An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 11:36: The Wholly Illuminated Body
This exegetical study of ‘An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 11:36: The Wholly Illuminated Body’ is based on a b-greek discussion from 1881. The discussion presents various critical editions of Luke 11:36, including Nestle 1904, Westcott and Hort 1881, Byzantine Majority Text 2005, Greek Orthodox Church 1904, and Tischendorf 8th Edition. These editions primarily exhibit minor orthographical and word order variations concerning the spelling of φωτινόν/φωτεινόν and σκοτινόν/σκοτεινόν, and the placement of τι relative to μέρος.
The central exegetical challenge of Luke 11:36 lies in its apparent tautological structure. Commentators like De Wette and the Expositor’s Greek Testament highlight this redundancy, noting that the verse seems to assert the same proposition in both its protasis and apodosis. This perceived repetition has led to various critical inquiries, including suggestions of textual corruption by Westcott and Hort, proposed emendations, and alternative interpretations that emphasize nuanced differences in meaning, such as the qualitative and quantitative aspects of illumination.
εἰ οὖν τὸ σῶμά σου ὅλον φωτινόν, μὴ ἔχον μέρος τι σκοτινόν, ἔσται φωτινὸν ὅλον ὡς ὅταν ὁ λύχνος τῇ ἀστραπῇ φωτίζῃ σε.
(Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- SBLGNT uses φωτεινόν and σκοτεινόν (with epsilon-iota) instead of Nestle’s φωτινόν and σκοτινόν (with iota). This is an orthographical variant without significant semantic change.
- SBLGNT reads τι μέρος in the negative clause (`μὴ ἔχον τι μέρος σκοτεινόν`), while Nestle 1904 reads μέρος τι (`μὴ ἔχον μέρος τι σκοτινόν`). This is a minor word order variation.
Textual criticism (NA28), lexical notes (KITTEL, BDAG).
The textual history of Luke 11:36 presents considerable complexity. While critical editions like Nestle 1904, Westcott and Hort 1881, and Tischendorf 8th Edition present a largely consistent text for this verse, more significant variants appear elsewhere in the immediate context (e.g., the inclusion of τις with Φαρισαῖος in v. 37 in the Byzantine Majority Text and Greek Orthodox Church 1904). For Luke 11:36 itself, the primary variations are orthographical (φωτινόν vs. φωτεινόν) and word order (μέρος τι vs. τι μέρος), which are generally considered minor. More critically, as noted by the Expositor’s Greek Testament, the verse is entirely omitted in Codex Bezae (D), some Latin codices, and the Syriac Curetonian, suggesting early textual instability or doubts regarding its authenticity. Westcott and Hort, as cited in commentary, posited a “primitive corruption” for this passage, a view endorsed by Weiss, who attempted a conjectural restoration of the “true text.” The Syriac Sinaiticus offers a distinctly different, highly obscure rendering, further indicating the challenges faced by early scribes and translators. The NA28 critical apparatus would detail these omissions and orthographical variations, often preferring the more common φωτεινόν form and acknowledging the significant textual witnesses that omit the verse.
Lexical Notes:
- ὅλον (holon): Occurs twice in Luke 11:36. BDAG defines ὅλος (holos) as “whole, entire, complete.” Its precise usage and position relative to φωτινόν/φωτεινόν are crucial for interpretation. As highlighted by Meyer and Bengel, the first instance (ὅλον φωτινόν) might emphasize the *completeness* or *entirety* of the body’s illumination (i.e., no dark parts remaining), while the second (φωτινὸν ὅλον) could emphasize the *degree* or *result* of that illumination, rendering it “wholly light” or “perfectly bright.” KITTEL would offer a detailed historical semantic range, aligning with “whole, entire” but also allowing for adverbial usage in specific contexts.
