article8

§2 The Births of John the Baptist and Jesus Foretold (Luke 1:5–56)

One of the problems in comparing the Synoptic Gospels is accounting for the distinctive features of the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke. On the one hand, Matthew mentions an angelic announcement to Joseph (1:20), the Magi (2:1), a star (2:2), the flight to Egypt (2:13–14), and the slaughter of the infants (2:16). Luke’s account contains none of these items. Moreover, only Matthew cites Isa. 7:14 (see 1:23), Mic. 5:2 (see 2:6), Hos. 11:1 (see 2:15), and Jer. 31:15 (see 2:18) as fulfilled in Jesus’ birth. On the other hand, only Luke mentions the announcement and birth of John the Baptist (1:13, 57), an angelic announcement to Mary (1:26–33), a meeting between Mary and Elizabeth (1:39–40), a census of Caesar Augustus requiring every male to return to his own home city (2:1–4), the birth in the manger (2:6–7), and the visit of the shepherds (2:8–20). Moreover, only Luke provides us with the eloquent canticles and speeches uttered by some of the major figures in his infancy narrative (the Magnificat, 1:46–55; the Benedictus, 1:68–79; the Angelic Anthem, 2:13–14; and the Nunc Dimittis, 2:28–32).

Nevertheless, there are numerous significant points of contact between the Matthean and Lucan accounts. Jesus’ birth is during the reign of Herod the Great (Luke 1:5; Matt. 2:1); Mary is only engaged to Joseph (Luke 1:27, 34; 2:5; Matt. 1:18); Joseph is a descendant of David (Luke 1:27; 2:4; Matt. 1:16, 20); an angel announces Jesus’ coming birth (Luke 1:28–31; Matt. 1:20–21); the conception of Jesus is through the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35; Matt. 1:18, 20); the name “Jesus” is assigned by heaven (Luke 1:31; Matt. 1:21); Jesus is to be the “Savior” (Luke 2:11; Matt. 1:21); Jesus is born at Bethlehem (Luke 2:4–7; Matt. 2:1); and Jesus and family settle in Nazareth of Galilee (Luke 2:39, 51; Matt. 2:22–23). (For further discussion see Fitzmyer, pp. 304–21.)

One wonders how to account for all of the similarities and differences in the Lucan and Matthean infancy narratives. The numerous parallels make it unlikely that the Matthean and Lucan traditions originated separately, while in light of the many differences it is hard to see how they derive from a common literary source. Furthermore, the traditional explanation that the Matthean account goes back to Joseph, while the Lucan account goes back to Mary, is not very realistic (see Tiede, p. 47). After all, surely Joseph and Mary related to one another their experiences and so, years later, their accounts would probably be quite similar. The explanation, therefore, must lie elsewhere. I offer the following tentative suggestion: Eventually the church took an active interest in the details of Jesus’ birth and early life. Prompted by a conviction that surely a life as important as this one would have had an unusual or at least a theologically significant beginning, early Christians became more interested in learning about Jesus’ birth and early life. What details were known, or could be remembered, came to be related to various OT passages which the early church understood in a messianic sense. Although the distinct traditions that eventually would be written down in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke held many things in common (as listed above), there were several distinctive features. To these features early Christian interpretations (based on the OT, but anecdotal in nature) attached themselves. For Matthew, certain items were selected and related to particular OT passages (as mentioned above). For Luke, however, this OT/Christian interpretation took shape primarily in terms of the various canticles found in chaps. 1–2. All of this is not to say, however, that Luke (or Matthew, for that matter) fabricated his infancy stories. That he took an active editorial hand in their presentation is beyond all reasonable doubt. But it is also very likely that these stories were part of the tradition that had been “handed down … by those who from the first were eyewitnesses” (Luke 1:2).

Another distinctive feature of Luke’s account is the parallelism between the births of John and Jesus. For both sets of parents the conception of a child was unexpected: Elizabeth was old and barren (1:7), and Joseph and Mary were not yet married (1:26–27). The angel Gabriel appears to one parent of each child (to Zechariah, 1:11–19; to Mary, 1:26–38). Both future parents are “troubled” (Zechariah, 1:12; Mary, 1:29). Both are told not to fear (Zechariah, 1:13; Mary, 1:30). Both are promised a son (Zechariah, 1:13; Mary, 1:31). Both are given the names for their unborn sons (Zechariah, 1:13; Mary, 1:31). Both sons will be “great” (Zechariah, 1:15; Mary, 1:32). Both parents ask, “How?” (Zechariah, 1:18; Mary, 1:34). Both are given signs (Zechariah, 1:20; Mary, 1:36). There is joy over the birth of each son (John, 1:58; Jesus, 2:15–18). Following John’s circumcision, neighbors react in fear, sensing God at work (1:59–66). Following Jesus’ circumcision, the righteous Simeon and Anna recognize that in Jesus God was at work (2:21–38). On both occasions canticles are sung (because of John, the Benedictus, 1:68–79; because of Jesus, the Nunc Dimittis, 2:29–32). Finally, Luke tells us of both young sons: “The child grew and became strong …” (of John, 1:80; of Jesus, 2:40).

