Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Luke 1:26 - 1:38
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
(The Gospel for the day of the Annunciation of Mary.)
34Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing, which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God. 36And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was [is] called barren. 37For with God nothing shall be impossible.38And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
Luk_1:27. To a virgin.—Joseph is the most prominent person in Matthew’s narrative of events preceding the birth of Christ, Mary in Luke’s; an indication that in all probability she was, whether mediately or immediately, the source whence he derived the account of these facts. (Comp. Act_21:17.)
Of the house of David.—These words, relating solely to Joseph, show that he was also of the blood-royal. That they by no means deny the descent of Mary from David, will appear hereafter.
Luk_1:28. And [the angel] came in unto her.—Here is no mere apparition of an angel in a dream, as to Joseph; but a visit in open day, although, of course, in a quiet hour of retirement, as more befitting and satisfactory under the circumstances.—The words, the angel, although wanting in the best manuscripts, is intended. The substitution of any human being is inadmissible.
Highly favored.—It is apparent from Luk_1:30 that this is not spoken of the external beauty of Mary, but of the favor or grace she had found in God’s sight. The same epithet is bestowed upon all believers, Eph_1:6, orig.
[The greeting of the angel in Luk_1:28 is called the Angelic Salutation or Ave Maria, and forms the first part of the famous Roman Catholic prayer to the Virgin Mary:
“
“
“
Luk_1:29. She cast in her mind.—A proof of her serenity and presence of mind at a critical hour. How different were Zachariah, and many before him!
Luk_1:32. Shall be called;—i.e., not only shall be, but shall one day be publicly recognized as what He really is.
The Son of the Highest.—This name seems here used by the angel, not in a metaphysical, but a theocratic sense. It points to the anointed King, so long foretold by the prophets, and to whom the words, 2Sa_7:14; Psa_2:7; Psa_89:28, so fully applied. Very deserving our consideration is the following observation of O. von Gerlach: “It is worthy of remark, that the proper divinity of her son was not definitely revealed to Mary: otherwise, neither she nor Joseph could have been in a position to bring up the child; for the submission, which was a necessary condition of His humanity, would have been submission only in appearance. But this promise, while it by no means abolished the parental relationship, would yet direct the reverential attention of the parents toward the child. From the very beginning of our Lord’s incarnation, we see that the knowledge of His divinity was not to be communicated in an external and awe-inspiring manner, but to be gradually manifested by His humanity and His work of redemption.”—For Mary, who was so intimately acquainted with the Old Testament, this prophecy would contain the essence of the most remarkable Messianic promises: 2 Samuel 7; Isaiah 9; Micah 5, etc.
Luk_1:33. Over the house of Jacob.—The announcement of His universal spiritual reign would have been, at this time, even more incomprehensible to Mary. It lies hidden, however, in the promise: “Of His kingdom there shall be no end.” We must not regard these words of the angel as an accommodation merely to the exclusively Jewish expectations then prevailing, concerning the kingdom of Messiah. Salvation is really of the Jews, and will one day return to Israel.
Luk_1:34. How shall this be? etc.—A natural objection, and a question as much allowed by the angel, as that of Zachariah (Luk_1:18) was arbitrary and blamable. Comp. Num_31:17; Jdg_11:39; Mat_1:18.
Luk_1:35. The Holy Ghost—the power of the Highest.—The parallel between these two expressions, exacts that the one should be interpreted by the other; and their mutual light teaches, that the Holy Spirit has verily a life-producing power, but by no means, that He is only power, without personality.
Shall come upon thee—shall overshadow thee.—Again two phrases reflecting light upon each other. Both point to the supernatural operation of the Holy Spirit, in bringing to pass that which ordinarily occurs only through conjugal intercourse. The word ἐðéóêéÜóåé can no more be understood to denote a special divine protection (Kuinoel), than a cohabitation (Paulus, the rationalist).
Therefore also.—His miraculous birth is here spoken of as the natural, but by no means the only reason, why He, who had no human father, should receive the name of the Son of God.
Luk_1:36. Thy cousin, or: kinswoman ( ἡ óõããåíÞò óïí ).—It does not quite appear what was the relationship between Mary and Elisabeth, the daughter of Aaron (Luk_1:5). This relationship, however, whatever it might be, proves nothing against Mary’s descent from David, as different tribes might be united by marriage. (Num_36:6 offers no difficulty, as it relates only to heiresses, whose family was in danger of becoming extinct.) There is, therefore, no reason to conclude that Mary, by reason of her relationship to Elisabeth, was of the tribe of Levi (as in the Testam. XII Patriarcharum, p. 542, and Schleiermacher’s Lukas, p. 26).
