Luke 1

H. Leo Boles Commentary On Luke 1 PREFACE OF THE GOSPELLuk_1:1-4 Luke 1:1 —Forasmuch as many—Luke introduces his narrative of the earthly life of Jesus by giving in his preface a reason for his writing it. “ Many” had written accounts of the ministry of Jesus; the preaching of the apostles related the history of the earthly life of Jesus, and those who heard them prepared an account for the benefit of others. The “ many” does not include Matthew and Mark, although Matthew was an apostle and an eyewitness, and Mark probably drew his material from what he learned from Peter. John’s gospel was not written at this time, and it is not probable that Luke had seen the accounts of Matthew and Mark. Those who had written these accounts to which Luke here refers were uninspired; hence the necessity of Luke’ s giving an inspired and accurate account. have taken in hand to draw up a narrative—The failure of those referred to by Luke and their partial account imposed the necessity on Luke to give a complete record. However, some think that nothing more is meant here by Luke than the simple undertaking of the task before him without any reference to the incomplete work of others. The motive of others was to give to the world the story of Jesus; hence they had drawn “ up a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us.” Luke purposes to give to the world a complete history of the facts of the Christian faith; he designs to substitute an inspired account in the place of those accounts written by the “ many” to which he here refers.

Luke 1:2 –even as they delivered them unto us,— All the first wit­nesses of these things were apostles, disciples, and others; Luke is a sure witness because he gives a true account of the facts of the gospel as the whole company of the apostles declared them. Luke begins his account with the conception of John the Baptist; but the disciples were eyewitnesses only from the beginning of the ministry of Jesus, when he was about thirty years old; the other information Luke gleaned from the testimony of those persons who were acquainted with the facts, and guided by the Holy Spirit recorded them. “ Eyewitnesses” were those who had seen the events as they occurred, and were the apostles and other disciples of Jesus; they had not been witnesses of the birth and childhood of John and Jesus. These witnesses are referred to as “ ministers of the word” ; some take “ word” here in the sense of eternal word (John 1:1-3), but this specific and peculiar use of the term is used only by John. The gospel is often called the “ word” (Luke 5:1; Acts 6:2). It seems clear from this that Luke was not a disciple from the beginning.

Luke 1:3 —it seemed good to me also,—Here Luke gives his reason for writing; his course is natural. From these motives he thought best to write, since he had a perfect knowledge of these things. He had “ traced the course of all things accu¬rately from the first” ; that is, he had checked on all of the things of which he writes from those who had been eyewitnesses. Luke, guided by the Holy Spirit, was incited to write on this subject because he had peculiar qualifications and facilities for the task; he had the perfect knowledge of all the things relating to his narrative. “ All things” refer to all things of importance, such as Luke deemed by the Holy Spirit essential to his narrative; he had traced all these accounts “ accurately from the first” and was prepared to give them in the order that he follows in his narrative. The word “ accurately” gives the emphasis to what he states as being perfectly reliable; these are given by Luke “ in order” ; that is, they are arranged in his account in their proper connection; he does not mean here that he is going to relate everything in his gospel in chronological order. most excellent ’ Theophilus;—Luke writes to “ Theophilus.” It is a matter which has not been determined whether Theo¬philus was the name of an individual, or whether the name is used to denote all “ lovers of God” or “ friends of God.” The name signifies “ a lover of God” or a “ friend of God.” This name was common for persons at that time; some commentators have interpreted this name to mean all who have dedicated themselves as lovers of God and beloved of him; others think that Theophilus was a pupil of Luke, and that Luke intended through him to give to the world this narrative of Jesus. The epithet “ most excellent” seems to restrict the name to an individual, as it is applied to Festus and Felix. (Acts 24:23 Acts 26:25.)

Luke 1:4 —that thou mightest know the certainty concerning the things—This again expresses Luke’s purpose of writing this narrative; it was that Theophilus and by implication all others would inform themselves in regard to the origin of these facts and principles on which Christianity was based. This implies that the other accounts referred to in verses 1 and 2 were imperfect narratives, and that no one could get an accurate and connected view of Christ’ s life and ministry. Theophilus as a Christian disciple had already received some instruction in divine things; naturally this instruction would follow the order of a connected narrative. He was to be “ instructed” in all the things recorded by Luke. The original from which “ instructed” comes means “ catechised,” which means to instruct by word of mouth; this is the term used also of Apollos (Acts 18:25) and the Jews addressed by Paul (Romans 2:18) as the representative of the church. This passage shows the insufficiency of oral instruction, and it also shows the habit of the early church, to teach systematically out of these narratives. The Holy Spirit thus through Luke made an inspired history for all to read and study.

THE BIRTH OF JOHN THE BAPTIST Luk_1:5-25

Luke 1:5 –There was in the days of Herod,—This entire chapter is found in Luke only, and is therefore the only record which we have of these events connected with the birth of John and of Jesus. This Herod, king of Judea, is commonly distinguished as “ Herod the Great.” Luke properly begins with this verse, as the preceding verses constitute what we call the “ Preface.” Matthew uses similar language with respect to Herod. (Matthew 2:1.) Luke recognizes events as being marked by the life or times of some principal man. (Luke 4:25 Luke 4:27.) Judea was a province under the Roman government at this time, and had been for some years. It is probable that the birth of John occurred near the end of the reign of Herod. The title “ king of Judaea” had been decreed to Herod by the Roman senate on the recommendations of Antony and Octavius.a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abijah:— Luke wastes no words in getting to his subject; he de­scribes minutely the parents of John . “ The course of Abijah” was the eighth course. (1 Chronicles 24:1-10.) David divided the priests into twenty-four classes for their convenience in ministering in the tabernacle worship “ as the duty of every day required.” (2 Chronicles 8:14.) Each course, from this cir­cumstance, seems to have been called a “ daily” course, though the period of its service lasted a week. Abijah received the eighth of the twenty-four classes into which David divided the priests; the head of a course was called the “ chief priests." Zacharias had “ a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.” Elisabeth was a descendant of Aaron and of the priestly tribe; it was a Levitical law that no priest should marry out of his tribe. (Numbers 36:7-8.) John the Baptist was of the tribe of Levi on both sides; his father Zacharias was a priest and his mother Elisabeth of the priestly family; Luke is careful to show that both the father and mother were of the priestly line.

Luke 1:6 —And they were both righteous before God,—Here Luke speaks of the character and circumstances in life of these par-ents of John. “ They were both righteous.” This describes their personal character; they were pious and humble before God; “ righteous” refers to what is just and right in the sight of the law rather than to goodness and benevolence of disposi¬tion, although the two qualities were combined in Zacharias. They walked “ in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.” This expresses the habitual daily conduct, including moral precepts and ceremonial rites. Perhaps Luke means to express extraordinary piety, rather than absolute perfection. Such parents are usually chosen of God to be emi¬nently honored and blessed; they were both obedient to the will of God as contained in the Old Testament scripture; they were truly and sincerely living in accordance to the law of Moses; they were blameless according to the imperfect system under which they lived.

Luke 1:7 —And they had no child,—Zacharias and Elisabeth were both very old, “ well stricken in years” ; it seemed from the course of nature that it was impossible for them to have children. “ Elisabeth was barren” ; many of the Old Testament characters were barren. Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Hannah were barren; it was accounted a disgrace among the ancients for a wife to be barren; not that their barrenness was the ef¬fect of sin, but ordained rather by man as a failure to fill the mission that God intended. The wife of Aaron was named Elisabeth (Elisheba), as was the wife of Zacharias. (Exodus 6:23.) Some claim that Zacharias could not have been over fifty years old, as the duties of the priest’ s office could not be performed beyond that age. “ Well stricken in years” does not necessarily mean that he was bowed down and wrinkled with age; it is quite likely that Elisabeth was near the same age of her husband, and if after many years of married life they were childless, their prospects of having children must have been hopeless.

Luke 1:8-9 — Now it came to pass, while he executed the priest’ s office—Zacharias was faithful in performing the duties which pertained to his course; he ministered with others of the course or family of Abijah. One of the priests burned in¬cense, another changed the showbread on the Sabbath day, and another took charge of the fire on the altar for burnt of¬ferings ; in this way their labors were appointed and a more responsible discharge of the various services secured from each individual. Each of the twenty-four courses served in ro¬tation, but those belonging to a course cast lots each day for the service they were respectively to perform. At this time the course to which Zacharias belonged was serving in the sanctuary, and it fell to him by lot to burn incense, which was the most honorable service, and could be performed only once on the same day by any priest, although incense was offered twice each day, at the morning and evening sacrifice. (Exodus 30:7-8.)

Luke 1:10 —And the whole multitude of the people were praying—The people assembled in the courts which surrounded the holy place, and while the priests were within burning incense, the people out in the court were engaged in silent prayer. One of the two priests, whose lot it was to offer incense, brought fire from off the altar of burnt offering to the altar of incense, and then left the other priest there alone, who, on a signal from the priest presiding at the sacrifice, kindled the in¬cense. Reference is had in Revelation 8:3-4 to this service, and the prayers of God’ s people, which were symbolically said to ascend upon the smoke of the incense. Since the people as-sembled for silent prayer at the time of the burning of in¬cense, that hour has been called the hour of prayer. (Acts 3:1.) This hour was at the evening sacrifices which began about three o’ clock.

Luke 1:11 —And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord— While Zacharias was attending to the duties of burning in¬cense the angel Gabriel appeared to him; we do not know the length of time that was spent in burning incense, but it is thought that the angel appeared near the end of his service in the sanctuary. This was no uncommon thing, as there are nu¬merous accounts of divine messengers in the Old Testament. (Genesis 19:1 Genesis 32:1-2.) This angel represented Jehovah; it is an awful thought for weak sinful man, even at his best, to be brought face to face with a spiritual being; the mortal terrors of one’ s own sin and their punishment are enough to frighten one. This angel appeared “ standing on the right side of the altar of incense.’’ The altar of incense stood near the veil in the holy place by the ark of the testimony which was sepa¬rated from the altar by the veil. It was made of acacia wood, overlaid with gold; the length and breadth of it were one cubit and the height two cubits; on the four corners were golden horns and a crown or scroll work of gold ran around the top. The priest placed upon it the censer of burning incense.

Luke 1:12-13 — And Zacharias was troubled when he saw him,— A pious man learned from the Old Testament scriptures (Judges 13:6 Judges 13:21-22), as well as from his own heart, to fear to look upon the celestial beings; the sudden and unusual appearance of the angel terrified or affrighted Zacharias. The angel knew the condition of Zacharias and hastened to reassure him with the usual form of encouragement “ fear not’’ (Daniel 10:12 Daniel 10:19; Revelation 1:17). As Zacharias had given up all hope of a son, this must not be referred to prayer offered at this time, when the angel said “ thy supplication is heard.’’ It is not probable that Zacharias was praying at this time for a son, so the angel referred to the petitions which he and his wife Elisabeth had often made. They had doubtless oftentimes mourned that their prayer was not heard and answered; but now while Zach¬arias had ceased to pray for a son, he had not done this from a rebellious spirit, but in cheerful acquiescence to the di¬vine will, and hence his mind was in a proper state to receive the blessing. “ Thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son” ; this shows the special object of their prayers; the angel was more specific than just announcing that Zacharias should have a son; he even told him what to name the son; “ thou shalt call his name John.” These names of divine appointment were usually symbolical of some blessing or grace accompanying them, of which they were the pledge. “ John” signifies “ given” or “ bestowed graciously of God.” This name was very appropriate, since the child was given, both as denoting God’ s gracious answer to the prayer of Zacharias and the office of John who was to be the forerunner of the Savior of man.

Luke 1:14 —And thou shalt have joy and gladness;—The Greek here is highly intensive; it means literally that there should be a “ leaping for joy.” This is not to be referred to the simple fact that a child was born to him so unexpectedly, but to John’ s piety and evident possession of the divine favor, which would fill his father’ s heart with emotions of joy. Not only should the parents of this promised child “ leap for joy,” but “ many shall rejoice at his birth.” The joy of Zacharias was to be shared by many others; this joy reached its culminating point when thousands flocked to John’ s ministry from all parts of the land. (Matthew 3:5.) There should be rejoicing because John would herald the long-expected Messiah.

Luke 1:15 —For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord,—There was a literal fulfillment of this promise, for Jesus said: “ Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist.” (Matthew 11:11.) This means that among men born up to that time there had been no one so highly favored of God. John’ s greatness consisted in his privilege of announcing the immediate coming of the Messiah, and the gracious zeal and eloquence with which he did it. (John 10:41.) John was to be great “ in the sight of the Lord,” not so much in the sight of men; Zacha rias is here cautioned against supposing that his son’ s greatness would consist in worldly honor or wealth. “ He shall drink no wine nor strong drink” ; he was to be bound with the Nazirite vow. (Numbers 6:1-20.) Samson was also bound with this vow. (Judges 13:2-5.) Wine was the fermented juice of grapes, and God saw fit to restrict the Nazirite and not permit him to drink wine; by such signs all the Jews recognized a man of God, and listened to him with reverence. (Matthew 21:32.) Furthermore, John should “ be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’ s womb.” This is given as the reason why he was to be a Nazirite from his very birth. In the life of a Nazirite, there appears consecrated the strict legal character which John, the close and crowning stone, as it were, of the old dispensation, was called to exhibit.

Luke 1:16 —And many of the children of Israel shall he turn—John’ s success is here predicted. “ The children of Israel” means the descendants of Jacob, called also Israel. (Genesis 32:28.) John was a prophet to the Jews only; he did not preach to the Gen-tiles. We are not told how many were converted under his preaching, but that the number was great is evident, not only from this verse, but from Matthew 3:5-6; Mark 1:5; Luke 3:7, and other scriptures, where John’ s ministry and baptism arc referred to. His work is described as turning the people “ unto the Lord their God.” Their sins had separated them from God, and by repentance and obedience, they were brought back to him; John instructed and persuaded the people to do this. Jehovah, in a peculiar sense, was the God of Israel; theirs were “ the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever.” (Romans 9:4-5.)

Luke 1:17 —And he shall go before his face—John was to go before Christ as a herald precedes a king. The Christ for whom the people waited was soon to come, and this child should anticipate his coming only by a little; these words perhaps refer to Malachi 4:5-6. John should go before Christ like one sent for¬ward by an eastern king to prepare the way and make ready suitable places of reception. He should go “ in the spirit and power of Elijah.” He should have the zeal and energy of the spirit of Elijah, and should inculcate the universal principles of peace, and get the people ready for the coming of the Messiah. The many points of resemblance between John and Elijah are interesting; it should be noted that the angel here quoted scripture. The angels announced “ and on earth peace among men in whom he is well pleased” (Luke 2:14) as a characteristic of Christ’ s coming; in John’ s mission this peace was an-nounced.

The account of John’ s first preaching to the Jews indicated that all ranks and parties felt, for a time, an inclination to lay aside their differences, and unite to await the Messiah. With the power and spirit of Elijah, John would “ turn the hearts of the fathers to the children” ; this corresponds to the prophecy of Malachi. In turning the hearts of the fathers to the children, he would move them to holy prayer and endeavor for their salvation. Furthermore he would cause “ the disobedient to walk in the wisdom of the just.” This would bring men back from the waywardness of their folly and rebellion against God to the true wisdom of seeking the Lord in penitence and prayer. This is summed up in stating that John would “ make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him.”

