But in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent of God to a city of Galilee, of which [the] name [was] Nazareth,
Luke's account moves from the temple in Jerusalem to a small town in the north, and from a priest to an unknown young woman. The same angel carries both errands. Why did God choose this place and this person to announce the Messiah's birth?
The setting of this second visit says as much as the message. One writer draws out what the change of place means:
The angel Gabriel is sent from God in the sixth month (of Elizabeth's pregnancy) with a more important message. After the long silence of centuries, heaven speaks again. In Luke it speaks in a more familiar way than in Matthew, where Joseph receives the messages, but in a dream. Here we have open, face-to-face speech. And the most important message comes not in the temple, but in a private home. God is coming near in His grace; and He always reveals Himself more fully the nearer He comes.
Gabriel is not a new figure in Scripture. God had sent him once before with a message about the Messiah:
It was the angel Gabriel who was sent to Daniel to make known long ago the Messiah's coming and cutting off, in the famous prophecy of the seventy weeks (Dan. 9:26). Now he comes to Mary, the one promised in marriage to Joseph, and announces to her — "the virgin" of a still older prophet (Isa. 7:14) — the birth of that Messiah.
Every detail of the address points downward. The angel passes by the religious centre of the nation, and the royal line he reaches has fallen:
The angel's mission now is not to the temple, nor to Jerusalem. It is to Galilee of the Gentiles, and to Nazareth. It is to a virgin promised in marriage to a man named Joseph, of the fallen house of David. The virgin's name is Mary, or Miriam ("exalted"). All is in ruin here, when God comes in to revive and raise to higher glory.
How far that house had fallen shows up in Joseph's trade, and how little it mattered to God:
In Nazareth, that despised place, there was found a young virgin, unknown by the world, whose name was Mary. She was promised in marriage to Joseph, who was of the house of David. But everything in Israel was so out of order that this descendant of the king was a carpenter. But what is this to God? Mary was a chosen vessel; she had found favour in the eyes of God.
Nothing about the town or the woman explains the errand. That mismatch is the point:
What was there in Nazareth and what in Mary that led the angel there? The city was small, obscure, and belonging to Galilee. The virgin was unknown, and, as she says, "of humble estate" (v. 52). There was no match between the place, the person, and the promise. But we must remember that grace owes nothing to what it finds here. And He whose coming is now announced comes to lowly circumstances and to humble, repentant hearts. He did not despise the virgin's womb.
This is not an accident of history but a settled pattern in how God works, and it fits the whole tone of Luke's Gospel:
Luke records the visit of Gabriel to Mary, a lowly virgin, at Nazareth in circumstances of the greatest poverty, but rich in faith… This is in perfect keeping with the Gospel, which sets out that surpassing grace that has come down to the very lowest in the eyes of men. Mary might be poor, and Nazareth despised, but these are what God will take up to accomplish His purposes.
The priest in the temple and the young woman in Nazareth answered the same angel in opposite ways:
The priest under the law did not believe the message of grace that Gabriel brought. So this representative of Israel could not speak until the day when God fulfilled His promise in grace. Then he could praise the Author of his salvation, as the faithful remnant will one day. Mary was not only godly, but humble and simple — an object of grace, and not a representative of the law. "You have found favour with God," said the angel. She was submissive: "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord." Her confidence was in the word of God, for she added, "let it be to me according to your word."
- Sent by God. The silence of centuries breaks with open, face-to-face speech, not a dream. The nearer God comes, the more He shows of Himself.
- Sent through Gabriel. This same messenger told Daniel long ago when the Messiah would come. Now he announces that the time has arrived.
- Sent to Nazareth. He passes by the temple and Jerusalem for an obscure town in Galilee. There David's royal line has sunk to a carpenter's trade.
- Sent to Mary. There was no match between the place, the person and the promise. Grace owes nothing to what it finds here.
- Received by faith. The priest doubted and fell silent. The unknown young woman answered, "let it be to me according to your word" — the fitting reply to a message of pure grace.
to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name [was] Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name [was] Mary.
God sends the angel Gabriel to a small town in Galilee, to a young woman nobody had heard of. She is promised in marriage to a man from David's royal line, and both facts shape the rest of Luke.
One writer weighs the gap between the messenger and the address:
What was there in Nazareth and what in Mary that led the angel there? The city was small, obscure, and belonging to Galilee. The virgin was unknown, and, as she says, "of low degree" (v. 52). The place, the person, and the promise did not match each other. But we must remember that grace owes nothing to anything here. He whose coming is now announced comes to lowly circumstances and to broken and humble hearts. He did not despise the virgin's womb.
Another writer reads the ruin of the nation into the address:
The angel's mission now is not to the temple or to Jerusalem. It is to Galilee of the Gentiles, to Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the fallen house of David. The virgin's name is Mary, or Miriam ("exalted"). All is in ruin here, when God comes in to revive and raise to higher glory.
"Of the house of David" sounds like a title of honour. In daily life it had sunk very low.
In Nazareth, that despised place, there was found a young virgin, unknown by the world, whose name was Mary. She was betrothed to Joseph, who was of the house of David. But everything in Israel was so out of order that this descendant of the king was a carpenter. But what is this to God? Mary was a chosen vessel; she had found favour in the eyes of God.
Both Mary and Joseph came from David, but by different branches. One writer sets out which line each of them belonged to:
Mary is the principal figure of the two in Luke, and there, I believe, the genealogy is hers… There were two lines that came down unbroken to those days — the house of Solomon and the house of Nathan. Mary was the representative of Nathan's family, as Joseph was of Solomon's.
