Anda di halaman 1dari 19

Jesus in The Gospels 4334

Introduction

This paper will offer an exegesis of Luke 16:19 – 21.

Context

Luke 16 addresses ‘Generosity: Handling money and possessions’1 amidst

a series of Jesus’ teachings on discipleship located within the Travel

Narrative (9:51 – 19:27).2 Luke 16:19-31, exclusive to the third Gospel,

finds itself as an adequate conclusion to the aforementioned theme in

chap 16.3 Bailey, rightly or wrongly, broadens the spectrum and considers

the pericope a part of a trilogy: starting with Luke 15:11-32 where a

prodigal dissipates his father’s wealth. Then Luke 16:1-8, where an unjust

steward wastes his master’s possessions, and the finale Luke 16:19-31,

where a rich man wastes his own possessions.4 Bailey’s inclusion of chap

15 is interesting as Nolland highlights the linkage between Luke 15 and 16

through parallelism in the greater Lukan structure.5 Either way this is to

be seen as Jesus’ conclusion on the matter of Mammon.

There is, however, much debate regarding whether Jesus’ discourse in

Luke 16:19-31 was a parable. Whilst some6 suggest the account is not

1 D. Bock, Luke, Vol. 2, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996), 1365.

2 A. Hultgren, The Parables of Jesus: A Commentary, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002),


111.

3 J. Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke X-XXIV, Volume2 (U.S.A: Doubleday, 1985),
1125.

4 K. Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes, (London: SPCK, 2008), 382.

5 J. Nolland, World Biblical Commentary: Luke 9:21-18:34, (Dallas: Word Books, 1993),
825.

6 D. Gooding, According to Luke (Leichester: InterVarsity Press, 1987), 227, and Millard
Erickson, Christian Theology, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984), 527.

1
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

parabolic others7 assert it is. Ryle opens up the possibility of it containing

elements of both.8 Greswell considers this standing to be “manifestly

absurd”.9 However, he does not further substantiate his view on the

matter. The writer empathises with Ryle, nonetheless, considers it too

problematic a task to discern the parabolic elements from the actual. The

paper must, therefore, decide if this is a fictitious representation or a real

narrative. This is crucial as it affects the way one exegetes the pericope.

For instance, Tertullian and Schleiermacher had rendered the passage as

purely metaphorical and thus understood that the Rich man meant Herod

Antipas, and Lazarus, John the Baptist.10 It is needless to say their

interpretation was heavily flawed.

Gooding defines a parable to be “based on actual things and activities in

this world, which are then used as parables of higher realities”. Thus, he

discards the passage as a parable, saying “heaven and hell are not

parables of higher realities but they are themselves the ultimate

realities”.11 Nonetheless, this has been criticized amongst scholars12.

Blomberg, for instance, considers Gooding’s limitation of a parable to be

7 C. Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables, (Leicester: Apollos, 1990), 205. Bock, Luke,
1362-1363. J. Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke X-XXIV, Vol. 2, (U.S.A: Doubleday,
1985), 1125.

8 J. Ryle, Expository Thoughts: Luke, Vol. 2, (Ipswich: Steam Press, 1859), 216.

9 E. Greswell, A Exposition of The Parables and of other Parts of The Gospels, Vol. IV,
(London: Oxford University, 1835), 106.

10 J. Ryle, 216. Vitringa said rich man represents the Jewish Nation and Lazarus Jesus.

11 D. Gooding, According to Luke (Leichester: InterVarsity Press, 1987), 227.

12 D. Bock, “The Parable of The Rich Man and Lazarus and The Ethics of Jesus”,
Southwestern Journal of Theology, Vol 40 no 1 (Fall 1997), 64.

2
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

“arbitrary and unwarranted”.13 One may rumour Gooding’s standing to be

a result of fear: fear of losing doctrine regarding the afterlife if it were a

parable. Bock states, such apprehensions are ill-advised and the genre

must always be verified before doctrine. He further stresses that doctrine

can be learned in symbolic texts, pointing to apocalyptic genre as an

adequate example.14

Nevertheless, both Bock and Blomberg do acknowledge various

characteristics of the account that are atypical for parables which may

suggest, Jesus is not presenting a parable.15 For instance, the parable

considers, to some great detail, the afterlife beyond referring to future

judgment.16 In addition, Jesus’ inclusion of a name has caused many to

infer that he told the story about people known to his audience.