Luke 1:18 —And Zacharias said unto the angel,—Zacharias, though smitten with great fear, being assured of the angel not to fear, was pleased to hear all that the angel had said to him. He asked the angel, “ Whereby shall I know this?” He wanted to know that the words of the angel were true. A similar ques¬tion was proposed by Abraham (Genesis 15:8; Judges 6:17); Hezekiah asked for a sign (Isaiah 38:22). In the case of Zach¬arias there was so little faith in the message of the angel that the sign of the fulfillment of the promise was also a pun¬ishment of his unbelief. Zacharias gave two reasons showing, as he thought, that it would be impossible to fulfill the prom¬ise ; he said: “ I am an old man,” and his second reason was “ my wife well stricken in years.” He was not like faithful Abraham who “ wavered not through unbelief, but waxed strong through faith.” (Romans 4:18-22. See also Genesis 17:1 Genesis 17:17; Hebrews 11:12.) Zacharias, being a priest, should have be¬lieved on the testimony of the angel.

Luke 1:19 —And the angel answering said unto him,—In reply to Zacharias’ question and in answering his two reasons pro-posed, the angel said: “ I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God.” This should have been enough for the bewildered and doubting Zacharias. The angel condescended to inform Zacharias of his name and angelic dignity. “ Gabriel” means “ man of God” ; he was an archangel sent on a special mission. A Jewish priest should know at once that this name carried with it the authority and presence of God. (Daniel 8:16 Daniel 9:21.) He is represented as the chief archangel, ministering to the infant Messiah. The name “ Gabriel” is made up of two Hebrew words, signifying “ the man of God.” He stood “ in the presence of God” as a dignitary may stand in the presence of a monarch. Our high priest is said “ now to appear before the face of God for us.” (Hebrews 9:24.)

Luke 1:20 —And behold, thou shalt be silent—The word in the Greek may also signify “ deaf” ; because Zacharias believed not the words of the angel, he should be deaf and should not be able to speak. The angel even told him that he should not be able to speak “ until the day that these things shall come to pass” ; it was the eighth day after the birth of the child that the pun¬ishment of his unbelief was remitted, and the power of speech again restored to him. The sentence was pronounced upon Zacharias in terms of severe and expressive fullness. It is specifically declared that unbelief was the cause of his punish¬ment, but we should not lose sight of the love with which his punishment was tempered in that it was a gracious sign of the due fulfillment to the promise. The angel further declared that all that had been promised him would “ be fulfilled in their season.” Every event promised, such as the birth, naming, education, and mission of the child, would all occur in or¬derly succession, and in exact accordance with the prediction made by the angel . Luke 1:21 —And the people were waiting for Zacharias,—The priest did not usually tarry long within the holy place, lest the peo¬ple, whose representative he was, should be alarmed with the apprehension that divine vengeance had overtaken him for some failure in the discharge of his priestly duty. “ They marvelled while he tarried in the temple” ; they were wondering and anxious about him, for they knew that it was an awful thing to minister before God. Very likely their mode of conducting their service was so regular and exact that any variation was remarkable. They began to reason among them¬selves as to the cause of his delay. We do not know how long the interview lasted with the angel; we have no means of knowing; it was probably of short duration, but was longer than others had remained in the sanctuary. This gives a reason for believing that the angel appeared at the close of the period of the ministry of Zacharias this day, and the conversa-tion with the angel delayed the time and caused the people to be anxious about him; the people had assembled for prayer.

Luke 1:22 —And when he came out, he could not speak unto them:—The people saw at once when Zacharias came out that he had seen a vision; they judged this to be the explanation of his delay, and then of his disturbed looks and his unusual silence when he came out. He was unable to dismiss them with the common benediction, so he “ continued making signs unto them, and remained dumb.” He made signs to inform them that something extraordinary had occurred, and to dismiss them to their homes. Prophecy had been silent now about four hundred years, and now the priesthood had become dumb as a sign of the approaching end of the Levitical ordinances.

Luke 1:23 —And it came to pass, when the days of his ministration—The term “ days” used here means the period of time that Zacharias served; they were the days of the week of the course or lot of the priests of Abijah. The priests during their term of service did not enter their own houses, but remained continually in the enclosures of the sacred hill. At the end of their weeks they returned home; Zacharias could not leave, though he had seen an angel; for the angel had not brought him permission to violate the duties of his office. It is supposed that Zacharias lived in the priestly city of Hebron. The priests were divided into twenty-four courses, and a course came to the sanctuary and ministered for a period of time, usually one or two weeks; but even one course or set was so numerous that it was necessary to make a selection out of it of those who should perform the most solemn parts of the service; this was done by lot. It fell to the lot of Zacha¬rias to burn incense, and this is probably the first time that he had had this exalted duty. What a favored lot he drew at this time!

Luke 1:24-25 — And after these days Elisabeth his wife conceived;—The event here spoken of took place soon after the return of Zacharias to his house. After her conception Elisabeth “ hid herself five months.” She did this for purposes of modesty and constant devotion; she desired probably to await the certain signs of the facts; she withdrew herself wholly from the sight of others, choosing her own place of concealment. Her sense of delicacy may have been heightened in this instance by her age which would subject her to more than usual notice and remark. Again she had been instructed that the child was to be a Nazirite, and Elisabeth wanted to keep herself within the limitations of a Nazirite; she could do this by voluntarily secluding herself; Elisabeth said that the Lord had thus taken away “ my reproach among men.” The hopes of a Messiah to be born of a woman increased in the minds of the Jewish women the natural desire for children. (Psalms 113:9.) Jewish women thought it peculiarly a reproach to be bar-ren; barrenness was in those times also considered as a deep privation of a great blessing.

Luke 1:26-27 —Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel—In this verse we learn the comparative age of Jesus and John; the place of the residence of Joseph and Mary give some light on Matthew 2:23. Reckoning from the time of Elisabeth’ s conception it was six months before the angel Gabriel made his appearance to Mary. John was about six months old when Jesus was born. The angel Gabriel was sent from God to Nazareth, a city of Galilee. Palestine was divided into three divisions— Judea in the south, Samaria in the center, and Galilee in the north. Many have thought that this was about December of our calendar; however, there is no evidence as to the exact time of year when Jesus was born; if he were born in December the angel came to Mary sometime in April.

Mary is described as “ a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David.” The tribe of King David was Judah, and Joseph was a direct descendant of the house of David. Some make the phrase “ of the house of David” refer to Mary instead of to Joseph. Mary was “ betrothed” to Joseph; she was engaged to Joseph; this was a sacred agree¬ment between them. Mary was “ a virgin.” Isaiah had proph¬esied that a virgin should become the mother of the Mes¬siah. (Isaiah 7:14.)

Luke 1:28-29 — And he came in unto her, and said,—The angel Ga-briel came to Mary and said: “ Hail, thou that art highly fa¬vored, the Lord is with thee.” This was the salutation with which the angel greeted Mary; he came into her dwelling or the apartment where she then was. “ Hail” is a salutation of honor in Greek and corresponds to the Hebrew form “ peace be unto you.” (Luke 24:36.) The angel sought to encourage as well as honor Mary. He addressed her as one “ highly favored” of God; this means the spiritual blessings already bestowed upon Mary and includes those which would be conferred upon her. She is pronounced as one who is honored by Jehovah. Mary was somewhat troubled as to “ what manner of salutation this might be.” Luke 1:30-33 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary:—In tenderness and assurance the angel Gabriel told her to “ fear not” ; the angel had declared to Zacharias that his prayers were to be answered, but to Mary “ thou hast found favor with God.” This was not from any personal worthiness on her part, or any immaculacy of moral character, but from the abundant grace of God bestowed upon her as upon all others who earnestly seek divine favor and guidance. Special reference is made to the great blessing which was about to be con-ferred upon her in being the mother of the promised Messiah. Mary was about to receive and enjoy a blessing long reserved in store for her. thou shalt conceive in thy womb,—This strange announce¬ment to Mary carried with it an astonishment. She did not understand how all of this would come to pass to her, a lowly maiden of Nazareth. The promise was that she should “ bring forth a son,” and the instruction was that she should “ call his name JESUS.” “ Jesus” means “ Saviour”; this was because he should “ save his people from their sins.” The angel continued to emphasize the character of this Son; “ he shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High.” This does not refer to temporal greatness, but to the glory and power to which he was to be exalted. He should be universally acknowledged as the “ Son of the Most High.” This is a special and definite name as Jesus, Christ, Messiah, and Lord are given to him. “ The Son of the Most High” was evidently a Messianic title, like “ Son of the Blessed.” (Mark 14:61.) The promise was made that he should be given “ the throne of his father David.” This promise of authority and dominion was made primarily and in the lowest sense to Solomon (2 Samuel 7:12-13), who was thus the type of Christ; in its higher and spiritual sense, it was prophetically made to the Messiah, who, according to the flesh, was to spring from David (Romans 1:3). It should be noted that Mary, though not actually married, had no difficulty in understanding this angelic message arising from family descent. This shows that she was herself, as many claim, a descendant of David, and fully aware of this distinguished honor, a fact which throws much light on the genealogy of our Lord as given a little later by Luke. (Luke 3:23-38.) he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever;—This verse and the word “ throne” in verse 32 are to be understood as representing a spiritual dominion. “ The house of Jacob” means the Israelitish nation, which, in the Messianic times, was to embrace all who were partakers of the faith of Abraham, whether they were Jews or Gentiles. (Galatians 3:7.) There was to be no end to his kingdom; other kingdoms, like the four spoken of in Daniel 7:14, should end, but this one would never cease from being a spiritual kingdom till he should surrender the redeemed saints to God the Father. (1 Corinthians 15:28; Hebrews 2:8-9.) It could not have been true as a promise to David in a temporal sense, for his kingdom and throne did cease. This kingdom, over which the promised Messiah should reign, extended beyond all generations and could not be limited by political boundaries. Christ will never cease to be King of his people; he will ever be adored as the Lamb of God that was slain to redeem his people from endless death.

Luke 1:34 —And Mary said unto the angel,—Mary did not under¬stand ; nothing of the kind had ever occurred, even as nothing of the kind has ever since occurred; the words of Mary are not those of unbelief, but the outpouring of a childlike spirit, seeking for light on a subjct so manifestly dark and mysterious. The words of the angel replied that the conception should take place immediately, and as she was yet unmarried, she saw not how the promise could be fulfilled. Zacharias was punished for his doubtful attitude toward the message of Gabriel; his was that unbelief; Mary’ s one of inquiry, directed in a childlike spirit which is not to be blamed.

Luke 1:35 —And the angel answered—The miraculous conception of this child Jesus is here assigned as the reason for his being called the Son of God; viewed on the side of his human nature and relations, this cannot be misunderstood. As Christ was the Son of the Father and begotten of him (John 1:14), this must be understood as the divine influence or energy exerted through the agency of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit did not create the world, but only moved upon the chaotic mass, bringing order out of confusion, so Christ was not begotten of the Holy Spirit, although the energy and influence of the Spirit was instrumentally employed in the conception of Mary. This is further emphasized by the statement that “ the Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee.” The figure used here is borrowed from a cloud; as the shadow of a cloud rests upon and circumfuses the top of a hill or mountain, so the divine influ¬ence was to be exerted and rest upon Mary for the production of the intended effect. This figure or imagery implies nothing gross or material, but simply the operation of the divine en¬ergy in the conception of Christ. wherefore also the holy thing which is begotten—It is emphatically declared here that Jesus was called the “ Son of God” because in his human nature he was begotten of God, and sustained a relation to God such as no one else has ever borne. “ The holy thing,” the neuter gender is here used in accordance with general usage, which withholds the idea of sex from an infant, until it is indicated by name or otherwise. It simply means in the original Greek “ thy holy offspring.” Christ is the Son of God only in his relation to the redemption of man; he is his “ Son” only in that he was born of a woman. He existed with God in eternity and was not the “ Son of God” before he came in the flesh; he was “ in the beginning” a member of the “ Godhead” ; but since he came in the flesh, suffered, died, and was raised from the dead, he is spoken of as “ the Son” of God. His divinity and deity are from eternity.

Luke 1:36-38 —And behold, Elisabeth thy kinswoman,—The angel continued his conversation with Mary and informed her of the condition of Elisabeth. We do not know how closely Mary and Elisabeth were related; she is represented here as “ thy kinswoman,” which does not express the degree of blood relation. Many think that the relation was on the mother’ s side, as Elisabeth was of the tribe of Levi (verse 5), and Mary was of the tribe of Judah; the genealogy was always reckoned on the paternal side. The angel informed Mary that Elisabeth had “ conceived a son in her old age,” and that “ this is the sixth month with her that was called barren.” Elisabeth’ s home was in the mountains of Judea, probably at Hebron, and Mary’ s home was at Nazareth in Galilee, far north from Elisabeth. The mode of communication was not as easy as it is now, and although it had been six months since Elisabeth con¬ceived, Mary, though a kinswoman of Elisabeth, had not learned of it. In this way the mother of the forerunner of Christ and the mother of Christ are brought together by the same angel. For no word from God shall be void—This is the great and crowning reason why Mary was to be assured of the accomplishment of all the things which had been spoken by the angel; although it was apparently so contrary to the natural course of events, yet Mary was to believe that nothing was impossible with God. This should strengthen her faith and prepare her for the great event; with God nothing shall ever be, nothing can ever be impossible. It is the glory of God that, when he wills, he does things impossible to human agen¬cies. Mary’ s soul bowed in sweet confidence and submission to this divinely revealed purpose; she said “ be it unto me ac¬cording to thy word.”

THE VISIT OF MARY TO Luk_1:39-56 Luke 1:39-40 —And Mary arose in these days and went—It seems that Mary did not delay; since the angel had informed her with respect to Elisabeth, she “ arose” and went “ with haste”; we do not know the significance of “ these days” as to the definite time. Some think that Joseph had been informed of Mary’ s condition before her visit to Elisabeth, which might have happened in three or four weeks from the time of her pregnancy; since a betrothed virgin could not travel, whereas, after Joseph had taken her home (Matthew 1:24), she could with propriety visit her kinswoman as here related. Others think that Joseph did not discover Mary’ s condition until the fourth or fifth month of her pregnancy, and therefore her visit to Elis-abeth was before Joseph discovered her condition. It seems that it was the sixth month after Elisabeth’ s conception that the annunciation took place, and as Mary stayed with Elisa¬beth about three months (verse 56), after which time, as is ev¬ident from verse 57, John was born, Mary must have left Naz¬areth almost immediately after the visit of the angel, and no space is therefore found for the three or four weeks, which some think intervened before she left Nazareth for the hill country.That she left very soon after the annunciation is evi¬dent also from the haste with which she prosecuted her journey. When she arrived in the hill country of Judea she en¬tered “ into the house of Zacharias and saluted Elisabeth.” There were various forms of salutations among the ancient Hebrews, such as “ be thou blessed of Jehovah,” “ the blessings of Jehovah be upon thee,” “ may God be with thee,” “ may peace be yours.” (Judges 19:20; Rth 2:4; 1 Samuel 25:26; 2 Samuel 20:9.) We do not know which salutation Mary used.