Betrothal in Israel was not an engagement in the modern sense. It carried the weight of the marriage itself.
The Jews looked on this as being as binding as marriage. Only a divorce could end it… Mary, the mother of the Lord Jesus, was betrothed to Joseph. He thought about divorcing her quietly, but the angel of the Lord told him the truth about her condition.
A claim to David's throne could not rest on Mary alone.
The Messiah had to be born not merely of a virgin, nor of a virgin daughter of David, but of one legally united to Joseph — in the eye of the law, really his wife… Let people slander as they might, Mary must be betrothed to Joseph. Otherwise the Lord Jesus would not have a proper title to the throne of David.
There was a further obstacle. The royal line running through Joseph lay under a prophetic curse:
A curse struck the direct line of descent, yet the line kept its legal title. So it could hand on to another what could be of no use to itself. The marriage of Joseph and Mary was, in the wisdom of God, the means of accomplishing this. The Lord's birth from Mary made Him the real Son of David (Luke 1:32) while the marriage of His mother made Him David's legal heir.
Luke twice calls Mary a virgin. That word guards a truth the gospel cannot do without:
We may be the 150th generation from Adam, but we are simply "after his kind". We could go on reproducing ourselves and push the first man and his race endlessly into eternity. We should still only have fallen man… There never was a real and original second man until Jesus was born, and that broke the inherited chain of sin and death. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit's power. Discard the virgin birth, and you have lost this great foundation truth of the gospel.
The verse names her and gives her no title. One writer marks the limit:
She was a woman, uniquely favoured because God chose her out of all the virgins of Israel to be the mother of the Lord. Yet the more we make of Mary, the less we make of the divine miracle of this holy birth.
- Place — Nazareth was small, obscure and in Galilee. The angel went there, not to the temple or Jerusalem.
- Person — an unknown young woman of humble estate, betrothed to a carpenter who came from the royal line.
- Promise — the place, the person and the promise did not match — grace owes nothing to anything here.
- Proof — betrothal was as binding as marriage. So Jesus was Mary's real Son and Joseph's legal heir, and His title to David's throne stood up in law.
- Purity — "virgin" is not decoration. Without conception by the Holy Spirit we have only Adam's fallen race again, and the foundation of the gospel is gone.
And the angel came in to her, and said, Hail, [thou] favoured one! the Lord [is] with thee [blessed art *thou* amongst women].
In Luke's Gospel, the birth of Jesus opens with an angel greeting a young woman in Nazareth. Two questions follow. What does the greeting say about Mary? And what does it say about the God who sent it?
The place had no standing. The household had no wealth.
This was the last place man would have chosen for God's purpose. In the world's eyes, the name of the town was enough to condemn anyone who came from there. There a young woman, unknown to everyone the world recognised, was engaged to a poor carpenter. Her name was Mary. But everything was in confusion in Israel: the carpenter was of the house of David. God never forgets His promises, and He never overlooks the people they concern. Here was the place where they would be fulfilled. Whether Nazareth was small or great made no difference. It only showed this: God expects nothing from man; man expects everything from God.
Gabriel had brought news of the Messiah before.
It was Gabriel who was sent to the prophet Daniel long ago, to make known the Messiah's coming and cutting off in the famous prophecy of the seventy weeks (Daniel 9:26). Now he comes to Mary, the one engaged to Joseph, and announces to her — "the virgin" of an even older prophet (Isaiah 7:14) — the birth of that Messiah. No wonder he greets her as a favoured one, with whom the Lord was… She is the chosen channel of the wonderful purposes that would yet fill her own people, and the whole world, with blessing. She is the appointed mother of One in whom God was about to solve every difficulty sin had brought into the world, and to do it by a righteous triumph over it. He would even make it possible for God to bless those who believed, sinners though they had been.
The words are not a random compliment. They move outward in three steps, and the first word carries the theme of the whole Gospel.
Gabriel's greeting speaks of great grace given to Mary. ("Favour" and "grace" translate the same Greek word.) It speaks of the Lord's presence with her, and of her being blessed among women. So her personal blessing comes first: great grace given to her. Then comes her relationship to the Lord: His presence with her. Then her relationship to others: blessed among women.
Older translations render the greeting "highly favoured"; the ESV has "O favored one." A moment later Gabriel tells Mary she has found favour with God.
The expressions "found favour" and "highly favoured" do not mean the same thing at all. She herself had found favour, so she was not to fear. But God, by His own choice, had given her this grace — the immense favour of being the mother of the Lord. In this she was the object of God's sovereign favour… Finding favour with God refers to Mary's own spiritual state. Being highly favoured refers to her being God's chosen vessel for the birth of Jesus. But the two are truly connected.
Gabriel's praise is high. His wording is also measured.
The angel tells her she is "highly favoured" (Luke 1:28). Could any woman have a higher favour than to be the mother of our Lord in His human birth? "Blessed are you among women" (Luke 1:28) is the angel's greeting. "Blessed" she certainly was. Note, it does not say "Most blessed." The language is restrained. There is no room there for the worship of Mary.
There is also a question about the text. Some manuscripts add a second clause here and others do not, and the ESV ends the greeting at "the Lord is with you!"
"Hail, favoured one!" said Gabriel to Mary. The words "Blessed are you among women" belong to the meeting with her cousin Elizabeth. The Revised Version agrees, following the best authority. The Latin Vulgate leaned towards heaping honour on Mary, and many followed it.
There is an opposite mistake.
Humanly speaking, Mary was most highly favoured. God singled her out by a supreme distinction. It is even possible that, in a right desire to keep clear of Roman Catholic error, Protestants have overlooked the remarkable honour God gave her. If that is an error at all, it errs on the right side.