Luk_1:37. . With God nothing shall be impossible.—Nothing, i.e., no word ( ῥῆìá ) of promise. A powerful support for Mary’s faith, who might infer from the mirabile the possibility of the miraculum. It is at the same time the last, and indeed the only sufficient, answer to the horror of the miraculous, which characterizes modern criticism.
Luk_1:38. Be it unto me.—Not only the utterance of obedient submission, but also of patient, longing expectation. The heart of Mary is now filled with the Holy Spirit, who can also prepare her body to be the temple of the God-Man.
2. Two views, which have obtained in the Christian world, concerning the person and character of Mary, are condemned by these early pages of Luke’s Gospel. The first is that of the Roman and Greek Church, which transforms the handmaid of the Lord into the queen of heaven; the mother of Jesus into the mother of God; the redeemed sinner into the mediatrix and intercessor. The other is that of Rationalismus vulgaris, which deprives the humble bride of the carpenter of the chastity and purity which were her richest dowry, and necessarily rejects the miracle of the supernatural birth; there being no reason for concluding that Jesus was the son of Joseph. The first idea was chiefly supported by the apocryphal Gospels, which surrounded the head of her, upon whom the light of the divine favor had indeed richly fallen, by a halo of celestial glory. Its result was an almost heathen apotheosis of the virgin-mother, producing all the follies of an unlimited Mariolatry. The second notion was first conceived in the brain of the heathen Celsus, who derides the mother of Jesus, as the victim of seduction; while the Jewish version of this fable names one Panthera or Pandira as her seducer. To the shame of Christendom, we have seen this blasphemy revived, in various forms, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Bahrdt, and, in some degree, Paulus and others). Its own intrinsic beauty, truth, and sublimity commend the Gospel narrative, in opposition to both these products of a diseased imagination.
3. With respect to the descent of Mary from David, it is undeniable that the words, ἐî ïἴêïõ Äáâßä , Luk_1:27, refer exclusively to Joseph; yet they by no means assert, that our Lord did not descend from David on His mother’s side. We shall soon see that Luke 3. presents us with the genealogy of Mary, as Matthew 1. does with that of Joseph. The angel, too, who announces to her that she shall conceive a son, through the power of the Holy Spirit, could not possibly have added: “The Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David,” had not Mary herself been a daughter of David. Her song of praise, also, clearly shows what expectations she cherished for the house of David, and can only be fully understood, psychologically, when it is regarded as uttered by the daughter of a royal house, who, though that house was then in the depths of degradation, was yet looking forward to the elevation of the rightful dynasty, and the abasement of the foreign tyrant who then usurped the throne. The Magnificat (as Mary’s Psalm is called) is as unambiguous a proof of Mary’s royal descent as the genealogy, Luke 3.
4. The miraculous conception of our Lord, by the power of the Holy Spirit, is related by Luke, as a fact which cannot be doubted, and leaves no room for the hypothesis that we have here a myth or legend. It has often been said, but never proved, that the Jews of those days were expecting that Messiah would be born of a virgin, in some miraculous manner; but even then, it would not follow that the narrative was composed merely in obedience to the dictates of such an expectation. The analogy of certain heathen theogonies may perhaps prove the possibility of inventing such a narrative, in a polytheistic or pantheistic sense; but its reality, in a Christian and theistic sense, can by no means be thus accounted for. A comparison with the accounts in certain apocryphal Gospels on this point speaks more for, than against, the historical fidelity of Luke. Our Lord Himself, indeed, so far as we know, never spoke of this miracle; but His silence may be satisfactorily accounted for. His mother’s honor, the nature of the circumstance, the enmity of the Jews, all forbade Him to bring to light a mystery, for the truth of which He had only His own or Mary’s word to offer. Nor need it astonish us, that His contemporaries speak of Him as the son of Joseph (Joh_1:45); nor that Mary, speaking of her husband to Jesus, then twelve years of age, should say, “Thy father” (Luk_2:48); nor, least of all, that His brothers should not believe in Him (Joh_7:5); for, from all in the domestic circle, except Mary and Joseph, the affair was concealed with profound secrecy. We have already seen that Matthew also speaks of a miraculous birth; while Mark passes over in silence the history of Christ previous to His entry upon His public ministry, although he presents the person of our Lord in so divine a light, as naturally to lead to the supposition of His heavenly origin. John is also silent on the subject, though, in his description of the children of God, as born ïὐê ἐî áἱìÜôùí , ïὐäὲ ἐê èåëÞìáôïò óáñêὸò , ïὐäὲ ἐê èåëÞìáôïò ἀíäñüò , immediately before the words, ὁ ëüãïò óὰñî ἐãÝíåôï , there seems contained a latent reminiscence of what he must have undoubtedly heard from Mary during his long and intimate intercourse with her. For if he says, that “that which is born of the flesh is flesh,” and that the ëüãïò äò ἦí ἐí ἀñ÷ῇ ðñὸò ôὸí Èåüí , became flesh, we must, according to this Evangelist also, believe that this took place in some other way than through the èÝëçìá óáñêüò . Nevertheless, though the conception by the power of the Holy Spirit may be deduced from his doctrine concerning the Logos, he certainly does not expressly declare it. Paul also contents himself with the general statement, that the Lord was born of a woman, and of the seed of David (Rom_1:4; Gal_4:4); and it seems clear that this miracle, though an indispensable element of gospel history, did not originally belong to the apostolic êÞñõãìá , which, according to Act_1:21, began with the baptism of John.
