Pharaoh's 'I have sinned against the LORD your God, and against you' is the closest verbal template for 'I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight,' the dual against-God-and-against-you formula. The parallel sharpens the son's confession as a recognized penitential script. Contested between this and the Davidic confessions.

Then Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron in haste, and he said, “I have sinned against Yahweh your God, and against you.


'Against you, you only, have I sinned, and done what is evil in your sight' supplies the language of sinning before God's sight that the son rehearses. As the paradigmatic penitential psalm it carries high recurrence in Jewish repentance piety, cohering with Luke's repentance theme (vv.7,10). Distinctive 'in your sight' overlap.

Against you, and you only, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in your sight; that you may be proved right when you speak, and justified when you judge.

Against thee only have I sinned, and done evil before thee: that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.


David's terse 'I have sinned against the LORD' models confession answered immediately by restoration, the rhythm of the son's resolve answered by the father. Recurrence of the 'I have sinned' formula across Saul/David/Pharaoh makes any single attribution contested. Faint.

David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against Yahweh.” Nathan said to David, “Yahweh also has put away your sin. You will not die.


Esau 'ran to meet him, embraced him, fell on his neck, and kissed him, and they wept' is the precise gesture-cluster of the father who ran, fell on his neck, and kissed the returning son. Volume and verbal distinctiveness are very high (run + fall on neck + kiss in sequence), and coherence is strong: an estranged brother/son reunion of unexpected mercy.

Esau ran to meet him, embraced him, fell on his neck, kissed him, and they wept.


Joseph falling on his brothers' necks, weeping and kissing them, reinforces the reconciliation embrace, and the broader Joseph reunion (46:29, falling on Jacob's neck) supplies the lost-then-found-alive frame. Recurrence of the Joseph story across this pericope (robe, ring, 'dead/alive') is strong. Slightly lower verbal match than Genesis 33:4.

He fell on his brother Benjamin’s neck, and wept, and Benjamin wept on his neck. He kissed all his brothers, and wept on them. After that his brothers talked with him.


Pharaoh exalts Joseph by putting a ring on his hand and clothing him in fine robes, the exact pair of honors (best robe + ring) the father bestows. The Joseph parallel makes the restored son a reinstated heir, not merely a forgiven servant. Distinctive robe-and-ring combination yields high volume and coherence.

Pharaoh took off his signet ring from his hand, and put it on Joseph’s hand, and arrayed him in robes of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck,


Joshua the high priest has his filthy garments removed and is clothed in rich robes as a sign of restored standing, illuminating the 'best robe' that re-clothes the defiled son. The figural logic of imputed honor replacing defilement coheres tightly with the swine-defiled returnee. Verbal link is the robe of restoration.

Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and was standing before the angel. He answered and spoke to those who stood before him, saying, “Take the filthy garments off of him.” To him he said, “Behold, I have caused your iniquity to pass from you, and I will clothe you with rich clothing.” I said, “Let them set a clean turban on his head.” So they set a clean turban on his head, and clothed him; and Yahweh’s angel was standing by.


Abraham's slaughter of a choice, tender calf for honored guests supplies the cultural background of the fattened calf killed for celebration. Faint and one of several calf-feast scenes (1 Samuel 28:24); included for the hospitality-feast availability. Contested.

Abraham ran to the herd, and fetched a tender and good calf, and gave it to the servant. He hurried to dress it.


Jacob mourns Joseph as dead and refuses comfort, so that Joseph's later disclosure that he is alive (45:26-28) is the canonical 'was dead and is alive, was lost and is found' reversal the father proclaims. The figural fit of a father's lost-and-restored son is strong and recurs across this pericope's Joseph allusions. Lower verbal volume, hence figural.

He recognized it, and said, “It is my son’s coat. An evil animal has devoured him. Joseph is without doubt torn in pieces.” Jacob tore his clothes, and put sackcloth on his waist, and mourned for his son many days. All his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted. He said, “For I will go down to Sheol to my son mourning.” His father wept for him.


Jonah is angry at God's mercy to the undeserving, sulks outside, and God comes out reasoning with him to the parable's open end, exactly the elder son angry at mercy whom the father comes out and entreats, ending on an unanswered appeal. Coherence is very high (resentment at grace, divine entreaty, open conclusion) and the structural parallel is distinctive. A strong figural-allusive frame for Luke's audience of grumblers.

But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was angry. He prayed to Yahweh, and said, “Please, Yahweh, wasn’t this what I said when I was still in my own country? Therefore I hurried to flee to Tarshish, for I knew that you are a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and abundant in loving kindness, and you relent of doing harm. Therefore now, Yahweh, take, I beg you, my life from me; for it is better for me to die than to live.” Yahweh said, “Is it […]


Cain is angry and downcast over a brother's favored standing, and the LORD comes out to him with entreaty and warning, paralleling the elder brother's anger and the father's coming out to plead. The elder-resents-younger pattern is the primal sibling-rivalry script. Coherence good; verbal link thematic.

but he didn’t respect Cain and his offering. Cain was very angry, and the expression on his face fell. Yahweh said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why has the expression of your face fallen? If you do well, won’t it be lifted up? If you don’t do well, sin crouches at the door. Its desire is for you, but you are to rule over it.”


The law of the stubborn and rebellious son who is gluttonous and a drunkard, to be brought before the elders and stoned, is the dark legal backdrop the parable deliberately subverts: the father runs to embrace rather than condemn. Directly preceding the inheritance law (21:17) already echoed, strengthening recurrence. Coherence high as a subverted intertext.

If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son, who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and though they chasten him, will not listen to them; then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city, and to the gate of his place. They shall tell the elders of his city, “This our son is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey our voice. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” All the men of his […]


Esau's bitter outcry and resentment over a blessing/inheritance given to the younger brother colors the elder son's grievance about service and unrewarded faithfulness. Recurrence of the older-brother-aggrieved motif (Cain, Esau) supports availability; verbal link is faint. Contested.

When Esau heard the words of his father, he cried with an exceeding great and bitter cry, and said to his father, “Bless me, even me also, my father.” He said, “Your brother came with deceit, and has taken away your blessing.” He said, “Isn’t he rightly named Jacob? For he has supplanted me these two times. He took away my birthright. See, now he has taken away my blessing.” He said, “Haven’t you reserved a blessing for me?” Isaac answered Esau, “Behold, […]


The elder son's charge that the younger 'devoured your living with prostitutes' restates Proverbs' 'companion of prostitutes squanders his wealth,' tying the two parts of the parable together with one wisdom maxim. Recurrence with 15:13 makes the proverb a coherent through-line. Verbal overlap of squandering plus harlotry.

Whoever loves wisdom brings joy to his father; but a companion of prostitutes squanders his wealth.


The manager's frantic foresight against future destitution ('I have no strength to dig, I am ashamed to beg') inverts the sluggard wisdom of Proverbs, where prudent provision against want is praised. The shared topos of provident foresight versus ruinous idleness gives modest coherence, though no verbal contact; faint and contested.

Go to the ant, you sluggard. Consider her ways, and be wise; which having no chief, overseer, or ruler, provides her bread in the summer, and gathers her food in the harvest. How long will you sleep, sluggard? When will you arise out of your sleep? A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep: so your poverty will come as a robber, and your scarcity as an armed man.


Joseph as the shrewd steward managing his lord's grain and debtors during scarcity offers a figural backdrop to a manager renegotiating debts of wheat and oil. Coherence is thematic (estate-steward over produce), but the moral valence is opposite and there is no diction overlap, so it is faint and contested.

There was no bread in all the land; for the famine was very severe, so that the land of Egypt and the land of Canaan fainted by reason of the famine. Joseph gathered up all the money that was found in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, for the grain which they bought: and Joseph brought the money into Pharaoh’s house. When the money was all spent in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians came to Joseph, and said, “Give […]


'Make friends by means of unrighteous mammon, so that they may receive you into the eternal tents' coheres tightly with the proverb that lending to the poor lends to the LORD, who repays. The shared logic that present generosity with money secures future, divine reception gives strong coherence with a widely available sapiential maxim.

He who has pity on the poor lends to Yahweh; he will reward him.


Tobit's counsel that almsgiving 'lays up a good treasure against the day of necessity' and 'delivers from death' supplies the precise economy Jesus assumes: wealth converted into mercy yields eschatological security. High coherence and Second-Temple availability make this a strong deuterocanonical echo behind 'receive you into the eternal tents.'

Give alms from your possessions. When you give alms, don’t let your eye be envious. Don’t turn away your face from any poor man, and the face of God won’t be turned away from you. As your possessions are, give alms of it according to your abundance. If you have little, don’t be afraid to give alms according to that little; for you lay up a good treasure for yourself against the day of necessity; because alms-giving delivers from death, and doesn’t allow […]


Ben Sira urges laying up alms in one's treasury as a deposit that will rescue one from misfortune, framing charity to the poor as deferred self-interest. The volume and coherence with 'make friends... so they may receive you' is high, and Sirach was demonstrably available to Luke's milieu.

Howbeit with a man in poor estate be longsuffering; And let him not wait for your alms. Help a poor man for the commandment’s sake; And according to his need send him not empty away. Lose your money for a brother and a friend; And let it not rust under the stone to be lost. Bestow your treasure according to the commandments of the Most High; And it shall profit you more than gold. Shut up alms in your store-chambers; And it shall deliver you out of all […]


Daniel's appeal to Nebuchadnezzar to 'redeem your sins by almsgiving and your iniquities by mercy to the poor' supplies the redemptive-almsgiving theology underlying using mammon to gain eternal welcome. Strong coherence with the verse's logic; the connection is conceptual rather than verbal.

Therefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you, and break off your sins by righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the poor; if there may be a lengthening of your tranquility.


The maxim 'faithful in a very little is faithful in much' coheres with Ben Sira's wisdom that integrity in small dealings with the lowly proves character, but the gnomic form is broadly diffused and no single passage controls it. Faint and contested as a specific source.

Incline your ear to a poor man, And answer him with peaceful words in meekness. Deliver him that is wronged from the hand of him that wrongeth him; And be not faint-hearted in giving judgement. Be as a father to the fatherless, And instead of a husband to their mother: So will you be as a son of the Most High, And he will love you more than your mother does.


'No servant can serve two masters... you cannot serve God and Mammon' echoes the covenantal either/or of choosing whom to serve, the LORD versus rival gods. Coherence with the exclusive-service motif is real but the diction is independent, so it is a faint figural echo at best.

If it seems evil to you to serve Yahweh, choose this day whom you will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve Yahweh.”


The demand for undivided love of God set against love of money draws on the Shema's totalizing claim ('with all your heart'), which forbids a divided heart. The opposition of single-hearted devotion versus a rival master gives modest coherence; verbal contact is absent, so it is contested.

You shall love Yahweh your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might.


'That which is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of God' closely matches the proverb that everyone proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD. Strong verbal and conceptual coherence (the 'abomination'/divine-loathing of human self-exaltation) and high availability support an allusion.

Everyone who is proud in heart is an abomination to Yahweh: they shall certainly not be unpunished.


'You justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts' rests on Samuel's principle that man looks on outward appearance while the LORD looks on the heart. The contrast of human-facing display versus divine heart-knowledge is a coherent and well-known scriptural axiom.

But Yahweh said to Samuel, “Don’t look on his face, or on the height of his stature; because I have rejected him: for I see not as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but Yahweh looks at the heart.”


'Every way of a man is right in his own eyes, but the LORD weighs the hearts' parallels self-justification before men exposed by God's knowledge of hearts. Coherence is high and the sapiential idiom was available, though Proverbs 16:5 and 1 Samuel 16:7 are the closer touchstones.

Every way of a man is right in his own eyes, but Yahweh weighs the hearts.


The LORD who 'searches the heart' to repay each according to his ways undergirds 'God knows your hearts.' The heart-searching-God motif is recurrent in the prophets, giving thematic coherence but no controlling diction here.

I, Yahweh, search the mind, I try the heart, even to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his doings.


'The Law and the Prophets were until John' presupposes the Elijah-figure who marks the close of the prophetic era and the turn to the day of the LORD. Malachi's promise of Elijah before the great day gives coherent, available background to John as the canon's hinge.

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Yahweh comes. He will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.”


'Easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of the Law to fall' coheres with 'the grass withers... but the word of our God stands forever,' affirming the imperishability of God's word against the transient cosmos. Strong conceptual coherence with a recurrent Isaianic theme.

The grass withers, the flower fades; but the word of our God stands forever.”


'Forever, O LORD, your word is settled in heaven' parallels the indestructibility of the Law's least stroke. The endurance-of-Torah motif gives thematic coherence, though the saying's imagery of a 'stroke of a pen' is independent.

Yahweh, your word is settled in heaven forever.


The divorce-and-remarriage saying directly engages the Mosaic certificate-of-divorce legislation, which Jesus reads against the grain by classing remarriage as adultery. Availability and coherence are decisive; this is the legal text the dictum addresses, framed by v.17's claim on the Law.

When a man takes a wife and marries her, then it shall be, if she finds no favor in his eyes, because he has found some unseemly thing in her, that he shall write her a bill of divorce, and put it in her hand, and send her out of his house. When she has departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife. If the latter husband hates her, and write her a bill of divorce, and puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house; or if the latter […]


The prohibition of divorce-and-remarriage as adultery rests on the creational one-flesh union that divorce cannot truly dissolve. The coherence with Genesis is high (Jesus' parallel teaching elsewhere makes the link explicit), supplying the theological ground here.

Therefore a man will leave his father and his mother, and will join with his wife, and they will be one flesh.


Malachi's oracle against faithless divorce ('the LORD hates divorce... she is your companion by covenant') coheres with Jesus' hardening of the marriage bond. The prophetic critique of casual divorce gives recurrent, available support, though no verbal quotation.

Yet you say, ‘Why?’ Because Yahweh has been witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion, and the wife of your covenant. Did he not make you one, although he had the residue of the Spirit? Why one? He sought a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of his youth. For I hate divorce”, says Yahweh, the God of Israel, “and him […]


Lazarus laid 'at the gate' desiring crumbs while the rich man feasts dramatizes the Deuteronomic command not to harden the heart against the poor brother at your gate, for the poor will never cease in the land. High coherence with the covenantal gate-and-poor topos.

If a poor man, one of your brothers, is with you within any of your gates in your land which Yahweh your God gives you, you shall not harden your heart, nor shut your hand from your poor brother; but you shall surely open your hand to him, and shall surely lend him sufficient for his need, which he lacks. Beware that there not be a base thought in your heart, saying, “The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand”; and your eye be evil against your […]


Lazarus 'full of sores' with dogs licking him evokes Job afflicted with sores from sole to crown, scraping himself amid loss. The shared imagery of a body covered in sores as the type of the abject sufferer gives coherent, available background.

So Satan went out from the presence of Yahweh, and struck Job with painful sores from the sole of his foot to his head. He took for himself a potsherd to scrape himself with, and he sat among the ashes.


The prospering, sumptuously clothed rich man set against the afflicted poor man echoes the psalmist's scandal at the wicked who are 'always at ease' and 'clothed with violence' while the godly suffer, resolved only at their end. Strong coherence with the reversal-of-fortunes frame that the parable will enact.

For I was envious of the arrogant, when I saw the prosperity of the wicked. For there are no struggles in their death, but their strength is firm. They are free from burdens of men, neither are they plagued like other men. Therefore pride is like a chain around their neck. Violence covers them like a garment. Their eyes bulge with fat. Their minds pass the limits of conceit. They scoff and speak with malice. In arrogance, they threaten oppression. They […]


The rich man 'clothed in purple and fine linen, feasting in luxury every day' matches Amos' woe on those who lie on ivory beds, eat lambs, and feast while not grieved over ruin, who go first into exile. The prophetic indictment of callous luxury gives recurrent, coherent background.

Woe to those who are at ease in Zion, and to those who are secure on the mountain of Samaria, the notable men of the chief of the nations, to whom the house of Israel come! Go to Calneh, and see; and from there go to Hamath the great; then go down to Gath of the Philistines. are they better than these kingdoms? or is their border greater than your border? Those who put far away the evil day, and cause the seat of violence to come near; Who lie on beds of […]


'Whoever shuts his ear to the cry of the poor will himself cry out and not be heard' anticipates the rich man's later unanswered cry from Hades after ignoring Lazarus at his gate. Coherence with the lex talionis of neglected mercy is real but the link is thematic, not verbal.

Whoever stops his ears at the cry of the poor, he will also cry out, but shall not be heard.


Being 'carried to Abraham's bosom' and the rich man's address 'Father Abraham' draw on the patriarchal hope of being gathered to one's fathers, with Abraham as the paradigmatic destination of the righteous dead. Coherence with the gathered-to-Abraham motif is strong, though 'bosom' as the resting place is Second-Temple development.

but you will go to your fathers in peace. You will be buried in a good old age.


'Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will receive us' on the lips of the martyrs supplies the explicit Second-Temple picture of the righteous welcomed by the patriarchs after death, illuminating 'Abraham's bosom.' Availability and coherence with the post-mortem reception motif support the echo.

If we suffer thus, Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob will receive us, and all the fathers will commend us.


The rich man's torment, flame, and anguish in Hades draws on Isaiah's closing vision of the dead whose fire is not quenched, the canonical seedbed of post-mortem fiery punishment. Coherence with the unquenched-fire judgment is high and the text was widely available.

“They shall go out, and look on the dead bodies of the men who have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they will be loathsome to all mankind.”


Ben Sira's image of the assembly of the wicked as tow set to flame and the broad road of sinners ending in Hades coheres with the flame and fixed-gulf fate of the rich man. The link is thematic to the sapiential fate-of-the-wicked topos rather than verbal.

The congregation of wicked men is as tow wrapped together; And the end of them is a flame of fire. The way of sinners is made smooth with stones; And at the last end thereof is the pit of Hades.


Enoch's tour of the hollow places of the dead, where the righteous and wicked are separated by a great division awaiting judgment, parallels the great chasm fixed between Lazarus and the rich man. As pseudepigraphal background to Second-Temple afterlife topography it is warranted but faint and contested.

[source text not in the World English Bible]


'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them' presses the Deuteronomic demand to heed the words spoken in God's name, with refusal entailing accountability. Coherence with the obligation to 'hear' the authoritative Mosaic word is strong, framing the sufficiency-of-Scripture point.

Yahweh your God will raise up to you a prophet from your midst, of your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him. This is according to all that you desired of Yahweh your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, “Let me not hear again the voice of Yahweh my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I not die.” Yahweh said to me, “They have well said that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a prophet from among their […]


Abraham's verdict that those who will not hear Moses will not be persuaded even by a resurrection coheres with Deuteronomy's insistence that the word is not far off in heaven or beyond reach but near, in mouth and heart, so no extraordinary sign is needed. The sufficiency and nearness of the revealed word grounds the saying.