- Favour, not merit. "Favour" and "grace" translate the same Greek word. The greeting names a gift to Mary, not a wage she earned.
- Favour lands low. God chose a despised town and a poor carpenter's home. Man expects everything from God; God expects nothing from man.
- Favour has two senses. She had found favour with God herself. She was also chosen as the vessel for the Lord's birth. The two are linked, but not the same.
- Favour flows outward. Grace given to her, then the Lord with her, then blessing reaching others.
- Favour keeps its measure. The wording is restrained: "blessed," not "most blessed." The best manuscripts leave out the second clause. Yet the honour God gave her is real.
But she, [seeing] [the angel], was troubled at his word, and reasoned in her mind what this salutation might be.
Gabriel has just greeted Mary, and her first response is not speech. She keeps silent and turns the greeting over in her mind. Was her trouble a failure of faith, or something else?
Who Mary was explains how she took the greeting.
But Mary, when she saw the angel — who no doubt appeared in human form (see Luke 24:4) — "was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be." That is, she reasoned inwardly about the nature of Gabriel's words. She was asking what their "aim and meaning" were. We can understand this if we recall her character and position. She was a devout, God-fearing woman, and, whatever her ancestry, she seems to have lived in lowly circumstances. Meekness, humility, and faith were the clear marks of her spiritual life. So she might well be troubled at what she had heard, and reason about what the angel's words meant. This was not the natural mind reasoning as the offspring of doubt. It sprang from perplexity of soul.
Older translations say Mary "cast in her mind." The Greek word behind that phrase turns up all through Luke, translated differently each time.
The word "thoughts" (dialogismoi) stands for inward reasonings. The same Greek word occurs in the following passages, though it is not always translated "thoughts." (1) Mary "cast in her mind" what manner of greeting the angel's was (Luke 1:29). (2) The people "mused" in their hearts whether John the Baptist was the Messiah or not (Luke 3:15). (3) Jesus said to the disciples when He appeared among them, Why do thoughts arise in your hearts? (Luke 24:38)… (5) The rich man whose crops were plentiful worked out his plans for future ease after he had "thought within himself" (Luke 12:17).
Gabriel does not press on with his announcement while Mary is still unsettled.
God gave Gabriel insight into Mary's feelings. So he first calms her mind. Then he assures her that she has found favour with God, preparing her for the amazing message he was sent to bring. We say "in preparation" for Gabriel's message, because a soul must be at peace and free before it can receive divine things.
How she waited matters as much as what she heard.
Mary was perplexed at such words, as no doubt also by the sudden appearance of the angel, but wisely waited in silence for an explanation. "Fear not," he says, to set her at rest. Again he speaks of her as favoured by God — grace, or favour, is a subject Luke brings out beautifully. No human merit could deserve such honour as being chosen by God to be the mother of the Messiah.
The greeting that unsettled her carried an enormous weight.
No wonder he greets her as a favoured one, with whom the Lord was… Mary, though troubled, pondered what the meaning of this greeting might be. The angel tells her not to fear, for she has found favour with God. She is the chosen channel of the wonderful purposes that would yet fill the world, and her own people too, with blessing. She is to be the appointed mother of One in whom God was about to solve, by a righteous triumph, every difficulty that sin had brought into the world. In Him God could even bless those who believed, sinners though they had been, and make them triumph righteously through Him and with Him.
Commentators separate two kinds of favour here.
"The expressions 'found favour' and 'highly favoured' do not at all mean the same thing. Personally she had found favour, so she was not to fear. But God had given her this grace of His own choice, this immense favour: to be the mother of the Lord. In this she was the object of God's sovereign favour." We can add that finding favour with God refers to Mary's spiritual state. Being highly favoured speaks rather of God choosing her as the vessel for the birth of Jesus. But the two things are certainly connected.
- Troubled — Her trouble came from perplexity of soul, not from a doubting mind. She waited in silence for the meaning of the greeting.
- Thinking — The same Greek word covers the crowd musing over John and the rich man planning his future ease. The word is neutral. The heart behind it decides.
- Calmed — Gabriel settles her before he announces anything. A soul must be at peace and free before it can receive divine things.
- Favoured — "Found favour" and "highly favoured" are not the same. One speaks of her spiritual state. The other speaks of God's own choice of her, which no merit could earn.
- Purposed — Through the Son she would bear, God would solve every difficulty sin brought into the world, and bless believing sinners with a righteous triumph.
And the angel said to her, Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favour with God;
Gabriel had already brought a message to Zacharias the priest. Now he comes to Mary, and his first word deals with her fear. The verse turns on one phrase — she has found favour with God — and the message that follows rests on it.
The greeting troubled Mary, and the angel does not press on until she is settled. Commentators see an order here: peace first, then the message.
She might well be troubled at what she heard, and reason about it — not out of doubt, but out of a puzzled heart, wondering what the angel's greeting meant. God gave Gabriel insight into Mary's feelings. So he first calms her mind. Then, to prepare her for the astonishing message he came to bring, he assures her that she has found favour with God. We say "in preparation" for Gabriel's message, because a soul cannot receive divine things until it is at peace and free.
Mary was not the only one who needed that word.
Sometimes He reveals Himself only by an angel, a mighty heavenly messenger. Even then the soul He speaks to is deeply troubled. It needs, like Zacharias or Mary, this very comforting word, "Fear not."
Luke's Gospel keeps grace in view, and favour is another word for it. Nothing in Mary earned what she was about to receive.
"Fear not," he says, to set her at rest. Again he speaks of God's favour toward her. Luke emphasises this subject — grace, or favour — beautifully. No human merit could deserve such an honour: that God should choose her to be the mother of the Messiah.