Furthermore, the account is found to reflect parallel themes in the larger

culture, both in Egypt17 and in Judaism.18 This background suggests that

aspects of the story were a part of popular reflection.19 Nevertheless, they

strongly consider it a parable with substantial reasons. Firstly, the

13 Blomberg, 205.

14 Bock, Parable, 64.

15 Bock, Parable, 65. Blomberg, 204.

16 Blomberg, 204. Bock, Parable, 64-65

17 Bernard Scott, Hear then the Parable: A Commentary on the Parables of Jesus
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989), 156-57. K. Grobel, “...Whose Name was Neves”,
New Testament Studies, Vol. 10, No. 3, (April 1964)
373.

18 1 Enoch 95:3-5; 96:4-8; 98:1-9; 97:8-10, 104:5; 103:3-7. A later version is found in
Hagigah II, 77d.

19 Bock, Parable, 65.

3
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

introduction as found in 16:1,20 indicates a parable. This notion is

strengthened and outweighs the possibility that this is a real narrative as

there are parallels in Jewish rabbinic parables.21 This is refuted, weakly,

by pointing out parables where this is not present. Secondly, the “triadic,

monarchic”22 structure of the passage is analogous to nine other parables

of Jesus.23 Therefore, it may be concluded that though the account may

hold certain characteristics to indicate an actual event, the reasons to

consider a parable here are stronger.

Verse 19

Now there was a rich man, and he habitually dressed in purple and fine

linen, joyously living in splendour every day

Now a certain man was rich

This introductory formula, as discussed above, indicates a parable.24 The

rich man is kept anonymous despite carrying his mantle as the main

character.25 It may be questioned whether his anonymity was intentional

as numerous copyists include a name for him. In Pseudo-Cyprianic, De

20 Similar introductory formulas found in (Luke 10:30, 12:16, 14:16, 16:1, 18:2, 19:12,
20:9).

21 Blomberg, 205.

22 G. Knight, Luke 16:19-31: The Rich Man and Lazarus, Review and Expositor, Vol. 94
(Spring 1997), 277.

23 Blomberg, 171-21. (Luke 15: 11-32; 15:4-10; 7:41-43; 12:42-48; Matthew 21:28-32;
25:1-13; 13:24-30, 36-43; 11:16-19)

24 Bock, 1385. R. Stein, Luke, (Nashville: Broadman, 1992), 423. Blomberg, 205.

25 K. Grobel, 373.

4
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

Pascha Computus, he is referred to as Phineas,26 in Priscillian (A.D. 385) it

is Phinees, and in a marginal note to the versified Bible of Peter of Riga it

is Amonofis.27 In the Bodmer Papyrus (P75), the oldest Greek text of the

Lukan Gospel, he is named Neuēs.28 Neuēs itself is unintelligible; thus the

name is suggested to be a scribal error for, 29


or a shortened form of, 30

Nineuēs. This is also found in the ancient Sahidic version as Nineuē

(Nineveh).31 Fitzmyer states this is an unusual personal name;

nevertheless, it may have been used to echo an aspect of the rich man’s

spirituality to Nineveh: the rich Assyrian city that brought upon itself the

judgement of God.32 Grobel explains the Coptic name Nineuē as two

words, nine, “nothing” and oue, “one, someone,” and concludes together

it means “Nobody.”33 Grobel’s explanation has received mixed reaction

amongst scholars. Marshall considers it to be “most ingenious” as it

depicts the rich man’s lack of eminence in the underworld. 34 However,

Fitzmyer, considers it an act of desperation as the word nine is used only

26 The reason he is named Phineas may be because in the Old Testament (Ex. 6:25; Nu.
25: 7, 11; Jos. 22:13, 31f.; 24:33) Eleazar and Phinehas are associated. Lazar is a
contraction of Eleazar in Hebrew. Marshall, 634.

27 T. Manson, The sayings of Jesus, (London: SCM Press, 1949), 298. Marshall, 634.
Marshall suggests ‘Amonofis’ is a form of ‘Amenophis’, a name of several ancient
Pharoahs.