For this commandment which I command you this day is not too hard for you or too distant. It is not in heaven, that you should say, “Who will go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, and proclaim it to us, that we may do it?” Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, “Who will go over the sea for us, and bring it to us, and proclaim it to us, that we may do it?” But the word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do […]


Israel's stiff-necked refusal to listen to the LORD's testimony 'by every prophet' despite warnings prefigures brothers who 'will not be persuaded' though warned by Moses and the prophets. The recurrent prophetic-rejection motif gives coherence, but the connection is thematic rather than verbal.

Yet Yahweh testified to Israel, and to Judah, by every prophet, and every seer, saying, “Turn from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets.” Notwithstanding, they would not listen, but hardened their neck, like the neck of their fathers, who didn’t believe in Yahweh their God.


The Holiness Code commands 'you shall surely rebuke your neighbor' rather than bear sin against him, the foundational text for fraternal correction that Jesus reproduces almost as a paraphrase ('rebuke him'). High Coherence with the surrounding love-of-neighbor frame and strong recurrence of this verse in Second-Temple reproof ethics give it good standing.

“‘You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.


Lamech's boast that he is avenged 'seventy-sevenfold' is the numerical foil that Jesus' sevenfold-forgiveness saying (and Matthew's seventy-seven) inverts: unlimited vengeance becomes unlimited pardon. The shared and distinctive sevenfold idiom gives moderate Volume; the figural reversal supplies Coherence.

If Cain will be avenged seven times, truly Lamech seventy-seven times.”


The new-covenant promise that God will forgive iniquity and remember sin no more underwrites the disciples' obligation to forgive the repentant brother. The link is thematic rather than verbal, so confidence is low, but the forgiveness motif gives Coherence with the pericope.

and they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know Yahweh; for they shall all know me, from their least to their greatest, says Yahweh: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.


Ezekiel's oracle on a land that 'sins against me' and the prophet's responsibility for warning resonates faintly with the 'if your brother sins' correction logic, but the connection is diffuse and the vocabulary common, so this is a contested faint echo at best.

Son of man, when a land sins against me by committing a trespass, and I stretch out my hand on it, and break the staff of its bread, and send famine on it, and cut off from it man and animal;


Jeremiah's sign-act binds a stone to the scroll and casts it into the Euphrates so Babylon will 'sink and not rise,' the closest OT image to a weight sunk in deep water as a figure of irreversible doom. The millstone-and-sea threat shares the distinctive stone-cast-into-water motif of total destruction, giving moderate Volume.

It shall be, when you have made an end of reading this book, that you shall bind a stone to it, and cast it into the midst of the Euphrates:


The Song of the Sea says the enemy 'went down into the depths like a stone,' supplying the stone-sinking-in-the-sea imagery of judgment. The verbal overlap (stone, depths of the sea) is suggestive but the motif is widespread, so the echo is faint.

The deeps cover them. They went down into the depths like a stone.


Nehemiah's prayer recalls the pursuers cast 'into the depths, like a stone into mighty waters,' reinforcing the same drowning-by-stone judgment topos. Low Volume and a commonplace image keep this contested.

You divided the sea before them, so that they went through the midst of the sea on the dry land; and you cast their pursuers into the depths, as a stone into the mighty waters.


Zechariah's word that the great 'mountain' shall become a plain before Zerubbabel by the Spirit, not by might, is the canonical pairing of faith with the moving/leveling of an immovable obstacle. The mountain-removed-by-faith logic gives Coherence with 'faith like a mustard seed,' though Luke uses a sycamore-into-sea rather than a mountain, lowering Volume.

Who are you, great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you are a plain; and he will bring out the capstone with shouts of ‘Grace, grace, to it!’”


The psalm's confidence even 'though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea' supplies the very image of an immovable thing thrown into the sea, here recast as the work of faith. The verbal overlap (uprooted/carried into the sea) is real but the figure is proverbial, so it is faint.

Therefore we won’t be afraid, though the earth changes, though the mountains are shaken into the heart of the seas;


The theophany that scatters the everlasting mountains coheres with the faith-moves-mountains topos behind the uprooted-tree saying. The connection is conceptual and diffuse, so confidence is low.

He stood, and shook the earth. He looked, and made the nations tremble. The ancient mountains were crumbled. The age-old hills collapsed. His ways are eternal.


Isaiah's 'the mountains may depart' as a figure of cosmic upheaval feeds the same stock of immovable-object-displaced imagery that the mustard-seed/sycamore saying exploits. Faint and contested.

For the mountains may depart, and the hills be removed; but my loving kindness shall not depart from you, neither shall my covenant of peace be removed,” says Yahweh who has mercy on you.


Eliphaz asks whether a man can be profitable to God or whether it is gain to the Almighty that one is righteous, the wisdom premise that human service places God under no obligation. This grounds the 'we are unworthy servants, we have only done our duty' logic; moderate Coherence with the servant parable.

“Can a man be profitable to God? Surely he who is wise is profitable to himself. Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that you are righteous? Or does it benefit him, that you make your ways perfect?


Elihu's 'if you are righteous, what do you give him?' states the same theology of non-meritorious obedience underlying the unprofitable-servant saying. Recurrence of the motif across Job strengthens the Availability and Coherence, though there is no verbal quotation.

If you are righteous, what do you give him? Or what does he receive from your hand?


The image of servants' eyes fixed on the hand of their master, waiting on his command, supplies the master-servant deference picture the parable assumes. Conceptual rather than verbal, hence low confidence.

Behold, as the eyes of servants look to the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maid to the hand of her mistress; so our eyes look to Yahweh, our God, until he has mercy on us.


God's claim that the Israelites are his servants whom he brought out of Egypt frames Israel's whole obedience as owed service, the covenantal backdrop to 'we have only done what was our duty.' Faint, diffuse, contested.

For to me the children of Israel are servants; they are my servants whom I brought out of the land of Egypt. I am Yahweh your God.


The Naaman narrative — a leprous Syrian foreigner cleansed who returns to the prophet to confess the God of Israel — is the structural template for the lone Samaritan leper who turns back to give thanks. The distinctive convergence of foreigner + leprosy + cleansing + grateful return gives strong Volume and Coherence, and Luke elsewhere cites Naaman explicitly (4:27), confirming Recurrence.

Now Naaman, captain of the army of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honorable, because by him Yahweh had given victory to Syria: he was also a mighty man of valor, but he was a leper. The Syrians had gone out in bands, and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maiden; and she waited on Naaman’s wife. She said to her mistress, “I wish that my lord were with the prophet who is in Samaria! Then he would heal him […]


The leprosy law requires the unclean to dwell apart and cry out, explaining why the ten 'stood at a distance' and lifted their voices. The pericope presupposes this purity legislation as its narrative grammar, giving high Coherence and Availability.

“The leper in whom the plague is shall wear torn clothes, and the hair of his head shall hang loose. He shall cover his upper lip, and shall cry, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’ All the days in which the plague is in him he shall be unclean. He is unclean. He shall dwell alone. Outside of the camp shall be his dwelling.


The cleansed leper must be presented to the priest for inspection and rites of restoration, exactly what Jesus commands: 'Go, show yourselves to the priests.' The direct dependence on the priestly examination law gives high Volume and Coherence.

“This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing. He shall be brought to the priest, and the priest shall go out of the camp. The priest shall examine him, and behold, if the plague of leprosy is healed in the leper, then the priest shall command them to take for him who is to be cleansed two living clean birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop.


Miriam's leprosy, exclusion 'outside the camp' for seven days, and restoration by intercession reinforce the segregation-and-cleansing pattern shaping the leper episode. Moderate Coherence; the motif overlaps with the Leviticus laws, so it adds recurrence rather than independent Volume.

The cloud departed from over the Tent; and behold, Miriam was leprous, as white as snow. Aaron looked at Miriam, and behold, she was leprous. Aaron said to Moses, “Oh, my lord, please don’t count this sin against us, in which we have done foolishly, and in which we have sinned. Let her not, I pray, be as one dead, of whom the flesh is half consumed when he comes out of his mother’s womb.” Moses cried to Yahweh, saying, “Heal her, God, I beg you!” Yahweh […]


The four lepers at the gate of Samaria who 'stood at the entrance' likewise embody the marginalized-leper-at-a-distance topos and the Samaria setting. Geographic and situational resonance, but no verbal dependence, so low.

Now there were four leprous men at the entrance of the gate. They said one to another, “Why do we sit here until we die?


The psalm's call to 'bless the Lord, O my soul... who heals all your diseases' coheres with the Samaritan's loud-voiced glorifying of God for his healing. Thematic only; faint.

Praise Yahweh, my soul! All that is within me, praise his holy name! Praise Yahweh, my soul, and don’t forget all his benefits; who forgives all your sins; who heals all your diseases;


Daniel's vision that the God of heaven will set up an everlasting kingdom underlies the Pharisees' question of when the Kingdom of God would come and Jesus' redefinition of its arrival. Moderate Volume from the shared 'kingdom of God' eschatology; Daniel is the key Second-Temple source for the expectation Jesus is correcting.

In the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people; but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.


The everlasting dominion given to the one like a son of man frames the kingdom expectation in view; the link is conceptual, anticipating the Son-of-Man material that immediately follows, so it is low here.

There was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.


Moses insists the commandment is 'not far off... but very near you, in your mouth and in your heart,' a nearness-not-distant idiom that resonates with 'the Kingdom of God is among/within you' rather than 'here' or 'there.' Suggestive but contested.

