Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Luke 4:1 - 4:13
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Luk_4:1-13. See on Mat_4:1-11. Comp. Mar_1:13.
According to the reading ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ (see the critical remarks), Luke says: and He was led by the (Holy) Spirit in the wilderness, whilst He was for forty days tempted of the devil. Thus the Spirit had Him in His guidance as His ruling principle (Rom_8:14). Luke relates besides, varying from Matthew, that Jesus (1) during forty days (comp. Mar_1:13) was tempted of the devil (how? is not specified), and that then, (2) moreover, the three special temptations related in detail occurred.[81] This variation from Matthew remained also in the Recepta εἰς τὴν ἔρημον , in respect of which the translation would be: He was led of the Spirit into the wilderness in order to be tempted of the devil during the space of forty days (by reason of the present participle, see on Luk_2:45).
Luk_4:3. τῷ λίθῳ τούτῳ ] more concrete than Mat_4:4.
Luk_4:5. ἈΝΑΓΑΓΏΝ ] (see the critical remarks) he led Him upwards from the wilderness to a more loftily situated place. The “very high mountain” (Matthew) is a more exact definition due to the further developed tradition. Luke has drawn from another source.
ἐν στιγμῇ χρ .] in a point of time, in a moment, a magically simultaneous glimpse; a peculiar feature of the representation.[82] On the expression, comp. Plut. Mor. p. 104 A; Jacobs, ad Anthol. VII. p. 126.
Luk_4:6. αὐτῶν ] ΤῶΝ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙῶΝ .
Observe the emphasis of ΣΟῚ … ἘΜΟΊ … ΣΎ (Luk_4:7).
ΠΑΡΑΔΈΔΟΤΑΙ ] by God, which the boastful devil cunningly intends to have taken for granted.
Luk_4:10 f. ὅτι ] not recitative, but: that, and then καὶ ὅτι : and that. Comp. Luk_7:16. Otherwise in Mat_4:6.
μήποτε ] ne unquam, not necessarily to be written separately (Bornemann); see rather Ellendt, Lex. Soph. II. p. 107; Lipsius, Gramm. Unters. p. 129 f.
Luk_4:13. πάντα πειρασμ .] every temptation, so that he had no further temptation in readiness. “Omnia tela consumsit,” Bengel.
ἄχρι καιροῦ ] until a fitting season, when he would appear anew against Him to tempt Him. It is to be taken subjectively of the purpose and idea of the devil; he thought at some later time, at some more fortunate hour, to be able with better success to approach Him. Historically he did not undertake this again directly, but indirectly, as it repeatedly occurred by means of the Pharisees, etc. (Joh_8:40 ff.), and at last by means of Judas, Luk_22:3[83]; but with what glorious result for the tempted! Comp. Joh_14:30. The difference of meaning which Tittmann, Synon. p. 37, has asserted (according to which ἄχρι καιροῦ is said to be equivalent to ἝΩς ΤΈΛΟΥς ) is pure invention. See Fritzsche, ad Rom. I. p. 308 f. Whether, moreover, the characteristic addition ἄχρι καιροῦ is a remnant of the primitive form of this narrative (Ewald) or is appended from later reflection, is an open question. But it is hardly an addition inserted by Luke himself (Bleek, Holtzmann, and others), since it is connected with the omission of the ministry of the angels. This omission is not to be attributed to a realistic effort on the part of Luke (Holtzmann, but see Luk_22:43), but must have been a feature of the source used by him, and hence the ἄχρι καιροῦ must also have already formed part of it.
[81] According to Hilgenfeld, Luke’s dependence on Matthew and Mark is said to be manifested with special clearness from his narrative of the temptation. But just in regard to this narrative he must have followed a distinct source, because otherwise his variation in the sequence of the temptations (see on Mat_4:5, Rem.), and the omission of the angels’ ministry, would be incomprehensible (which Hilgenfeld therefore declares to be a pure invention), as, moreover, the ἄχρι καιροῦ (ver. 13) peculiar to Luke points to another source.
[82] The various attempts to make this ἐν στιγμῆ χρότου intelligible may be seen in Nebe, d. Versuch. d. Herrn, Wetzlar 1857, p. 109 ff. The author himself, regarding the temptation as an actual external history, avails himself of the analogy of the fatum morganum, but says that before the eye of the Lord the magical picture immediately dissolved. But according to the connection ἐν στιγμ . χρ . does not mean that the appearance lasted only a single moment, but that the whole of the kingdoms were brought within the view of Jesus, not as it were successively, but in one moment, notwithstanding their varied local situation upon the whole earth. Bengel says appropriately, “acuta tentatio.”
[83] According to Wieseler, Synopse, p. 201, the persecutions on the part of the Jews are meant, which had begun, Joh_5:15-18 ff.; there would therefore be a longer interval between vv. 13, 14. But a comparison of ver. 14 with ver. 1 shows that this interval is introduced in the harmonistic interest; moreover, Hofmann’s reference to the agony in Gethsemane (Schriftbew. II. 1, p. 317) is introduced, since not this, but probably the whole opposition of the hierarchy (Joh_8:44), and finally the crime of Judas (Joh_13:2; Joh_13:27), appears as the work of the devil.