“`html
An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 23:45: The Nature of the Solar Obscuration
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 23:45: The Nature of the Solar Obscuration is based on a b-greek discussion from Tue Oct 9 11:54:11 2001. The initial query centered on the interpretation of Luke’s use of the participle ἐκλιπόντος in Luke 23:45. The discussion questioned whether this term should be understood as describing a literal solar eclipse, as implied by certain English translations (e.g., Phillips, NEB), or merely as an idiomatic expression for a general darkening of the sun, without intending a scientific explanation of an eclipse (e.g., NIV, NASB).
The main exegetical issue at hand is the precise semantic range and contextual implications of the aorist active participle ἐκλιπόντος (or the textual variant ἐκλείποντος) in Luke 23:45. This involves determining whether Luke employs the term to denote a natural solar eclipse, an event whose duration and timing typically do not align with the narrative’s account of a three-hour darkness during the day, or if he uses it in a broader sense to signify a supernatural obscuration or failure of the sun’s light, thereby highlighting the extraordinary cosmic significance of the crucifixion event without offering a scientific explanation.
Greek text (Nestle 1904):
τοῦ ἡλίου ἐκλιπόντος.
- Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- Nestle 1904 reads ἐκλιπόντος (aorist active participle, genitive singular masculine).
- SBLGNT 2010 reads ἐκλείποντος (present active participle, genitive singular masculine).
Textual Criticism (NA28): The Nestle-Aland 28th edition (NA28) for Luke 23:45 presents the reading τοῦ ἡλίου ἐκλείποντος, favoring the present active participle over the aorist. However, the apparatus notes indicate significant manuscript support for the aorist participle ἐκλιπόντος (e.g., A, D, R, Θ, 𝛗, f1, f13, 28, 700, 1079, 1241, 1582, ℓ844, ℓ2211, it, vg). The preferred NA28 reading of the present participle ἐκλείποντος (supported by 𝔓75, א, B, C, L, W, Ψ, 0102, 0124, 0250, Byz, Lect) suggests an ongoing or continuous state of the sun’s failing light, whereas the aorist participle ἐκλιπόντος, on which the original query was based, would denote a completed action, “the sun having failed.” Despite the textual variation in tense, the core semantic question regarding the nature of the sun’s failure remains central to the exegesis.
Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG): The verb ἐκλείπω (from which both participles derive) possesses a wide semantic range, as detailed by classical and New Testament lexica. Liddell, Scott, and Jones (LSJ) offers a comprehensive overview: it can mean to leave out, pass over, forsake, abandon, quit, or give up in its transitive uses. Intransitively, it can mean to die, faint, leave off/cease, fail/be wanting, remain, or depart. Crucially, LSJ explicitly lists “of the Sun or Moon, suffer eclipse” (II.1), citing examples from Herodotus (7.37) and Thucydides (2.28). Similarly, Bauer, Danker, Arndt, and Gingrich (BDAG) includes “to be eclipsed” as a specific meaning for ἐκλείπω when referring to celestial bodies, also noting its use in secular Greek for such phenomena. Therefore, lexically, the term ἐκλείπω *can* indeed denote a solar eclipse. However, the broader context provided by Luke 23:44 (“and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour”) – a three-hour darkness from midday – presents a significant challenge to a literal interpretation of a *natural* solar eclipse, which has a much shorter duration and specific visibility. Hermann Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT) often contextualizes such terms within their theological significance, recognizing that while the word itself might allow for “eclipse,” the surrounding narrative in Luke points to a miraculous or supernatural event rather than a natural phenomenon. This suggests that Luke likely employs a term capable of describing an eclipse to portray a divinely orchestrated darkening, transcending a purely scientific explanation.
Translation Variants
The range of English translations for Luke 23:45 reflects the exegetical tension inherent in τοῦ ἡλίου ἐκλιπόντος. Translations such as the New English Bible (NEB) render it as “for the sun was in eclipse,” directly implying a celestial event. Phillips’ 1960 translation, “and the sun’s light failed,” while avoiding the explicit term “eclipse,” still conveys a similar effect of the sun ceasing to provide light. In contrast, versions like the New International Version (NIV), “for the sun stopped shining,” and the New American Standard Bible (NASB), “because the sun was obscured,” opt for a more generalized description of the darkening, deliberately moving away from the technical implication of an eclipse.
Grammatically, τοῦ ἡλίου ἐκλιπόντος is a genitive absolute construction, functioning as a circumstantial or causal clause that explains the darkness mentioned in the preceding verse. The participle, whether aorist (ἐκλιπόντος) or present (ἐκλείποντος), signifies the state or action of the sun. Rhetorically, this phrase serves to attribute the extraordinary three-hour darkness directly to the sun’s failure. By using a term that *could* refer to a natural eclipse but in a context where a natural eclipse is chronologically and geographically impossible, Luke heightens the miraculous and cosmic dimensions of the event. The sun, a source of life and light, is portrayed as being profoundly affected, signaling the profound significance of Jesus’ death—a disruption of the natural order pointing to divine judgment and cosmic lament. This intentional ambiguity or metaphorical use of “eclipse” language emphasizes the divine intervention without committing to a scientific explanation of the phenomenon.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
Based on the lexical evidence and contextual analysis, it is clear that while the term ἐκλείπω can denote a solar eclipse, the narrative context of Luke 23:44-45 strongly suggests a supernatural event rather than a natural one. The duration of three hours for the darkness at midday, “over the whole land,” far exceeds the parameters of any natural solar eclipse. Luke therefore uses a term from common astronomical vocabulary to describe an *uncommon* event—the miraculous failure or obscuration of the sun’s light. The most faithful translations should convey the effect of the sun’s light being withdrawn or failing, while allowing for the implied supernatural agency without prematurely forcing a natural scientific explanation.
- “because the sun’s light failed.” This translation is direct, maintains a neutral stance regarding the mechanism, and accurately reflects the effect described.
- “for the sun was obscured.” This option emphasizes the result—the sun being hidden or made dim—without specifying a natural process, thus allowing for a supernatural interpretation.
- “due to the sun’s miraculous darkening.” This rendering explicitly highlights the extraordinary and non-natural character of the event, which is strongly implied by the Lukan narrative’s temporal and geographical details.
“`