¹ For brief discussions of Luke' text vis-à-vis Mark 12.28–34 and other texts, cf. Lagrange, M.-J., Évangile selon Saint Luc (Paris: Gabalda, 1948) 310;Google ScholarNolland, J., Luke 9:21–18:34 (WBC 35B; Dallas: Word, 1993) 580;Google ScholarErnst, J., Das Evangelium nach Lukas (RNT; Regensburg: Pustet, 1977) 344–6;Google ScholarMarshall, I. H., The Gospel of Luke (Exeter: Paternoster, 1979) 440–1;Google ScholarGoulder, M., Luke - A New Paradigm (JSNT Suppl. Series 20; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1989) 2.485–6, 490–1;Google ScholarFitzmyer, J., The Gospel according to Luke (AB 28A; Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1983) 877–8;Google ScholarEvans, C. F., Saint Luke (TPI NTComm; London: SCM Press, 1990) 463–4.Google Scholar

² Fitzmyer, , Gospel, 880,Google Scholar ‘The phrase reveals a hostile attitude. Contrast Mark 12:28’; Johnson, L. T., The Gospel of Luke (SPS 3; Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1991) 172:Google Scholar ‘Luke thus identifies the intent of the question as hostile.’ Lagrange, Évangile, 310 speaks of ‘l’intention d'embarrasser le Maître …’ Wickham, E. S. G., ‘Studies in Texts: Luke 10.29’, Theology 60 [1957] 417–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar questions that ἐκπεıράζων reveals a hostile intent; Evans, , Luke, 464Google Scholar notes that it is ‘assumed’ the term indicates hostility.

³ Marshall, , Gospel, 442,Google Scholar ‘… it is his view which is tested by Jesus’.

⁴ Johnson, , Gospel, 172,Google Scholar ‘There is irony here … the lawyer continues to test Jesus in order to assert himself.’ Fitzmyer, , Gospel, 886,Google Scholar notes that this first question ‘found such a simple answer’. This observation only raises the question about the nature of the testing and its real intent.

⁵ I believe Lagrange, Évangile, 311 is on the right track as he lists certain possibilities one might choose from: ‘… la réponse du scribe pourrait n’être en effet que l'écho de la prédication de Jésus … Il a pu l'entendre et lui servir sa propre doctrine, se réservant de l'embarrasser sur le point de savoir qui est le prochain. Ou bien on peut admettre que pour conduire sa narration au point voulu, Luc a attribué au docteur ce qui était l'enseignement du Maître.’

⁶ Marshall, , Gospel, 441,Google Scholar notes Manson's observation that ‘there is nothing surprising about the lawyer repeating what he already knew to be the answer of Jesus himself to the question in order to put his own counter-question’; cf. Ernst, , Evangelium, 346,Google Scholar ‘Die Antwort des Schriftgelehrten ist in Wahrheit die Antwort Jesu’; Schürmann, H., Das Lukas Evangelium (HTKNT 3; Freiburg: Herder, 1994) 2.133,Google Scholar ‘erstaunlicherweise … ganz im Sinne Jesu’..

⁷ For the preference exemplum, cf. Fitzmyer, , Gospel, 883;Google ScholarNolland, , Gospel, 591,Google Scholar is unsure about this identification.

⁸ Cf. Ernst, , Evangelium, 346:Google Scholar ‘… er möchte vielmehr die “Rechtgläubigkeit” Jesu auf die Probe stellen. Die an sich abgegriffene Anrede δıδάσκαλος behält im vorliegenden Zusammenhang die ursprüngliche Bedeutung von “Lehrer”’; 348: ‘Die Hilfeleistung wird in den Einzelheiten geschildert, um das Tun zu unterstreichen …’; Evans, Luke, 471, ‘the details … emphasize the extent of the Samaritan's compassion and his generosity …’.

⁹ Evans, , Luke, 467–8,Google Scholar is particularly sharp in his criticism of a less than literarily satisfying union of vv. 29–37 with vv. 25–8, but the change of perspective from one set of texts to another is not un-Lucan and not literarily inappropriate.

¹⁰ Fitzmyer, , Gospel, 883,Google Scholar ‘Only secondarily has it [10.29–37] been joined to the preceding [10.25–28], since it does not really answer the lawyer's second question’; but Marshall, , Gospel, 440,Google Scholar ‘…although the latter [10.29–37] appears to follow as a kind of appendix, it is integral… and forms the climax’.