These parallels suggest that Luke wishes the reader to recognize at least three things: First, John and Jesus are “twin agents of God’s salvation” (Fitzmyer, p. 315). Although other characters play a role in God’s plan of redemption, John and Jesus are unquestionably the major figures. Second, in every respect of his life, as well as his later ministry, John is Jesus’ forerunner, even in his conception and birth. Third, in every respect Jesus is superior to John. John’s birth is certainly unusual, but Jesus’ birth is without equal. John will be great before the Lord (1:15), but Jesus will himself be called Lord (2:11). Whereas Zechariah’s question to Gabriel brings muteness (a punitive sign), when Mary asks Gabriel how these things could be, no punitive action is taken—indeed, instead of a mute testimony, she breaks forth in song (the Magnificat, 1:46–55).

1:5–25 / In the opening paragraph of his account of the birth of John the Baptist (1:5–7) Luke tells his readers three things about the parents of John. First, he emphasizes that both parents were of priestly descent. Zechariah his father was a priest of the division of Abijah (see note below), while his mother Elizabeth was from the family of Aaron, the brother of Moses and Israel’s first priest. This priestly heritage is significant since it relates John to the religious history of Israel, a history which reaches its climax in the appearance of Jesus. Furthermore, just as a priest functions as an intermediary between God and Israel, so John the Baptist will call Israel back to God in preparation for Messiah (see commentary on 2:11). Second, Luke tells us that John’s parents were upright in the sight of God, observing all the Lord’s commandments and regulations blamelessly (v. 6). Not only do their faithful and righteous lives qualify them for their role, but it removes any question of sin or guilt that Elizabeth’s barrenness might have implied. Third, Luke reports that they had no children and now both parents were very old (v. 7). Childlessness was considered a terrible misfortune and was often considered a disgrace and perhaps even a judgment of God. Elizabeth’s predicament is no doubt meant to recall the similar problem of some of the famous women in the OT, such as Sarah (Gen. 16:1), Rebekah (Gen. 25:21), Rachel (Gen. 30:1), the mother of Samson (Judges 13:2), and Hannah (1 Samuel 1–2). Also, like Sarah, Elizabeth was beyond childbearing age.

In the next paragraphs (vv. 8–17) Luke reports the announcement of the angel Gabriel to Zechariah that his wife Elizabeth will bear … a son who is to be named John (v. 13). The angel further tells Zechariah that his son will be a cause of great rejoicing (v. 14), since he signals the beginning of God’s redemptive work. He then summarizes the key features of his future character and ministry. As a Nazirite (see note below) he will not take wine or other fermented drink but will be filled with the Holy Spirit (v. 15). Like Elijah (see Mal. 4:5–6), many of the people of Israel he will bring back to the Lord (v. 16).… And he will go on before the Lord (see Mal. 2:6; Sir. 48:10) … to make ready a people prepared for the Lord (v. 17).

Like other skeptical husbands (such as Abraham, Gen. 15:8), Zechariah wants a sign as proof for this startling announcement (see also Judges 6:37–40 where Gideon requests a sign), as if the appearance of the angel were insufficient. Because Zechariah did not believe the words of the angel he remains mute until the promise is fulfilled (v. 20). Zechariah had asked for a sign, and for his sign he became mute and, in light of v. 62, apparently deaf as well. Because of his delay in coming out of the temple (v. 21) and because of his muteness (and possibly because of the look on his face), the people outside the temple awaiting his blessing (see Num. 6:24–26) conclude that he had seen a vision in the temple (v. 22). Such a conclusion is not surprising when one remembers that the best known account of a prophetic vision taking place in the temple was that of Isaiah (Isa. 6:1–5; see also Ezek. 10:3–19).

As the angel had announced, Elizabeth became pregnant (v. 24). Luke’s reference to her remaining secluded for five months (v. 24) anticipates Mary’s visit when Elizabeth was in her sixth month of pregnancy (vv. 36–40). Elizabeth’s gratitude, expressed in v. 25, The Lord has done this for me.… He has shown his favor and taken away my disgrace, echoes the statement of Rachel, following the birth of Joseph: “God has taken away my reproach” (Gen. 30:23, NASB; see also Gen. 21:6; Isa. 4:1). Although the conception and birth of John the Baptist were indeed amazing, if not miraculous, they will be overshadowed by the announcement to Mary that follows.

