Translation commentary on Luke 2:22

Exegesis:

kai hote eplēsthēsan hai hēmerai tou katharismou autōn ‘and when the days of their purification had been fulfilled,’ i.e. ‘when the time for their purification had come.’ eplēsthēsan hai hēmerai, cf. on 1.57.

katharismos (also 5.14) ‘purification,’ i.e. the restoration of ritual cleanness; according to the law of Moses a woman remained unclean for forty days after the birth of a male child. During this period she was forbidden to touch any sacred thing or to enter the temple. Ritual cleanness was restored by a burnt offering and a sin offering (cf. Lev. 12.1-8). autōn ‘of them,’ i.e. ‘their’ may refer to Joseph and Mary; to Jesus and Mary (cf. Lagrange), or to the three of them (cf. Grundmann), preferably the first.

kata ton nomon Mōuseōs ‘according to the law of Moses’ may be connected with eplēsthēsan ‘were fulfilled,’ as e.g. New English Bible, Williams, or, preferably, with tou katharismou autōn ‘of their purification,’ as e.g. Translator’s New Testament, Phillips, An American Translation, Moffatt.

nomos ‘law,’ in Luke of the law of Moses only, even when his name is not added as here.

anēgagon auton eis Hierosoluma ‘they brought him up to Jerusalem.’

anagō ‘to bring up’ from a lower to a higher place. Actually Bethlehem is lying higher than Jerusalem, but it is hardly conceivable that Luke was aware of this difference in height.

Hierosoluma ‘Jerusalem’; this is the Greek form of the name. Elsewhere (e.g. v. 25) Luke uses the Hebraistic Ierousalēm.

parastēsai tō kuriō ‘in order to present him to the Lord’; object ‘him’ (i.e. Jesus) to be understood from auton, the object of anēgagon.

paristēmi in the active ‘to present’; presentation in the temple was not part of the ritual of the redemption of the first-born sons referred to in v. 23. Ex. 13.2, quoted there, does not order presentation to God, but is, together with other passages, the foundation for the redemption-offering. Luke does not mention the redemption-offering at all but selects one basic aspect of it, the belonging of all male first-borns to God, in order to bring into special relief the fact that Jesus had been presented to God in the temple. This presentation is probably a reminiscence of 1 Sam. 1.22-28; hence translations like ‘to dedicate’ (Brouwer) but this dedication is to be interpreted in the sense of ‘to bring in the presence of,’ cf. Acts 23.33.

V. 22 is taken up again in v. 24, the chain of thought being: (22) when the time for their purification came, they went to Jerusalem (24) to offer the prescribed sacrifice. Between these two clauses Luke inserts something else which disrupts this logical sequence and is much more important for Luke because it prepares the way for the recognition by the inspired Simeon of Jesus as Israel’s Messiah.

Translation:

When the time came for their purification, or ‘the purification day having-come’ (Balinese, derivation as in v. 21, leaving the person that are the objects of the purification unidentified), or, using a verbal clause, ‘on the day that they (or, his parents, or, Joseph and Mary) should be purified,’ ‘when they must cause-themselves-to-be-purified’ (Kituba), ‘when (they) should do ceremony to purify self’ (Thai, the subject idiomatically being left implicit). For purification, and ‘purify.’ Since removal of ritual uncleanness resulting from childbirth is rather widespread, the receptor language often provides an acceptable specific term; such a term, however, cannot be used here if its application is restricted to the purification of the mother only.

According to the law, or, ‘following the law,’ “stipulated by the Law” (Phillips), ‘that the Law required/prescribed,’ ‘as the law … has laid-down’ (Sranan Tongo). Law. Receptor language terminology may differentiate between two or more of the following pairs of contrasting concepts: customary law versus statute law, often coinciding with the contrast oral versus written code; secular versus religious law; tribal versus national or supranational law, either secular (e.g. law or custom of the tribe versus law of the national state), or religious (tribal religion versus one of the world religions). Between these pairs there may be considerable overlapping. The term chosen should preferably suggest a written code of behaviour, divinely inspired, and of at least national validity. A receptor language term (such as, ‘word/matter to be observed’ in Ekari, ‘decision/decree,’ a derivation of ‘to cut,’ in Shona 1966) may, even if originally linked up with another religion, permit sufficient expansion to cover the law of other peoples or religions, where necessary reinforced by a qualification such as ‘of the Jews.’ In some cases, however, such an expansion of meaning is impossible because the term, in question is exclusively associated with one specific religion. For that reason, probably, technical terms for the Muslim law have often proved unsatisfactory, e.g. in languages of Indonesia. Where no technical term is existent or acceptable, one may coin a descriptive phrase, e.g. ‘commands/ordinances/decisions of God,’ ‘written command’ (Mossi ), ‘laws/rules-(contained-in-)scripture’ (Marathi).