- φωτινόν/φωτεινόν (phōtinon/phōteinon): BDAG lists both as adjectives meaning “full of light, bright, luminous.” The orthographical difference (iota vs. epsilon-iota) is a common Greek variation without significant semantic impact in this context. It describes the state of the body, indicating the presence of light. KITTEL would explore its roots in light imagery and its theological implications.
- σκοτινόν/σκοτεινόν (skotinon/skoteinon): BDAG defines this as “dark, gloomy.” It functions as the antonym of φωτινόν/φωτεινόν, signifying the absence of light in any part of the body. KITTEL would trace its usage in the Septuagint and other Hellenistic literature to contextualize its meaning.
- λύχνος (lychnos): BDAG translates this as “lamp, light.” It refers to an artificial light source, often contrasted with natural light. Commentators like Meyer and Bengel explicitly link this to the “lamp” mentioned earlier in Luke 11:33, suggesting continuity in the discourse. KITTEL would provide extensive details on its cultural and metaphorical uses in the ancient world.
- ἀστραπῇ (astrapē): BDAG’s primary meaning is “lightning,” but it can also denote “brilliancy” or “bright light.” Vincent’s Word Studies notes that while “lightning” is common in classical Greek, its use here for the “light of a lamp” serves to “emphasize the idea of moral illumination,” suggesting an intense, pervasive brightness. KITTEL would demonstrate its use for sudden, vivid, and intense light.
Translation Variants
The perceived tautology in Luke 11:36 has prompted various interpretative strategies among scholars. The verse is structured as a conditional sentence: `εἰ οὖν τὸ σῶμά σου ὅλον φωτινόν, μὴ ἔχον μέρος τι σκοτινόν,` (If therefore your body is entirely light, having no dark part), followed by a result clause: `ἔσται φωτινὸν ὅλον ὡς ὅταν ὁ λύχνος τῇ ἀστραπῇ φωτίζῃ σε.` (it will be entirely light as when the lamp illumines you with its brightness). The verb ἔσται (estai) is future indicative, indicating a resultant state, and the particle οὖν (oun) explicitly connects this verse to the preceding discourse concerning the “single eye” (Luke 11:34).
From a rhetorical perspective, the apparent redundancy is addressed by several approaches:
- Emphasis Shift: Heinrich Meyer, supported by Johann Albrecht Bengel, argues that the perceived tautology is resolved by a nuanced shift in emphasis. In the protasis, the stress falls on ὅλον (“wholly” or “entirely”), ensuring no part of the body is dark. In the apodosis, the emphasis shifts to φωτινόν (“light” or “bright”), highlighting the *quality* and *degree* of this illumination, likened to the intense shining of a lamp. Bengel applies the concept of “Ploce” (repetition with nuanced meaning), suggesting the first ὅλον refers to the “perfection of parts,” and the second to the “perfection of degrees.”
- Adverbial Usage: The Cambridge Greek Testament suggests that ὅλον can be understood adverbially with φωτινόν, rendering “wholly light.” This interpretation also allows for a differentiation in meaning beyond simple repetition.
- Spiritual Significance: The Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary posits that the verse is not truly tautological when apprehended in its spiritual context. It describes the apprehension of Christ’s teaching by a “simple, single-seeing soul.” If such a soul has “no part darkened by prejudice or selfish lusts,” it will be “wholly illuminated by it, as by the candle of the Lord.” This interpretation moves beyond a purely literal or grammatical reading, positing that the second clause describes a *further result and waxing onward* of the light, indicating spiritual growth and pervasive clarity. Wesley’s Explanatory Notes similarly connect this to being “filled with holy wisdom.”
- Metaphorical Illumination: Vincent’s Word Studies notes that the choice of ἀστραπῇ (often translated “lightning” or “bright shining”) serves to emphasize “moral illumination.” This strengthens the metaphorical aspect of the entire passage, where the body’s light reflects an inner spiritual state. John Trapp further illustrates this by describing the “regenerate man” as “totus diaphanus, like a crystal glass, with a lamp in the midst.”
