An Exegetical Examination of Luke 10:31: The Directional Semantics of κατεβαινεν in the Parable of the Good Samaritan
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Examination of Luke 10:31 is based on a b-greek discussion from Fri Jul 23 13:00:22 EDT 1999. The initial inquiry focused on the interpretation of the priest’s movement in the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37), specifically whether the verb κατεβαινεν (descended/was going down) in Luke 10:31 unequivocally indicates movement away from Jerusalem or could be understood more broadly as simply “traveling on the road.” This distinction holds significant implications for understanding the priest’s motivation for passing by the injured man.
The central exegetical issue revolves around the precise semantic range and contextual implications of the aorist imperfect verb κατεβαινεν in Luke 10:31. Specifically, does Luke’s use of this verb, following its explicit geographical specification in verse 30 for the injured man (“descending from Jerusalem to Jericho”), necessarily imply that the priest was also moving from Jerusalem towards Jericho? Or does the absence of an explicit geographical qualifier in verse 31 allow for a more generalized reading of movement along the road, potentially even towards Jerusalem? The answer bears directly on the validity of interpretations that suggest the priest avoided the injured man to prevent ritual impurity before entering the temple, an explanation often associated with movement towards Jerusalem, as proposed by scholars like E. P. Sanders.
Greek text (Nestle 1904):
κατὰ συγκυρίαν δὲ ἱερεύς τις κατέβαινεν ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ἐκείνῃ, καὶ ἰδὼν αὐτὸν ἀντιπαρῆλθεν.
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- There are no textual differences in Luke 10:31 between the Nestle 1904 text and the SBL Greek New Testament (2010). Both texts present the same wording for this verse.
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)
The textual tradition for Luke 10:31 is remarkably stable, with no significant variants affecting the verb κατεβαινεν itself in the NA28 apparatus. This suggests that the form and presence of the verb are not subject to textual uncertainty, focusing the exegetical task on its semantic and contextual interpretation.
Lexically, καταβαίνω (katabainō) generally means “to go down, descend.” BDAG notes its various uses, including literal descent (from a mountain, house, ship) and figurative senses. Crucially, it is often contrasted with ἀναβαίνω (anabainō, “to go up, ascend”). In the context of Jerusalem, which is geographically elevated and religiously significant as “up” (cf. “Psalms of Ascent”), movement away from it is routinely described with καταβαίνω, while movement towards it is described with ἀναβαίνω. For example, Acts 18:22 presents a clear contrast: ἀναβὰς καὶ ἀσπασάμενος τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, κατέβη εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν (“having gone up and greeted the church, he went down to Antioch”). This idiomatic usage, particularly in the Hebraic cultural context influencing Luke, suggests that “going down” from Jerusalem was a fixed expression for departing the city. KITTEL, while not extensively detailing this specific instance, would generally affirm the contextual and directional implications of such verbs when associated with significant geographical markers like Jerusalem.
Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis
The primary grammatical and rhetorical issue in Luke 10:31 concerns the implied direction of the priest’s travel, given the explicit directional statement for the injured man in verse 30. The verb κατεβαινεν is an imperfect indicative, emphasizing continuous or repeated action in the past: “he was descending” or “he was going down.”
In verse 30, the text explicitly states the man “κατεβαινεν ἀπὸ Ἱερουσαλὴμ εἰς Ἰεριχώ” (was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho). This sets a strong precedent. When verse 31 states “ἱερεύς τις κατέβαινεν ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ἐκείνῃ” (a certain priest was going down on that road), the absence of explicit geographical markers “from Jerusalem to Jericho” for the priest might seem to open the door for a more generalized reading. However, the strong parallelism and contextual contiguity with verse 30 argue against a casual interpretation.
Rhetorically, Luke presents a direct sequence of events on the same road. The natural inference for the reader is that the priest is traveling the same path and in the same general direction as the injured man, who was explicitly descending from Jerusalem. The idiom of Jerusalem being “up” for religious and geographical reasons (even supplying the city’s name for ἀναβὰς in Acts 18:22, as observed in some translations like TEV) further strengthens the interpretation that κατεβαινεν implies movement away from Jerusalem. If Luke had intended to convey movement towards Jerusalem, or a directionally neutral “traveling,” he would likely have chosen ἀνέβαινεν (was going up) or a more neutral verb like ἐπορεύετο (was traveling) or ἤρχετο (was coming/going), possibly with different prepositional phrases.
The consistent Hebraic and New Testament usage of καταβαίνω and ἀναβαίνω with Jerusalem forms a strong binary opposition. To suggest a “casual” use of καταβαίνω that could encompass ascending or general travel on a road from Jerusalem without implying descent would contradict this established linguistic pattern. Therefore, while not explicitly stated, the context and conventional usage strongly suggest the priest was also descending from Jerusalem, rather than ascending or simply traversing the road neutrally.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
Based on the contextual parallelism with Luke 10:30, the established geographical and religious idiom surrounding Jerusalem in ancient Jewish and early Christian literature, and the consistent lexical usage of καταβαίνω in contrast with ἀναβαίνω, it is highly probable that Luke intends the reader to understand the priest as also descending from Jerusalem. This interpretation largely precludes the “corpse impurity while going to the temple” explanation, as the priest would be moving away from the temple. While it might still be possible to argue he wished to avoid subsequent cleansing before returning to Jerusalem, the primary on-the-way-to-temple rationale is significantly weakened.
Translation suggestions for Luke 10:31 are:
- “By chance, a priest was descending on that road, and seeing him, passed by on the opposite side.”
This translation maintains a literal rendering of κατεβαινεν, allowing the context of verse 30 to imply the specific direction. - “As it happened, a priest was on his way down that road, and when he saw him, he went by on the other side.”
This provides a slightly more idiomatic rendering of “descending” while still implying the directional movement away from Jerusalem. - “A priest, traveling down from Jerusalem on that very road, happened upon him, and seeing him, passed by on the opposite side.”
This translation makes the implied direction explicit, aligning with the strong contextual and linguistic evidence for movement away from Jerusalem.
It occurred to me recently that the way we read the Good Samaritan (Luke 10.25-37) depends partly on whether or not we see the priest walking towards Jerusalem or away from Jerusalem. If he is on his way to Jerusalem he might be passing by on the other side because he is attempting to avoid corpse impurity — he thinks the man may be dead and since he is on his way to the temple, he does not want to risk corpose impurity (Lev. 21.1-3).
It occurred to me recently that the way we read the Good Samaritan (Luke 10.25-37) depends partly on whether or not we see the priest walking towards Jerusalem or away from Jerusalem. If he is on his way to Jerusalem he might be passing by on the other side because he is attempting to avoid corpse impurity — he thinks the man may be dead and since he is on his way to the temple, he does not want to risk corpose impurity (Lev. 21.1-3).