5. This does not, however, interfere with the fact, that the miraculous conception stands on a firm historical foundation, and is of great dogmatic importance. For the first assertion, they who deny it, a priori, as absolutely impossible, deserve no other answer than: ðëáíᾶóèå ìὴ åἰäüôåò ôὰò ãñáöὰò ìçäὲ ôὴí äýíáìéí ôïῦ Èåïῦ [Mat_22:29]. Yet, far rather than say, with a modern theologian (Karl Hase), that “birth of a virgin cannot be proved to be impossible,” would we comfort ourselves with the words of the angel [to Mary, Luk_1:37]: ὅôé ïὐê ἀäõíáôÞóåé ðáñὰ ôïῦ Èåïῦ ðᾶí ῥῆìá . The laws of nature are not chains, wherewith the Supreme Lawgiver has bound Himself; but cords, which He holds in His own hand, and which He can lengthen or shorten as His good pleasure and wisdom dictate. And surely, in the present case, an end worthy of divine interference justified the deviation. When the Eternal Word was, in “the fulness of the time,” to take upon Him the form of a servant, the new member could only be introduced into the human series in an extraordinary manner. He, who was in the beginning with God, and who came of His own will to sojourn in this our world, could hardly enter it as one of ourselves would. He, who was the light and life of men, must surely see the light of day, not by carnal procreation, but by an immediate exercise of omnipotent power. Besides, how could He be free from every taint of original sin, and redeem us from the power of sin, if He had been born by the fleshly intercourse of sinful parents? The strong and healthy graft which was to bring new life into the diseased stock, must not originate from this stock, but be grafted into it from without. To deduce hence the need also of an immaculata conceptio, in the case of Mary, would be to lose sight of the fact, that we do not lay the chief stress upon the article “natus e virgine M.,” but upon the preceding “conceptus e Sp. S.” From the moment of our Lord’s conception, the Holy Spirit certainly continued to influence and penetrate the mind and spirit of Mary, to suppress the power of sin, and to make her body His consecrated temple. If it be said (by Schleiermacher) that Christian consciousness is perfectly satisfied by accepting the fact, that God removed from the normal development of the Son of Man all the pernicious influences and consequences attending an ordinary human birth, the question here is not, What can the Christian consciousness of an individual bear? but, What saith the Scripture? We believe, on the authority of Luke, who took all pains and had the best means of reliable information (comp. Luk_1:1-4), that the power of the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary in a mysterious manner. The moment of conception is simply hinted at by the words, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord,” and seems to coincide with the departure of the angel. Moreover, the true humanity of the Son of Man is by no means abolished, but rather explained by this miracle; for was Adam no real man, because he also, in a physical view, was a õἱὸò Èåïῦ ? In short, the miraculous conception is a óêÜíäáëïí to those alone who will see in our Lord nothing more than His pure humanity, and who put the sinlessness of the perfect man Christ Jesus in the place of the real incarnation of God in Him. To us, who believe in the latter, His miraculous conception is the natural consequence of His superhuman dignity, the basis of His normal development, and a symbol of the ἄíùèåí ãåííçèῆíáé , which must take place in every member of the kingdom of God. Compare J. J. van Oosterzee: Disputatio Theologica de Jesu e virgine Maria nato. Traj. ad Rh. 1840.
6. The conception of the Son of God, by the Holy Spirit, is the beginning of the intimate union between the ëüãïò ἔíóáñêïò and the ðíåῦìá ïὐê ἐêìÝôñïõ , Joh_3:34. Thirty years later, the Spirit descended upon Him in a bodily shape; and after He was glorified, He sent the Spirit upon all that believed on Him. The same Spirit who formed the body of Christ, forms also the corpus Christi mysticum, the Church.
Starke:—God knows where to find His children, however hidden they may be (2Ti_2:19).—God is wont to bestow His favors in times of quiet and retirement, Isa. 30:50.—All believers are the “blessed” of the Lord (Eph_1:3).—The holier, the humbler.—The “troubles” of holy minds always end in comfort.—The members of Christ’s kingdom have in Him an everlasting King, an everlasting support, and an everlasting joy.—Let even thy nearest and dearest forsake thee, so thou make sure the Lord Jesus be with thee, and abide in thee.