Verse 28 calls her highly favoured. This verse says she has found favour. Writers keep the two apart.
The expressions "found favour" and "highly favoured" do not have the same meaning at all. She herself had found favour, so she was not to fear. But in His sovereignty God had given her this grace, this immense favour, of being the mother of the Lord. In this she was the object of God's sovereign favour… Finding favour with God refers to Mary's spiritual state. Being highly favoured speaks more of her place as God's chosen vessel for the birth of Jesus. But the two things are certainly connected.
The priest Zacharias doubted his message. Mary submitted to hers. Commentators trace the difference to grace.
The law does not produce confidence. Grace alone calls that out. The priest under the law did not believe the message of grace that Gabriel brought… Mary was not only pious. She was humble and simple — an object of grace, not a representative of the law. "You have found favour with God," said the angel. She was subject: "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord." Her confidence was in the word of God, for she added, "Let it be to me according to your word."
In her own song, Mary names her own need.
Mary was the mother of our Lord according to the flesh. She was surely "blessed among women," chosen for the highest honour possible to a woman. In her song she says, "my spirit rejoices in God my Savior" (Luke 1:47). Now if Mary had been sinless she had no need of a Saviour — and she certainly needed a Saviour, like the rest of us.
Another writer holds both sides together.
Mary is great in that she is nothing. Yet God favours her in a way no one else shares.
The favour was not a private honour.
The angel tells her not to fear, for she has found favour with God. She is the chosen channel of wonderful purposes. Those purposes would yet fill her own people, and the world too, with blessing. She is to be the appointed mother of the One in whom God was about to solve every difficulty sin had brought into the world, and to do it by a righteous triumph over sin.
And what came to her as a rare distinction is now the settled ground of every believer.
David the king found favour in the sight of God, and so did Mary of Nazareth, the mother of Jesus. But these were exceptional cases. The New Testament shows that standing in the favour of God is not limited to a few. All who are justified have it alike.
- Fear stilled. God quiets the heart before He entrusts it with anything. Gabriel's "Do not be afraid" clears the way for the message.
- Favour given. "Found favour" is the language of grace — no merit could qualify anyone to carry the Messiah.
- Favour distinguished. Found favour speaks of her own state before God. Highly favoured speaks of the unique task God gave her.
- Favour received. Law left Zacharias doubting; grace made Mary submissive — "let it be to me according to your word."
- Favour extended. Hers was an exceptional case. In the New Testament the same standing in God's favour belongs alike to all who are justified.
and behold, thou shalt conceive in the womb and bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus.
The angel tells Mary what is about to happen, and he names the child himself. Everything he says next about greatness, a throne, and a kingdom rests on the one who carries that name.
"Jesus" is not just a label. The name carries a meaning, and that meaning is far bigger than the home the child was born into.
As you can see from Hebrews 4:8, Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua, or Jehoshua. The name means "Jehovah is salvation," or "whose salvation is Jehovah." So there is good reason for the common observation that the name Jesus means Jehovah the Saviour. If so, what a subject this sets before our souls to think about — yes, and to adore! God Himself declares that a child born into the world, of lowly parentage in man's esteem, is Jehovah the Saviour!
The name would have raised no eyebrows in first-century Israel. Other men wore it, before and after Him.
"Jesus." The name (Jeshua), Nehemiah 8:17, was very common among the Jews of the time. Colossians 4:11 mentions a Jesus called Justus, one of the Jews. One of the Lord's own human ancestors bore the same name — see Luke 3:29. The Talmud wanted to get rid of the original meaning of "the name" (James 2:7). So while it uses "Jeshua" for everyone else who bore that name, it regularly calls the Lord by the clipped name Jesu.
after_note: DELETE
The lowliness of the name and the glory in it belong together:
It is His personal, human name: the name which tells us of His grace and tenderness, His lowly life, His sorrow, and His death. But this name also carries divine glory with it, for it means JEHOVAH THE SAVIOUR. Yes, the very name of His humiliation, the one written in mockery on His cross, declares to us the greatness of His person and the love of His heart.
The angel says the conception happens in her womb. That small phrase settles a question about where the Lord's humanity came from.
It is wrong and misleading to say that the human nature of Christ was created in the virgin's womb — that is, formed out of nothing. Such a claim plainly departs from Scripture. Mary undoubtedly had her part in the sacred mystery, as the angel said to her, "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son." Some claim that the Lord's "holy humanity was created by a creative act of the Holy Spirit." That claim in effect denies the angel's own words to Mary about her conception.
In Matthew, the angel gives the same instruction to Joseph. Each Gospel has a reason for its choice.
Here again Joseph was the one who acted in public, while in Luke (Luke 1:31) Mary gave the name. The difference comes from the point of view the Holy Spirit gives us of our Lord's person in the two Gospels. In Luke He was proving that Jesus, though divine, was truly man — a partaker of humanity apart from sin. In our case it is sinful human nature; in His case it was holy… One great aim of that Gospel was to prove His holy manhood. It shows how fully and how suitably He could be a Saviour of men. He could take up the sorrows and the misery, and on the cross suffer for the sinfulness of others — Himself the Holy One.
The angel does not stop at the name. He goes straight on to speak of a throne.
So he says, "you shall call his name Jesus" — a Divine Saviour. "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David." This is another and quite different glory. It joins His title of Messiah to saving power… Even in the lowest sphere, how far His kingdom is from being a mere human dominion!
The first half of the angel's message has already come true. Commentators read that as the guarantee of the rest.
