder Jesus, v1-6: i] The religious authorities make their plans, v1-2. The feast of Passover is at hand, and the religious authorities have decided to act against Jesus, planning to arrest him and put him to death. All they need is the opportunity.

de "now" - but/and. Transitional, identifying a step in the narrative.

twn azumwn (oV) gen. " of Unleavened Bread" - [the feast] of the unleavened bread. The genitive is adjectival, descriptive, idiomatic / identification, "the festival / feast known as Unleavened Bread." Celebrated between 15 and 21 Nisan and by now virtually part of the Passover festival.

hJ legomenh (legw) pres. mid. part. "called" - the one being called. The participle is adjectival, attributive, limiting "Unleavened Bread"; "which is called Passover."

pasca (a)"the Passover" - the passover. Probably here the passover meal is meant, prepared on the afternoon of 14 Nisan and eaten between sunset and midnight of 15 Nisan.

hggizen (eggizw) imperf. "was approaching" - was coming near. The imperfect, being durative, gives the sense "was drawing near", HCSB.

 
v2

Josephus, the Jewish historian of the time, recounts that major festivals were volatile, and at times, violent. At this festival, the religious authorities were planning their own moment of violence, but they had to do it in a way not to promote a riot and cause the Roman authorities to act.

ezhtoun (zhtew) imperf. "were looking / scheming" - [and the chief priests and the scribes] were seeking. The imperfect is probably used here to indicate background information.

to "-" - the. The neuter article serves as a nominalizer, turning the interrogative "how they might destroy him" into a substantive, accusative object of the verb "to seek", and as such it serves as a dependent statement of perception expressing what they seek.

pwV + subj. "for some way [to get rid of]" - how [they might kill, destroy him]. The interrogative pwV, "How?" + the deliberative subjunctive anelwsin, "may kill", serves to introduce an indirect question.

gar "for" - because [they feared the people]. Introducing a causal clause explaining why the authorities wanted to kill Jesus, "because" they were afraid of the people. The authorities probably fear Jesus' popularity and the consequent undermining of their authority, or even that Jesus' popularity may prompt a popular uprising causing a crackdown from Rome.

 
v3

ii] Judas Iscariot's betrayal of Jesus, v10-11. The religious authorities are seeking to arrest Jesus secretly and one of his own disciples, for the payment of a fee, is happy to oblige. Luke doesn't tell us why Judas wants to take Jesus down, although the offer of money points to a motive of greed.

satanaV "Satan" - [and] satan [entered into]. Nominative subject of the verb "to enter into." Along with John, Luke notes the involvement of Satan in Judas' betrayal. Satan has maintained a low profile since the temptation of Jesus, but now it's time to either compromise his enemy, or take him down

eiV "-" - into [judas]. Indicating the direction of the action and arrival at. A typical idiomatic repetition of a prepositional prefix, here for the verb eisercomai, "to enter into."

ton kaloumenon (kalew) pres. mid. part. "called" - the one being called. The participle is adjectival, attributive, limiting "Judas"; "who was called Iscariot."

Iskariwthn (hV ou) "Iscariot" - [judas] iscariot. We may have expected a genitive, "Judas, the man from the village of Karioth", but it serves as the accusative object of the participle "being called." An identifier for the man Judas, possibly a family name, but more likely of a place.

o[nta (eimi) pres. part. "-" - being. The participle is adjectival, attributive, limiting "Iscariot"; "who was one ...." The attributive modifier serves to further explain Judas' person; he is one of the twelve.

ek + gen. "of" - from. Expressing source / origin.

twn dwdeka gen. "of the twelve" - [the number] of the twelve. The genitive is adjectival, partitive; Judas is one of those numbered among the twelve.

 
v4

When it comes to the "Why?", it is unclear why Judas betrayed Jesus, although money seems to be the issue, but as for the "What?", his actions are somewhat clearer. The religious authorities need to surreptitiously arrest Jesus and Judas gives them the means. Some have suggested that Judas provides the authorities with the messianic secret (Jesus' claim to be the messiah), but Judas is not used at the trial so this is unlikely.

apelqwn (apercoma) aor. part. "went to [the chief priests]" - having departed [he spoke with]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the main verb "to speak with", but possibly adverbial, temporal, "After going off .....", ie., "after leaving Jesus and his fellow disciples", TH. Yet it seems likely that a more general sense is intended by the verb, with the weight on Judas going to the religious authorities rather than his leaving Jesus, as NIV; "Judas went and discussed with the chief priests ...", Barclay.

toiV arciereusin (euV ewV) dat. "the chief priests" - the chief priests and with the commanders, officers (temple police). As with "commanders", dative of direct object after the sun prefix verb "to speak with."

to "-" - the. The article serves as a nominalizer turning the interrogative "how he might hand over them to him" into a substantive, direct object of the verb sunlalew, "to speak with", so serving as a dependent statement expressing what they were discussing. This is technically difficult, given that the verb "to speak with" is intransitive, but the construction images v2 where the verb was zhtew, "to seek."

pwV "how" - how [they might hand over him]. The interrogative pwV, "How?" + the deliberative subjunctive paradw/, "may hand over", serves to introduce an indirect question.

autoiV dat. pro. "-" - to them. Dative of indirect object.

 
v5

As Plummer puts it, Judas "simplified matters" for the religious authorities because they now have the means to arrest Jesus away from public gaze.

dounai (didwmi) aor. inf. "to give" - [and they rejoiced and put together = agreed] to give. The infinitive introduces an object clause / dependent statement of indirect speech expressing what they agreed; "they agreed that they would pay him a sum of money."

autw/ dat. pro. "him" - [silver, money] to him. Dative of indirect object. It is possible that this pronoun goes with the verb suneqento, taking the sense "to agree with", in which case the pronoun is a dative of direct object after the sun prefix verb "to agree with"; "they came to an agreement with him to give him money", TH.

 
v6

ezhtei (zhtew) imperf. "watched" - [and he admitted = agreed to the deal, and] was seeking. The imperfect is probably used here to express durative / ongoing action.

tou paradounai (paradidwmi) aor. inf. "to hand [Jesus] over" - [an opportunity] to deliver over = betray [him]. The genitive articular infinitive most likely serves to introduce a final clause expressing purpose, so Zerwick, "in order to hand him over", but sometimes the construction is epexegetic, here specifying the "opportunity", so Culy.

autoiV dat. pro. "to them" - to them. Dative of indirect object.

a[ter + gen. "when no [crowd] was present" - apart from, without [a crowd]. Expressing separation. A rare preposition used only twice in the NT. "Without collecting a crowd", REB.

 

Luke Introduction

Exegetical Commentaries

 

[Pumpkin Cottage]
lectionarystudies.com