28 Fitzmyer, 1130. Stein, 423. Metzger, 140. C. Evans, Saint Luke, (London: SCM Press,
1990), 616.

29 B. Metzger, A Textutal Commentary On The Greek New Testament, 2nd Ed., (Stuttgart:
German Bible Society, 1994), 140. 140.

30 Fitzmyer, 1130. Marshall, 634.

31 Fitzmyer, 1130. Marshall, 634. Metzger, 140. Manson, 298. L. Johnson, The Gospel of
Luke, (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1991), 251.

32 Fitzmyer, 1130.

33 Grobel, 381.

34 Marshall, 634 – 635.

5
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

in Fayyumic and not Sahidic.35 In light of Fitzmyer’s view it is evident that

Marshall’s reasoning for the endorsement of Grobel’s work is weak.

Moreover, these names may be just an attempt to attribute a conjugate

name for the rich man; this is particularly noticeable with the name

Phineas.36 Alternatively they may have been the copyist’s attempt to

embellish the story. Metzger speculates these names are a prompting of

“horror vacui” on the writers.37 Moreover, majority of Greek manuscripts

attribute no name to the rich man.38 Therefore one may conclude the rich

man’s anonymity was probably deliberate in order to maintain the

narrative’s generic focus on the wealthy as stated by Bock. 39 Or his name

was omitted to parallel the book of life where Lazarus was found but not

the rich man, as inferred by Ryle.40

Purple robe (πορφύραν) and fine linen (βύσσον)41

“Purple” refers to the man’s outer garments, most likely made of fine wool

dyed with imported Phoenician purple made from the murex.42 His under

garments, similarly stained with extravagance, were made of “fine linen”.

35 Fitzmyer, 1130

36 Especially noticed with Phineas.

37 Metzger, 140.

38 Metzger, 140. Fitzmyer, 1130.

39 Bock, Luke, 1365.

40 Ryle, 217.

41 Nolland, 827. Appear together in Prov and Qap both cases referring to female garb.

42 Fitzmyer, 1130. B. Easton, 251.

6
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

The Greek word used is “bussos” which in Hebrew is butz, referring to

expensive Egyptian cotton (Exod. 26: 1, 31, 36; Ezek. 16: 10, 27: 7).43

This Egyptian material was also used for mummy wrap and sometimes

referred to as “woven air”, further highlighting the profligacy of his

clothing.44

Bock brings to perspective the man’s wealth as he states “some people

have nothing, while others can afford expensive underwear”.45 Bailey

notes Jesus’ use of humour; the rich man not only wore luxurious outer

garments but in case anyone was interested he also wore similarly priced

underwear made out of imported materials.46 He is portrayed not only rich

but callously and profanely rich just as the Sadducees – to whom this may

have been addressed.47

The man’s garments were considered an indication of opulence as they

were made using the most delicate and luxurious fabric known to the

ancient world.48 Moreover, the use of the customary imperfect verb

(ενεδιδύσκετο), indicates it was habitual for him dress this way.49

Fitzmyer suggests the descriptions indicate he lived an analogous lifestyle

43 A. Plummer, The Gospel According to St. Luke, (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1906), 391.
Fitzmyer, 1131. Marshall, 635.

44 A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. 2 (Nashville: Broadman


Press, 1930), 221.

45 Bock, 1365.

46 K.Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes, (London: SPCK, 2008), 382.

47 Manson, 296.

48 Manson, 298.

49 J. Story, “Twin Parables”, American Theological Inquiry, Vol. 2 no 1(Jan 15 2009), 113.
Knight, 279.

7
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

to a king in the Old Testament (Prov. 31:22).50 Stein concurs with

Fitzmyer and further notes the link found in NT associating ‘purple’ to

kingship; Mark 15:17, 20; Rev 18:12.51 Knight, in harmony with the above,

uses Josephus’ writings to substantiate his standing on the matter.52

Manson is in agreement with the aforementioned association nevertheless

offers no justification – biblical nor external – for his culmination. 53 Easton,

conversely, is in complete divergence with the above four as he states

“the man merely dressed according to his station”.54 This is based on,

what seems to be his poor interpretation of Prov. 31:22 and attempt to

superimpose it on the current context.