Surely every "shall" in this wonderful passage must come true, as really and as literally as the birth of Jesus did. God said He should be born: it came to pass. God says He shall reign over the house of Jacob: it will surely come to pass.
- Named — Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua. It means "Jehovah is salvation," so God calls a child of humble parents Jehovah the Saviour.
- Common — the name was ordinary among Jews of that day. The name of His humiliation is the very name that carries His divine glory.
- Conceived — the angel says Mary will conceive. She truly had her part, so His humanity was not formed out of nothing.
- Holy — Luke sets out to prove real manhood without sin. That is why Mary gives the name here, while Joseph gives it in Matthew.
- Reigning — the saving name comes with a throne and a kingdom. The "shall" of His birth came true, so the "shall" of His reign will too.
*He* shall be great, and shall be called Son of [the] Highest; and [the] Lord God shall give him the throne of David his father;
Gabriel tells Mary who her child will be, and what God will give Him. Two glories meet in one person — a divine title and a royal throne — and the angel speaks both over a child not yet born.
Gabriel had already promised Zacharias a great son, John. The two announcements do not describe greatness in the same way.
The contrast between these two messages is worth noticing. John would be "great in the sight of the Lord." Of Jesus the angel said, "He shall be great." All John the Baptist's greatness depended on the Person whose herald he was. Jesus was great in Himself and of Himself. From where I write, I can see the shadow of a chestnut tree in the light of the rising sun. The shadow grows to a giant size. Yet the shadow does not show how big the tree is. It witnesses to the sun's rising and splendour. Such was John.
Where the ESV reads "Son of the Most High," the older translation used in the quotes below says "Son of the Highest." The title was not new. It had a long history among the people who heard it.
"The Highest." The Old Testament Elyon. It was the usual name for God among the Greek-speaking Jews scattered abroad. It appears again in verses 35 and 76.
The striking thing is who carries that name: a child about to be born.
Here we are told that He — the One who should be born — "should be great," and, born into this world, "should be called the Son of the Highest." He had been the Son of the Father before the world was. But this child, born on earth, would be called the Son of the Highest — such as He was down here. He would fully prove His right to that title by His acts, and by everything that showed what He was. It is a precious thought to us, and full of glory, that a child born of a woman rightly bears this name, "Son of the Highest." It is supremely glorious for One who is in the position of a man, and really was such before God.
The order of the angel's two statements matters.
He (not Mary) would be great, called "the Son of the Highest," a dignity far higher than could be given to Him by Mary, indeed an eternal dignity. Therefore the Lord God would give to Him the throne of His father David. First mentioned is His being Son of the Highest, His eternal deity; then Son of David, which involves His manhood, being born of Mary.
God gives this throne. The gift rests on birth-right and on God's own purpose.
But other things still were connected with the One who should be born. God would give Him the throne of His father David. Here again we plainly see that He is considered as born, as man, in this world. The throne of His father David belongs to Him. God will give it to Him. By right of birth He is heir to the promises — the earthly promises which, as to the kingdom, belonged to the family of David. But it would be according to the counsels and the power of God.
Joseph was not the child's real father, so how does David's line reach Him? Commentators differ over whose family record Luke traces, but not over the descent itself.
Whose line does Luke give us, Joseph's or Mary's? Some have long held it is Joseph's, as Matthew's is; others say it is Mary's. No one has yet settled the question. The Lord's Davidic descent is unquestionable, whichever view is adopted. Peter affirmed it (Acts 2:30), and Paul also (Acts 13:23; Rom. 1:3; 2 Tim. 2:8), and the Lord Himself declared it (Matt. 22:45; Mark 12:37; Luke 20:41; Rev. 22:16). The angel Gabriel's words to Mary (Luke 1:32) speak of it, and so does Zacharias in his song (1:69). Yet both knew — certainly Gabriel, and doubtless Zacharias — that Joseph was not the real father of the child about to be born. Mary's child was really David's seed.
Gabriel announces the throne. Announcing it is not the same as receiving it.
He was about to come as the Son of David according to the flesh, but He is also David's Lord. He is the One who spoke these words to the prophet Nathan. Of Him God announced: "the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David. And He shall reign forever and of His kingdom there shall be no end." That throne and that kingdom He has not yet received. He fills the Father's throne in the highest heaven.
- Great. John was great in the sight of the Lord. Jesus is great in Himself, and every other greatness only points to Him.
- Named. "The Most High" is the Old Testament name Elyon. The child born on earth is called His Son, and He proved that name by everything He did.
- Ordered. The angel names the eternal dignity first and the throne second: Son of the Most High, therefore Son of David.
- Given. God hands over the throne. It is His by right of birth, held by God's counsel and power.
- Awaited. David's true heir came through Mary's line. He has not taken that throne yet. He fills the Father's throne in heaven while the promise still stands.
and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for the ages, and of his kingdom there shall not be an end.
The angel's message to Mary ends with a throne, a people, and a length of time. It raises three questions: which kingdom is meant, who its subjects are, and how an endless reign fits a Saviour who suffered.
Christ does not take this reign for Himself. God gives it to Him, and He receives it as a man born into David's line.
Here again we see Him clearly: born into this world as a man. The throne of His father David belongs to Him. God will give it to Him. By right of birth He is heir to the promises. These are the earthly promises about the kingdom that belonged to David's family. But it would all come about by the counsels and the power of God. He would reign over the house of Jacob, not only over Judah. His would not be a weak, passing power with a short life. It would last throughout the ages.
The angel names the people He will rule: the house of Jacob, wider than Judah alone. Some writers take that name at face value.