Luke 1:41-45 —And it came to pass, when Elisabeth heard—When Elisabeth heard the salutation spoken by Mary, “ the babe leaped in her womb”; such a movement often accompanies sudden excitement, yet the reference to it by Luke, and the words of Elisabeth, show that it was to be attributed to a secret and powerful spiritual influence. The verb in the Greek is used to denote the leaping and frisking for joy of young animals, and denotes here something more than the natural movements of the unborn child; this gives weight to the words she uttered in reply to Mary’ s salutation. “ Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit,” which shows that her words were inspired, and gives the cause of the sudden motion mentioned; as a pious and just woman, she expressed her joy at the great favor which was done to her youthful kinswoman, and prophesied concerning her. So far as the record shows Mary had only saluted her and had as yet told her nothing; hence Elisabeth learned of Mary’ s condition by inspiration. and she lifted up her voice with a loud cry,—Here follows the inspired utterances of Elisabeth. “ Lifted up her voice with a loud cry” shows that she was excited to great transport of mind by the Holy Spirit with which she was filled. She began her utterance by saying, “ Blessed art thou among women”; this was not an ordinary salutation, but one in the very words employed by the angel Gabriel (verse 28), of whose appearance to Mary Elisabeth was probably yet igno¬rant; it was a salutation prompted by the Holy Spirit and was calculated to encourage Mary in her condition. Furthermore she said: “ Blessed is the fruit of thy womb.” Here again Elis¬abeth must have been enlightened by the influence of the Holy Spirit, for she had no knowledge as yet of Mary’ s conception ; by the Holy Spirit Elisabeth blessed Mary and her unborn child. Some think that this implies nothing but the superiority of the age of Elisabeth over Mary; however, it must imply much else. It was natural for the age of Elisabeth to bless her young friend. And whence is this to me,—Here Elisabeth uses the language of humility; she expressed her wonder that she had been considered worthy of such a visit from Mary; she inquired : “ Whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come unto me?” This seems to be the first one to speak of Jesus as “ my Lord” ; later it became a common title among the disciples of Jesus. Such utterances made of an un¬born child can be attributed only to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and were the words spoken by Elisabeth who was filled with the Spirit. Elisabeth reveals to Mary that, “ when the voice of thy salutation came into mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy/’ This explains why Elisabeth knew that Mary was to be the mother of the long-expected Messiah. While this knowledge of Elisabeth was the result of divine revelation she, under the influence of the Spirit, refers to it as the effect that Mary’ s salutation had upon her unborn child. And blessed is she that believed;—Elisabeth, by inspiration, recognized that Mary had from the first believed, and was unlike Zacharias, who at that time was still smitten with dumbness. Her language passes from the second to the third person, and must be looked upon in the light of a prayer or invo¬cation of blessings upon Mary. Still speaking by the Holy Spirit, Elisabeth declares that “ there shall be a fulfillment of the things which have been spoken to her from the Lord.’’ There is no evidence that Mary had as yet revealed to Elisa¬beth anything, and Elisabeth was still under the influence of the Holy Spirit when she uttered these unusual words; the ex¬pression, although in form indefinite, is designed to apply di¬rectly to Mary. Elisabeth recognizes that what the angel had spoken to Mary was “ from the Lord.” Luke 1:46-56 —And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,—Mary is now filled with the Holy Spirit and breaks forth into expressions of joy and thankfulness; she may not have under-stood the full import of her words, yet they are very significant. These verses comprise most of the recorded words of Mary; we have but few recorded words of the mother of Jesus — more of them here than anywhere else. They remind one of the ancient song of Hannah under similar circumstances. (1 Samuel 2:1-10.) They breathe the most delightful recognition of God’ s great mercy, his condescension to their humble es¬tate, his often manifested law of moral administration to exalt the lowly and to abase the proud. Here is a celebration of his glorious fulfillment of a long extant promise to Israel of the Messiah. This speech of Mary’ s is put in the structure of Hebrew poetry. my spirit hath rejoiced in God—Mary rejoiced in the fact that she was elevated from a state of earthly obscurity, but her deepest joy was in the fact that she was to bring the promised Messiah into the world. Verses 48 and 49 show the ground of Mary’ s praise; God had looked upon her favorably and had made her the mother of our Lord; she regarded the blessings of the Messiah’ s advent as reaching to the end of time; she gave utterance to great spiritual truths respecting the true glory of the Messiah’ s reign. She passes to a general song of praise; rising above personal blessings and losing sight of them in the divine glory and goodness of God which are revealed to her at this time. He hath given help to Israel his servant,—In this song of praise Mary is enabled by the Holy Spirit to look back and see all the good things that Jehovah had done for Israel; she was permitted to view the future and the blessings which should come to the world through this Messiah. The language of praise and grateful remembrance of the divine help in behalf of the poor and humble now assumes a more comprehensive and general form. Jehovah had extended mercy as he had spoken unto “ our fathers” and “ toward Abraham and his seed for ever.” God’ s covenant of mercy was not only made with the patriarchs, but declared to them in words of the strongest import, and confirmed with an oath. All the promises that God had made to Israel were now focusing on the babe that she would bring into the world.

BIRTH AND OF JOHNLuk_1:57-80 Luke 1:57 —Now Elisabeth’ s time was fulfilled—Luke now dismissed the history concerning Mary until her journey with Joseph to Bethlehem. (Luke 2:1.) Mary left Elisabeth, it seems, just before the birth of John; she may have done so, wishing to avoid the excitement of the occasion, and the observation of such an assemblage. The birth of John the Baptist was soon after Mary’ s departure, probably in the spring. According to the promise of Gabriel, at the proper time, a son was born to Zacharias and Elisabeth; as the prediction of the angel was fulfilled in this particular, so we may expect every prophecy concerning John to be fulfilled. Luke 1:58-59 —And her neighbors and her kinsfolk heard—When the kinspeople heard that Elisabeth had brought forth a son, they were ready to congratulate her on being blessed even in her old age; very likely they were more enthusiastic since hope had been lost in her becoming a mother. “ They rejoiced with her” ; it was a happy occasion for Elisabeth and her neighbors and kinspeople with her; thus early began to be fulfilled the prediction of the angel as recorded in verse 14. There was a similar rejoicing at the birth of Obed. (Rth 4:14-17.) “ And it came to pass on the eighth day, that they came to circumcise the child.” According to the patriarchal custom and the Mosaic law the male child was to be circumcised on the eighth day. (Genesis 17:12; Leviticus 12:3.) If the eighth day came on the Sabbath, the rite was not postponed. (John 7:22-23.) According to the Jewish traditional law, ten persons were required to be present as witnesses to the circumcision; hence the presence of relatives and friends. Circumcision was enjoined upon Abraham as a token or covenant sign, and was to be performed upon all his male descendants and upon every male that was admitted within the folds of the Jewish nation. (Genesis 17:9-14.) It was an essential condition of Jewish nationality ; Paul speaks of it also as “ the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while he was in uncircumcision: that he might be the father of all them that believe.” (Romans 4:11.) Circumcision was the attesta¬tion of Abraham’ s justification by faith; it became a type of the cleansing of the heart, as Paul says “ circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter.” (Romans 2:29.) “ For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and glory in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.” (Philippians 3:3.)

Luke 1:60-61 —And his mother answered and said, Not so;—Evidently Zacharias had in some way communicated to Elisabeth that his name, according to the instruction of the angel (verse 13), should be “ John”; or Elisabeth had received instruction by inspiration as to the name of her son. When the friends persisted at his circumcision in calling him “ Zacharias,” Elisabeth positively refused to sanction the name Zacharias and declared that he should be called John. The custom of naming children after some connection of the family was urged as a ballad of objection against the name John; it was fitting that the harbinger of the new dispensation should have a name not found among his natural connections, as “ Jesus” is not found among our Lord’ s ancestors. It was a common usage then, as in all ages, to name at least one son for the father; this law of usage the neighbors and relatives insisted should be followed; but the Lord had overruled it and had named him John before his birth. “ John” means “ Jehovah’ s gift,” and was a very appropriate name for this child, as he was a gift from Jehovah.

Luke 1:62-64 —And they made signs to his father,—The neighbors and friends were surprised at Elisabeth’ s positive refusal to let him be called Zacharias; she had spoken with such emphasis that they thought it useless to argue with her any longer, so they “ made signs to his father” and asked what his wish was; the fact that they “ made signs” with the head or hands or both shows that Zacharias was deaf as well as dumb. They assumed that the father had a wish in the case, and that his wish would settle the matter. In fact, the original Greek im¬plies that the question was so put as to demand a definite reply; more literally “ they made signs as to what he is”; that is, what is his name. And he asked for a writing tablet,—Zacharias made signs and asked for “ a writing tablet” that he might give answer; he probably asked for that which he had used for nine months as a means of communicating with his wife and others. The instrument of writing then was probably a light board covered with wax and a sharp iron instrument for a pen; the iron was broad and smooth at one end for smoothing the wax and sharp at the other for writing. Zacharias wrote a simple statement—“ his name is John.” This means that the child had already been named and that they had nothing to do with it. The neighbors and friends all “ marvelled.” And his mouth was opened immediately,—Zacharias had been smitten with dumbness from the time the angel Gabriel announced to him that he should have a son; Zacharias had asked for a sign in his unbelief that the angel had truly informed him, and the sign of his dumbness was given. Zacharias had faithfully followed the instruction of the angel and had given his son the name “ John,” and at that eventful moment the tongue of Zacharias was loosed, and his soul was filled with praise and his glad tongue gave it suitable expression. The naming of the child was an evidence of Zacharias’ restored faith; in apprehending the full meaning of the name John, “ one whom God has graciously given/* he accepted in full confidence all that had been foretold. The first use of his recovered speech was not in complaint, nor in conversation with his wife or friends, but in praising or blessing God. He blessed God, not merely for himself, but for the child, and for what God was about to do for his people by the Messiah and his forerunner.

Luke 1:65-66 —And fear came on all that dwelt—“ Fear” means religious awe on account of the evident display of divine power; fear has always been the first effect produced on man by the consciousness that heavenly beings are entering into nearer and unusual intercourse with man. All in the immediate neighborhood of the city of John’ s birth, probably Hebron, were greatly impressed by the scenes which had transpired. “ All these sayings were noised abroad throughout all the hill country of Judaea*’ ; these things were talked of everywhere and told abroad; this means the circumstances regarding John’s birth became the great topic of conversation in all the hill country of Judea, but it seems that they did not reach Jerusalem. The people knew of Zacharias’ affliction of dumbness ; they had heard rumors of the events connected with the birth of John; now Zacharias gives his son an unusual name, which was given by the angel, and now for the first time in nearly a year he breaks his long silence. The people would remember these when John began preaching the gospel of the kingdom. And all that heard them laid them up in their heart,—By this we are to understand that there were certain manifesta¬tions of divine favor toward the child; events which would be noticed by observers living in Hebron, but which Luke did not see fit to record. Many absurd legends were propagated in the early ages of the church concerning the period which intervenes between the births of John and Jesus and their public ministry, but we may be safe in rejecting them; if the inspired writers had seen fit, they could have given them to us. They observed that the hand of the Lord was with him; the guidance, protection, and blessings of God, including the gracious influences of the Holy Spirit, were with John. Luke here gives a glimpse of John’ s early history, intimating both the continued fulfillment of the angel’ s words and also the realization of the expectations awakened among the people at his birth. Luke 67-75—And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit,—The spirit of prophecy had ceased with Malachi, but now, after about four hundred years, it is given again. Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and in a strain of sacred rapture he “ prophesied.” A prophet was one who was used by God as a means of communicating his will, even though he may not predict any future events. (Genesis 20:7; John 4:19.) A prophet was God’ s mouthpiece to the people. Zacharias spoke as the prophets did of old. (2 Peter 1:21.) God generally chose holy men as prophets, yet sometimes he has inspired even wicked men. (Numbers 23:5 Numbers 24:11.) Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel;— The song of Zacharias is a hymn of thanksgiving and a prediction of John’ s relation to Christ; it is Messianic in its character; Christ is its theme, and it is John’ s glory to be forerunner of Christ. Its structure is in the form of Hebrew poetry, and abounds in He¬brew idioms. Zacharias probably committed it to writing, and copies of it were very likely preserved, and Luke had a copy of it.

The song consists of two parts: (1) Blessing God for the true spiritual salvation in fulfillment of his promises. (Luke 1:68-75.) (2) Presenting John as the prophet and herald of the Messiah, the one who was to prepare the way for the Christ. (Luke 1:76-79.) “ Blessed be the Lord, the God of Is¬rael.” It seems natural for Zacharias to praise Jehovah; his restored speech is used first in blessing God under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit. To bless God is not only to acknowledge and proclaim his infinite and eternal blessedness, but to render to him ascriptions of praise and thanksgiving.

As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets—This verse is parenthetical; Mary had ended her song (verse 55) with a parenthetical statement, and Zacharias begins his with such an expression; he alludes to the burden of ancient proph¬ecy ; it seems that Zacharias begins where Mary left off. God spoke through his holy prophets. “ For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:21.) The burden of prophecy had been the future Messiah. “ For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” (Revelation 19:10.) Zacharias refers in general to the ancient prophets and most naturally to all who uttered predictions regarding the Christ. The first promise of a Redeemer was made by Jehovah himself in the garden of Eden. (Genesis 3:15.) This was the fountainhead of the stream of prophecy, which flowed down the ages in an ever widening and deepening channel until it ended in the great Redeemer. Salvation from our enemies,—The salvation here is explanatory of and the result of the “ horn of salvation for us,” re¬ferred to in verse 69: the thought in verse 69 is now taken up after the parenthesis. This was a spiritual deliverance from spiritual enemies, since serving God “ in holiness and righteousness before him all our days” (verse 75) was to be the result of this salvation. Zacharias may have connected this with the deliverance from the political oppression of Herod and the Romans, expecting national exaltation with the highest religious prosperity like that in the days of David and Solomon; however it seems that he must, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, have been chiefly speaking of a salvation from the bondage of individual and national sins. To grant unto us that we being delivered—The covenant that Jehovah made was a “ holy covenant” ; it was a “ holy cov¬enant” because it originated in holiness and was productive of holiness in the saved from all injustice and unrighteousness and from every imperfection. (Romans 3:26.) God remem¬bered his oath for the purpose of performing or granting its fulfillment; hence he exercised mercy in remembering his holy covenant and performing his oath to grant deliverance to his people. It was of the greatest importance in the mind of Zacharias that they should serve God “ without fear,” and hence he makes it prominent.

Luke 1:76-80 —Yea and thou, child, shalt be called the prophet—At this point the song of Zacharias begins its second part. After giving vent to his gratitude for the coming and blessing of the Messiah, Zacharias now first mentions his son, whom he ad-dressed in language of great beauty, yet he speaks of him only as the prophet and forerunner of him whose glorious mission and salvation he was now celebrating. John was called here “ the prophet of the Most High” ; he was the messenger of God spoken of by Malachi. John was a prophet not only as a preacher of truth, but also as the foreteller of Christ’ s coming and of the vengeance that should befall the Jewish nation for its impenitence and unbelief. The preeminence of Jesus is here designated by the “ Most High.” John’ s mission is also outlined here when Zacharias said that he should “ go before before the face of the Lord."