Joyously living in splendour every day

The rich man is portrayed to eat, as he dresses, in extravagant

abundance, not just on special occasions, but every day. The word “daily”

(καθ' ημέραν) is reinforced by the customary verbal forms used to

illustrate the man’s habitual feasting.55 In addition, utmost excellence and

finery is strongly denoted with the use of the adverb “λαμπρῶς”.56

Furthermore, “εὐφραινόμενος”, found nowhere in the bible outside Luke’s

50 Fitzmyer, 1130. See also 1Macc 8:14, 10:62. Esth 8:15.

51 Stein, 423.

52Knight, 279. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 8.183; 11.256-57.


53 Manson, 298.

54 B. Easton, The Gospel According to St. Luke, (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1926), 251.

55 Twin Parables, 113.

56 Johnson, 252. Stein, 423.

8
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

writings,57 is only used for special occasions as found in 12:19, 15:23, 24,

29, 32.58

Easton suggests the description of the rich man’s feasting do not

necessarily display his spirituality in a negative light.59 However, Johnson

disagrees with such a view as he compares the descriptions of the man to

the sort of affluence and “overdone sumptuousness” found in Amos 6:4-

7.60 Bailey, contesting Easton, demonstrates Jesus’ implied message as

inferred by his 1st Century Middle Eastern audience regarding the rich

man’s spirituality. The man greatly feasted and celebrated every day,

including the Sabbath without giving a day of rest for his workers.

Therefore, he desecrated the Ten Commandments publicly every week in

order to maintain his decadent lifestyle, which he evidently showed more

importance to than the law of God.61 Nolland also agrees that the man’s

feasting is not Godly as he entertains the possibility that Luke, here, is

using a literary device to contrast between fitting(Cf. 15:23, 24, 29, 32)

and blasphemous celebration (16:19).62 Whilst the paper concurs wholly

with Bailey, Johnson and Nolland, the writer would further question

Easton’s rationale for his view, if there is one.

57 Nolland, 827.

58 Plummer, 391. Johnson, 252.

59 Easton, 251.

60 Johnson, 252.

61 K. Bailey, 382.

62 Nolland, 828.

9
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

Verse 20

And a poor man named Lazarus was laid at his gate, covered with sores

And a certain poor man named Lazarus

Lazarus is introduced as “ptōchos de tis onomati” by way of contrast to

the rich man in v16.63 The contrast is continued sharply in the description

of his lifestyle. The word ptōchos implies that Lazarus was a beggar.64

Gowler states that Lazarus was forced into “the most degrading and lethal

form of poverty”.65

The poor man has been given the name Lazarus: the Greek form of

Eleazar meaning He whom God has helped.66 This is unexpected since

Lazarus is the least significant of the three characters and does not speak

at all.67 Furthermore, the inclusion of a name, as mentioned above, is

anomalous for a parabolic account. However, Schweizer considers his

name to carry a significant role in revealing his spirituality because of

what it means.68 Fitzmyer states, regarding the poor man’s name: “This is

a fitting name for the beggar in this parable, who was not helped by a

63 Nolland, 828.

64 “πτωχὸς”, G, Kittel, G. Friedrich, ed., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,


Vol. VI, (Stuttgart: Eerdmans, 1968), 886.

65 D. Gowler, “A Dialogic Reading of Luke 16:19-31”, Perspectives in Religious Studies,


Vol. 32 no 3 (Fall 2005), 255.

66 Stein, 423.

67 C. Evans, 616.

68 E. Schweizer, trans. D. Green, The Good News According to Luke, (London: SPCK,
1984), 260. Easton, 251.

10
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

fellow human being, but in his afterlife consoled by God.” 69 Moreover, this

highlights and affirms Luke’s linkage between poverty and piety found

throughout his Gospel (Luke 4:18; 6:20; 7:22 and later 21:3).70 The

association may be further strengthened as Johnson identifies this parable

to reflect this linkage as he notes the first Beatitudes and woes (Luke 6:20

– 26) to be reflected here with the use of ptōchos in such close

juxtaposition with plousios.71 However, these reasons – though valid – are

not strong. Nolland offers several that are, in the opinion of the writer.