For this commandment which I command you this day is not too hard for you or too distant. It is not in heaven, that you should say, “Who will go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, and proclaim it to us, that we may do it?” Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, “Who will go over the sea for us, and bring it to us, and proclaim it to us, that we may do it?” But the word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do […]


The title 'the Son of Man' and his sudden, heaven-spanning revelation derive from Daniel's one like a son of man coming with the clouds of heaven. This is the controlling OT source for the entire 'days of the Son of Man' discourse, giving high Volume, Recurrence, and Coherence.

I saw in the night visions, and behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.


Zechariah's theophany where 'the Lord will appear... his arrow will go out like lightning' supplies the lightning-flash imagery for the Son of Man's day. The distinctive divine-lightning-of-judgment motif gives moderate Volume.

Yahweh will be seen over them; and his arrow will go flash like lightning; and the Lord Yahweh will blow the trumpet, and will go with whirlwinds of the south.


'His lightnings light up the world' depicts the cosmic, world-illuminating theophany echoed in the lightning that shines from one part of the sky to the other. Common theophanic imagery, so low.

His lightning lights up the world. The earth sees, and trembles.


The Suffering Servant 'despised and rejected by men' undergirds 'he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.' The must-suffer-and-be-rejected formula coheres strongly with Isaiah 53, giving moderate Volume to a figural reading.

He was despised, and rejected by men; a man of suffering, and acquainted with disease. He was despised as one from whom men hide their face; and we didn’t respect him.


The flood narrative — humanity eating and marrying in oblivious normalcy until Noah enters the ark and the deluge destroys them all — is explicitly invoked ('as in the days of Noah'). Direct named typology gives maximal Volume and Coherence.

Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters came on the earth. Noah went into the ship with his sons, his wife, and his sons’ wives, because of the floodwaters. Clean animals, unclean animals, birds, and everything that creeps on the ground went by pairs to Noah into the ship, male and female, as God commanded Noah. After the seven days, the floodwaters came on the earth. In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the […]


The verdict that human wickedness was great and every intention only evil supplies the moral indictment implicit in the days-of-Noah comparison: heedless wickedness met by sudden judgment. Strengthens the Coherence of the flood typology.

Yahweh saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of man’s heart was continually only evil.


Sodom's destruction by fire and sulfur rained from heaven, with Lot going out on the day of doom, is named directly ('the days of Lot'). The explicit citation of fire-and-brimstone judgment gives maximal Volume and Coherence as the paired type to Noah.

Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and on Gomorrah sulfur and fire from Yahweh out of the sky. He overthrew those cities, all the plain, all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew on the ground.


The outcry against Sodom's sin that prompts the divine visitation supplies the moral premise behind the eating-buying-building-as-usual-until-judgment picture. Coheres with the Lot typology and supports its Recurrence.

Yahweh said, “Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now, and see whether their deeds are as bad as the reports which have come to me. If not, I will know.”


The covenant curse describes the land as 'brimstone and salt... like the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah,' showing Sodom's fire-and-sulfur as the standard type of sudden total ruin Luke is invoking. Adds Recurrence; faint as an independent source.

and that all of its land is sulfur, salt, and burning, that it is not sown, doesn’t produce, nor does any grass grow in it, like the overthrow of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, which Yahweh overthrew in his anger, and in his wrath;


Ezekiel's reading of Sodom's sin as prosperous, complacent ease before judgment matches the buying/selling/planting/building complacency Luke emphasizes. Thematic reinforcement, low Volume.

Behold, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: pride, fullness of bread, and prosperous ease was in her and in her daughters; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. They were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away when I saw it.


'Remember Lot's wife' explicitly names the woman who looked back and became a pillar of salt, the warning against turning back when fleeing judgment. A direct citation by name gives maximal Volume and Coherence with 'let him not turn back.'

But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar of salt.


The angels' command 'do not look behind you... lest you be consumed' is the prohibition Lot's wife violated and the imperative behind 'let him not go down... not turn back.' The flee-without-looking-back instruction is closely reproduced, giving high Volume.

It came to pass, when they had taken them out, that he said, “Escape for your life! Don’t look behind you, and don’t stay anywhere in the plain. Escape to the mountains, lest you be consumed!”


The proverb 'all that a man has he will give for his life' resonates faintly with the paradox of seeking to save one's life and losing it; the connection is thematic, not verbal, so low.

Satan answered Yahweh, and said, “Skin for skin. Yes, all that a man has he will give for his life.


The plague on the firstborn 'from the firstborn of Pharaoh to the firstborn of the maidservant who is behind the mill' pairs sleeping/grinding social opposites singled out for judgment, a structural analogue to the two in one bed and two grinding, one taken and one left. Suggestive selective-judgment motif, but no verbal dependence, so low.

and all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sits on his throne, even to the firstborn of the female servant who is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of livestock.


Malachi's promise that you will again distinguish 'between the righteous and the wicked' on the day of judgment coheres with the sudden separation of the paired figures, one taken and one left. Thematic and faint.

Then you shall return and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him who serves God and him who doesn’t serve him.


The Lord's speech on the eagle/vulture whose young suck up blood and that is wherever the slain are ('where the slain are, there is he') is the clearest source for 'where the body is, there the vultures gather.' The distinctive corpse-and-bird-of-prey proverb gives strong Volume and Coherence with the judgment scene.

His young ones also suck up blood. Where the slain are, there he is.”


The Chaldean horsemen who fly 'like an eagle swift to devour' gathering to the prey supply the swooping-bird-of-prey-toward-the-doomed imagery. Moderate Volume; reinforces the judgment-by-gathering-raptors motif.

Their horses also are swifter than leopards, and are more fierce than the evening wolves. Their horsemen press proudly on. Yes, their horsemen come from afar. They fly as an eagle that hurries to devour.


The summons to the birds to gather to God's sacrificial slaughter and eat the flesh of the slain provides an eschatological carrion-gathering image very close to the saying's apocalyptic function. Good Coherence with the day-of-judgment context, lowered only by the eagles/vultures vs. generic-birds difference.

You, son of man, thus says the Lord Yahweh: Speak to the birds of every sort, and to every animal of the field, Assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to my sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, even a great sacrifice on the mountains of Israel, that you may eat flesh and drink blood. You shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth, of rams, of lambs, and of goats, of bulls, all of them […]


'Set the trumpet to your lips! One like an eagle is over the house of the Lord' offers an eagle-as-onrushing-judgment image. Faint and contested, but adds Recurrence to the bird-of-prey-judgment topos.

“Put the trumpet to your lips! Something like an eagle is over Yahweh’s house, because they have broken my covenant, and rebelled against my law.


Sirach declares the Lord will not ignore the widow's cry nor the supplication of the oppressed, the prayer that pierces the clouds, and that he will not delay nor be patient (slow) until he repays vengeance. Luke fuses the widow figure, the day-and-night crying, the question of God's delay, and the swift vindication, making this the densest Second-Temple background for the parable. High volume and coherence.

He will in no wise despise the supplication of the fatherless; Nor the widow, when she pours out her tale. Do not the tears of the widow run down her cheek? And is not her cry against him that has caused them to fall? He that serves God according to his good pleasure shall be accepted, And his supplication shall reach to the clouds. The prayer of the humble pierces the clouds; And till it come near, he will not be comforted; And he will not depart, till […]


The Torah forbids afflicting any widow or orphan, promising that if they cry out God will surely hear and his wrath will burn. This grounds the parable's premise that God vindicates the crying widow, drawing on the covenantal cry-and-hear pattern. Strong availability and coherence with the elect 'crying out day and night.'

“You shall not take advantage of any widow or fatherless child. If you take advantage of them at all, and they cry at all to me, I will surely hear their cry; and my wrath will grow hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless.


Deuteronomy commands not to pervert the justice due to the sojourner or fatherless and not to take a widow's garment in pledge. The unjust judge embodies the legal failure this law targets, while God is the true judge who defends the widow's case ('Defend me from my adversary'). Coherent with the legal-vindication theme though more diffuse than Sirach.

You shall not deprive the foreigner or the fatherless of justice, nor take a widow’s clothing in pledge;


Psalm 9-10 (one psalm in LXX) praises God as the one who judges the oppressed, does not forget the cry of the afflicted, and vindicates the poor against the wicked who say God does not see. The widow's plea for vindication and God's avenging of his elect echo this petitionary justice psalm. Medium volume; thematic rather than verbal.

I will give thanks to Yahweh with my whole heart. I will tell of all your marvelous works. I will be glad and rejoice in you. I will sing praise to your name, O Most High. When my enemies turn back, they stumble and perish in your presence. For you have maintained my just cause. You sit on the throne judging righteously. You have rebuked the nations. You have destroyed the wicked. You have blotted out their name forever and ever. The enemy is overtaken by […]


Habakkuk promises the vision awaits its appointed time, hastens to the end, will not lie, and 'though it delay, wait for it.' The parable's tension between God's apparent patience/delay and his coming swift vindication, capped by 'when the Son of Man comes,' resonates with this eschatological delay-yet-certain motif. Coherent with Luke's vindication eschatology.

For the vision is yet for the appointed time, and it hurries toward the end, and won’t prove false. Though it takes time, wait for it; because it will surely come. It won’t delay.

For the vision is yet for a time, and it shall shoot forth at the end, and not in vain: though he should tarry, wait for him; for he will surely come, and will not tarry.


The lament of crying to God day and night ('day and night I cry before you') supplies the unceasing-prayer language of the elect crying out day and night. The verbal pairing is common in the Psalter but Psalm 88 is its sharpest instance. Low confidence given the formula's diffusion.