Luke 1:76 —the face of the Lord to make ready his ways.” John is likened to one going before an oriental monarch and preparing the way for him. Christ is first, John secondary; Zacharias so recognizes this relation between John and Jesus. There seems to be a clear reference here to the prophecies in Isaiah 40:3 and Malachi 3:1. The divine nature of Jesus as the Messiah is brought to view here by the application of the name “ Lord” to him. John was to prepare the way for Jesus by pointing out the sins of the people and leading them to repentance.

Luke 1:78 —To give knowledge of salvation—This expresses the object of John’ s going before Jesus to prepare his way; John awakened in the people a conception of their need of a spiri¬tual emancipation and of the necessity of repentance and reformation of life, and pointed to Jesus as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. John thus taught and heralded the salvation which Christ was to bring, and put the people in preparation for it. This knowledge should lead them unto “ the remission of their sins.” John was to give a knowledge of a salvation consisting in the forgiveness of sins. Before Christ came there was not a clear understanding of the method by which God could grant the full forgiveness of sins, and hence the knowledge of this was the great need of the Jews and of the world. Luke 1:79 —Because of the tender mercy of our God,—The knowledge of the remission of sins, as well as the salvation from sin, is through the tender mercies of God. It is also through the tender mercy of God that Christ, man’ s Redeemer, should come. “ Whereby the dayspring from on high shall visit us.” Literally, “ dayspring” means “ the rising” of the sun, or “ the dawn of a heavenly day.” We have here a reference to prophetic terms: “ But unto you that fear my name shall the sun of righteousness arise with healing in its wings; and ye shall go forth, and gambol as calves of the stall.” (Malachi 4:2.) This seems to compare the coming of the Christ and the dawn of a better day to the heavenly bodies, which do not come from beneath the horizon, but as it were from the very zenith. With prophetic vision Zacharias saw the dawn already begin-ning and the Messiah coming. Luke 1:79 –To shine upon them—The purpose of the coming of Christ is here given; he was to give light to the people and to illumi-nate all who sat “ in darkness and the shadow of death.” The dark, terrible, and dismal condition in which the people had been wrought by sin was to be removed by dispelling the darkness of spiritual death, and giving light through the Christ. This was to be done by his guiding “ our feet into the way of peace.” They were to be led by Christ into that course of life which is attended with peace of conscience and led to eternal peace. The gospel of Christ shows us the only way to peace with God. The coming of Christ is like the day-dawn that comes to the weary and benighted traveler in the darkness of the most dismal night, and enables him to pursue his journey in paths of peace and safety. The hymn of Zacharias closes grandly with the boundless prospect in the future for eternal and supernal happiness.

Luke 1:80 —And the child grew,—Luke now gives us a glimpse of John’ s private life, his development of both body and mind, his preparation for his peculiar work; the conclusion is similar to that in Luke 2:40 Luke 2:52. Some think that this marks the end of one of those documents which Luke used under the direction of the Spirit. (Verse 3.) “ The child grew” in a physical, mental, and spiritual sense; he was gradually fitted for the great work of preaching repentance to a wicked nation. He remained “ in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel.” “ Deserts” here means sparsely-inhabited districts of southern Palestine; the word “ desert” or “ wilderness” means in the New Testament merely an unenclosed, untilled, and thinly-inhabited district; it was applied to the mountainous regions, to districts fitted only for pasture, and to country remote from towns. John remained in “ the deserts” until the time of his public manifestation, or his entrance into his public ministry, which was about thirty years of age. Some think that his parents died when he was young; he was not taught in the Jewish schools; he did not appear in the service of the temple at an age when he could have done so. (Numbers 8:24; 1 Chronicles 23:27.)

Verse 1Nineteen hundred years have not dimmed the luster of this glorious chapter nor cast any shadow over the hard historical facts related therein, facts which have been etched into the conscience of all mankind and which are indelibly written into the pages of the world’s authentic records. The account here was written by a brilliant physician, scientist and literary genius, following years of patient and thorough research, and who had the incomparable opportunity of examining all of the sources, written and oral, that had any bearing on the events narrated. Luke’s vivid, scientific account is as far above the subjective guesses of modern scholars as the sun in heaven is above the mudflats of earth. If men would know what really happened at that pivotal point in history which would split all time into the two segments called B.C. and A.D., then let them read it here. This is what happened! This chapter contains the author’s preface (Luke 1:1-4), the record of the annunciation to Zacharias (Luke 1:5-23), the conception of Elizabeth (Luke 1:24-25), the annunciation to Mary (Luke 1:26-38), and Mary’s visit to Elizabeth (Luke 1:39-56), the birth of John the Baptist (Luke 1:57-66), the prophecy of Zacharias (Luke 1:67-79), and a one-sentence summary of John the Baptist’s early life (Luke 1:80). THE PREFACEForasmuch as many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us, even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all things accurately from the first to write thee in order, most excellent Theophilus; that thou mightest know the certainty concerning the things wherein thou wast instructed. (Luke 1:1-4) This preface is not a statement of what Luke proposed to do, but a record of what he had already done. “The tense of the verbs shows that he wrote these verses after he had completed the body of the Gospel."[1]Here also is a glimpse of the true meaning of the doctrine of the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. “All scripture is inspired by God” (2 Timothy 3:16 RSV), and “Men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21); but this does not mean that God’s inspiration comes to the lazy and inactive mind, but rather to the diligent seeker of truth, as beautifully exemplified by the research of Luke. As Barclay expressed it, “The word of God is given, but it is given to the man who is seeking for it."[2] God guided his inspired authors by guiding their purpose, their research, and by protecting them from error, yet leaving the writer free to express the truth discovered in the terms and vocabulary that he already knew. Many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative … This indicates that Luke’s written sources were numerous. “Many” is incapable of meaning only five or six. Even as many as eight are called “few” in Scripture (1 Peter 3:20); and we are therefore presented with the declaration which reveals a much larger number, perhaps as many as a score, or even more. Thus, the very first line of this Gospel disproves the notion that Luke got most of his Gospel from Mark. As a matter of fact, the solid evidence is all against the assumption that Luke ever saw either Matthew’s or Mark’s Gospels. As the scholarly Macknight stated, “Without all doubt, had he been speaking of them, he would not have passed them over in such a slight and casual manner."[3]Matters which have been fulfilled among us …

By these words, Luke affirmed that his record dealt with nothing that was new or novel in the faith of the very extensive Christian community already established throughout the Mediterranean world. The word for “fulfilled” in this clause means “fully established” (English Revised Version (1885) margin); and this means that the total content of Luke’s Gospel was already the faith of the whole church at the time he wrote in 60 A.D. Who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word … Luke’s mention of eye-witnesses of the things he recorded “from the beginning” and “from the first” (Luke 1:3), along with the conspicuous birth narrative in the first two chapters is very nearly the equivalent of saying that he had interviewed the Virgin Mary herself, a conclusion that will appear mandatory in the narrative itself. This is devastating to the wild, subjective theories with regard to Luke’s source for the first two chapters. This is also the end of all attempts to late-date the Gospel; for, even at the time Luke wrote, the Virgin Mother was not less than eighty years of age, even allowing for the annunciation to have occurred when she was fifteen years old. Ministers of the word … The Greek word Luke used here for “ministers” is [@huperetai], a word used in medical terminology “to refer to doctors who served under a principal physician."[4] Thus, Doctor Luke referred to a group, including the apostles themselves, who served as lesser DOCTORS under the Great Physician. There are numerous uses of such a medical vocabulary throughout Luke. It seemed good to me also … This removes any doubt that Luke disapproved of previous writings on the Christian faith, for he here plainly placed himself on the same platform with previous authors. Having traced the source of all things accurately from the first … The words “from the first” are a translation of the Greek term [@anothen], the same word which is rendered “from above” in John 3:3. G. Campbell Morgan insisted on the latter meaning here, which would make this an affirmation by Luke of the fact of his inspiration. Hobbs said that there is no reason why both meanings should not apply here.[5]To write unto thee in order … There is no way to know exactly what Luke intended by this, other than the inherent truth that his record is systematic. It does not seem to be strictly chronological in every instance; but it is not affirmed here that it is. Most excellent Theophilus … The use of “excellent” denominates Theophilus as a man of equestrian rank, that is a knight, the term being used of such officials as the governor of the province (Acts 23:26). The name Theophilus means “one who loves God,” but there is no reason to suppose that Luke used this name otherwise than as the personal cognomen of his friend, who might also have been his patron. The omission of the title “excellent” in Acts 1:1 supports the speculation that Theophilus was governor of an unnamed province when Luke was written, but that he was no longer governor when Acts was penned. That thou mightest know the certainty concerning the things wherein thou wast instructed … The Greek word here rendered “things” is actually “words” (English Revised Version (1885) margin); and the last clause means “which thou wast taught by word of mouth,” unmistakable references to the oral instruction received by Christians in those times, prior to and after their acceptance of the faith. This makes the implications of this passage to be of epic proportions. Despite the fact of there having been “many” written portions of the gospel message, even so important a person as Theophilus had received only word-of-mouth teaching, indicating the universality of the word-of-mouth method of instruction. This fully accounts for the word-by-word correspondence to be found in certain episodes recorded in the synoptic Gospels, all of them written independently. Luke’s Gospel was written for the precise purpose of confirming the accuracy of the oral instruction Theophilus had already received.

The glimpse afforded here, as Dummelow said, “is all that is really known, as distinguished from what is guessed about the sources of the synoptic Gospels."[6]One other implication of vast significance appears in this preface. Whereas the oral instruction received by Theophilus was admitted by Luke to have been absolutely correct, and whereas the “many” writers had written of the things Luke recorded, this Gospel was composed for the purpose of greater “certainty” (Luke 1:4) than could have been held in respect of oral teachings, and with a design of giving an account of “all things” (Luke 1:3) that were pertinent to the holy faith, as contrasted with implied inadequacy of the “many” written accounts, this latter implication of inadequacy, or incompleteness, being the sole fault of the “many” writers before him. There is not the slightest hint that Luke was writing to correct false teachings of the writers cited. [1] Herschel H. Hobbs, An Exposition of the Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1966), p. 17. [2] William Barclay, The Gospel of Luke (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1956), p. 2. [3] James MacKnight, Harmony of the Gospels in Two Volumes (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1950), Vol. I, p. 34. [4] Herschel H. Hobbs, op. cit., p. 19. [5] Ibid., p. 21. [6] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 736.

Verse 5 There was in the days of Herod, king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abijah: and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. TO Herod … This ruler is the one known historically as Herod the Great, a savage Idumean, who had acquired the kingship of several provinces in Palestine from the Roman Senate, influenced by Octavius, to whom Herod had given large sums of money. He was a descendent of Esau and fully as profane as his progenitor. Technically, he reigned from 40 B.C. to the year of his death in 4 B.C.; but his actual control of the country dates from 37 B.C.[7] The event narrated here occurred in either 7 B.C. or 5 B.C., depending upon the exact date assigned to the birth of our Lord. Dummelow favored 6 B.C.,[8] and Boles 4 B.C.[9] The reckoning of time from the birth of Christ began a long time after the event of his birth, the error remaining long undetected; and this accounts for the paradox that Christ was born in a year called B.C.! The uncertainty of the exact year stems from Matthew’s statement that Herod slew all the children “two years old” and under ( Matthew 2:16). If the two years were those lost by the Wise Men in finding Jesus (which would suppose the star to have appeared two years before he was born), then the date would be 4 B.C.; but if the two years represented the two-year period while Herod searched for Jesus, then his birth would have been no later than 6 B.C. One thing is sure, Jesus was born before the death of Herod on April 1,4 B.C. Zacharias, of the course of Abijah … The name of this priest means” - Jehovah is renowned."[10] Following the events of this chapter, there is no further mention of him in the New Testament. The course of Abijah was one of 24 classes of priests who were rotated in the service of the temple. The great numbers of priests necessitated that particular choice for various functions should be made by casting lots; and no one was allowed to burn incense more than once, many never being permitted to do so at all. Elisabeth … was also a descendent of Aaron, her name meaning “God is an oath."[11] It is significant that she was a relative, a cousin of the mother of our Lord (Luke 1:36); but this does not mean that Mary also belonged to the tribe of Levi, for “Male descent alone determined the tribe, and Mary may have been related to Elizabeth on her mother’s side."[12][7] Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 11, p. 510. [8] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 627. [9] H. Leo Boles, Commentary on Matthew (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1936), p. 36. [10] Herbert Lockyer, All the Men of the Bible (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1958), p. 339. [11] F. N. Peloubet, Peloubet’s Bible Dictionary (Philadelphia: The John C. Winston Company, 1925) p. 174. [12] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 739.

Verse 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.It should be noted that this verse has Luke’s words, and that he who was the companion of the great apostle to the Gentiles and thus fully knowledgeable of Paul’s teaching about “the righteousness of God,” here gave what is tantamount to a definition of that “righteousness,” the same being not some kind of an inheritance through faith alone, but a state marked by the most careful and consistent obedience of the commandments and ordinances of the Lord. Advocates of the “faith only” doctrine have, of course, sought to soften this. Summers said, “In later Christian use, particularly Pauline, the word took on a connotation of with God through faith commitment to Christ rather than through obedience to legal requirement."[13] If this view is correct, Luke could not possibly have written anything like this verse; but since he most assuredly wrote it, it must appear as a fair conclusion that this verse presents a Pauline view of righteousness fully in harmony with Romans 1:5; Romans 16:26 where “obedience of faith” is also stressed. ENDNOTE: [13] Ray Summers, Commentary on Luke (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher, 1974), p. 24.

Verse 7 And they had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren, and they both were well stricken in years.The experience of this holy couple paralleled that of Abraham and Sarah in that their long and patient prayers for a child had brought no change in their status. However, God had not said, “No”; he had only said, “Wait!” Childlessness was a particularly deplorable state in the thinking of the Jewish people.

Verse 8 Now it came to pass, while he executed the priest’s office before God in the order of his course, according to the custom of the priest’s office, his lot was to enter the temple of the Lord and burn incense.The necessity for the choice of the priest who would burn incense having been made by lot sprang from the greatness of the number eligible to do this. It was an honor which resulted ever afterward in the title of “rich” for those who received it. The temple … refers to the Holy of Holies, the most sacred part of God’s temple in the inner area where few men ever entered, and into which an ordinary priest entered only once in a lifetime.

Verse 10 And the whole multitude of the people were praying without at the hour of incense.This would have been about 3:00 o’clock in the afternoon. It was customary for the people to assemble in the great courts of the temple and wait for the benediction to be pronounced upon them by the priest who burned the incense morning and evening (Exodus 30:6-8).