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The textual and interpretive complexities surrounding Luke 11:36 underscore its profound nature, compelling readers beyond a superficial understanding. While the verse initially appears tautological, scholarly analysis reveals its intention to convey a complete and perfect state of illumination, encompassing both its scope and intensity, particularly when one’s inner “eye” is unhindered and focused. The interplay of the body metaphor, its constituent parts, and the vivid image of a lamp with its brilliant shining combine to describe a holistic spiritual clarity and purity.
- “If, therefore, your entire body is luminous, possessing no dark portion, then it will be completely luminous, just as when a lamp illumines you with its flash.”
This translation prioritizes a literal rendering, emphasizing the completeness (`entire`) in the protasis and the resultant complete luminosity (`completely luminous`) in the apodosis, thereby acknowledging the potential for perceived redundancy as a rhetorical device to underscore totality. - “If, then, your body is wholly bright, having no part whatsoever that is dark, it will become perfectly bright, just as a lamp provides intense light for you with its brilliance.”
This version seeks to differentiate the two occurrences of ‘wholly/entirely’ by using ‘wholly bright’ for the initial condition and ‘perfectly bright’ for the outcome, and interprets ἀστραπῇ as ‘intense light’ or ‘brilliance’ to emphasize the profound degree and quality of illumination. - “Thus, if your whole self is filled with light, possessing no dark corner, it will be fully radiant, as when a lamp shines its brightest light upon you.”
This interpretive translation leans into the spiritual significance of the passage, inferring “whole self” from “whole body” and using “fully radiant” to convey both completeness and intensity, aligning with theological interpretations that view this as a state of complete spiritual clarity and moral uprightness.
Here we go yall Walter Polasik Link Hudson starting you with the basic teaching of Jesus just like Wesley would have. Will bring it up a notch when you are ready. Note it is a command not a choice and it comes straight from Jesus. Other greek grammar is explained in detail in the post. Like I tell my students – if you have any questions make sure to ask before I fail you because then it will be too late (just like the rapture) BTW do gain basic knowledge on Wesleyan quadrilateral if you are really Pentecostal
And so the question is, why does your belief system have an excuse for Christians not to live up to what Jesus taught here after they get saved, and before they have some kind of experience some time later?
Troy Day: This passage is saying the same thing as Psalm 119:10-19. Jesus is talking about where we fix our hearts, our “spiritual eyesight” as it were. Either we are totally given over to Him or we are lacking. What we take in and our heart-attitude will guide where we go spiritually. This also speaks to bad doctrine. If the “light” that comes into our eyes isn’t really light at all, but darkness, “how great is that darkness!”. This happens when people take in cultic doctrine. Also when believers take in bad doctrine. Thank you for making my point for me, Troy. Next!
Let’s discus the verse in question pls What in this scripture is NOT entirely about entire sanctification ?
BTW, It DOES have to do with holy living. As Jesus says in the verses preceding, “The lamp of the body is the eye.” Now, you tell me, Troy, what does that have to do with either us being sanctified by the blood of Jesus at salvation or at a later point through a zap? But it DOES have to do with how we live towards God in this world.
Here we go yall Walter Polasik Link Hudson starting you with the basic teaching of Jesus just like Wesley would have. Will bring it up a notch when you are ready. Note it is a command not a choice and it comes straight from Jesus. Other greek grammar is explained in detail in the post. Like I tell my students – if you have any questions make sure to ask before I fail you because then it will be too late (just like the rapture) BTW do gain basic knowledge on Wesleyan quadrilateral if you are really Pentecostal
And so the question is, why does your belief system have an excuse for Christians not to live up to what Jesus taught here after they get saved, and before they have some kind of experience some time later?
Troy Day: This passage is saying the same thing as Psalm 119:10-19. Jesus is talking about where we fix our hearts, our “spiritual eyesight” as it were. Either we are totally given over to Him or we are lacking. What we take in and our heart-attitude will guide where we go spiritually. This also speaks to bad doctrine. If the “light” that comes into our eyes isn’t really light at all, but darkness, “how great is that darkness!”. This happens when people take in cultic doctrine. Also when believers take in bad doctrine. Thank you for making my point for me, Troy. Next!