Why should we not expect this word of the Lord, spoken by His angel, to be fulfilled? I cannot see any reason why I should doubt this, or any other part of God's word. The subjects, then, of His Kingdom will be the house of Jacob, not the Church of God.
Behind the angel's words stands God's older promise to David. That promise has not yet come true in Israel's history.
Again, "Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me. Your throne shall be established forever" (2 Sam. 7:16). God has never yet fulfilled this promise to Israel. The question is whether it will come true literally in their history, or spiritually in the Church. Nothing in the prophecy seems to point to the Church, and nothing in the Church seems to point to the prophecy.
The obvious objection is that Jesus never reigned. Writers answer it by dividing His two comings.
We all know full well that instead of reigning, He suffered when He was here before. But when He comes again, He comes to reign. He will reign over the house of Jacob, as we have seen in so many Scriptures. But more than that, as we have seen in many others, He will "have dominion from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth."
Jeroboam once seized ten parts of Israel's kingdom. Christ's reign carries no such weakness.
The foundations of His throne rest in the deep places of eternity. His sceptre carries the stamp of immortality, and His crown the stamp of incorruptibility. No Jeroboam will rise then to seize ten parts of the kingdom. It will be one undivided whole forever, under the peaceful rule of Him who is "gentle and lowly in heart."
Commentators differ over what "no end" covers. Davison reads it as a guarantee against any successor, not a claim about the eternal state.
after
It does not mean that the kingdom will go on forever in the eternal state. It means that it will not have a successor. Kingdoms exist to keep hostile powers in subjection as well as to protect their subjects. Indeed one is the outcome of the other. But there are no hostile powers in the eternal state, so the kingdom will not be necessary. This is clear from 1 Cor. 15:24-26.
Darby traces the same point back to Daniel's prophecy.
As Daniel had predicted, no one else would ever take it. It would never pass to another people. God would establish it by His counsels, which never change, and by His power, which never fails. Christ will exercise a royal rule that nothing can dispute. He will hand it over to God when all things are fulfilled, but nothing will ever tarnish its royal glory in His hands.
One question remains. Is this just an earthly throne like any other?
Even at its lowest level, how far His Kingdom is from being a mere human dominion!
- Given — The throne is not taken by force. God gives it to the One born as heir of David's line.
- Given to a people — He will rule the house of Jacob, which writers keep distinct from the Church.
- Given, but delayed — At His first coming He suffered instead of reigning; the reign belongs to His return.
- Given without rival — No Jeroboam divides it, and no successor replaces it.
- Given without limit — Even in its most earthly form, this rule is far more than human dominion.
But Mary said to the angel, How shall this be, since I know not a man?
Gabriel has told Mary she will bear a son, and she answers with one honest question: how? Much hangs on how we read it — whether she doubted, and how this Child came into the world.
Earlier in the chapter, a man questioned an angel and lost his speech for it. Mary's words sound similar, yet Gabriel answers her instead of rebuking her.
And Mary said to the angel, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?" She does not doubt; she asks with confidence. So there is no striking dumb and no sign of unbelief, as with Zacharias, who asked, "How shall I know this?" There may be a question in the spirit that needs an answer but shows no lack of faith. There might be another not so different in form which really sprang from unbelief. God does not judge by appearance, but by the heart.
One writer weighs her question against the request of Zacharias.
Zacharias had constantly asked for a son. It was only a question of God's goodness and power to grant his request, and God's clear declaration brought him to a point where he had only to trust it. He did not trust God's promise. It was only the exercise of God's extraordinary power within the natural order of things. Mary asks, with holy confidence, since God has so favoured her, how the thing is to be accomplished, outside the natural order. Of its accomplishment she has no doubt.
Her question exposes what she took for granted about the incarnation — God the Son entering the world as a man.
When the angel Gabriel announced the honour about to be given to her in the great work of incarnation, she asked, not in a spirit of scepticism but of honest ignorance, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?" Clearly she thought that the birth of this glorious Person, who was about to appear, would follow the ordinary principles of generation. In God's great goodness, her thought becomes the occasion for developing much valuable light on the central truth of incarnation.
Commentators differ on what exactly puzzled her. Another points to the titles she has just heard.
The coming Child was to have David as His ancestor and yet be the Son of the Highest! She did not ask for a sign, since she accepted the angel's words, but she did ask for an explanation.
Her asking did not stop the plan. It drew out the fullest answer in the passage.
Mary replied to the angel, "How will this be?" What was promised had to happen outside the order of nature. Even so, distrust did not prompt her question. We see this because God allowed Gabriel to give a full and complete answer to her question. That answer reveals two things: the miraculous conception of our blessed Lord, and that the Child so born should be called the Son of God.
Mary's description of herself also settles an old question about translation.
The Old Testament was carefully translated into Greek in the version commonly called the Septuagint, and our Lord quoted from it again and again. That translation plainly understood the word "virgin" as Mary herself shows in Luke 1:34. It rendered the word parthenos, which does mean "virgin."
Some have read her words as a vow of lifelong virginity. One writer rejects that, since an earlier verse in the chapter rules it out:
Schanz abandons his usually sensible interpretation by taking Mary's words as a vow of virginity, which verse 27 rules out.
If the child had come the ordinary way Mary assumed, everything would be different.
Sinful men have sinful children… Does it matter, then, or does it not, how the Lord was born into this world? Had He come by natural generation, would He not have been like every other man? To deny the virgin birth is to deny His pre-existence in the Godhead. It also denies the holiness of His Manhood. Without these two great truths about His glorious Person, He could not have been the Saviour.
- Ask. Mary's "how" is faith seeking light, not doubt demanding proof. God reads the heart, not the wording.