Verse 11 And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord standing on the right hand side of the altar of incense.An angel of the Lord … appeared … Note that the angel did not approach; he just appeared, visibly manifested in an instant of time. The reality of the angelic creation is everywhere assumed and taught in the New Testament. Jesus himself frequently mentioned the angels of God; and those who believe in Jesus find in his holy words full authority for receiving all that the New Testament relates with regard to them. (For an essay on the subject of angels, see my Commentary on Hebrews, Hebrews 1:14). The right hand side … This was the north side of the altar; and the inclusion of such details indicates that Luke’s research had extended far enough to discover such circumstantial knowledge as this. Scholars have been quick to point out that in this section the precise, elegant Greek preface (Luke 1:1-4) has been replaced by a style of language steeped in the traditions, religion, and psychological attitude of the Hebrews, a style which it would have been impossible for any man to improvise, showing how carefully Luke had researched these events. Some have tried to explain this by supposing “that St. Luke is here using a Hebrew document”;[14] but such a supposition is sheer unadulterated imagination. As is also evident, later in the chapter, and with regard to Mary, “The psychological detail Luke gives indicates he may have Mary, as later passages will confirm."[15] Of course, the same is true here. [14] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 737. [15] Anthony Lee Ash, The Gospel according to Luke (Austin, Texas: Sweet Publishing Company, 1972), p. 36.

Verse 12 And Zacharias was troubled when he saw him, and fear fell upon him.Such an attitude of fear and apprehension was altogether natural in the presence of an archangel, such an attitude being invariably manifested by all who ever saw such a being, the lone exception being that of Mary Magdalene who, through her overwhelming grief at the grave of Jesus, seems to have talked with an angel without even realizing it (John 20:11-18).

Verse 13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias; because thy supplication is heard, and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John.Fear not … This was the word of Jesus to his storm-tossed apostles, and the word of the angels to the shepherds when Jesus was born, and it was the last message of the enthroned Christ for all who believe in him (Revelation 1:17). Thy supplication is heard … The most natural way to understand this is as a reference to the prayers of this holy couple for a child; and, although his priestly duties of that occasion demanded that he should also have prayed for the coming of the Messiah and the bringing in of the kingdom of God, it certainly appears that his prayer for a child, whether uttered again on that occasion or not, was nevertheless continually in his heart; and it was to THAT PRAYER which the angel referred in this appearance.

Verse 14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth.Rejoice at his birth … has reference to the rejoicing that would ultimately follow the great message from God which the promised son was destined to deliver, and not merely to the gladness of the relatively few neighbors who would joyfully hail the event itself.

Verse 15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and he shall drink no wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.Great in the sight of the Lord … is a far different thing from being great in the sight of men, the vicious and unprincipled Herod the Great, just mentioned, being a classical example of the latter type of “greatness.” No wine nor strong drink … This prohibited, not merely wine, but all intoxicants, and supports the view that John the Baptist like Samuel, Samson, and the Rechabites in the Old Testament, was a Nazarite for life (Numbers 6:1-21); however, as Ash noted, “Some facets of the Nazarite vow are not specified here (e.g., allowing the hair to grow)."[16] The type of ascetic piety exhibited by John had its proper place in the purpose of God; although John, strictly speaking, was not in the kingdom, because he preceded it. Nevertheless, God used him, particularly in the manner of his life style contrasting so dramatically with that of Jesus. It is impossible to avoid the significance of the contrast in this verse between intoxicating “spirits” which John would renounce and the “Spirit” who would be in him, filling him, even from his mother’s womb, and for his whole life. The same contrast was evident on Pentecost when the apostles were not “drunk with wine” but filled with “the Spirit.” Paul wrote, “And be not drunken with wine wherein is riot, but be filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18). Strong drink is an unqualified curse upon the earth; and, although Christ did not require the kind of abstinence which marked the life of John the Baptist, drunkenness is forbidden, as well as any association with a drunkard (1 Corinthians 5:11). ENDNOTE: [16] Ibid., p. 31.

Verse 16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn unto the Lord thy God.This, to be sure, was literally fulfilled, as detailed in Matthew 3:1-12.

Verse 17 And he shall go before his face in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to walk in the wisdom of the just; to make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him. And he shall go before his face … This is obviously an error in the English Revised Version (1885), this being a clause in which the KJV, the NEB, and the RSV concur in the reading, “And he shall go before him … etc.” A good deal of importance attaches to this, because, as Summers noted, “The immediate antecedent of the pronoun him' appears to be God’ in Luke 1:16."[17] and this accounts for the rendition in Phillips translation which reads, “He will go out before God … etc.” Thus, an archangel delivered the word that John the Baptist would go before God as a herald; and thus, in the fullness of time, when John went before Jesus, which was the very thing the angel had in view here, it was the same as going before God, thus attesting the fact of Jesus’ absolute identification with the Father. Therefore, one finds here on the first page of Luke’s Gospel the same thought expressed more fully by John who said that “the Word was God” (John 1:1). In the spirit and power of Elijah … In these words, an angel of God explained what was meant by the promised coming of Elijah (Malachi 4:5-6). The express terminology of Malachi’s prophecy was used here by the angel; and, therefore, there was no excuse for the refusal of the Pharisees and other leaders of Israel to recognize John the Baptist as the fulfillment of Malachi’s prophecy. Not only was there this specific heavenly identification of the promised son as that “Elijah,” but there was the additional fact of John’s conformity to the pattern of clothing worn by the first Elijah. Jesus, of course, confirmed the word of the angel, citing John the Baptist as the Elijah who was to come (Matthew 17:9-13). Turn the hearts of the fathers to the children … etc. These are plainly the words of Mal 4:5-6; but what do they mean? There seems to be a metaphor here in which the fathers, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. have turned away their hearts from the rebellious Israelites. Therefore, the preaching of the great herald will cause many to repent, leading to turning the fathers’ hearts to the children. And the disobedient to walk in the wisdom of the just … This is the same as “turning the hearts of the children to the fathers,” as it is stated in Malachi, meaning that they will repent and again honor the faith of their father Abraham. There is, of course, the obvious fact that much more than metaphor is intended here. Moses and Elijah who were also among “the fathers,” appeared in conversation with Jesus in the transfiguration; and from this the deduction could be made that “the fathers” referred to by the angel in this passage were fully aware of Israel’s apostasy, and that the reunification of children and fathers would be a reality, although spiritual, and not merely a figure of speech. Of course, the envisioned unity would be accomplished only in the persons who would repent and turn to God under John’s preaching. To make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him … This was indeed achieved, even though on a smaller scale than would have been desirable. Some of the apostles were first disciples of John. (John 1:35 ff). ENDNOTE: [17] Ray Summers, op. cit., p. 26.

Verse 18 And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wife well stricken in years.There was an element of unbelief in this question which, in effect, denied the possibility of what the angel had promised, contrasting sharply with the submissive belief of the virgin Mary in this narrative.

Verse 19 And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and I was sent to speak unto thee, and to bring thee these good tidings.I am Gabriel … Only two angels are named in the canonical Scriptures, the other being Michael (Daniel 10:21; Jude 1:1-9). There are seven such archangels who stand before God’s throne (Revelation 8:2). “There seems to be a remarkable gradation in the words (of this verse) enhancing the guilt of Zacharias’ unbelief."[18] The thought appears to be: I am Gabriel a holy angel, yes, one of the highest angels, and I have been specifically commissioned by God to bring you this good news! ENDNOTE: [18] John Wesley, One Volume Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1972), en loco.

Verse 20 And behold, thou shalt be silent and not able to speak, until the day that these things shall come to pass, because thou believest not my words, which shall be fulfilled in their season.Thou shalt be silent … This punishing rebuke was appropriate. Since Zacharias had not believed God’s word as delivered by Gabriel, his own words were cut off until the time appointed. From Luke 1:62, it is certain that Zacharias also lost his hearing at the same time. Implicit in this episode is the injunction that men should believe God’s words, even when they are delivered by one of God’s messengers.

Verse 21 And the people were waiting for Zacharias, and they marvelled while he tarried in the temple.Zacharias was possibly very much unsettled and shaken by the awesome experience he had encountered, occasioning some delay in the completion of his duties; and, also, from his affliction imposed upon him by the angel, there would have been a reluctance for him to go forth to the people. Perhaps he waited awhile before appearing.

Verse 22 And when he came out, he could not speak unto them, and they perceived that he had seen a vision in the temple: and he continued making signs unto them, and remained dumb.The last clauses in this verse explain the first two. As to the manner of how the people “perceived that he had seen a vision,” it is clear that Zacharias communicated with them through the making of signs, an activity that was continued at length by him. Yet he remained a deaf-mute until his son was born.

Verse 23 And it came to pass, when the days of his ministration were fulfilled, he departed unto his house.The word translated “ministration” here, [@leitourgein], “in Biblical Greek refers to priestly SERVICE in the worship of God and also to service for the needy. From the word comes the English word LITURGY."[19] It should be noted that Zacharias did not use his handicap as an excuse for terminating his service. He fulfilled his assignment. In the same manner, people today should not use any handicap, old or new, as a basis for refusing to do their duty. ENDNOTE: [19] Anthony Lee Ash, op. cit., p. 34.

Verse 24 And after these days, Elisabeth his wife conceived; and she hid herself five months, saying, Thus hath the Lord done unto me in the days wherein he looked upon me, to take away my reproach among men.This contrasts dramatically with the conception by the virgin, that Luke is about to relate. Here, there is no suggestion of anything out of the ordinary, except in view of the age of both and the barrenness of Elizabeth. Though the power to conceive a son under such circumstances was, in a very genuine sense, from God, it was nonetheless a far different thing from the case of the conception of Jesus. Hid herself five months … No good explanation of this seems to be available. Perhaps it was the natural embarrassment that came to a person of such age undergoing such an experience, or it may be that she deliberately waited until any doubt of her condition had been removed. This is another stark Lukan detail that could have come only from a personal interview with a member of the family, such as Mary. The Lord … looked upon me … The Hebrew thought viewed God’s looking upon his servants as an indication of God’s intention of helping them. “Behold the eye of Jehovah is upon them that fear him” (Psalms 33:18). To take away my reproach among men … This was not a mere euphemism among the Hebrews. Childlessness was viewed as a curse of God, or, at least, as a sign of God’s utmost displeasure; and the mores of that society were such that Elizabeth would indeed have suffered all kinds of reproach from her family, possibly even from her husband, and certainly from her community. Her gratitude at the lifting of such a reproach is beautiful and touching. If she had suffered a number of miscarriages in the past, it would have accounted for her period of hiding for five months.

Verse 26 Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth. TO MARYIn the sixth month … refers to the time since Elizabeth’s conception (Luke 1:36). For note on “Gabriel,” see under Luke 1:19. Nazareth … Luke’s explanation that Nazareth was a city of Galilee indicates that many of his readers were Gentiles. No Jew would have needed to be told the location of Nazareth. No man could ever have imagined that an archangel would be commissioned by the God of all creation to visit a village such as Nazareth, situated in a district, the very name of which announced it as a place of the despised Gentiles. “GALILEE is a contraction of the region’s full name, [~geliyl] [~ha-gowyim], which means “district of the pagans."[20] Many reasons have been suggested for God’s choice of such a place for the residence of the divine Messiah, including the following: (1) Its Gentile character pointed to God’s purpose of saving Gentiles. (2) Its insignificance suggested that no place where men live is beyond the Father’s love and care. (3) The rural atmosphere provided an appropriate place for Jesus to develop into maturity. (4) By such a choice God signaled the reversal of human value judgments. (5) It enabled the fulfillment of the prophecy that Jesus should be called a Nazarene (Matthew 2:23). (6) It was less accessible to the curiosity and malignant hatred of powerful rulers than would have been the case with some large city. ENDNOTE: [20] Roland de Vaux, Everyday Life in Bible Times (Washington, D.C.: The National Geographic Society, 1967), p. 302.

Verse 27 To a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.To a virgin betrothed … Among the Jews of that period the betrothal took place a year before the couple lived together; but in every other respect it WAS the marriage ceremony. The bride’s infidelity during the betrothal period was a capital offense (Deuteronomy 22:23 f). The house of David … Commentators have sometimes troubled themselves over the applications of these words, whether to Joseph or to Mary; but they surely apply to both. That Mary was also of the house of David, as a comparison with Luke 1:69 shows, Luke would fully prove by the genealogy which he introduced a little later (Luke 3:23 f). The virgin’s name was Mary … This is the same as Miriam and was a common name for daughters in those times, and ever since. THE VIRGIN BIRTHThe Old Testament foretold the virgin birth. The first prophecy of the Messiah ever given (Genesis 3:15) identified him as “the seed of woman”; and that never meant, nor could it ever have meant, anything other than the virgin birth of Christ. It was prophesied again in Isaiah 7:14, a prophetic word which an apostle declared a prediction of the virgin birth (Matthew 1:23). The Old Testament identified the coming redeemer as Immanuel (meaning “God with us”), Mighty God, Everlasting Father, etc. (Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 1:14 f); and this identification was continued in the New Testament where Jesus Christ is referred to no less than ten times as “God.” How could God have become a man if not by means of a virgin birth? The pre-existence of Christ “before the world was” (John 17:5) made it an impossibility for him to have entered earth life as a result of the normal processes of procreation in which the union of two mortals, male and female, is utterly incapable of producing a life which had already existed. A denial of the virgin birth is a denial of the deity of Jesus Christ. All four of the Gospel writers evidence their belief that Christ was born of a virgin. Matthew spelled it out categorically, presenting it from the viewpoint of Joseph. Mark did not mention it, but in his report of the gossip at Nazareth selected the words “Is not this the carpenter?” rather than the other form of it, “Is not this the carpenter’s son?” as it is in Matthew (Mark 6:3; Matthew 13:55). Of course, the gossip existed in both forms; but Matthew, who had recorded the virgin birth, selected one form of it; and Mark, who had not recorded the virgin birth, was careful to choose the other form in order to avoid any implication against the virgin birth. From this we are certain that Mark knew of the doctrine and that he believed it. Extensive New Testament reference to Jesus as “Son of God” cannot be understood otherwise than in the sense of the unique sonship of Jesus Christ, every such reference being equivalent to denial that Jesus was begotten by any mortal father. Therefore, the fact of the virgin birth is affirmed in every reference. “Only begotten,” as used by John (John 1:18; John 3:18), carries the same message of confirmation from the Gospel of John. Regarding the allegation that Paul “knew nothing of the virgin birth!” - such an error can derive only from ignorance of what that great apostle said: Christ was “of the seed of David” and also “Son of God” (Romans 1:3-4); “Christ existed in the form of God … emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, and being made in the likeness of men” (Philippians 2:5-7); “God sent forth his Son, made of woman” (Galatians 4:4).[21] Versions or translations rendering this passage “born of a woman” are in error. As Clarke said, “Being made of a woman was according to the promise of Gen 3:15 : (meaning) produced by the power of God in the womb of the virgin Mary without the intervention of man."[22] “He taketh hold of the seed of Abraham” (Hebrews 2:16) has the reading in the Greek New Testament, “He taketh on him the seed of Abraham.” This makes the birth of Jesus to have been an act willed by himself while existing at a time prior to his entering our earth life. This cannot be anything except a recognition of the fact of the virgin birth. The Hebrew reference is here considered as Pauline. The fact that Paul did not make any references to this doctrine is incapable of casting any doubt regarding his true acceptance of it; because, in his preaching to the Gentiles, he stressed the far greater miracle of the resurrection. Significantly, Luke himself, in Acts, made no reference to the virgin birth in that volume; and if, for any reason, the Gospel of Luke had been lost, the critics would still have been shouting to high heaven that “Luke knew nothing of it?’ We are thankful to God that Paul made a more than sufficient reference to this vital doctrine to justify the conclusion that he fully received it. Actually, the virgin birth is no greater miracle than raising the dead, walking on the sea, or changing water into wine. It even pales in significance when compared to the resurrection of Christ. Therefore, unbelief of the virgin birth is really a refusal to believe in Christ at all. [21] Nestle’s Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959). [22] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton-Porter, 1829), Vol. VI, p. 402.