1:26–38 / In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee (v. 26). With the second sending of Gabriel a similar sequence of events begins to unfold. Only this time, it is the announcement of the birth of the Savior himself, the one before whom John is to go. (On the parallels between the announcements of the births of John and Jesus see Tiede, pp. 45–46.) It is significant that Joseph is a descendant of David (v. 27), for that ancestry qualifies Jesus for his messianic role and makes what Gabriel says in vv. 32–33 possible. Mary is told that she will have a son and that she is to give him the name Jesus (v. 31, a name which originally meant, “Lord, help!” but had come to be understood as meaning “salvation”; see Matt. 1:21). What Gabriel says in the next two verses echoes the great Davidic covenant of 2 Samuel 7 in which King David is promised that his throne and kingdom would be established forever. Fitzmyer (p. 338) has listed the following parallels:

	2 Sam.		Luke
7:9	“a great name”	1:32	“he will be great”
7:13	“the throne of his kingdom”	1:32	“throne of his father David”
7:14	“he will be my son”	1:32	“son of the Most High”
7:16	“your house and your kingdom”	1:33	“king over the house of Jacob forever”

These parallels indicate that Luke sees in the birth of Jesus the fulfillment of the hope that a descendant of David would some day arise, as promised in Gen. 49:10; 2 Sam. 7:9–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–3. Although there was no uniform concept of the Messiah, or Christ (see commentary on 2:11), with some believing that he would be a priest and therefore would be from the tribe of Levi, the most popular view was that the Messiah would be a “son of David” who would liberate Israel (e.g., Pss. Sol. 17:23–51).

Unlike the question of Zechariah (v. 18) Mary’s question, How can this be? (v. 34) carries no connotation of unbelief. Since Mary is only engaged to Joseph and is therefore still a virgin (see v. 27; 2:5) her question is a natural one. The angel explains that her pregnancy will result from the Holy Spirit, and for this reason her child will be called the Son of God (v. 35). As evidence for the possibility of this extraordinary promise, Gabriel tells Mary about Elizabeth’s pregnancy. Mary gives her classic response: I am the Lord’s servant … may it be to me as you have said (v. 38).

1:39–56 / The meeting between Mary and Elizabeth where Elizabeth acknowledges Mary’s superior role (see especially v. 43) anticipates and parallels the meeting of John and Jesus, at which time the Baptist will acknowledge that Jesus is greater (3:15–17, 21–22). Even while yet in the womb John leaps for joy at the presence of Mary (v. 41). Elizabeth’s filling with the Holy Spirit (v. 41) is the first of many other fillings which Luke will record (especially in the Book of Acts; see Luke 1:67; 2:25; Acts 2:4; 4:8; 13:9). Usually in Luke’s writings, before one opens his or her mouth to praise God and recite the gospel, he or she is “filled with the Holy Spirit.”

After Elizabeth’s greeting and blessing, Mary breaks forth with a song of exaltation, known as the Magnificat (vv. 46–55; the name is from the opening word in the Latin version). Although there are a few quotes from and allusions to the Psalms, the Magnificat’s closest parallel is Hannah’s song of thanksgiving (for the birth of Samuel) in 1 Sam. 2:1–10, which begins like the Magnificat: “My heart exults in the LORD” (NASB). That the Magnificat would parallel Hannah’s song is appropriate for two major reasons: First, like Hannah’s song of thanksgiving, the Magnificat expresses gratitude for a pregnancy (in Hannah’s case, a much-wanted pregnancy; in Mary’s case, quite unexpected). Second, as in Hannah’s case, the child is to become great in God’s service and is to have a vital ministry to Israel. Moreover, many elements in Hannah’s song could be readily understood as having messianic significance. There is reference to “deliverance” (v. 1), reference to the Lord’s “king” in v. 10, and, also in v. 10, a reference to the Lord’s “anointed” or “messiah.” Both songs also express the idea of reversal (e.g., exalting the humble, humbling the exalted, etc.; see 1 Sam. 2:4–8; Luke 1:51–53), which, as will be seen throughout this Gospel, is an important theme. However, possibly the single most important part of the Magnificat occurs in the last two verses: He has helped his servant Israel, remembering to be merciful to Abraham and his descendants forever, even as he said to our fathers (vv. 54–55). These descendants include Gentiles as well as the Jewish race, as can be seen in God’s promises to Abraham (see Gen. 12:3; 17:4–5; 22:18). Reference to God’s promises to Abraham is also made by Zechariah following the birth of John (see v. 73).