Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν· ἀγαπήσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου ἐξ ὅλης τῆς καρδίας σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ψυχῆς σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ἰσχύος σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς διανοίας σου, καὶ τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν· (Luke 10:27)
Luke’s quotation of the Great Commandment in Luke 10:27 appears, at first glance, to be a straightforward recitation of Israel’s creed. But the Greek syntax of this verse does more than translate the Shema; it becomes a narrative device that advances the theological arc of Luke–Acts. The command to love God and neighbor is not simply cited; it is grammatically re-inscribed into a story where Israel’s ancient confession becomes the charter of the emerging church. In typical Lukan fashion, grammar functions rhetorically: the repeated ἐξ ὅλης creates a pattern of intensification that mirrors the movement from Israel’s old boundaries to the universal horizon of Pentecost.
Here the lawyer answers Jesus using grammar that Israel already knew—but his syntactic form becomes the stage on which Jesus will re-stage the question: “And who is my neighbor?” The grammar, therefore, is not background; it is the hinge on which Luke’s moral imagination turns.
Imperatival Future: A Command that Creates a People
The key grammatical feature of this verse is the imperatival future Ἀγαπήσεις. Greek students often treat it as a mere variation on the imperative, but Luke uses it with canonical sensitivity. In Deuteronomy, the future form expresses covenantal identity—Israel was not merely told to “love” but was linguistically shaped into a people whose destiny was to embody love. Luke, quoting this form in a story about boundary-crossing compassion, signals that Jesus is not giving a new ethic; he is reinstating Israel’s original vocation.
The future form also pushes the command forward, projecting obedience into ongoing life. Love is not an isolated action but a future-directed posture. (Greek student, pause: How would the tone shift if Luke had used an aorist imperative instead of a future indicative?) The answer lies in narrative tempo: an aorist imperative would stress a decisive moment; the future indicative creates a sustained identity.
Canonical Horizon: From Shema to Samaritan Hospitality
Luke sets this commandment in the narrative frame of the Good Samaritan. But as a canonical theologian, Luke also places it within a larger story: Israel’s vocation was always centripetal and centrifugal—centred in devotion to YHWH yet radiating love outward to neighbor. By the time we reach Acts, this love breaks Israel’s traditional boundaries as Samaritans, Gentiles, and “all who are far off” enter the people of God. Grammar seeds theology: the fourfold ἐξ ὅλης becomes a literary prelude to the fourfold geographical expansion in Acts 1:8.
Thus the commandment’s grammar contributes to the church’s identity as a community whose love for God is indivisible from love for neighbor. The Shema becomes the heartbeat of mission—not through command alone but through the syntactic shape of total devotion.
Morphology Table: The Commandment Under the Microscope
| Form | Gloss | Morphology | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| ὁ δὲ | but he | Article nominative masc. sg. + conjunction | Shifts focus back to the lawyer; aligns with Lukan dialogical style. |
| ἀποκριθεὶς | answering | Aorist passive participle nominative masc. sg. | Formulaic response verb; the passive participle highlights the dialogical chain of speech. |
| εἶπεν | he said | Aorist active indicative 3rd sg. | Simple narrative verb framing the lawyer’s citation. |
| Ἀγαπήσεις | you shall love | Future active indicative 2nd sg. | Future used imperativally; commands total disposition rather than momentary act. |
| Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου | the Lord your God | Accusative phrase + pronoun gen. sg. | Marks direct object of the love-command; echoes covenant identity. |
| ἐξ ὅλης | from all / with all | Preposition ἐκ + adjective fem. sg. gen. | Denotes source or manner; here expresses totality. |
| τῆς καρδίας | the heart | Genitive fem. sg. | Seat of volition and loyalty in biblical anthropology. |
| τῆς ψυχῆς | the life / soul | Genitive fem. sg. | Refers to holistic life-force; not a dualistic soul-body split. |
| τῆς ἰσχύος | the strength | Genitive fem. sg. | Physical and social capacity; frames love as embodied practice. |
| τῆς διανοίας | the mind | Genitive fem. sg. | Lukan addition compared to the Hebrew Shema; foregrounds cognitive devotion. |
| τὸν πλησίον | the neighbor | Accusative masc. sg. | Direct object of the second command; becomes central to Lukan narrative. |
| ὡς σεαυτόν | as yourself | Comparative particle + reflexive pronoun acc. sg. | Disrupts self-interest by making the self the benchmark for generosity. |
Echo Chamber: A Grammar that Carries Ancient Soundwaves
Greek Fragment: ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου καὶ φοβηθήσῃ τὸν θεόν — “You shall love your neighbor and you shall fear God.” (Representative LXX-style legal phrasing)
The LXX often pairs future forms to structure covenant obedience. Luke inherits this grammar but twists it by linking love of God to radical inclusion through the Samaritan parable. Instead of reinforcing ethnic boundaries, the NT re-deploys the future form to redefine who counts as “neighbor,” turning an Israel-centered command into a Christ-shaped mission charter.