- Contrast. Zacharias would not trust a promise inside nature's order. Mary never doubted one outside it.
- Assume. Her question shows she expected an ordinary birth. That mistake became the occasion for light on the incarnation.
- Answer. Because she asked in faith, God let Gabriel answer in full: the miraculous conception, and the Child called the Son of God.
- Depend. Her own words about herself anchor the virgin birth. Deny that birth and you deny His pre-existence and the holiness of His Manhood — and He could not be the Saviour.
And the angel answering said to her, [The] Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and power of [the] Highest overshadow thee, wherefore the holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God.
Gabriel told Mary she would bear a son who would reign forever. She asked how, since she had no husband. This verse is his answer — how a virgin could bear a child, and why that child would be called Son of God.
Zechariah had asked a similar question earlier in the chapter and lost his speech for it. Mary does not.
She does not doubt; she asks in trust. So she is not struck silent, and there is no sign of unbelief — unlike Zechariah, who asked, "How shall I know this?" A question may rise in the spirit and need an answer, yet show no lack of faith. Another question, close to it in wording, might spring from unbelief. God does not judge by appearance, but by the heart.
The verse says two things about what God will do. One writer reads them as two distinct acts, not one act stated twice.
"The Holy Spirit will come upon you" means that the Holy Spirit produced the human nature of our Lord in the virgin by a creative act. And so He had a completely holy nature. "And the power of the Most High will overshadow you." This is not a repetition of the first statement. It means that the Son of God, who is the Most High, overshadowed the virgin. He united Himself with the human nature the Spirit had prepared. He is called "that holy thing" in His very being, because He fits into no class.
Commentators differ. Others read the whole verse as one act of divine power: "it was not to be nature, but divine power" (William Kelly).
Older translations render the phrase "that holy thing." That word choice separates this child from the first man God made.
There is no taint at all in that "Son of Man." It does not say "that innocent thing," but "that holy thing." The first man before the fall was innocent and guiltless. But that condition was only negative, and it was unstable. He was of the earth, earthy — made of dust; with a spirit, but a creature, and nothing more. The second Man is out of heaven. He was "holy," and had a positive, inherent, lasting character, utterly incapable of sin. His positive holiness came from the direct, divine work of the Spirit in His incarnation, apart from fallen nature.
This birth did not simply add one more descendant to Adam's family.
When the fullness of time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of woman (Gal. 4:4), yet conceived under the direct action of the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35). That is why, although the Deliverer came by the woman, He was not an ordinary son of Adam at all. The virgin birth means that the Lord Jesus, while truly Man, was yet a Man of a new order.
The word "therefore" ties the name to the miracle just described.
"Therefore the child to be born will be called holy — the Son of God," and not just Son of Man. This is very important. "Son of God" is a title that belongs to our Lord in His divine glory before He became a man, and here too. When He became a man, He did not stop being the Son of God. As incarnate He was still the Son of God. And the same was true when He rose from the dead. So the title belongs to Him in all three conditions in which Scripture shows our Lord: Son of God as a divine Person; Son of God when He became a man; Son of God risen from the dead and gone to heaven.
What this verse teaches is narrower than the full doctrine of the Son:
It is not here the doctrine of the eternal relationship of Son with the Father. The Gospel of John, the letter to the Hebrews and the letter to the Colossians establish this precious truth and show how important it is. But here it is the One born by the miraculous conception who, on that ground, is called the Son of God.
This verse does Luke's work, not John's.
The power of the Holy Spirit did what would otherwise have been impossible. "That holy thing" born of the virgin was the "Son of God," even as to His humanity. This does not by itself declare what John declares. It is not the same as the Word becoming flesh. Luke's is the Gospel of the Manhood, as John's is of the Deity of the Lord. Both sides are essential to His proper glory.
- Question — Mary's "how" came from faith, not doubt, and God answered it fully; He reads the heart behind the words.
- Power — The conception was not nature at work but God at work: a creative act of the Holy Spirit.
- Holy — He is holy, not merely innocent. Adam could lose his innocence; nothing could touch this holiness.
- Name — "Therefore" links the name Son of God to the miracle. Yet the title was His before He became man, and His again when He rose.
- New — Born of a woman yet not of Adam's line, He is a Man of an entirely new order.
And behold, Elizabeth, thy kinswoman, she also has conceived a son in her old age, and this is the sixth month to her that was called barren
Gabriel has just told Mary that she will bear the Son of God. Then, without being asked, he adds a second piece of news: an elderly relative is already six months pregnant. Why does the angel attach this quieter miracle to the greater one, and what does the pairing of these two mothers teach?
The verse fixes the timing of Gabriel's visit to Mary by the calendar of Elizabeth's pregnancy. That detail marks a shift in how God was dealing with people.
God sends the angel Gabriel in the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy with a more important message. After the long silence of centuries, heaven speaks again. In Luke it speaks in a closer way than in Matthew, where Joseph receives the messages, and receives them in a dream. Here we have open, face-to-face speech, and the most important message comes not in the temple but in a private home. God is coming near in His grace; and the nearer He comes, the more fully He reveals Himself.
Gabriel offers Elizabeth's case as evidence. One writer puts the reason plainly:
The less wonderful birth is set before her to strengthen her faith to believe in the more wonderful birth. "For nothing will be impossible with God" (Luke 1:37).
Mary had asked how this could happen. Commentators separate her question from the doubt of Zacharias, Elizabeth's husband.
What God promised had to be outside the order of nature. Even so, unlike Sarah and Zacharias, it was not distrust that prompted her question. We see this because God let Gabriel give her a full and complete answer… But to strengthen the faith God had already given her, He also sent Gabriel to tell her of His grace to her relative Elizabeth. "For," he said, giving the unchanging basis of all belief, "nothing will be impossible with God."