Yahweh, the God of my salvation, I have cried day and night before you. Let my prayer enter into your presence. Turn your ear to my cry. For my soul is full of troubles. My life draws near to Sheol. I am counted among those who go down into the pit. I am like a man who has no help, set apart among the dead, like the slain who lie in the grave, whom you remember no more. They are cut off from your hand. You have laid me in the lowest pit, in the darkest […]


Abraham's appeal, 'Shall not the Judge of all the earth do justice?' frames God as the just Judge contrasted here with the unjust human judge. The figural contrast between God-the-just-Judge and the city judge who fears neither God nor man may stand behind Luke's argument a fortiori. Faint and thematic.

Be it far from you to do things like that, to kill the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous should be like the wicked. May that be far from you. Shouldn’t the Judge of all the earth do right?”


The tax collector's 'God, be merciful to me, a sinner' closely tracks the penitent's plea in Psalm 51, 'Have mercy on me, O God... blot out my transgressions,' the paradigmatic prayer of the contrite sinner. The shared vocabulary of mercy plus self-identification as sinner and the broken-and-contrite heart God accepts make this a strong verbal-thematic echo. High volume and coherence.

Have mercy on me, God, according to your loving kindness. According to the multitude of your tender mercies, blot out my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity. Cleanse me from my sin. For I know my transgressions. My sin is constantly before me. Against you, and you only, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in your sight; that you may be proved right when you speak, and justified when you judge. Behold, I was born in iniquity. In sin […]


The maxim 'God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble' underwrites the closing logion that the self-exalting are humbled and the self-humbling exalted. The Pharisee's proud self-display versus the tax collector's lowliness is precisely this proverb's contrast, and the LXX wording was a standard Second-Temple proof text. Strong coherence with Luke's reversal theme.

Surely he mocks the mockers, but he gives grace to the humble.

The Lord resists the proud; but he gives grace to the humble.


Job 22:29 states that when one is brought low he says 'lift up,' for God saves the lowly of eyes, matching both the exaltation-of-the-humble logion and the detail that the tax collector would not lift up his eyes. The eyes-lowered humility detail strengthens the link beyond the common reversal topos. Medium volume.

When they cast down, you shall say, ‘be lifted up.’ He will save the humble person.


Ezekiel's oracle 'exalt that which is low, and abase that which is high' supplies a prophetic form of the humbled/exalted reversal that concludes the parable. The phrasing is a recognized OT antecedent for Luke's reversal sayings (cf. also 1:52). Thematic rather than verbal-specific here.

thus says the Lord Yahweh: Remove the turban, and take off the crown; this will not be as it was; exalt that which is low, and abase that which is high.


Isaiah 58 rebukes those who fast yet oppress, contrasting empty self-righteous fasting with the fast God chooses (justice and mercy to the poor). The Pharisee's boast of fasting twice a week and tithing, set against the justified penitent, draws on this prophetic critique of cultic display divorced from righteousness. Coherent with Luke's piety-critique.

‘Why have we fasted,’ say they, ‘and you don’t see? Why have we afflicted our soul, and you take no knowledge?’ “Behold, in the day of your fast you find pleasure, and exact all your labors. Behold, you fast for strife and contention, and to strike with the fist of wickedness: you don’t fast this day so as to make your voice to be heard on high. Is such the fast that I have chosen? the day for a man to afflict his soul? Is it to bow down his head as a […]


God dwells 'with him who is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the heart of the contrite,' which matches why the humbled tax collector goes home justified rather than the proud Pharisee. The contrite/humble spirit that God favors is the theological engine of the parable. Medium coherence.

For thus says the high and lofty One who inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy: “I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also who is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite.


Sirach insists that keeping the law and almsgiving outweigh mere sacrifice, a Second-Temple critique of confidence in cultic performance like the Pharisee's. Faint and contested, but coherent with the tithing/fasting boast being insufficient. Low volume.

He that keeps the law multiplies offerings; He that takes heed to the commandments sacrifices a peace offering. He that requites a good turn offers fine flour; And he that gives alms sacrifices a thank offering. To depart from wickedness is a thing pleasing to the Lord; And to depart from unrighteousness is an atoning sacrifice.


The one who may ascend the temple hill is the clean of hands and pure of heart; the two men 'went up into the temple to pray' and only the contrite one is accepted. The temple-ascent and acceptability motif faintly underlies the scene. Low confidence.

He who has clean hands and a pure heart; who has not lifted up his soul to falsehood, and has not sworn deceitfully.


The patriarch laying hands on and blessing children stands behind Jesus' touching and receiving the babies, a gesture of paternal blessing. The link is gestural and thematic rather than verbal. Low confidence given how common blessing-of-children scenes are.

Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it on Ephraim’s head, who was the younger, and his left hand on Manasseh’s head, guiding his hands knowingly, for Manasseh was the firstborn. He blessed Joseph, and said, “The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has fed me all my life long to this day, the angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads, and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham […]


The psalmist's posture of a weaned child, calm and humble, with eyes not raised too high, resonates with receiving the kingdom 'like a little child' as dependent lowliness. Coheres with the surrounding humility theme but verbally faint. Low confidence.

Yahweh, my heart isn’t haughty, nor my eyes lofty; nor do I concern myself with great matters, or things too wonderful for me. Surely I have stilled and quieted my soul, like a weaned child with his mother, like a weaned child is my soul within me. Israel, hope in Yahweh, from this time forward and forever more.


Jesus recites the Decalogue's second table—do not commit adultery, murder, steal, bear false witness, honor father and mother—quoting the commandments nearly verbatim. This is an explicit citation of the Ten Commandments as the answer to inheriting eternal life. Highest volume; direct quotation.

“Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which Yahweh your God gives you. “You shall not murder. “You shall not commit adultery. “You shall not steal. “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.


The Deuteronomic recension of the Decalogue is an equally valid source for the cited commandments; Luke's order (adultery, murder, steal, false witness, honor parents) reflects a known sequence in the LXX tradition shared by both Exodus and Deuteronomy. Direct quotation, high volume.

“Honor your father and your mother, as Yahweh your God commanded you; that your days may be long, and that it may go well with you, in the land which Yahweh your God gives you. “You shall not murder. “You shall not commit adultery. “You shall not steal. “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.


Jesus' 'No one is good except God alone' echoes the Shema's confession of the one God as the sole locus of goodness and uniqueness. The monotheistic premise reframes the ruler's 'Good Teacher.' Medium volume; theological rather than verbal-exact.

Hear, Israel: Yahweh is our God. Yahweh is one. You shall love Yahweh your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might.


Leviticus' promise that the one who keeps the commandments 'shall live by them' undergirds the link between commandment-keeping and inheriting eternal life that frames the dialogue. This was the standard Second-Temple text connecting Torah obedience and life. Coherent though not quoted.

You shall therefore keep my statutes and my ordinances; which if a man does, he shall live in them. I am Yahweh.


The 'sell all and give to the poor' command and the implicit demand of total neighbor-love stand near Leviticus' love-of-neighbor, often paired with the Decalogue in Jesus' teaching. Faint here since Luke does not cite the love command in this pericope. Low confidence.

“‘You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people; but you shall love your neighbor as yourself. I am Yahweh.


The question 'what shall I do to inherit eternal life' and the demand for clean conduct loosely recall the entrance-liturgy question 'Who shall ascend?' answered by moral purity. Thematic and faint. Low confidence.

Who may ascend to Yahweh’s hill? Who may stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart; who has not lifted up his soul to falsehood, and has not sworn deceitfully.


'The things impossible with men are possible with God' closely echoes the LORD's word to Sarah, 'Is anything too hard for the LORD?', the foundational OT statement of divine possibility against human impossibility. The salvation of the rich, humanly impossible, is staked on this Abrahamic promise of God's power. High coherence and recurrence.

Is anything too hard for Yahweh? At the set time I will return to you, when the season comes round, and Sarah will have a son.”


Job's confession 'I know that you can do all things, and no purpose of yours can be thwarted' directly parallels 'what is impossible with men is possible with God.' This is a near-formulaic OT affirmation of divine omnipotence that Luke deploys at the climax of the rich-ruler episode. Strong volume and coherence.

“I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be restrained.


'If it is marvelous (impossible) in the eyes of the remnant... should it also be marvelous in my eyes? says the LORD' contrasts human impossibility with divine ease, mirroring Luke's antithesis. The eschatological restoration context fits Luke's kingdom-entry theme. Medium volume.

Thus says Yahweh of Armies: “If it is marvelous in the eyes of the remnant of this people in those days, should it also be marvelous in my eyes?” says Yahweh of Armies.


Jeremiah prays 'Ah Lord GOD... nothing is too hard for you,' another standard OT declaration of divine possibility echoed by 'possible with God.' Reinforces the recurrence criterion alongside Genesis 18:14 and Job 42:2. Thematic, near-formulaic.

Ah Lord Yahweh! Behold, you have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and by your outstretched arm; there is nothing too hard for you,


'He who trusts in his riches will fall' coheres with the warning that the rich enter the kingdom only with difficulty. Wisdom's critique of riches stands generally behind the camel-and-needle saying. Low volume; no verbal contact.

He who trusts in his riches will fall, but the righteous shall flourish as the green leaf.


'Everything written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished'—his being delivered up, mocked, shamefully treated, spit on, scourged, and killed—draws directly on the Suffering Servant who was despised, gave his back to smiters, and was led to slaughter. Luke programmatically reads the passion as the prophesied Servant fate. High coherence; the chief scriptural script for the passion.