Let’s discus the verse in question pls What in this scripture is NOT entirely about entire sanctification ?
BTW, It DOES have to do with holy living. As Jesus says in the verses preceding, “The lamp of the body is the eye.” Now, you tell me, Troy, what does that have to do with either us being sanctified by the blood of Jesus at salvation or at a later point through a zap? But it DOES have to do with how we live towards God in this world.
This verse applies to all Christians, not just those from the Holiness movement.
This verse applies to all Christians, not just those from the Holiness movement.
1. Jesus commands entire holiness trough entire sanctification
2. It is for ALL disciples i.e. all Christians should be entirely sanctified as Wesley taught
3. It is for this time – not a future time
4. Note the grammatical tense and case too
5. It is entire – cant be partial
6. No part can be left unsanctified
7. No case for partial or progressive sanctification is meant.
8. It is all entire and complete
9. As a matter of fact, Jesus speaks plainly against partial holiness – there’s just no such thing in the Bible
10. A partially holy church aint gonna be in the rapture (Have a nice tribulation!)
Troy Day, well I apologize if I misunderstood your view to be that it is normative Christians to be unsanctied until they have an experience at an altar or some other place.
But it sounds like you are beating up a strawman.
And believing in a pre-trib rapture won’t save you from tribulation in this life.
Dont waste my time pls. If you have something to say about the Bible verse in question pls do – especially about the grammatical construction involved in the original language, do tell. Otherwise find another hobby
“If thy whole body therefore be full of light, having no part dark, the whole shall be full of light, as when the bright shining of a candle doth give thee light.”
– Luke 11:36
I looked up several uses of light in the new testament. Jesus called John Baptist a light, a candle or a lamp. And says, “you rejoiced in his light” meaning the shining like the glory of angels. In Luke 11 the form of the Greek word is different, phōteinos. It means bright moral character and well lit. To me that can only mean to be full of passion for Jesus Christ and to love him. That will necessarily overflow with love and genuine concern for our fellow man.
For me it is important to remember, John 8:12:
“Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.”
So any true light or true love or goodness is only as we abide in Him.
1. Jesus commands entire holiness trough entire sanctification
2. It is for ALL disciples i.e. all Christians should be entirely sanctified as Wesley taught
3. It is for this time – not a future time
4. Note the grammatical tense and case too
5. It is entire – cant be partial
6. No part can be left unsanctified
7. No case for partial or progressive sanctification is meant.
8. It is all entire and complete
9. As a matter of fact, Jesus speaks plainly against partial holiness – there’s just no such thing in the Bible
10. A partially holy church aint gonna be in the rapture (Have a nice tribulation!)
Troy Day, well I apologize if I misunderstood your view to be that it is normative Christians to be unsanctied until they have an experience at an altar or some other place.
But it sounds like you are beating up a strawman.
And believing in a pre-trib rapture won’t save you from tribulation in this life.
Dont waste my time pls. If you have something to say about the Bible verse in question pls do – especially about the grammatical construction involved in the original language, do tell. Otherwise find another hobby
“If thy whole body therefore be full of light, having no part dark, the whole shall be full of light, as when the bright shining of a candle doth give thee light.”
– Luke 11:36
I looked up several uses of light in the new testament. Jesus called John Baptist a light, a candle or a lamp. And says, “you rejoiced in his light” meaning the shining like the glory of angels. In Luke 11 the form of the Greek word is different, phōteinos. It means bright moral character and well lit. To me that can only mean to be full of passion for Jesus Christ and to love him. That will necessarily overflow with love and genuine concern for our fellow man.
For me it is important to remember, John 8:12:
“Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.”
So any true light or true love or goodness is only as we abide in Him.