Exegesis:

These verses comprise a long elaborate sentence, introduced by kai idou (‘and behold,’ cf. on 1.20). The structure of this sentence is as follows: the subject anēr onomati Iōsēph is followed by three appositions bouleutēs huparchōn, anēr agathos kai dikaios and apo Arimathaias poleōs tōn Ioudaiōn which serve to identify him as to his position, his moral character and his local origin, and by the relative clause hos prosedecheto tēn basileian tou theou which identifies him as to his religious conviction. Between the second and third apposition a parenthetical clause is inserted (houtos … autōn) in order to explain his relationship with the trial of Jesus. At the beginning of v. 52 the main clause begins, the subject being resumed by the demonstrative pronoun houtos; it consists of three co-ordinate verbs ētēsato, enetulixen and ethēken, the first two being preceded by a subordinate participle (proselthōn and kathelōn). In each case participle and main verb denote closely connected acts. Finally mnēma is more precisely defined by the closing relative clause hou … keimenos. For details cf. subsequent notes on each verse.

(V. 50) bouleutēs huparchōn lit. ‘being a council member,’ i.e. a member of the Sanhedrin, cf. on 22.66. For huparchō cf. on 7.25. Here huparchōn is virtually redundant. bouleutēs.

anēr agathos kai dikaios ‘a good and just man,’ used in a moral sense, and explained by what follows.

(V. 51) houtos ouk ēn sugkatatetheimenos tē boulē kai tē praxei autōn ‘this man had not agreed with their plan and their action,’ parenthesis serving to explain how he, a member of the Sanhedrin, in the present situation with regard to Jesus could be called good and just. The periphrastic pluperfect has no special meaning. autōn refers to the members of the Sanhedrin, though they are not mentioned in the preceding clauses. boulē, cf. on 7.30.

sugkatatithemai, with dative, ‘to agree with,’ ‘to consent to,’ ‘to vote for.’

boulē here ‘plan,’ ‘purpose,’ ‘policy.’

praxis ‘action,’ ‘act.’

apo Arimathaias poleōs tōn Ioudaiōn lit. ‘from Arimathea a town of the Jews,’ best understood as identifying him as a native, not an inhabitant, of Arimathea. tōn Ioudaiōn has the name of the people instead of that of the country.

hos prosedecheto tēn basilean tou theou ‘who expected the (coming of the) kingdom of God.’ For a similar use of prosdechomai cf. on 2.25, 38. For the coming of the kingdom of God cf. on 17.20.

(V. 52) ētēsato to sōma tou Iēsou ‘(he) asked for the body of Jesus.’ sōma means here ‘(dead) body,’ ‘corpse.’

(V. 53) kai kathelōn enetulixen auto sindoni ‘and after taking it down (from the cross) he wrapped it in a linen cloth.’ auto, referring to sōma ‘corpse,’ goes with both verbs.

entulissō ‘to wrap,’ ‘to wrap up.’

sindōn ‘linen,’ ‘linen cloth,’ ‘linen sheet.’

ethēken auton en mnēmati laxeutō ‘he laid him in a rock-hewn tomb.’ Note auton ‘him,’ referring to a person, i.e. Jesus, after auto ‘it’ in the preceding clause.

laxeutos ‘hewn in the rock.’

hou ouk ēn oudeis oupō keimenos ‘where no one had yet been laid.’ The accumulation of the negations strengthens the negative aspect of the clause. Periphrastic ēn keimenos is to be rendered as a pluperfect, not as an imperfect.

Translation:

The main clause, vv. 52f, can usually be rendered as two or more separate sentences; the real difficulty is in the introductory clauses, vv. 50f, because of the parenthesis in v. 51. Some translators change the syntactic structure rather radically, redistributing the clauses and phrases according to a clearer, more logical sequence, cf. e.g. Good News Translation. This has the drawback of suggesting relationships which Luke may not have had in mind. Most translators, therefore, think it wiser to restrict themselves to subdividing vv. 50f into two or more sentences, if necessary elucidating the relationships, e.g. ‘Now there was a man called Joseph, a member of the (Jewish) council, a good and just man, who had (or, He was a good and just man; as such he had) not agreed with their … deed. He came from the Jewish town of A. He expected the kingdom of God. This man (or, Joseph) went to Pilate…,’ cf. e.g. New English Bible, Bible de Jérusalem; also Marathi (which puts the locative apposition directly behind the name, as does Good News Translation). It may be necessary to transpose part of the main clause to the first sentence, e.g. ‘Look, a man who was called Joseph, a member of the council, a good and upright man, went to Pilate. He had not agreed with … what they did. He was a man from A., … He was expecting the kingdom of God. Well, he went to Pilate, he asked…’ (Sranan Tongo).

(V. 50) From the Jewish town of Arimathea, or, ‘native from A., a town in the region Judea (Bahasa Indonesia RC, Balinese), or, in the Jewish country.’ For the force of the preposition from see on “of Cyrene” in v. 26, for town cf. on “city” in 1.26.

A member of the council, or, ‘a man of the (or, elder in their) council’ (cf. Balinese, Zarma), ‘one of the men who sat in council’ (cf. Tae’); or a derivation of the word for council, e.g. ‘one of the speechmakers/discussers’ (Ekari). For council see on 22.66; the term may have to be specified, cf. “Jewish council” (Phillips).

Righteous, cf. references on 1.6.

(V. 51) Who had not consented to their purpose and deed, or, ‘who had not approved of what they had decided and what they had done (cf. Sranan Tongo), or, what the other members had designed and done,’ or, ‘he had not agreed with the other men about the things they had planned and done.’ In Ekari consented, or, ‘agreed’ is rendered by the phrase ‘one thought decided.’

He was looking for, or, ‘expecting,’ see on 2.25.

The kingdom of God, or, ‘the day to come that God rules’ (San Miguel El Grande Mixtec), ‘the time when the hour of God’s governing would arrive’ (Tzeltal).

(V. 52) Went to. In this context an honorific term may be preferable or obligatory, e.g. ‘waited upon’ (Balinese, cf. also “went into the presence of”, Good News Translation).

Asked for. In some cases better in direct discourse, ‘said, “Please, give me the body of Jesus” .’

Body, or, ‘corpse,’ ‘dead body,’ as is obligatory in several languages.

(V. 53) He took it down. A locative specification may be preferable, and/or an indication that Joseph probably was not the direct agent, e.g. ‘he had it taken down (or, caused people to lower it) from the cross.’

A linen shroud, or, ‘a grave cloth’; or less specifically, ‘a (good, or, linen) cloth.’

Laid him. In several languages the use of a personal pronoun would suggest a reference to a living person, and therefore one has to neglect the difference and use “it”, or a similar non-personal reference.

A rock-hewn tomb, or, ‘a tomb hewn (or, cut/dug) out of a rock (or, a rock cliff),’ ‘a stone-hole grave’ (Sranan Tongo). If tomb has to be described, one may say here, ‘hole/cave to place dead people in,’ or simply ‘hole/cave,’ the function being sufficiently clear from the context.

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.