He was despised, and rejected by men; a man of suffering, and acquainted with disease. He was despised as one from whom men hide their face; and we didn’t respect him. Surely he has borne our sickness, and carried our suffering; yet we considered him plagued, struck by God, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. The punishment that brought our peace was on him; and by his wounds we are healed. All we […]


The Servant who gave his back to those who struck, his cheeks to those who pulled the beard, and hid not his face from shame and spitting matches Luke's specific list: mocked, shamefully treated, and spit upon. The spitting and shaming details are strikingly verbal. High volume.

I gave my back to the strikers, and my cheeks to those who plucked off the hair; I didn’t hide my face from shame and spitting.


The mocking and shameful abuse of the righteous sufferer in Psalm 22 ('all who see me mock me') belongs to the prophetic passion script Luke invokes; Luke's passion narrative later cites this psalm directly. Here it stands among 'all that is written.' Medium volume in this verse, high recurrence in Luke.

My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from helping me, and from the words of my groaning? My God, I cry in the daytime, but you don’t answer; in the night season, and am not silent. But you are holy, you who inhabit the praises of Israel. Our fathers trusted in you. They trusted, and you delivered them. They cried to you, and were delivered. They trusted in you, and were not disappointed. But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of […]


The title 'Son of Man,' the figure whose fate the prophets foretell, derives from Daniel's heavenly one given dominion; Luke pairs the suffering with this exalted title pointing toward vindication and resurrection on the third day. The Son of Man designation carries Danielic resonance even in a passion context. Medium coherence.

I saw in the night visions, and behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.


'On the third day he will raise us up' is widely held to inform the 'on the third day he will rise again' formula of the passion predictions. The third-day vindication motif is a recognized Second-Temple resurrection backdrop. Medium volume; contested verbal link.

After two days he will revive us. On the third day he will raise us up, and we will live before him.


The rejected stone made the cornerstone foreshadows the Son of Man rejected then vindicated/raised, part of the prophetic-fulfillment frame. Faint here since unquoted in this pericope. Low confidence.

The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner.


The blind man's confession 'Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me' invokes the Davidic covenant promise of an everlasting throne to David's offspring, identifying Jesus as the messianic Son of David. The title is the theological hinge of the healing, set en route to Jerusalem. High coherence with Luke's royal Christology.

When your days are fulfilled, and you shall sleep with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who shall proceed out of your bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; but my loving kindness shall not […]


'Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened' is the signature prophecy of messianic restoration that Luke enacts in the Jericho healing, signaling the in-breaking kingdom. The opening of blind eyes is a programmatic Lukan fulfillment motif (cf. 4:18; 7:22). High volume and coherence.

Then the eyes of the blind will be opened, and the ears of the deaf will be unstopped.


'The eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity and darkness' adds to the Isaianic cluster promising sight to the blind in the day of restoration, reinforced by Luke's pattern of citing such oracles. Medium volume; part of a recurring Isaianic chain.

In that day, the deaf will hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind will see out of obscurity and out of darkness.


The Servant is appointed 'to open the eyes that are blind,' tying the blind-man healing to the Servant's commission and complementing the passion's Servant Christology in the prior pericope. Coherent within Luke's Isaianic program. Medium confidence.

to open the blind eyes, to bring the prisoners out of the dungeon, and those who sit in darkness out of the prison.


'The LORD opens the eyes of the blind' attributes sight-giving to God, so that the crowd's praising God when the blind man sees enacts this psalm's confession of God who heals. Coheres with the closing 'glorifying God' and the Davidic-mercy frame. Medium volume.

Yahweh opens the eyes of the blind. Yahweh raises up those who are bowed down. Yahweh loves the righteous.


Psalm 89's celebration of God's steadfast covenant mercy to David and his line reinforces the 'Son of David, have mercy' plea, linking Davidic sonship with covenant mercy (eleos). Thematic support for the title's mercy resonance. Low volume.

I will sing of the loving kindness of Yahweh forever. With my mouth, I will make known your faithfulness to all generations. I indeed declare, “Love stands firm forever. You established the heavens. Your faithfulness is in them.” “I have made a covenant with my chosen one, I have sworn to David, my servant, ‘I will establish your seed forever, and build up your throne to all generations.’” Selah. The heavens will praise your wonders, Yahweh; your […]


The Servant anointed to proclaim 'recovery of sight to the blind' (so the LXX, taken up at Luke 4:18) faintly underlies the Jericho restoration as fulfillment of the Jubilee announcement. Faint here, strong in Luke overall. Low confidence.

The Spirit of the Lord Yahweh is on me; because Yahweh has anointed me to preach good news to the humble. He has sent me to bind up the broken hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and release to those who are bound;

The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me; he has sent me to preach glad tidings to the poor, to heal the broken in heart, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind;


Zacchaeus pledges to restore fourfold what he has wrongfully exacted, matching the Torah's penalty of four sheep for a stolen sheep. Luke's specific multiplier 'four times' aligns precisely with the lower of the Exodus restitution scales, signaling Zacchaeus's voluntary embrace of legal restitution beyond mere repayment. High volume and coherence with the conversion-as-restoration theme.

“If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills it, or sells it; he shall pay five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.


Numbers prescribes that one who wrongs another must confess, restore the principal in full, and add a fifth. Zacchaeus's confession plus voluntary restitution enacts this penitential statute, even exceeding it in the fourfold portion. The coherence of confession-and-restoration makes this a strong background for the verse's logic of repentance.

“Speak to the children of Israel: ‘When a man or woman commits any sin that men commit, so as to trespass against Yahweh, and that soul is guilty; then he shall confess his sin which he has done, and he shall make restitution for his guilt in full, and add to it the fifth part of it, and give it to him in respect of whom he has been guilty.


Nathan's parable has David decree the rich thief must restore the lamb fourfold, the same multiplier Zacchaeus invokes. The shared fourfold figure tied to a wealthy man's exploitation of the poor gives a narrative echo, though it derives the number from the Exodus statute David applies. Medium confidence as the link is mediated through the legal background.

He shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity!”


The Son of Man's mission to 'seek and to save that which was lost' echoes Ezekiel's promise that God himself will seek the lost sheep and bind up the strayed, in contrast to the false shepherds. Luke applies the divine shepherd-search directly to Jesus, with the rare verb pairing seek/lost matching the prophetic oracle. High volume and thematic coherence with Luke's lost-and-found motif.

I will seek that which was lost, and will bring back that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was broken, and will strengthen that which was sick: but the fat and the strong I will destroy; I will feed them in justice.


Ezekiel adds that God will 'save' his flock so they shall no more be a prey, reinforcing the seek-and-save pairing of v. 10. The combination of seeking the lost and saving the flock in one oracle undergirds Luke's compressed mission statement. Medium because v. 16 carries the primary verbal weight.

therefore will I save my flock, and they shall no more be a prey; and I will judge between sheep and sheep.


Jesus declares Zacchaeus 'a son of Abraham,' invoking the Abrahamic covenant and its promise of inclusion. The phrase asserts that the despised tax collector belongs to the covenant family, an echo of God's covenant with Abraham and his offspring. Medium volume; the title is idiomatic but covenantally loaded in Luke.

Neither will your name any more be called Abram, but your name will be Abraham; for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make nations of you. Kings will come out of you. I will establish my covenant between me and you and your seed after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God to you and to your seed after you.


The gathering of the scattered/lost of Israel as a restoration motif faintly underlies 'came to seek and to save that which was lost.' The remnant-gathering theme coheres with Luke's salvation-to-this-house, but the verbal contact is slight. Low confidence; Ezekiel 34 is the stronger source.

It will happen in that day that the Lord will set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant that is left of his people from Assyria, from Egypt, from Pathros, from Cush, from Elam, from Shinar, from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. He will set up a banner for the nations, and will assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.


Micah's promise to gather 'her that is driven out' and 'the lost' (LXX) supplies another prophetic seeking-the-lost background for v. 10. The image of God assembling the strayed remnant coheres with Jesus's mission statement but is verbally faint beside Ezekiel. Low confidence, marked contested.

“In that day,” says Yahweh, “I will assemble that which is lame, and I will gather that which is driven away, and that which I have afflicted;


The parable's transplanting and accountability imagery, where a vassal is set up and judged for fruitfulness, faintly resembles Ezekiel's eagle-and-vine allegory of kingship and rebellion. Both concern a ruler's delegated authority and reckoning, though the minas parable is closer to political memory than to this oracle. Low and contested.

Yahweh’s word came to me, saying, Son of man, tell a riddle, and speak a parable to the house of Israel; and say, Thus says the Lord Yahweh: A great eagle with great wings and long feathers, full of feathers, which had various colors, came to Lebanon, and took the top of the cedar: he cropped off the topmost of the young twigs of it, and carried it to a land of traffic; he set it in a city of merchants. He took also of the seed of the land, and planted it […]


The nobleman 'went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return' evokes the Son of Man approaching the Ancient of Days to receive dominion, kingship, and a returning reign. Luke frames the parable amid expectation that the Kingdom would appear, making the Danielic enthronement-and-return pattern a coherent backdrop. Medium volume given the political-historical surface.

I saw in the night visions, and behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. There was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.


The faithful servant entrusted with much and given authority over cities loosely recalls Joseph's stewardship rewarded with rule over Egypt. The steward-elevated-to-governance pattern coheres but is a common biblical type, so verbal contact is weak. Low confidence, contested.

Yahweh was with Joseph, and he was a prosperous man. He was in the house of his master the Egyptian. His master saw that Yahweh was with him, and that Yahweh made all that he did prosper in his hand. Joseph found favor in his sight. He ministered to him, and he made him overseer over his house, and all that he had he put into his hand. From the time that he made him overseer in his house, and over all that he had, Yahweh blessed the Egyptian’s house for […]


The master's reproach about not depositing the money to earn interest plays against the Torah's regulation of usury, sharpening the third servant's failure. The interest/banking language gains bite against the Mosaic lending economy, though no quotation is intended. Low and contested.