Of Moses. For the meaning if this construction see on “the law of the Lord” in v. 23. The name may require a title, ‘the prophet M..’

They brought him up, or, ‘they took Him along with them (lit. took-as-companion Him)’ (Tae,’ which can use this verb even when the ‘companion’ is as passive as a babe of six weeks), ‘they carried the child’ (Sranan Tongo, Kituba); idiom may require the use of a verb specifying the way of carrying (in the arms, on the shoulder etc.).

To present him to the Lord, or, ‘to place him before the Lord’s face’ (Sranan Tongo), ‘to show him to the Lord’ (Tae’). In Malay “to present” is rendered by the causative of a verb meaning ‘to be-in-front-of,’ hence ‘to have-an-audience with,’ ‘to pay-one’s-respects to.’

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.

SIL Translator’s Notes on Luke 2:22

Paragraph 2:22–24

There are two main events in this paragraph:

(a) Mary was purified after she gave birth to Jesus (2:22a and 2:24). In 2:22a this event was introduced. In 2:24 Luke gave details about the sacrifice for Mary’s purification.

(b) Jesus was presented to the Lord (2:22b–23).

Notice that the purification of Mary is mentioned in 2:22a and also in 2:24. The presentation of Jesus (2:22b–23) separates the two places where Mary’s purification is mentioned. In some languages, it may be clearer to reorder these verses. For example:

22aWhen Mary and Joseph’s days of purification ended according to the Law of Moses, 22bthey went to Jerusalem. 24aThey went there to offer the sacrifice of 24btwo doves or two young pigeons. 24aThis was to obey what the Law of the Lord says. 22bThey also went to Jerusalem with Jesus to present him to the Lord, 23abecause the Law of the Lord also says, 23b“Whenever a mother’s first child is a son, he must be set apart to be holy to the Lord.”

2:22a

And when the time of purification according to the Law of Moses was complete: The Law that God gave to the Israelites through Moses said that when a Jewish woman gave birth to a baby, she became “unclean.” In order to become ritually “clean” (or pure) again after giving birth to a baby boy, she had to do two things:

(a) wait for a period of forty days after the birth;

(b) offer a sacrifice.

The period of forty days was called “the time of her purification.” At the end of that time, she was required to offer a sacrifice, and then she was clean again.

Some other ways to translate this are:

After the days required by Moses’ Teachings to make a mother clean had passed (God’s Word)
-or-
When the necessary days had passed in order for a mother to become clean again, as the Law of Moses teaches

the time of purification:
The Greek text speaks literally of “their” purification. (The Berean Standard Bible does not translate this pronoun.) The term “their” probably refers to Joseph and Mary. Some English versions make this explicit. For example:

The time…for Joseph and Mary to perform the ceremony of purification (Good News Translation)

The Law that God gave to the Israelites through Moses did not require Joseph to be purified. But because purification was a family matter, he was included. In some cultures, it may be more natural to say only that the mother needed to become pure or clean. If that is true in your language, you can say:

The waiting period for ⌊Mary⌋ to become pure again ended

purification: The word purification refers to becoming ritually pure or clean according to religious customs.

Law of Moses: The Law of Moses is the law that God gave to the Israelites through Moses.

2:22b

Joseph and Mary went to Jerusalem for two reasons. The first reason is here in 2:22b. They went to present Jesus to the Lord. The second reason is in 2:24a.

to Jerusalem: Joseph and Mary took Jesus to God’s temple, which was located in the city of Jerusalem. In some languages, it may be necessary to make this explicit. For example:

to the temple in Jerusalem (Contemporary English Version)

to present Him to the Lord: In this context, the phrase to present Him to the Lord indicates that they took Jesus to the priest to acknowledge that Jesus belonged to God. This action is explained further in 2:23a and 2:23b. You may want to consider how to translate “consecrated” in 2:23b at the same time as you think about how to translate present Him to the Lord. See also Lord, Context 2, in the Glossary.

© 2009, 2010, 2013 by SIL International®
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.