¹¹ Nolland, , Gospel, 592,Google Scholar ‘The lawyer wishes to appear in a good light, despite having lost the initiative to Jesus, and having been displaced from the position of challenger to that of the one being challenged’; Ernst, , Evangelium, 346,Google Scholar ‘Der Schriftgelehrte, der sich blosgestellt sieht…’;

Marshall, , Gospel, 447,Google Scholar ‘The lawyer is depicted as wishing to justify his earlier question and regain the initiative…He looks rather foolish having asked a question to which he himself has been forced to give the answer…so he professes inability to practise the law until its meaning has been clarified.’ Cf. Evans, , Luke, 469,Google Scholar ‘it is not clear what it means. Luke alone has the expression…which is not found in classical Greek, the papyri, or the LXX’. A less common view is that of Wickham, E. S. G., Theology 60, 417,CrossRefGoogle Scholar who suggests that ‘justifying himself’ means to make oneself just by learning from Jesus what one needs for justification. Tumbarello, G., ‘Lettura esegetica’, Bibbia e Oriente 33 [1991] 36Google Scholar notes,‘… si rende conto di essere stato messo in ridicolo ma non riesce ad accettare umilmente la sconfitta …’

¹² Fitzmyer, , Gospel, 886,Google Scholar ‘… to show that he was right in posing the question that he had originally proposed to Jesus’; Nolland, , Gospel, 597,Google Scholar ‘Despite having lost the initiative to Jesus in vv. 25–8, the lawyer thinks he can still emerge from the encounter looking good …’; Lagrange, , Évangile, 312Google Scholar notes ‘[Le Scribe] répond avec promptitude (ce καί!) comme un argumentateur qui peut-être a pr´vu et même amené la difficulté.’

¹³ Marshall, , Gospel, 439,Google Scholar treats 10.25–11.3 as a unit, ‘the second main point in the major teaching section of Lk.’, but does not link this section with what precedes except to note that it is part of the small complexes of teaching (9.51–10.24; 10.25–11.13; 11.14–54), 402.

¹⁴ Fitzmyer, , Gospel, 877,Google Scholar writes that ‘Jesus has just contrasted the disciples as “small children” with “the wise and intelligent” (10.21). Now Luke … introduces one of the latter to question Jesus …’; Johnson, , Gospel, 174,Google Scholar notes ‘We have been instructed by the thematic statement in 7:29–30 to recognize in the “teachers of the Law” those who reject prophets and reject God's will for them, failing to justify God. We are not surprised, therefore, to find a lawyer ‘testing him“ by asking how to gain eternal life and when given an answer … trying to trap Jesus in a classic casuist puzzler’; cf. Schürmann, , Lukasevangelium, 131,Google Scholar ‘Die Einleitung kou καί ἰδού markiert … eine Zäsur … Die eschatologischen Zusagen und Selig-preisungen VV 20.21.23f könnten ja miβverstanden werden, aus der Heilsfrage kann doch nicht die des “Tuns” … ausgeklammert werden’; Lagrange, Évangile, 312, ‘Seulement il figure ici moins comme Samaritain que comme appartient á un peuple ennemi, á tout le moins comme un étranger’, but I am not inclined to downplay the choice of Samaritan here. Schneider, G., Das Evangelium nach Lukas (ÖTK 3; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1977) 1.246Google Scholar notes, ‘Auf die Seligpreisung der Jünger (10.23) folgen zwei Stücke, die im wesentlichen Sondergut darstellen und die vom Tun der Nächstenliebe einerseits (10.25–37) sowie vom Hören auf Jesu Wort andererseits (10.38–12) sprechen.’

¹⁵ Cf. Nolland, , Gospel, 536.Google Scholar As the textual critical apparatus shows, one would expect Jesus to have a ‘dominical saying’ with which to conclude this story; rather, we find that the disciples have the literary privilege of ‘first-person citation’. This intentional imbalance is due, in part, to stress the forcefulness of the apostles’ anger and, in part, to give clear justification of their harsh reaction: Elijah reacted this way, and with Old Testament approval. Jesus, here as in the subsequent 10.60 and 10.61, gives a reaction different from certain Old Testament guidelines.