Verse 28 And he came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favored, the Lord is with thee.Thou art highly favored … In the Vulgate, these words are “gratia plena” as found in the opening phrase of the famed “Ave Maria.” Plummer noted that this is wrong if it means “full of grace which thou hast to bestow,” and right only if it is understood as “full of grace which thou hast received."[23] Thus, the Vulgate is inaccurate, as Spence said: The “plena gratia” of the Vulgate, said and sung so often in the virgin’s famous hymn, is an inaccurate rendering. Rather, “gratia cumulata,” as it has been well rendered. “Having been much graced (by God)” is the literal translation of the Greek word.Luke 1, p. 8.">[24] [23] Herschel H. Hobbs, op. cit., p. 34. Luke 1, p. 8.">[24] H. D. M. Spence, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1962), Vol. 16, Luke 1, p. 8.

Verse 29 But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this might be.The awesome presence of the mighty Gabriel was more than enough to strike terror into the heart of this young maiden in the village of Nazareth.

Verse 30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary; for thou hast found favor with God.Fear not … is the same admonition addressed to Zacharias, and it was designed to calm the apprehensive excitement that swept over the virgin. Favor … is also rendered “grace.” We are not told just how she had come to receive such favor in the sight of God; but the burst of praise from her lips, later recorded in this chapter, called the Magnificat, reveals an intimate knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, a deep and abiding trust in God, accompanied by a life of virtue and integrity, these having ever been fundamental prerequisites for the receiving of favor in the sight of God.

Verse 31 And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.As Luke 1:34 reveals, Mary understood that such a conception was to take place at once; and since the consummation of her marriage was scheduled for some considerable time in the future, she could not understand how such a promise as this was to be fulfilled. Although not evident in this text, the meaning was clearly a promise of an immediate conception. JESUS … is the New Testament form of the Old Testament “Joshua,” and has the meaning, “Jehovah is salvation.” Matthew’s account quotes the angel as giving the reason why this name was chosen, “For it is he who shall save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). Thus, the great purpose of Jesus’ entry into our earth life was not political or secular, but redemptive.

Verse 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High: and the Lord God shall give him the throne of his father David.The Son of the Most High … Strangely, this is the title given by the demoniac (Mark 5:7) to our Lord, suggesting that this is one of the titles given to the Son of God throughout the unseen world of angels and demons. Ash noted that “Most High” is used seven times in Luke (Luke 1:32; Luke 1:35; Luke 1:76; Luke 2:14; Luke 6:35; Luke 8:28; Luke 19:38) and only four times in the rest of the New Testament.[25]The throne of his father David … The virgin maiden of Nazareth might easily have understood these words as a reference to the secular throne of the Hebrews, despite the fact that the very name JESUS emphasized the moral and spiritual purpose of God and pointed away from any literal kingdom. Jesus was indeed destined to sit upon the throne of David, but it was to be upon the throne of the universal spiritual kingdom of which David’s throne was merely a feeble type. Jesus’ ascension to that throne would not come through military power, political change, or earthly favor; but it would be accomplished by his resurrection from the dead (Acts 2:31).

The holy Mary may be forgiven if she misconstrued this promise; but one finds no extenuation for such a view as that of Spence who said: “These words of the angel … yet unfulfilled … speak of a restoration of Israel … still … very distant!"[26]Inherent in these words of the angel is also the fact of Mary’s descent from David. Mary herself being the only physical link that Jesus ever had with that monarch. Joseph, the husband of Mary, was also the direct heir to the Davidic throne, through Solomon, thus making Jesus the legal heir of David, as well as his fleshly descendent. [25] Anthony Lee Ash, op. cit., p. 37. [26] H. D. M. Spence, op. cit., p. 8.

Verse 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.The house of Jacob … This patriarch’s God-given name was “Israel”; and the Israel over which Christ is now reigning is the true “Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16;Matthew 19:28). And of his kingdom there shall be no end … has reference to the perpetual existence of Christ’s church throughout the present dispensation of God’s grace (Daniel 2:44; Ephesians 3:21).

Verse 34 And Mary said unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?From this it is clear that the angel had foretold Mary’s immediate conception; and, since the consummation of her marriage was an event scheduled some considerable time afterward, her perplexity was natural. I know not a man… As Gilmour said: Mary is astonished that she is to have a son before her marriage. Roman Catholic interpreters have discovered support in this verse for their dogma that Mary had taken a vow of perpetual virginity.[27]There is, however, no way to reconcile Mary’s betrothal and definite intention of being married to Joseph with any superstition to the effect that she made reference in this place to any vow of perpetual virginity. ENDNOTE: [27] S. MacLean Gilmour, The Interpreter’s Bible (New York: Abingdon Press, 1952), Vol. VIII, p. 39.

Verse 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee: wherefore also the holy thing which is begotten shall be called the Son of God.This record of what the archangel Gabriel said to the virgin mother of our Lord is unimpeachable. With Spence we agree that Luke’s narrative here derives from the lips of Mary herself; and, as for the meaning of what was promised in this announcement, the words of Bishop Pearson on the Creed are appropriate: The Word was conceived in the womb of a woman, not after the manner of men, but by the singular, powerful, invisible, immediate operation of the Holy Spirit, whereby a virgin, beyond the law of nature, was enabled to conceive; and that which was conceived in her was originally and completely sanctified.[28]The power of the Most High shall overshadow thee … Ash has this beautiful word on the “overshadowing” of Mary: “Overshadow” recalls the cloud over the tabernacle during the wilderness wandering. The word is used in all the synoptic Gospels of the cloud that came at the transfiguration. The only other New Testament usage is in Acts 5:15. The term is always used of divine power. The concept is reminiscent of the Spirit hovering over the waters in Genesis 1:2. Here the Spirit would be active in a new “creation” of God.[29]This whole paragraph regarding the annunciation is fantastically beyond the power of any mere human being to have invented it. Like many other passages in the Bible, this lies utterly beyond the perimeter of anything that the natural man might have imagined. [28] H. D. M. Spence, op. cit., p. 8. [29] Anthony Lee Ash, op. cit., p. 39.

Verse 36 And behold, Elisabeth thy kinswoman, she also hath conceived a son in her old age; and this is the sixth month with her that was called barren.Mary had not requested a sign, but one was given. The providential conception that had been allowed to Zacharias and Elizabeth would provide exactly the encouragement that Mary would require. The sixth month … determines what is meant by the same expression in Luke 1:26.

Verse 37 For no word from God shall be void of power.It was not his own word that was delivered by Gabriel, but the word of Almighty God; and what was true (and ever is true) of the word Gabriel delivered is also true of the word of God delivered by the sacred writers of the New Testament, including, of course, the words through the beloved physician.

Verse 38 And Mary said, Behold, the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.This is the record of Mary’s acceptance of God’s promise. “Handmaid” as rendered here is from a Greek term that means bondservant, or slave. It is certain that Mary’s acceptance was taken in full light of the human consequences. How could she hope to explain such a thing to Joseph? What would the neighbors say? And there were the stern provisions of the Law that might require her to be stoned to death (Deuteronomy 22:23 f). Never was there a greater act of faith.

Verse 39 And Mary arose in these days and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Judah.MARY’S VISIT TO Milligan identified the “city of Judah” mentioned here as a place called “Juttah,” basing his conclusion upon the following: (1) From the fact that Juttah was one of the forty-eight cities that were given to the priests (Joshua 15:55; Joshua 11:16). (2) It was in the hill country of Judaea; and (3) This is according to the tradition of the primitive Church.[30]Some have identified the residence of Zacharias as Hebron; but Milligan’s identification is more likely correct. ENDNOTE: [30] R. Milligan, Analysis of the New Testament (Cincinnati, Ohio: Bosworth, Chase and Hall, Publishers, 1874), p. 18.

Verse 40 And entered into the house of Zacharias and saluted Elisabeth. And it came to pass when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.This phenomenal event was construed by the principals who participated in it, as well as by the inspired author of this Gospel, as being due to the fact of John the Baptist’s being filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb, and a perception of the blessed Spirit with John of the presence of the Son of God in the virgin’s womb. The Spirit also inspired the following words of Elizabeth.

Verse 42 And she lifted up her voice with a loud cry, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.One may only be astounded at the declaration to the effect that “Elizabeth’s exclamation was not unlike uncontrollable ecstatic behavior”![31] Indeed! Indeed! Where is there any evidence of any such thing as that? The loud cry of Elizabeth could have been nothing else except a shout of joy; and, as for the notion that her actions were uncontrollable, such a view is refuted by the ordered logic of the intelligible words spoken by her on that occasion. This greeting from Elizabeth did not follow Mary’s revelation of her own conception, but preceded it, Elizabeth having become aware of it through the direct revelation of the Holy Spirit. Her words, therefore, were of monumental encouragement to the virgin who would at once have accepted Elizabeth’s salutation as a divine confirmation of all that the angel Gabriel had foretold. ENDNOTE: [31] Anthony Lee Ash, op. cit., p. 41.

Verse 43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come unto me?The New Testament does not relate just how Elizabeth had arrived at the conclusion that Mary would be the mother of the Messiah; but the active voice of prophecy in Zacharias, as well as her own inspiration, had left no doubt whatever of the fact. Her words in this verse recognized Jesus as God within a short while after his conception.

Verse 44 For behold, when the voice of thy salutation came into mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.Thus, Elizabeth interpreted that leaping of the unborn child as proof that the Saviour was already conceived in the virgin’s womb; and this was spoken by Elizabeth as proving the implications of what she had just said in the previous verse. At the age of six months, there would already have been a number of “quickenings” by the unborn son; but there was something extraordinary about what happened when Mary appeared and greeted Elizabeth.

Verse 45 And blessed is she that believed; for there shall be a fulfillment of the things which have been spoken to her from the Lord.Elizabeth’s use of the word “Lord” here and in Luke 1:43 is significant. There it means “Messiah,” and here it means the Father in heaven. This testifies at once to the oneness of God and Christ, and to the fact of their being two different persons; hence, there can be no valid ground here for denominating Mary as the “Mother of God.” THE Mary’s marvelous response recorded in the next ten verses is also called “The Virgin’s Hymn.” For nearly fourteen centuries it has been used in the public liturgies of Christendom. We find it first in the office of Lauds in the rule of St. Caesarius of Aries (A.D. 507).[32]The fact of this response from Mary having been written in poetic form is no evidence whatever that Luke was copying some document in this section. The Psalms of David are also poetry; and Mary the descendent of David proved in these lines that she was indeed a worthy member of the house of David. Only a male chauvinist could deny that this highly favored daughter of David’s line could have composed such a beautiful poem, relating it to Luke in her own words. ENDNOTE: [32] H. D. M. Spence, op. cit., p. 10.

Verse 46 And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my Spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. For he hath looked upon the low estate of his handmaid: For behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.This is the first of four divisions of the . It details the joy, reverence, and gratitude of a person, counted by the world as lowly, and who refers to herself as a slave. It utters praise to God for what he has done for her. The privilege which came to Mary dominates the thought.

The prophecy that all generations should call her “blessed” was a true one, and it shows that she fully realized the world-shaking import of what God was doing through her. It is inconceivable that any young girl, pregnant through some illicit relationship, could ever have thought any such thoughts as these, much less have composed an eternal poem to express them.

Verse 49 For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; And holy is his name. And his mercy is unto generations and generations on them that fear him.These lines extol the power, the holiness, and the mercy of God, three of the great attributes of the Almighty. The words seem to reach a climax with reference to God’s mercy. A particular aspect of that mercy was seen, and perhaps had already been realized by Mary, in the patient and understanding love of the incomparable Joseph who dared the scorn of all the world to maintain his patient place at the side of his beloved Mary. This was mentioned by Matthew who recorded the story from the standpoint of Joseph; and, although Luke does not mention Joseph, approaching the narrative from another standpoint, the thought of Joseph surfaces in this song.

Verse 51 He hath showed strength with his arm; He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their heart. He hath put down princes from their thrones, And hath exalted them of low degree. The hungry he hath filled with good things; And the rich he hath sent empty away.Barclay found in this gracious hymn the “dynamite” of the Christian religion which has wrought in the world a triple revolution: He scatters the proud … this is a moral revolution. … He cast down the mighty; he exalts the humble. This is a social revolution. … He has filled those who are hungry … those who are rich he hath sent empty away. This is an economic revolution.[33]Thus, there is in this beautiful song a prophetic discerning of the immense consequences of the religion of Christ upon the earth. ENDNOTE: [33] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 10.

Verse 54 He hath given help to Israel his servant, That he might remember mercy (As he spake unto our fathers) toward Abraham and his seed for ever.In the first division of this matchless hymn, there was a stanza regarding the blessing and privilege that had come to Mary herself; in the second there was uttered a praise of the power, holiness, and mercy of God; in the third, there was prophesied the world consequences of the faith of Jesus Christ; and in this final stanza there was a connecting of the old and new covenants, a glimpse of the true Israel, the church, and the relation of all the redeemed to the old institution as the true spiritual seed of Abraham. It may well be believed that the young girl who spoke these immortal lines in reality did not possess any complete knowledge of all their total meaning, any more than the other prophets before her (1 Peter 1:10-12); but it was given her to speak this hymn, even as it was given her to bear the flesh of the Son of the Most High!

Verse 56 And Mary abode with her about three months, and returned unto her house.It is idle to speculate on whether or not she remained until John the Baptist was born, for there is nothing in the word of God that settles the question. THE BIRTH OF JOHN THE BAPTISTLuke’s mention of Mary’s departure before introducing the event of John’s birth seems to suggest that Mary was not any longer present.

Verse 57 Now Elisabeth’s time was fulfilled that she should be delivered; and she brought forth a son.Thus was fulfilled the word of God through Gabriel to Zacharias.

Verse 58 And her neighbors and her kinsfolk heard that the Lord had magnified his mercy toward her; and they rejoiced with her.This verse seems to say that many, even of the relatives, did not know of the approaching event of this birth, but they heard the glad news after it happened. The devout community celebrated it by acknowledging the hand of the Lord in such an occurrence and by general rejoicing.

Verse 59 And it came to pass on the eighth day, that they came to circumcise the child; and they would have called him Zacharias, after the name of his father.This is an authentic glimpse of a small community where the officious neighbors took a ready hand in naming someone else’s child. Of course, they meant well! It was customary to name a male child upon the occasion of his being circumcised.

Verse 60 And his mother answered and said, Not so; but he shall be called John.This indicates that Zacharias had already informed Elizabeth of the name bestowed by the angel Gabriel. Of course, this, like all other communications from Zacharias during that period, would have been through written communication. Someone has remarked that Zacharias was “a quiet father” prior to John’s birth! The officiousness of the neighbors is seen in their appealing over the mother’s wishes to Zacharias himself.

Verse 61 And they said unto her, There is none of thy kindred that is called by this name.The heavy hand of tradition was in evidence here; and, of all the people who ever lived, the Jews seem to have had the greatest regard for such things.