The Quadripartite Totality: Heart, Life, Strength, Mind
The fourfold sequence—καρδία, ψυχή, ἰσχύς, διάνοια—is not mere stylistic padding. It is a grammatical intensification, using genitive complements to stretch the meaning of devotion across the total human spectrum. Luke’s inclusion of διάνοια is particularly significant. In Greco-Roman discourse, the mind was central to moral deliberation; in Israel’s Scriptures, obedience was oriented toward the heart. Luke brings both worlds together into a bilingual anthropology suitable for a Gentile mission.
This grammatical expansion prepares the reader for Acts, where understanding (διάνοια) and transformation of the heart (καρδία) are both marks of conversion. The grammar thus anticipates Pentecost: the Spirit forms a people whose devotion engages cognitive, emotional, physical, and volitional dimensions.
Neighbor-Love as Syntactic Disruption
The surprising element in the command is not the requirement to love God but the comparative construction ὡς σεαυτόν. This structure equalizes neighbor with self, collapsing the ethical hierarchy by making the self the baseline for mercy. In the canonical storyline, the question “Who is my neighbor?” becomes the hinge on which Jesus turns the conversation toward a Samaritan—someone beyond expected boundaries.
Grammar becomes the seedbed of the story’s scandal: the comparative particle ὡς does not merely invite empathy; it demands equivalence. Luke’s syntax, therefore, prepares the theological surprise before Jesus narrates it.
Internal Dialogue and External Mercy
The reflexive pronoun σεαυτόν reveals that the command assumes a stable sense of self-directed care. Luke harnesses this anthropological insight for narrative effect: the Samaritan in the parable treats the wounded man “as himself,” while the priest and Levite fail to meet even the baseline implied by the reflexive. The grammar thus critiques religious performance that lacks covenantal compassion.
In Luke–Acts, the church’s outward mission is grounded in this inward grammatical logic. Believers extend compassion not because they feel spontaneous goodwill but because their syntax has been shaped by Scripture: love God wholly, love neighbor equivalently.
From Papyrus to Pulpit
Cyril of Alexandria emphasized that the quadripartite description of devotion expresses not four compartments but one integrated allegiance. His comment underscores a point translators still wrestle with: how to retain the totalizing force of the repeated ἐξ ὅλης without flattening the nuance of each term. In today’s vernacular translations, preserving this repetition matters—because the grammar is what communicates that devotion to God is not fragmented but all-encompassing.
The Horizon that Begins in the Heart
Luke’s careful syntax invites readers to recognize that grammar itself is missionary. The future indicative shapes a people whose destiny is love; the fourfold genitive outlines the contours of whole-person devotion; and the comparative construction challenges the boundaries of community. Through the Greek of Luke 10:27, the church learns that the grammar of love is also the grammar of its story—a story that expands, surprises, and continues to reshape the world.
