The Betrayer’s Moment: Literary and Theological Context of Luke 22:3
Luke 22:3 — Εἰσῆλθε δὲ ὁ σατανᾶς εἰς Ἰούδαν τὸν ἐπικαλούμενον Ἰσκαριώτην, ὄντα ἐκ τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ τῶν δώδεκα,
(“Then Satan entered into Judas, the one called Iscariot, who was of the number of the twelve.”)
This terse but weighty verse initiates the betrayal sequence in Luke’s Passion Narrative. The language is grammatically straightforward but theologically profound: Satan is now said to “enter” Judas, leading directly to the conspiracy with the chief priests (v. 4). The syntax employs sharp clarity to emphasize the gravity and shock of the event—particularly through the compound identification of Judas and the forceful verb of indwelling. This verse combines grammar and narrative precision to signal a spiritual crisis that is both personal and cosmic.
Grammatical Feature Analysis: Aorist Ingressive Verb and Appositional Clauses
The main verb εἰσῆλθε is the aorist active indicative, 3rd person singular of εἰσέρχομαι (“to enter”). The aorist tense here is ingressive, emphasizing the moment of entry—Satan did not merely influence Judas but entered into him decisively. The subject ὁ σατανᾶς (“Satan”) is placed first for emphasis, with the verb following immediately: “Then Satan entered…” This inversion lends the sentence both solemnity and narrative momentum.
The prepositional phrase εἰς Ἰούδαν marks the person into whom Satan entered, followed by a double-layered identification:
- τὸν ἐπικαλούμενον Ἰσκαριώτην — “the one called Iscariot.” The participle ἐπικαλούμενον (present passive participle, accusative masculine singular from ἐπικαλέω) functions adjectivally to further identify Judas by name.
- ὄντα ἐκ τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ τῶν δώδεκα — “being of the number of the twelve.” The participle ὄντα (present active participle, accusative) stresses that this man—this traitor—was no outsider. He was an insider, one of Jesus’ closest circle.
These appositional clauses cumulatively heighten the tension: the Satanic intrusion has occurred not into an unknown antagonist, but into one of the twelve.
Exegetical Implications of Participial Description and Ingressive Aspect
The participial phrase ὄντα ἐκ τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ τῶν δώδεκα functions theologically as much as grammatically. It highlights the proximity of betrayal. The betrayal is not from the periphery but from within the inner circle of discipleship. Luke’s Greek deliberately preserves the horror: the Satanic act occurs within the apostolic band.
The use of the aorist εἰσῆλθε conveys that Satan’s entry was sudden and complete. This is not influence from afar—it is personal incursion. The narrative does not delve into how or why Satan entered Judas here (contrast John 13:27), but the grammar presents it as a turning point in the narrative and in Judas’ spiritual state.
Cross-Linguistic Comparisons and Historical Context
In LXX and Greek literature, εἰσέρχομαι + εἰς + accusative is used for entering physical locations, but in Jewish apocalyptic and Hellenistic Jewish contexts, it can also denote spiritual or demonic possession (cf. Tobit 3:8; Josephus, Ant. 6.166). Luke, as a Hellenistic physician and historian, uses this terminology with calculated theological effect.
The name Ἰσκαριώτης (Iscariot) may refer to Judas’ hometown (Kerioth) or be a patronymic. In either case, Luke’s use of the full designation and the appositional clause sets the stage for Judas’ immediate move to negotiate Jesus’ betrayal (v. 4). It provides the narrative backdrop for a theology of divine sovereignty and human responsibility.
Theological and Literary Significance of Identifying the Betrayer
Luke’s syntax enforces the identity of Judas as both fully known and fully fallen. The grammar expresses what the theology affirms: the enemy’s entry point is intimate betrayal. Judas is not a nameless agent of evil; he is “the one called Iscariot, being of the twelve.”
Literarily, the sentence balances on three names: Satan, Judas, and the Twelve. Their juxtaposition makes the moment jarring. Satan enters—but not the Sanhedrin. He enters the familiar, the trusted, the apostle. The structure shocks and warns at once.
Entered and Identified: Grammar as Theological Alert
Luke 22:3 uses grammar to deliver theological revelation. The ingressive aorist presents a decisive demonic act; the participial modifiers name the betrayer fully. Luke makes no attempt to soften the blow—he presents the convergence of spiritual evil and apostolic familiarity.
Through the precision of syntax, readers are led not just to information, but to confrontation: with betrayal, with the cost of discipleship, and with the mystery of evil that moves even among the chosen.