Verse 62 And they made signs to his father, what he would have him called.This plainly indicates the deafness of Zacharias; because, if he had been able to hear, there would have been no reason at all to “make signs.”

Verse 63 And he asked for a writing tablet, and wrote, saying, His name is John. And they marvelled all.Writing tablet … “The tablets in use generally at the time were usually made of wood, covered with a thin coating of wax."[34] Writing on such a tablet was done with a small iron stylus. By this strong statement of the neighbors’ efforts to name the child, Zacharias affirmed the word of the angel of God as truth; and his impediment was quickly removed. ENDNOTE: [34] H. D. M. Spence, op. cit., p. 11.

Verse 64 And his mouth was opened immediately, and his tongue loosed, and he spake, blessing God.True to the word borne through Gabriel, Zacharias’ handicap lasted only until the son had come, as promised, and the fact of his name had been determined. The prophet Zacharias used his first words to bless the name of God and to extol his praise.

Verse 65 And fear came on all that dwelt around about them: and all these sayings were noised abroad throughout all the hill country of Judea.Fear … was a natural result of such providential intervention as had been evidenced, not only in the birth, but in the naming of John. Also, Luke is careful to point out, as distinguished from the affairs of Mary, that the events relative to this birth received the widest publicity and comment throughout the whole area. There were none who could say they had not heard of such a thing.

Verse 66 And all that heard them laid them up in their hearts, saying, What then shall this child be? For the hand of the Lord was with him.This outlines the great expectations which many had with regard to a child providentially born to aged parents, and who might indeed have become an orphan at quite an early age. God, however, was more than able to take care of this one whom God has chosen as herald of the Redeemer. For the hand of the Lord was with him … This verse is a projection of the attitude in that community as it extended for years after the events narrated. Along withLuke 1:80, and Luke 2:52, this is a typically Lukan style. This clause is an anthropomorphic metaphor such as abounds in the Old Testament. The “feet” of God (Exodus 24:10), the “finger” of God (Exodus 31:18), the “eyes” of God (Deuteronomy 11:12), the “ears” of God (Numbers 11:18), and the “hand” of God (Exodus 9:3) are Old Testament examples of the same metaphor. Such imagery was used to aid human thinking with regard to HIM who is actually a Spirit (John 4:24). “Lord” is the word Luke here used of the Almighty, and the same word was used of Jesus even before he was born (Luke 1:43); thus this Gospel author joined apostles (John 1:1) and other sacred authors in ascribing absolute deity to Jesus Christ our Lord.

Verse 67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying.Prophesied … This word, as used in the New Testament, is not limited in meaning to the mere prediction of future events. Paul, a close friend of Luke, said, “He that prophesieth speaketh unto men edification, exhortation, and consolation” (1 Corinthians 14:3). Of course, the foretelling of the future is also part of the meaning. Filled with the Holy Spirit … The inspiration and infallible accuracy of what Zacharias said in this circumstance is affirmed by such a declaration as this. THE The twelve verses recording Zacharias’ words could be briefly summarized as a thanksgiving for the arrival of the times of the Messiah. It was God’s blessing and mercy manifested by his fulfilling at last the ancient prophecies of the Old Testament, his breaking the centuries of silence after Malachi, and his establishing the promised reality of the covenant with Abraham that dominated the major part of Zacharias’ prophecy. Not until the last four verses did he speak of his precious son and the share he would have in such a glorious fulfillment of God’s word. Like the Magnificat, this portion of Luke has been used extensively in the liturgies of the historical church; like the Virgin’s Hymn, this too was first adopted for liturgical use by St. Caesarius of Arles in the sixth century.

Verse 68 Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel; For he hath visited and wrought redemption for his people. And hath raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David.Here Zacharias was speaking, not of his own son John, but of Jesus the Christ. The use of the past tense, at a time when Jesus had not yet been born, is prophetic, a tense peculiar to the Holy Scriptures, in which future events are announced in the past tense, implying the certainty of fulfillment. What God promises is as certain as if it had already happened. Horn of salvation … This metaphor was one which, to the Israelites, suggested the very greatest strength. Such men as Abraham and Moses were said to be “horns” of Israel.[35]In the house of his servant David … This, like the words of the angel (Luke 1:32), shows that Mary was a descendent of David. ENDNOTE: [35] Ibid., p. 12.

Verse 70 (As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets that have been of old), Salvation from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us.His holy prophets … Beginning with Genesis 3:15 and through the last words of the Old Testament, there are 333 prophecies regarding Jesus the Saviour; and fittingly enough this received emphasis by Zacharias. This holy priest had probably spent the previous months studying those very prophecies and coming to the conclusion that the time had arrived for God to fulfill them all. Salvation from our enemies … It is too much to suppose that Zacharias knew the full meaning of this; for like the majority of his contemporaries, he might fully have expected that God would chase out the Romans and restore the earthly kingdom. The true enemies, of which God spake through him, however, were Satan and the sins which warred against the souls of men. The bondage from which Israel most required to be delivered was the servitude of Satan, not political vassalage under the Romans. Yet, so very few of Israel were aware of this. As Godet expressed it: A carnal and malignant patriotism had taken possession of the people and their rulers, and the idea of a political deliverance had been substituted for that of a moral salvation.[36]Speaking under the power of God’s Spirit, Zacharias spoke truth beyond his full comprehension of it (1 Peter 1:10-12). ENDNOTE: [36] Ibid.

Verse 72 To show mercy towards our fathers, And to remember his holy covenant; The oath which he sware to Abraham our father.These words show the connection between the old and the new covenants. The covenant with Abraham had envisioned the blessing of “all the families of the earth” through the glorious Seed (singular) which is Christ (Genesis 12:1-3). Moreover, God had confirmed the covenant promise to Abraham with an oath (Genesis 22:16;Hebrews 6:13-15). Just as God’s promise to Abraham of a son was delayed of fulfillment until it seemed no longer possible, so also the establishment of Messiah’s kingdom had been held in abeyance for centuries, the last voice of prophecy having expired with Malachi; but wow all was to be fulfilled. As to who were, and who were not, true sons of Abraham and thus entitled to the promise, there was widespread misunderstanding. The materialistic, secular priests, and a majority of the people, thought that mere fleshly descent from Abraham was all that mattered; but, of course, it was only to the “spiritual seed,” the people of like faith and character with Abraham, that the promise really pertained. It was the great mission of John the Baptist to enlighten Israel on this very point.

Verse 74 To grant unto us that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies should serve him without fear, In holiness and righteousness before him all our days.Zacharias here foretold the character of the coming kingdom as one in which Israel would be delivered from enemies and continue in the service of God with holiness and righteousness without fear. That he might have thought, in his own heart, that this had reference to the restoration of the secular kingdom is a possibility; but the fidelity of his words to the promptings of the Holy Spirit was such that the more extended meaning as it pertains to the universal church of all ages is clearly evident; and, in the remaining words of his message, there appears the glorious promise of salvation for the Gentiles.

Verse 76 Yea, and thou, child, shall be called the prophet of the Most High: For thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to make ready his ways.Only the inspiration of the Holy Spirit could have prompted the father of this child of such long hopes and prayers to have deferred any mention of him until near the end of the prophecy. One is reminded of the cows that went lowing away from their calves (1 Samuel 6:7-12). Most High … See under Luke 1:32. Go before the face of the Lord … These words are an elaboration of the prophecy in Malachi 4:5-6. The imagery is that of a herald going before a king to prepare the way for a royal visitor. Here too the subordination of John, the child of hope, to the royal dignity of the yet unborn Christ (by these words of Zacharias) is contrary to all human behavior and must be attributed solely to the inspiration of the prophet Zacharias by the Holy Spirit. To make ready his ways … The principal burden upon John was to enlighten Israel with regard to the fundamental truth with regard to just who were really the sons of Abraham.

Verse 77 To give knowledge of salvation unto his people in the remission of their sins, Because of the tender mercy of our God, Whereby the dayspring from on high shall visit us.In the remission of their sins … This is the salvation Jesus came to provide. In this sector only is man powerless to do anything for himself. It is forgiveness that the soul cries for, and it is available nowhere except in Jesus Christ the Saviour. When either churches or individuals lose sight of this, total moral blindness is the result. It is not the standard of living, nor political freedom, nor rights, nor economic parity - or anything else, which distinguishes the salvation of Christ - “it is the forgiveness of sins.” This focuses attention upon the great prophecy of Jer 31:31 ff, in which forgiveness of sins is the distinctive mark of the new covenant.

The term here rendered forgiveness is found eight times in the Lukan writings, and only seven times in the rest of the New Testament.[37]Dayspring from on high … Neither the English Revised Version (1885) nor the RSV has properly translated this phrase; as Summers noted: The RSV is not a translation, but a smooth paraphrase of a Greek expression which literally translated would be, “in which shall shine upon us the light rising from on high."[38]Thus again we have a close correspondence with the Gospel of John which also identified Jesus as “the true Light lighting every man, coming into this world” (John 1:9). In view of the actual meaning, “Dayspring from on High” (as in the KJV) is the best rendition. Christ is indeed the Light of the world; and it was appropriate that he should thus have been identified by the very first prophet to speak after the promise of Malachi (Malachi 4:2) that “the Sun of righteousness” should arise “with healing in his wings.” There is a strong resemblance here to 2 Peter 1:19, in which Christ is compared to a lamp shining in a squalid room. Shall visit us … should in all probability be rendered “hath visited us,” as in many ancient authorities; but, since prophetic tense refers to future events, no violence to the true meaning was done. It is fully the truth, stated either way. [37] Anthony Lee Ash, op. cit., p. 50. [38] Ray Summers, op. cit., p. 35.

Verse 79 To shine upon them that sit in darkness and the shadow of death; To guide our feet into the way of peace.Darkness and the shadow of death … Here there is a certain reference to salvation for the Gentiles, as more pointedly stated by Matthew, who explained Jesus’ residence in Capernaum as a fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah (Isaiah 9:1-2), as follows: The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali. Toward the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles. The people that sat in darkness Saw a great light, And to them that sat in the region and shadow of death To them did light spring up. Zacharias’ words in this verse correspond perfectly with the prophecy of Isaiah. To guide our feet into the way of peace … The word “peace” is like “forgiveness” in Luke’s writings, where it occurs nineteen times, twelve times in this Gospel, and occurring only nine times in the rest of the New Testament. The type of peace referred to is peace with God through the forgiveness of sins and a restoration of fellowship with the Creator.

Verse 80 And the child grew and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel.Like a similar statement in Luke 2:52, this compresses thirty years of John’s life into one sentence. A comparison of the two reveals some significant differences, there being no hint here that John increased in favor “with men.” The strong, rugged, ascetic character of the herald contrasts with the loving, sociable nature of the Sun of Righteousness. The deserts … refers to the desolate and forbidding wastelands south of Jericho and along by the Dead Sea. The occasion of his dwelling in such places could have come about through the death of his parents, who were in their old age when he was born; but this is not stated. This region was not inhabited. “The Qumran covenanters (had) established their headquarters in this general area”[39] as proved by the Dead Sea Scrolls; but “any definite connection of the Baptist with the Qumranites is pure theory."[40] God certainly would not have brought John the Baptist into the world for his great work and then have turned his education over to such radical sects in the wilderness as the Essenes or the Qumranites! Besides this, any resemblances based upon the teachings are very superficial; and, as Ash said, “There are marked differences."[41][39] Merrill F. Unger, The Dead Sea Scrolls (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1957), p. 17. [40] Ibid., p. 18. [41] Anthony Lee Ash, op. cit., p. 51.

Questions by E.M. Zerr For Luke 11. To what writers does Luke refer? 2. How had these writings been received ? 3. Is Luke included in “ they” of 2d verse? 4. How had “ they” been qualified as writers? 5. What seemed good to Luke? 6. State his qualification. 7. To whom is this writing addressed ? 8. For what purpose was the document furnished him 9. In what days does he begin his narrative? 10. Who was Zacharias ? 11. Explain “ course of Abia” verse five. 12. State his wife’ s name. 13. Of what tribe was she? 14. State the tribe of Zacharias. 15. What is said of their lives? 16. Tell what restricted the size of their family. 17. What was the work of the priest? 18. At what place was this? 19. What were the people doing at the same time? 20. Who appeared to Zacharias at this time ? 21. How was he affected? 22. For what had he prayed ? 23. State the promise made to him here. 24. What specification was given him? 25. Tell what this birth would cause. 26. In whose sight will he be great? 27. State his personal habits. 28. With what will he be filled? 29. What will he do for many children of Israel? 30. Who is “ him” in 17th verse? 31. For what purpose will he go forth ? 32. What preparation was he to make? 33. Who was telling all this to Zacharias? 34. Why did he express doubt to the angel? 35. Tell the sign to be put on him, 36. How long was it to continue? 37. Why did the people marvel? 38. When did he return home? 39. Why did his wife hide herself? 40. How did she comment on her condition? 41. To whom was Gabriel sent again? 42. Where did she live? 43. What was she to Joseph? 44. Of what lineage was she? 45. How was Mary to stand among women? 46. Of whom was she to be favored? 47. How did this greeting affect her? 48. With what fact did he calm her? 49. State the promise he made her. 50. Aud state the instruction about the name. 51. How will he be called? 52. What will be given him ? 53. Tell of his authority. 54. Why did this all seem impossible to Mary ? 55. How was this difficulty to be met? 56. Why was the child to be called the Son of God? 57. What other information was given Mary? 58. How great is God’ s power? 59. Describe Mary’ s spirit of resignation. 60. To what country did she then go? 61. Into whose house did she then enter? 62. What caused the quickening within Elizabeth ? 63. Tell what filled her at this time. 64. On what subject did this cause her to speak ? 65. Why did she seem to feel honored? 66. What assuring word did she give Mary ? 67. Who spoke next? 68. What was being magnified? 69. In what did she find rejoicing? 70. What social position did she remember? 71. Tell the future honor she expected. 72. Where does she place the credit? 73. Who shall receive his mercy? 74. What had he done to the proud ? 75. And to the humble? 76. What reversal hath God done to the rich and hungry? 77. Whom of the fathers had he remembered? 78. State the length of Mary’ s visit here. 79. At this time what took place? 80. Who were led to rejoice? 81. What rite was observed the 8th day? 82. Tell what they called him and why. 83. Who objected? 84. What was their reasoning about it? 85. Who settled the dispute ? 86. Why did he call for writing material? 87. At what did they marvel? 88. What happened to Zacharias now? 89. How did he show appreciation? 90. State the general effect of this circumstance. 91. What hand was said to be with the child ? 92. Who became inspired at this time? 93. What had God done for his people ? 94. Of what house was this child? 95. Who had spoken of all this? 96. State the object of it. 97. What was to be remembered ? 98. The child was to be called what? 99. Where was he to go? 100. To give what to the people? 101. What was to be remitted ? 102. This was through what? 103. What had visited the earth? 104. State who were to have light. 105. How did the child progress? 106. Where did he dwell? 107. For how long was it to be?

Luke 1:1

1 I have consulted a great number of works of reference, such as histories, Bible Dictionaries, encyclopedias, lexicons and critical concordances; also a number of commentaries, and all agree that Luke is the author of the book we are now studying. For the sake of saving space, I do not think _it necessary to list all of these works, in view of the unity in their statements making the conclusion well founded. Many of them state also that Luke was not a born Jew, and that he was a doctor of medicine. He was not an apostle but was inspired to write a record of the Gospel.