Firstly, he states the naming of the poor man prevents generalising the

pattern of reversal to all those who are poor. Secondly, the naming of the

poor man and not the rich is done in order to indicate towards the

immanent reversal of their fortune just as the usual anonymity of the poor

and the individuating significance of wealth has been reversed.72

Creed questions if this is the Lazarus who is raised from the dead in John.73

Hultgren states there is no reason to suggest it is.74 Moreover, the fact

that Lazarus in John is shown to have a family (11:1-44; 12:1- 11) discards

any notion of them being the same person. If that were to be the case,

his family would have cared for him and it would also suggest this account

was an actual event and not parable. Marshall does not suggest that both

69 Fitzmyer, 1131.

70 Stein, 423.

71 Johnson, 252.

72 Nolland, 828.

73 J. Creed, The Gospel According To St. Luke, (London: Macmillan and Co., 1930), 211.

74 A. Hultgren, The Parables of Jesus: A Commentary, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,


2002),111.

11
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

men are one instead recognises the name as a common one75 and

intrigues over the fact that Lazarus’ resurrection in John 11 did not cause

them to believe in Jesus; just as it was said to the rich man in Luke 16:

31.76 Weiss, states that the name Lazarus might have been introduced to

this parable under the influence of John 11 either when the NT canon was

formed or when Luke was writing his Gospel. The latter requires the

assumption that the Johanine Gospel was already of the tradition.

Moreover, Weiss’ views are merely speculations and hold no evidence to

them. Having stated this, the writer complies with Marshall’s view on the

matter.

Laid at his gate

Lyle suggests that ebeblēto means ‘was thrown’ and refutes the English

translations that render it less harshly.77 Hendrikson, however, disagrees

with Lyle and explains that ebeblēto is the third person singular pluperfect

indicative passive verb of bállo which also has weakened meanings.78 This

paper favours Hendrickson’s standing which is also supported by the work

of Plummer.79 It should be noted that the phrase is frequently used to

75 Though Marshall offers no evidence for this, Fitzmyer, 1131, offers justification for the
name being a common one based on the frequent appearance of the name in Josephus,
Antiquities of the Jews, 18.4,5.

76 Marshall, 637.

77 Story, 114.

78 W. Hendrickson, New Testament Commentary: Luke, (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth,


1978), 788.

79 Plummer, 391.

12
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

describe the sick and lame (Matt 8:6, 14; 9:2; Mark 7:30; Rev2:2).80

Nolland speculates that this vocalises Lazarus’ lack of ability in choosing

his location.81 This notion of his inability to move is supported by Bock,

who further speculates this to be a result of his hunger and malnutrition.82

Therefore, due his lack of locomotion one may infer that Lazarus had to be

placed at the gate by friends or even just people every day.83

The fact that the rich man has a gate to his house indicates the

“grandeur” of the house.84 This must have been an outer entrance or

portico (Acts 10:17, 12:13, Matt 26:71) as Lazarus would not be accepted

near the actual entry door.85 Nevertheless, Lazarus is still open to view,

therefore it is no surprise that Lazarus begs by the gate of the rich man’s

house as he will be definitely noticed whenever people enter and depart

including the rich man himself.86 This shows that man had numerous

chances to stop and help Lazarus yet he did not. Moreover, the fact that

Lazarus’ name is known by the rich man when addressing him in v.24 in

the afterlife shows the rich man knew who he was on earth illustrates the

extreme level of ignorance shown by the rich man towards Lazarus. 87 He

80 Nolland, 828. Bock, Luke, 1366. Hultgren, 118. Stein, 423.

81 Nolland, 828.

82 Bock, Luke, 1366.

83 Hultgren, 112. Easton, 251.

84 Plummer, 391.

85 Stein, 423. Nolland, 828.

86 A. Bruce, The Parabolic Teaching of Christ, (Minneapolis: Klock & Klock Christian
Publishers, 1980), 385.

87 Story, 114.

13
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

knew Lazarus and his needs yet chose to do nothing but remain

consumed in his self-indulgent lifestyle.