You shall not lend on interest to your brother; interest of money, interest of food, interest of anything that is lent on interest. You may lend on interest to a foreigner; but to your brother you shall not lend on interest, that Yahweh your God may bless you in all that you put your hand to, in the land where you go in to possess it.


The contrast between increasing wealth by labor and the unproductive hoarded mina resonates with Proverbs' maxim that wealth gotten by vanity dwindles but he who gathers by labor increases it. The wisdom logic of fruitful versus idle stewardship coheres faintly. Low confidence.

Wealth gained dishonestly dwindles away, but he who gathers by hand makes it grow.


The citizens' embassy declaring 'We don't want this man to reign over us' echoes the recurrent rejection of the appointed king and rebellion against the suzerain, as when Zedekiah rebelled against the overlord. The rejected-ruler motif coheres with Israel's pattern of refusing God's anointed, but no single text is quoted. Low, contested.

He also rebelled against king Nebuchadnezzar, who had made him swear by God: but he stiffened his neck, and hardened his heart against turning to Yahweh, the God of Israel.


The subjects' refusal of the nobleman's reign recalls Israel's rejection of God as king ('they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them'). The verbal shape 'reign over us / over them' coheres with Luke's theme of rejecting the true king, though the parable's surface is Herodian politics. Low confidence, contested.

Yahweh said to Samuel, “Listen to the voice of the people in all that they tell you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me, that I should not be king over them.


The entry on a colt amid royal acclamation enacts Zechariah's oracle of the king coming to Zion humble and riding on a colt, the foal of a donkey. Though Luke does not cite the verse explicitly as Matthew does, the colt and the proclaimed king make this the controlling prophetic background. High volume and coherence with Luke's kingship theme.

Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion! Shout, daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your King comes to you! He is righteous, and having salvation; lowly, and riding on a donkey, even on a colt, the foal of a donkey.


Jacob's blessing on Judah foretells the ruler whose scepter does not depart, binding his colt to the vine, an early messianic colt image. The royal colt of the coming ruler coheres with Luke's enthronement entry and the kingly acclamation. Medium because the contact runs through the colt image rather than direct citation.

The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs. To him will the obedience of the peoples be. Binding his foal to the vine, his donkey’s colt to the choice vine; he has washed his garments in wine, his robes in the blood of grapes.


The crowd cries 'Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord,' quoting the pilgrim blessing of Psalm 118:26 with the added royal title 'the King.' This is a direct verbal citation embedded in the Hallel context of festal approach to the temple. High volume; the quotation is explicit and load-bearing.

Blessed is he who comes in Yahweh’s name! We have blessed you out of Yahweh’s house.


Setting the king-to-be on a mount for a processional enthronement recalls Solomon riding David's mule to Gihon to be proclaimed king. The royal mounting and acclamation parallel the Davidic succession ritual, supporting Luke's kingship framing. Medium confidence; the mount differs (colt vs. mule) but the enthronement pattern is strong.

The king said to them, “Take with you the servants of your lord, and cause Solomon my son to ride on my own mule, and bring him down to Gihon.


Spreading garments before the rider evokes the acclamation of Jehu, where the people put their cloaks under him on the steps and proclaimed 'Jehu is king.' The garment-strewing as royal enthronement gesture closely parallels the crowd's act here. Medium volume; the cloak ritual is a recognizable kingship sign.

Then they hurried, and took every man his garment, and put it under him on the top of the stairs, and blew the trumpet, saying, “Jehu is king.”


The acclamation 'Peace in heaven, and glory in the highest' echoes the heavenly-praise summons of the Psalms to praise the Lord 'in the heights.' The vertical glory-in-the-highest language coheres with the angelic Gloria pattern Luke reprises. Low because it is diffuse liturgical idiom.

Praise Yah! Praise Yahweh from the heavens! Praise him in the heights!


Jesus's claim that 'the stones would cry out' if the disciples were silent draws on Habakkuk's woe, where the stone cries out from the wall and the beam answers against injustice. The personified crying stone witnessing truth coheres with the inevitability of acclaiming the coming king. High volume; the crying-stone image is rare and distinctive.

For the stone will cry out of the wall, and the beam out of the woodwork will answer it.


The summons to Zion to rejoice because 'the King of Israel, the Lord, is in your midst' resonates with the rejoicing multitude hailing the coming king at the descent to Jerusalem. The Daughter-of-Zion joy at the king's arrival coheres with Luke's scene. Low confidence; Zechariah 9 is the dominant source.

Sing, daughter of Zion! Shout, Israel! Be glad and rejoice with all your heart, daughter of Jerusalem. Yahweh has taken away your judgments. He has thrown out your enemy. The King of Israel, Yahweh, is in your midst. You will not be afraid of evil any more.


The siege oracle against Ariel (Jerusalem), where the Lord encamps against her, raises siege-works, and brings her low so she speaks from the ground, supplies the language of barricade, encirclement, and being dashed to the ground. Luke's weeping prophecy closely tracks this Ariel oracle's imagery of the humbled city. High volume and coherence with the lament form.

Woe to Ariel! Ariel, the city where David encamped! Add year to year; let the feasts come around; then I will distress Ariel, and there will be mourning and lamentation. She shall be to me as an altar hearth. I will encamp against you all around you, and will lay siege against you with posted troops. I will raise siege works against you. You will be brought down, and will speak out of the ground. Your speech will mumble out of the dust. Your voice will be […]


Jeremiah commands to 'cast up a mound against Jerusalem' for the siege and indicts the people who 'did not know' and were not ashamed at the time of visitation. Luke's barricade, encirclement, and the charge 'you did not know the time of your visitation' draw directly on this oracle's siege-and-visitation structure. High volume; the visitation language is verbally close.

For Yahweh of Armies said, “Cut down trees, and cast up a mound against Jerusalem: this is the city to be visited; she is wholly oppression in the midst of her. As a well produces its waters, so she produces her wickedness: violence and destruction is heard in her; before me continually is sickness and wounds. Be instructed, Jerusalem, lest my soul be alienated from you; lest I make you a desolation, a land not inhabited.” Thus says Yahweh of Armies, […]


Isaiah's 'what will you do in the day of visitation' undergirds Jesus's reproach that Jerusalem 'did not know the time of your visitation.' The day-of-visitation as a moment of accountability and judgment coheres with Luke's siege lament. Medium; Jeremiah 6 carries the parallel verbal weight.

What will you do in the day of visitation, and in the desolation which will come from afar? To whom will you flee for help? Where will you leave your wealth?


The prophecy that enemies 'will dash you and your children within you to the ground' echoes the imprecatory Psalm's image of dashing children against the rock. The dash-children-to-the-ground violence of urban conquest supplies the horror Luke evokes for Jerusalem's fall. Medium; the verb dashing applied to children is distinctive.

Happy shall he be, who takes and dashes your little ones against the rock.


Ezekiel's sign-act lays siege to a depicted Jerusalem, building siege-works and an iron wall against the city. Luke's 'your enemies will throw up a barricade against you' draws on this prophetic siege-enactment imagery. Medium volume; the barricade/siege-wall is the shared element.

You also, son of man, take a tile, and lay it before yourself, and portray on it a city, even Jerusalem: and lay siege against it, and build forts against it, and cast up a mound against it; set camps also against it, and plant battering rams against it all around. Take for yourself an iron pan, and set it for a wall of iron between you and the city: and set your face toward it, and it shall be besieged, and you shall lay siege against it. This shall be a […]


Elisha's tearful prophecy of the coming atrocities, the slain young men and the dashed little ones, parallels Jesus's weeping over the city's foreseen destruction. The weeping prophet foreseeing the slaughter of children coheres with Luke's lament tone. Low; the contact is thematic.

Hazael said, “Why do you weep, my lord?” He answered, “Because I know the evil that you will do to the children of Israel. You will set their strongholds on fire, and you will kill their young men with the sword, and will dash in pieces their little ones, and rip up their women with child.”


Hosea's judgment that Samaria's infants will be dashed in pieces and her pregnant women ripped open supplies another prophetic image of children destroyed in conquest behind 'dash you and your children to the ground.' The atrocity-on-children topos coheres but Hosea concerns Samaria. Low and contested.

Samaria will bear her guilt; for she has rebelled against her God. They will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women will be ripped open.”


Nahum's depiction of conquered Thebes, whose little ones 'were dashed in pieces at the head of every street,' is another stock siege-atrocity image standing behind Luke's children-dashed-to-the-ground. The shared conquest-of-a-city horror coheres faintly. Low confidence.

Yet was she carried away. She went into captivity. Her young children also were dashed in pieces at the head of all the streets, and they cast lots for her honorable men, and all her great men were bound in chains.


Jeremiah declares that at 'the time of their visitation they shall be cast down,' the very phrase Luke turns into the reproach that Jerusalem failed to know its time of visitation. The visitation-as-judgment idiom is a direct conceptual borrowing. Medium, overlapping with the broader Jeremiah 6 siege oracle.

Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? No, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush. Therefore they shall fall among those who fall; at the time that I visit them, they shall be cast down,” says Yahweh.


The covenant curse foretells the enemy besieging your towns until the high walls fall, with horrors befalling children during the siege. Luke's siege, encirclement, and destruction of the city read as the realization of the Deuteronomic covenant curse for disobedience. Medium; the curse-fulfillment frame coheres strongly with Luke's theology.