Luke 1:2

2 Luke was not an eyewitness of the things on which he writes, but they were told him by those who were. In copying down the things told him he would be qualified by inspiration, even as the Spirit guaranteed the accuracy of the memory of the apostles which was promised by Jesus before he left them (John 14:26).

Luke 1:3

3 So thorough was the report these witnesses gave Luke that he says it caused him to have perfect (“exact” –Thayer) understanding of the whole story. The book of Luke was addressed to Theophilus who was an outstanding, educated Christian, according to the Bible Dictionaries. Being addressed to one individual does not affect its importance for others, any more than does the fact that Paul wrote four of his epistles to individuals do so.

Luke 1:4

4 The special purpose Luke had in writing to this man was that he might be assured of the instructions he had already received.

Luke 1:5

5 Luke, like Matthew, begins his record at the time just prior to the birth of Jesus. However, unlike Matthew, he first gives us the history concerning the parentage of John the Baptist. It was in the days of Herod (The Great) who was king of- Judea. Course of Abia is explained at 1 Chronicles 24 in volume 2 of the Old Testament Commentary. All priests had to be descendants of Aaron but that was not required of their wives, hence Luke gives us the added information that Elizabeth was also from Aaron.

Luke 1:6

6 This couple lived up to all requirements of the law, which proves that it was not physically impossible to do so as some teach. Paul was another who did this according to Philippians 3:6.

Luke 1:7

7 They had no child, because that Elizabeth was barren. This is a significant statement that contrasts with the practice of some professed Christians who are childless from choice. Such people treat with contempt the first object of marriage by practicing birth control. Not only was Elizabeth barren, but she and her husband were in advanced age as were Abraham and Sarah (Genesis 11:30; Genesis 17:17), yet they did not give up hope (verse 13).

Luke 1:8

8 Order of his course. (See the comments at verse 5).

Luke 1:9

9 This custom of the priest’s office is described in Exodus 30:7-10.

Luke 1:10

0 The whole multitude were obeying Leviticus 16:17.

Luke 1:11

1 The altar of incense was in the first holy room of the temple, and incense was burned on it daily. Right side; on Zacharias’s right hand as he stood facing the altar in the service.

Luke 1:12

2 The people were not permitted to accompany the priest in this place (verse 10), hence the appearance of an angel there caused Zacharias to be disturbed.

Luke 1:13

3 Prayer is heard and bear thee a son are phrases that are related; he had been praying for a son. This was one thing that caused Luke to say this couple was righteous. Had they been opposed to children and tried to avoid having them, they would not have been righteous. The promise of a son included instructions for his name.

Luke 1:14

4 Not only was Zacharias to rejoice over this son, but many others would have reason to be glad for his birth because of the great work he was to do in preparing a people for the king of heaven.

Luke 1:15

5 Great in the sight of the Lord whether the world admired him or not. Drink neither wine nor strong drink was a qualification of a Nazarite under the law (Numbers 6:1-4). During his entire life he was to be under the guidance of the Spirit.

Luke 1:16

6 This verse shows the fulfillment of Mal 4:6.

Luke 1:17

7 Elias (Elijah) was a powerful prophet in the Old Testament, and John was to be given a spirit of power like his. Turn the hearts of the fathers, etc., refers to the same as at verse 16. A people prepared for the Lord means the people whom John baptized in preparing a people for Christ.

Luke 1:18

8 The promise of a child under the conditions seemed so nearly impossible that Zacharias overlooked the evidence of the miracle already before him, that of the presence of an angel in that exclusive spot.

Luke 1:19

9 This was not merely an angel, but was one of the two who only are named in the Bible. This one was from the immediate presence of God where he usually stood, ready to do the bidding of the occasions as they came up.

Luke 1:20

0 Zacharias was to receive a sign that would be both an evidence and a mild punishment, because he believed not the words. This dumbness that was to come at once would start the evidence, and when it was completed it would strengthen the meaning.

Luke 1:21

1 The people waited according to the law, but Zacharias was detained longer than the regular service usually required which caused them to wonder.

Luke 1:22

2 A vision is defined as something that appears to one either while awake or asleep. As Zacharias had become speechless since he entered the temple, the people realized that something supernatural had occurred.

Luke 1:23

3 Days of Ms ministration were accomplished. The priests took turns in the service which is explained in the comments at 1 Chronicles 24:6, volume 2 of the Old Testament Commentary.

Luke 1:24

4 Hid is from which Thayer defines, “to conceal on all sides or entirely, to hide,” and he explains his definition, “to keep one’s self at home.” It is the usual custom for expectant mothers to keep in retirement the last months of the period, but Elizabeth did the reverse. Nothing is said about her continuing the retirement after the five months, hence we would not think the other was done out of false modesty. A reasonable conclusion is that she was still under the feeling that it was “too good to be true,” and before telling the good news to her friends, she decided to await the five months which would be the time for life to be evident.

Luke 1:25

5 After the five months had shown that she was to become a mother, she then commented by saying (last word of the preceding verse) that it was the Lord who had dealt thus with her. In bestowing this upon Elizabeth she commented that it would take away her reproach. To be unable to bear children in those days was considered a reproach, and it is still so considered with those who respect the first commandment regarding the divine object of marriage.

Luke 1:26

6 Sixth month means the sixth since the conception by Elizabeth. The same angel who appeared to her at the first was sent on a similar mission to Nazareth.

Luke 1:27

7 A virgin is a person who has not had any relations with the opposite sex. The connection must show in each case whether the virgin is a male or female. Since this one was espoused (engaged) to a man we know it means a female. House is from OIKOS and Thayer defines it at this place, “stock, race, descendants of one,” which denotes that Joseph was a descendant of David.

Luke 1:28

8. Hail is a friendly greeting, indicating that some good news is about to be given to the person addressed. This was to be given to Mary as a special favor peculiar to women, and it was to be from the Lord.

Luke 1:29

9 Troubled means “agitated,” and it was caused by the unexpectedness of the situation, and she was wondering what it all meant.

Luke 1:30

0 Seeing the disturbed condition of Mary, the angel assured her there was nothing to fear, but that God had selected her as an object of His favor.

Luke 1:31

1 Womb is from GASTER, and this is the only place where it comes from that Greek word. Also, this is the only place in the Bible where a statement of conceiving is joined with the word womb; this is significant. Matthew 3:9 says that God could raise up children even from the stones. To promise Mary (a single girl) a son might have been taken to mean that God would give, her a son in some miraculous way independent of her own body. Hence it was necessary to tell this virgin that she was to conceive in her womb. The name of the son also was selected for her at this time.

Luke 1:32

2 Verses 28 and 30 contain all that the angel said by way of praise for Mary. After that he spoke of the greatness to be bestowed upon her son. San of the Highest is the same as calling him the Son of God. Throne of David means the throne which David (his great ancestor) had prophesied should be given him (Psalms 132:11).

Luke 1:33

3 House of Jacob is a phrase often used to mean the Jewish nation in general, and later referring to the people of God spiritually whether Jew or Gentile. The kingdom of this “son of David” and of Mary was to stand for ever. (See Daniel 2:44.)

Luke 1:34

4 I know not a man. This cannot mean that Mary had no male acquaintance, for she was even engaged to one. The word know is from GINOSKO, and Thayer says at this place the word means, “the carnal [sexual] connection of male and female.” Robinson says virtually the same thing, except that he gives it as his definition of the word at this place. Mary meant that she was not being intimate with any man, which she thought would be necessary to conceive in her womb. We are taught an important lesson in morals here. The fact of being engaged was as binding in Biblical times as the actual marriage as far as obligations towards each other were concerned, but it did not authorize any intimacies until the time of marriage.

Luke 1:35

5 The Holy Ghost (Spirit) is an invisible, though personal being, and that is why he could enter into and take charge of the womb of Mary without any conscious participation on her part. The germ of life necessary to fertilize that of the female was thus deposited in the proper place by this holy Being, sent directly from God and authorized to represent Him in this union. Therefore, the angel concluded, the person to be brought forth from this union was to be called the Son of God. This is the only instance in which God ever did a thing like this, and that is the reason Jesus is called the ONLY begotten Son of God. From the conception and ever afterward through the period of expectancy, the experience of Mary was like that of all mothers.

Luke 1:36

6 The Greek word for cousin has an indefinite meaning, and may apply to any relative not as near as brother or sister. Mary had not expressed any doubt of the miracle that the angel just promised. However, he supported the promise by reporting another one along the same line, that her cousin was already six months along in her expectancy, notwithstanding she was called barren.

Luke 1:37

7 This verse is the angel’s explanation of the two miracles of conception. God cannot do anything wrong, but nothing is impossible with Him because it is too hard.

Luke 1:38

8 This speech of resignation of Mary is one of the sweetest passages ever made. There is no sign of exultation over her special favor, but a meek submission as a handmaid, unto the word of the Lord. The angel delivered his message and departed.

Luke 1:39-40

0 It was a sweet and confidential meeting these happy women had with each other. This joy was mutual, but Mary’s evidence was only the word of the angel for as yet there was no physical evidence of her conception, while Elizabeth had that of the living child within her own body.

Luke 1:41

1 It is usual for an unborn babe at that period to manifest a movement of life, but this was a miraculous instance since it not merely moved but leaped. Besides, it occurred as an immediate result of the voice of Mary acting through the ears of Elizabeth. The explanation is in the closing sentence, Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost.

Luke 1:42

2 The entrance of the Spirit into Elizabeth inspired her so that the words she spoke from here through verse 45 are those of inspiration. The blessing pronounced on Mary was emphasized by the one upon the fruit of thy womb.

Luke 1:43

3 Mother of my Lord. Elizabeth could have known this only by having been filled with the Holy Ghost, for the angel said nothing about it as far as we are told.

Luke 1:44

4 An unborn babe is unconscious, so the physical movement of this one was a reaction to the effect produced in the mind of Elizabeth; it was for joy of hers that caused the stirring of the babe in her womb.

Luke 1:45

5 She that believed refers to Mary who had no physical evidence as yet. (See the comments at verses 39, 40.) Elizabeth then gave Mary an assurance of the fulfillment of the promises, and that was an expression of her inspired mind.

Luke 1:46

6 To magnify the Lord denotes a desire to “esteem highly,” not that any human being can contribute anything to the greatness of the Lord.

Luke 1:47

7 Mary is not making any technical distinction between her soul and her spirit. Her entire inner being was filled with praise for the greatness of the Lord.

Luke 1:48

8 Low estate refers to the humble station in life she had occupied; now she will receive the good esteem of all generations, but not that she would be worshiped.

Luke 1:49

9 Mary attributes her great favor to the One with a holy name.

Luke 1:50

0 The mercy will endure continuously to all who fear Him.

Luke 1:51

1 Since we know that Elizabeth was enabled by the Spirit to speak with supernatural wisdom, we may properly conclude Mary to have been doing the same thing.

Luke 1:52

2 He hath is general as to tense, and means that God always recognizes humility and rewards it with His favor, but deposes those who exalt themselves.

Luke 1:53

3 These statements are figurative in form, but teach the same principles as those in the preceding verses.

Luke 1:54

4 Holpen means helped Israel in remembrance or in view of his wonted mercy.

Luke 1:55

5 Abraham was the father of the Jewish race, and God had promised him an heir who should bless the world, which Mary was recalling to mind.

Luke 1:56

6 Mary visited with Elizabeth until the time for the birth of her son, then she returned to her own home in Nazareth in Galilee.

Luke 1:57

7 Elizabeth gave birth to a son at the usual time after conception.

Luke 1:58

8 Shewed great mercy refers to the former condition of barrenness that had been overcome. Rejoiced with her is an example of Rom 12:15.

Luke 1:59

9 The covenant with Abraham as well as the law of Moses required this rite (Genesis 17:12; Leviticus 12:2-3). The law did not specify the age when the child should be named, but custom had established the time of circumcision for it. It happens frequently even today that people outside the family will presume to name the new baby. It was understandable why they would suggest the name of his father as that had long been another custom.

Luke 1:60

0 Elizabeth did not resent their wanting to pick a name for her baby, only they did not have the right one.

Luke 1:61

1 These people even argued the question which reminds us of 1 Peter 4:15.

Luke 1:62

2 It is strange that the father had not been consulted in the first place, instead of waiting until they wanted him to decide a dispute. Made signs means they beckoned by a nod or something similar what they wanted him to do.

Luke 1:63

3 Zacharias had been dumb since the appearance of Gabriel (verse 20), hence his calling for a writing table which means a tablet. They marveled because Zacharias said the babe’s name is John, indicating that the matter had been previously decided, which it had been by the angel (verse 13).

Luke 1:64

4 Mouth was opened immediately fulfills verse 20. He had two reasons for praising God; the birth of a son and the recovery of his speech.

Luke 1:65

5 Fear means a general feeling of respectful consideration for the wonderful things that had occurred. These sayings or happenings were reported extensively all through the country of Judea.

Luke 1:66

6 Laid them up in their hearts denotes that they kept them in mind. What manner of child shall this be! This remark was caused by the unusual circumstances connected with his conception and birth.

Luke 1:67

7 Being filled with the Holy Ghost made Zacharias’ prophecies inspired.

Luke 1:68

8 This was said in view of the work of John in reforming the Jewish people, preparing them for the work of Christ (See Malachi 4:6).

Luke 1:69

9 This whole speech of Zacharias was on a theme that combined the work of John and Christ, with the weight of, it in favor of the latter. This priest was happy to be the father of the forerunner of the Saviour of his people. Horn of salvation refers to the power that Christ would have to be able to save the people.

Luke 1:70

0 Christ had been foretold by the prophets through Old Testament times, in places toa numerous to mention at this place.

Luke 1:71

1 saved from our enemies has reference to the suffering the Jews were undergoing from the heathen powers, as well as from the influences of sin.

Luke 1:72

2 This holy covenant pertains to the promise of Christ.

Luke 1:73

3 This oath to Abraham is recorded in Genesis 12:3; Genesis 18:18; Genesis 22:18.

Luke 1:74

4 This is the same in meaning as verse 71.

Luke 1:75

5 Zacharias places salvation on condition of lifelong righteousness.

Luke 1:76

6 Thou, child, has specific reference to his own son who had just been born. Called the prophet was done by Jesus in Matthew 11:9. Go before . . . to prepare his ways pertains to the work of John in preparing a people for Christ.

Luke 1:77

7 Knowledge of salvation means to let the people know what would be necessary for salvation. It was to be the remission of sins upon repentance and baptism (Matthew 3:11). This was preached by Jesus also (Mark 1:15).

Luke 1:78

8 Day spring is a comparison of the coming of Jesus into the world with the sunrising that ushers in a new day for the inhabitants of the earth.-

Luke 1:79

9 Light and darkness are figurative terms to represent truth and error. The teaching of Jesus was to show mankind the way of peace.

Luke 1:80

0 This child refers to the babe John, whose birth had occasioned this interesting speech of Zacharias. As the child grew he lived in the deserts. That was appropriate since he was to do his work there, when the time came for him to appear among the people of Israel as the forerunner of Christ.