Heubner:—Mary and Eve: their similarity and dissimilarity, their relation to the human race.—Mary the happiest, but also the most sorely tried, of women.—Christians born of the house of Jacob, according to the Spirit.—Humility the best frame of mind for the reception of grace.—Our birth is also a work of God.—The miraculous birth of Jesus, a glorification of the whole human race.
Wallin:—The angel’s salutation of Mary may be applied to Christians in all the holy seasons of life: baptism, confirmation, the time of chastening, the day of death.
Fr. Arndt:—How does the time of regeneration begin in the world, and in the heart? By an announcement of the grace of God, which is: 1. Heard in humility; 2. received with patience and entire self-resignation.
Van Oosterzee [in sermons previously published]:—Mary the handmaid of the Lord. This saying the inscription of the history of Mary, as maid, wife, and widow.—Her character presents a rare combination of: 1. Genuine humility, with joyful faith; 2. of quiet resignation, with active zeal; 3. of faithful love, with unwavering heroism.—That the Word was made flesh, is: 1. An undoubted fact; this proved by: (a) the life, (b) the words, (c) the works of the Lord; 2. an unfathomable miracle; (a) the unprecedented, (b) the intimate, (c) the voluntary, nature of the union of the Divine Word with flesh; 3. an ever-memorable benefit; for this incarnation is: (a) the glory, (b) the light, (c) the life of mankind. To conclude, the questions: Do you believe in the fact? adore the miracle? highly esteem the benefit?
Footnotes:
Luk_1:26.—“In the sixth month,” i.e., of the pregnancy of Elisabeth.
Luk_1:28.—The ὁ ἄããåëïò of the text. rec., though sustained by Codd. A., C., D., and the Latin Vulgate (angelus), is omitted by the Vatican and other uncial Codd. and thrown out by Tischendorf and Alford, but retained by Lachmann, and Tregelles who includes it in brackets. The Sinaitic MS. comes to its aid, and reads: ðñïò áõôçí ï áããåëïò åéðåí (the text. rec. places ἄããåëïò before áὐôÞí , so also Lachmann and Tregelles). It is easier to account for its insertion than for its omission.
Luk_1:28.—Highly favored, Begnadigte (Luther less literally: Holdselige), is the proper translation of the passive participle êå÷áñéôùìÝíç , and not full of grace, gratia plena, gnadenvolle, as the Latin Vulgate and the Romish versions render it in the service of Mariolatry. Alford: “Though ÷áñéôüù is not found in classical writers, the analogy of all verbs in - üù must rule it to mean, the passing of the action implied in the radical substantive [ ÷Üñéò ] on the object of the verb—the conferring of grace or favor upon.” The word occurs besides here once in the N. T., viz., Eph_1:6 : ôῆò ÷Üñéôïò áὐôïῦ , ἐí ᾗ ἐ÷áñßôùóåí ἡìᾶò ἐí ôῷ ἠãáðçìÝíῷ , which the Vulgate renders: “in qua gratificavit nos,” etc., the E. V.: “wherein he hath made us accepted,” lit.: has graced us.
Luk_1:28.—The words of the text. rec., åὐëïãçìÝíç óὺ ἐí ãõíáéîßí , blessed thou among women, are generally regarded as a later insertion from Luk_1:42, and thrown out of the text by the recent critical editors. Tregelles retains the words, but in brackets. Cod. Sinait. likewise omits them. The original reading of the angelic salutation then is simply: “Hail, highly favoured one, the Lord [be] with you!” The reading here in connection with the proper translation of êå÷áñéôùìÝíç has some bearing upon the question of the worship of Mary.
Luk_1:29.—The word ἰäïῦóá , when she saw him, for which the Vulgate reads cum audisset, is wanting in Codd. Sin., Vatican., and other ancient authorities, and thrown out of the text by Griesbach, Tischendorf, Alford, and Tregelles, while Lachmann retains it. The correct reading is: ç ̊ óὲ ἐðὶ ôῷ ëüãῳ äéåôáñÜ÷èç , and she was troubled at the saying. Meyer, and after him Alford, suppose that the original mistake was, passing from ÄÅ to ÄÉÅáñÜ÷èç (hence Cod. D. reads only the verb. simplex), which gave rise to the glosses, transpositions, and reinsertions of ἐðὶ ôῷ ëüãῳ .
Luk_1:35.—Or: The Holy One that is born, ôὸ ãåííþìåíïí ἅãéïí ; Vulgate: quod nascetur (other Latin authorities: nascitrur) sanctum. The particularizing addition, ἐê óïõ , ex te, of thee, of the received text, is without sufficient authority and thrown out or put in brackets by the critical editors.—P. S.]
[Older divines generally date the supernatural conception from the words of the angel, Luk_1:35, which were the medium of the mysterious operation of the Holy Spirit.—P. S.]