They will besiege you in all your gates, until your high and fortified walls come down, in which you trusted, throughout all your land. They will besiege you in all your gates throughout all your land, which Yahweh your God has given you. You will eat the fruit of your own body, the flesh of your sons and of your daughters, whom Yahweh your God has given you, in the siege and in the distress with which your enemies will distress you. The man who is tender […]


Isaiah's vision of the land laid waste, cities burned, and Daughter Zion left desolate provides a background for Jerusalem's coming devastation. The desolation-of-Zion motif coheres with Luke's lament but is diffuse. Low confidence.

Your country is desolate. Your cities are burned with fire. Strangers devour your land in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers. The daughter of Zion is left like a shelter in a vineyard, like a hut in a field of melons, like a besieged city.


God's warning that he will cast out Israel and make the temple a heap if they forsake him, leaving passersby astonished, anticipates the destruction Jesus foresees. The conditional ruin-of-house-and-city coheres with the visitation-judgment theme. Low and contested.

then I will cut off Israel out of the land which I have given them; and this house, which I have made holy for my name, will I cast out of my sight; and Israel shall be a proverb and a byword among all peoples. Though this house is so high, yet shall everyone who passes by it be astonished, and shall hiss; and they shall say, ‘Why has Yahweh done thus to this land, and to this house?’


Jesus quotes 'My house shall be a house of prayer' from Isaiah's oracle promising that foreigners' offerings will be accepted in a house of prayer for all peoples. The citation grounds the temple's intended purpose against its corruption. High volume; an explicit, marked quotation introduced by 'it is written.'

even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.”


Jesus brands the temple traffickers as making it 'a den of robbers,' quoting Jeremiah's temple sermon that asks whether the Lord's house has become a den of robbers in the people's eyes. The citation imports Jeremiah's threat of the temple's destruction for covenant infidelity. High volume; explicit quotation fused with Isaiah 56:7.

Has this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your eyes? Behold, I, even I, have seen it,” says Yahweh.


Zechariah's eschatological vision ends with 'there shall be no more a trader (Canaanite) in the house of the Lord,' coheres with Jesus expelling the buyers and sellers from the temple. The purified end-time temple free of commerce supports the cleansing act. Low confidence; the prophetic-cleansing background is suggestive but uncited.

Yes, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah will be holy to Yahweh of Armies; and all those who sacrifice will come and take of them, and cook in them. In that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of Yahweh of Armies.


Malachi foretells the Lord suddenly coming to his temple to purify the sons of Levi and the offerings, an oracle of temple purgation that coheres with Jesus's cleansing entry. The Lord-comes-to-purify-the-temple pattern undergirds the scene though no words are quoted. Low confidence.

“Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me; and the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, behold, he comes!” says Yahweh of Armies. “But who can endure the day of his coming? And who will stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire, and like launderer’s soap; and he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi, and […]


The zeal for God's house that consumes the psalmist faintly informs Jesus's forceful purging of the temple, a connection John makes explicit. In Luke the link is at most an echo of the zealous-for-the-house motif. Low confidence and contested.

For the zeal of your house consumes me. The reproaches of those who reproach you have fallen on me.


The challenge 'by what authority?' / 'who made you ruler?' echoes the perennial Israelite question put to a divinely commissioned but unrecognized agent (Moses rebuffed: 'Who made you a ruler and judge over us?'). Coherent with Luke's Moses-typology of Jesus but volume is faint and the wording is not distinctive.

He said, “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you plan to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” Moses was afraid, and said, “Surely this thing is known.”


The crowd's conviction that 'John was a prophet' whom it would be deadly to dishonor draws on the deuteronomistic theme that God repeatedly sent prophets whom the people rejected, setting up the tenants parable that follows. Volume is moderate; recurrence is strong across the OT prophet-rejection tradition, and it coheres tightly with 20:9-16.

Yahweh, the God of their fathers, sent to them by his messengers, rising up early and sending, because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place: but they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and scoffed at his prophets, until the wrath of Yahweh arose against his people, until there was no remedy.


The framing of John's baptism as 'from heaven' and the people's reckoning of John as a true prophet trades on the Deuteronomic test of the authentic prophet sent by God. Availability and coherence are good, but the link to John specifically is inferential and contested.

Yahweh your God will raise up to you a prophet from your midst, of your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him. This is according to all that you desired of Yahweh your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, “Let me not hear again the voice of Yahweh my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I not die.” Yahweh said to me, “They have well said that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a prophet from among their […]


The parable is structurally built on the Song of the Vineyard: a man plants a vineyard, expects its fruit, is disappointed, and the owner finally acts in judgment. Volume is high (the LXX of Isaiah 5:2 supplies 'planted a vineyard' and the verb for letting/hedging), recurrence pervades the vineyard-Israel tradition, and coherence with Luke's polemic against the leaders is total.

Let me sing for my well beloved a song of my beloved about his vineyard. My beloved had a vineyard on a very fruitful hill. He dug it up, gathered out its stones, planted it with the choicest vine, built a tower in its midst, and also cut out a wine press therein. He looked for it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes. “Now, inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, please judge between me and my vineyard. What could have been done more to my […]


The transplanted vine that God planted and then exposes to ravagers reinforces the vineyard-as-Israel image and the motif of the owner withdrawing protection. Moderate volume; strongly coherent and recurrent with Isaiah 5, though it is the secondary vineyard text behind the parable.

You brought a vine out of Egypt. You drove out the nations, and planted it. You cleared the ground for it. It took deep root, and filled the land. The mountains were covered with its shadow. Its boughs were like God’s cedars. It sent out its branches to the sea, Its shoots to the River. Why have you broken down its walls, so that all those who pass by the way pluck it? The boar out of the wood ravages it. The wild animals of the field feed on it. Turn […]


'I will send my beloved son' (ton huion mou ton agapeton) verbally echoes the LXX of the Aqedah, where Isaac is the 'beloved son' whom the father gives up. Volume rests on the distinctive phrase agapetos huios, shared with Luke's baptism/transfiguration; coherent with Luke's Son Christology, though some read it merely as 'only/dear son.'

He said, “Now take your son, your only son, whom you love, even Isaac, and go into the land of Moriah. Offer him there for a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will tell you of.”


The tenants' deliberation 'Come, let us kill him' over the heir verbally mirrors the brothers' plot against Joseph ('Come now, let us kill him... and we shall see what becomes of his dreams'). The shared conspiratorial formula is suggestive but the wording is conventional and the connection is contested.

They saw him afar off, and before he came near to them, they conspired against him to kill him. They said one to another, “Behold, this dreamer comes. Come now therefore, and let’s kill him, and cast him into one of the pits, and we will say, ‘An evil animal has devoured him.’ We will see what will become of his dreams.”


The escalating beating and killing of successive servants (prophets) sent to the vineyard reflects the murder of Zechariah son of Jehoiada and the broader chronicle of slain prophets, the canonical endpoint of prophet-rejection in the Hebrew Bible. Coherent and recurrent with the deuteronomistic theme, supplying the parable's 'servants.'

The Spirit of God came on Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest; and he stood above the people, and said to them, “Thus says God, ‘Why do you disobey the commandments of Yahweh, so that you can’t prosper? Because you have forsaken Yahweh, he has also forsaken you.’” They conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king in the court of Yahweh’s house. Thus Joash the king didn’t remember the kindness which Jehoiada his […]


God's persistently sending his servants the prophets 'rising up early,' only to have them met with stiff-necked refusal, underlies the parable's repeated dispatch and abuse of servants. Recurrence is high across Jeremiah's 'servants the prophets' formula; moderate volume and strong coherence.

Since the day that your fathers came out of the land of Egypt to this day, I have sent to you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them: yet they didn’t listen to me, nor inclined their ear, but made their neck stiff: they did worse than their fathers.


Explicit 'what is this that is written' citation: 'The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone.' Verbatim LXX quotation (Ps 117:22), highest volume, and a recurrent early-Christian testimonium, perfectly coherent with the rejected-then-vindicated Son of the parable.

The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner. This is Yahweh’s doing. It is marvelous in our eyes.


'Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken' draws on Isaiah's 'stone of stumbling and rock of offense' on which many shall fall and be broken. Volume is high (shared falling/breaking imagery), it recurs in the NT stone-catena, and it coheres with the judgment turn of v.18.

He will be a sanctuary, but for both houses of Israel, he will be a trap and a snare for the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Many will stumble over it, fall, be broken, be snared, and be captured.”


'It will crush whomever it falls on to dust' echoes the stone cut without hands that strikes the image and grinds it to chaff/dust, scattered like summer threshing. Distinctive crushing-to-powder imagery (Dan 2:44-45 adds the kingdom that shall never be destroyed) gives high volume and strong eschatological coherence.

You saw until a stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image on its feet that were of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken in pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that no place was found for them: and the stone that struck the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.


The tested cornerstone God lays in Zion belongs to the same stone-testimonia cluster and may inform 'cornerstone' here, reinforcing Psalm 118. Recurrence in the NT stone-catena is strong, but for Luke the Psalm 118 citation carries the load, so the Isaiah 28 contribution is secondary.

Therefore thus says the Lord Yahweh, “Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious cornerstone of a sure foundation. He who believes shall not act hastily.


'Whose image (eikon) and inscription?' / 'give to God the things that are God's' plays on the human person as bearer of the divine image: the coin bears Caesar's image, but the human bears God's, owed wholly to God. The eikon wordplay gives moderate volume and the saying coheres with a creation-theology reading widely recognized in interpretation.

God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the sky, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” God created man in his own image. In God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.