Covered with sores

These were ulcers,88 Luke’s medical background is revealed here as he

uses this verb which was commonly used amongst medical writers,

moreover, it is only found here in whole the biblical greek.89 The medical

cause of his ulcers is unknown, but they are what keep him from being

employed.90

Manson insinuates that Lazarus may have been leprous. He explains that

the Greek word ptōchos (poor) is miskēnā in Aramaic, which in turn is

used as a euphemism for “leper”. 91


Marshall contests his view and

questions if that were the case would Lazarus have begged in public.92

Conclusion

Luke’s exceptional language and detail in the everyday lives of the rich

man and Lazarus allow their portraits to be vividly and as Manson puts it

‘violently’ contrasted.93 Whilst the rich man is lives a like king, Lazarus is

88 Stein, 423.

89 Plummer, 392.

90 Nolland, 828.

91 Manson, 298.

92 Marshall, 635.

93 Manson, 298.

14
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

forced beg, unable to walk and covered with ulcers. The rich man is

depicted not only a ‘lover of money’ but also as one who wants everyone

to know his wealth. Colloquially one might say he was ‘in your face’ with

his wealth. It wasn’t just the way he was finely clothed but also the way

he ate sumptuously and lived a corresponding lifestyle of ostentatious

splendour in his mansion. Marshal reckons the extensive description of

the two men (Luke 16:19-21) does not serve adequately the first part of

the parable.94 The writer contests this suggesting it does as it gives more

than just a mere description of the men’s material possessions but also to

some degree as aspects of this paper has shown their spirituality.

Bibliography

Articles

Bock, D. “The Parable of The Rich Man and Lazarus and The Ethics of

Jesus”, Southwestern Journal of Theology, Vol 40 no 1 (Fall 1997), 63-72.

Gowler, D. “A Dialogic Reading of Luke 16:19-31”, Perspectives in

Religious Studies, Vol. 32 no 3 (Fall 2005), 249-265.

94 Marshall, 633.

15
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

Grobel, K. “...Whose Name was Neves”, New Testament Studies, Vol. 10,

No. 3, (April 1964)

Knight, G. Luke 16:19-31: The Rich Man and Lazarus, Review and

Expositor, Vol. 94 (Spring 1997), 277- 283

Story, J. “Twin Parables”, American Theological Inquiry, Vol. 2 no 1(Jan 15

2009), 105-120.

Books

Bailey, K. Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes,London: SPCK, 2008

Blomberg, C. Interpreting the Parables, Leicester: Apollos, 1990

Bock, D., Luke, Vol. 2, Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996

Bruce, A., The Parabolic Teaching of Christ, Minneapolis: Klock & Klock

Christian Publishers, 1980

Creed, J. The Gospel According To St. Luke, London: Macmillan and Co.,

1930

Easton, B. The Gospel According to St. Luke, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark,

1926

Erickson, M. Christian Theology, Vol. 2 Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,

1984

Evans, C. Saint Luke, London: SCM Press, 1990

Fitzmyer, J., The Gospel According to Luke X-XXIV, Volume2 U.S.A:

Doubleday, 1985

Gooding, D. According to Luke Leichester: InterVarsity Press, 1987

Greswell, E. A Exposition of The Parables and of other Parts of The

Gospels, Vol. IV, London: Oxford University, 1835

16
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

Hendrickson W., New Testament Commentary: Luke, Edinburgh: Banner of

Truth, 1978,

Hultgren, A. The Parables of Jesus: A Commentary, Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 2002

Johnson, L. The Gospel of Luke, Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1991

Manson, T. The sayings of Jesus, London: SCM Press, 1949

Metzger, B. A Textutal Commentary On The Greek New Testament, 2nd

Ed., Stuttgart: German Bible Society, 1994

Nolland, J., World Biblical Commentary: Luke 9:21-18:34, Dallas: Word

Books, 1993

Plummer, A. The Gospel According to St. Luke, Edinburgh: T & T Clark,

1906

Robertson, A. T., Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. 2 Nashville:

Broadman Press, 1930

Ryle, J. Expository Thoughts: Luke, Vol. 2, Ipswich: Steam Press, 1859

Schweizer, E. The Good News According to Luke, London: SPCK, 1984

Scott, B. Hear then the Parable: A Commentary on the Parables of Jesus

Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989

Stein, R. Luke, Nashville: Broadman, 1992

Dictionaries

Bammel, E., “πτωχὸς”, G, Kittel, G. Friedrich, ed., Theological Dictionary

of the New Testament, Vol. VI, Stuttgart: Eerdmans, 1968

17
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

18
Jesus in The Gospels 4334

19