Both women conceive by God's power, yet the two births are not on the same level. The angel even names Elizabeth as the one "called barren." One writer shows how far apart the two children stand:
John comes as a child of promise. A special gift of God renewed a natural power in his mother. But Jesus comes as Son of God, born by no natural power at all, but by the Holy Spirit, beyond nature altogether. One is the child of a barren wife, the other the child of a virgin… Elizabeth was the mother of the saved, Mary the mother of the Saviour. Elizabeth's child was the sanctified, Mary's the Sanctifier.
The same writer explains why the child of a barren woman pictures the saved. It "tells us of God's grace and gift to those who were found powerless and lacking."
Mary now had two impossible pregnancies to think about, not one.
Gabriel's visit then ended. But first he told Mary that her relative Elizabeth was expecting a child, news she was clearly hearing for the first time. The barren woman was to become fruitful. The virgin was to bear a son. Both were miracles.
Gabriel stops there and says nothing more about Elizabeth's child.
He needed to add nothing more about John. This was enough to move Mary to visit Elizabeth, which was what God intended. Mary's simple faith is beautiful. She gladly took the place of a servant and accepted Gabriel's word, unlike Zacharias, who did not believe (v.38).
The ESV calls Elizabeth Mary's "relative." Older translations say "cousin." People often stretch this family link further than the text allows.
John the Baptist and our Lord were not first cousins, though people often say so by mistake. Mary and Elizabeth were the cousins, as we read in Luke 1:36… God did not send him to identify a relative, but to identify the Son of God, and to bear witness of this to Israel.
- Nearness. After centuries of silence, heaven speaks again. Not in the temple, but in an ordinary home, face to face. God was coming near in grace.
- Evidence. Gabriel gives Mary the lesser wonder to strengthen her faith for the greater one. Six months of it are already there for her to go and see.
- Difference. Elizabeth's son came by a natural power renewed. Mary's Son came beyond nature altogether: mother of the saved, and mother of the Saviour.
- Response. Mary hears just enough to stir her, and answers as a servant. Her question was inquiry, not the distrust of Zacharias.
- Limit. The kinship between the two women is real. But God sent John to identify the Son of God, not a relative.
for nothing shall be impossible with God.
Gabriel has just told Mary that she will have a son, though she has no husband, and pointed her to her relative Elizabeth, who is pregnant in old age. His closing sentence is the ground under the whole announcement, and commentators read it as a word about God's power and as the base of Mary's faith.
The words come at the end of a message that no ordinary birth could explain. One writer treats them as the settling of the whole matter:
This last statement from the angel "who stands in the presence of God" needs no comment. It drives away all doubt for those who will believe. The birth of the Saviour was miraculous, it was by God's power, it was God's work. No man had any part in it; the Son of Mary was holy and undefiled. He was the Son of God... Unbelief says it is against every law of nature, and impossible. Faith answers in the words of Gabriel, who knew God's power well: "nothing will be impossible with God."
Mary had asked how such a thing could happen. One commentator says her faith was already there, and explains why the angel added the news about Elizabeth:
She already had God-given faith. To strengthen it, God sent Gabriel to tell her of His grace to her cousin Elizabeth. "For," he said, giving the unchanging basis of all belief, "nothing will be impossible with God." God would not be God if this were not so; and, as the Lord Himself taught, "All things are possible for one who believes." Mary had learned this deep in her soul. Her answer shows it: "Behold, I am the servant" (the bondservant) "of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word."
Translations differ here because the Greek manuscripts differ. One writer, comparing revised versions with the older English text, notes the change at this exact point:
In verse 37 there is a bold change of reading in the Greek, which gives the wording "no word from God shall be without power."
Read that way, the promise covers more. God can do anything. And every word God speaks carries its own power to happen.
The word Gabriel used is not limited to Mary's situation. One writer applies it beyond the birth itself:
Admit superhuman power, and all difficulty vanishes. "Nothing," we read, "will be impossible with God" — "no thing," neither the virgin birth, nor the raising of the dead!
The same writer presses the point at the level of physical law: "His power is infinite, and no physical law is beyond that power. Nature is clearly subservient to the will of its Maker."
Gabriel had brought a similar promise to Zacharias earlier, and Zacharias had not believed it. He could not speak until his son was born. One commentator traces how that ended:
On the eighth day after the child's birth the father could speak again. He praised God, and prophecy through a human voice returned. It had been silent for ages. Now it burst out afresh as Zacharias blessed God for visiting and redeeming His people... His unbelief had vanished. Nothing will be impossible with God, Gabriel had said, and to that Zacharias added his Amen.
If nothing is impossible with God, the practical question becomes how a person comes to rely on that. One writer connects the promise to the condition of the one who trusts it:
So faith links the believer to the almighty power of God and puts that power to work. We could even say it brings God Himself in to act for His people. That is why, in the words of our Lord, nothing is impossible to them. But never forget that faith is a real thing. It is a divine plant, and it only grows out of the soil of a broken will. First we must come to the end of ourselves and our resources. We must learn how helpless we are. Only then do we throw ourselves on God and depend fully on Him and His power.
- Power — Gabriel's sentence holds up the whole announcement. The birth "was by God's power, it was God's work." No human father had a part in it.
- Basis — One writer calls it "the unchanging basis of all belief," because "God would not be God if this were not so."
- Reach — The word is "no thing." Neither the virgin birth nor the raising of the dead lies outside it. Nature is under the will of its Maker.
- Reading — Some manuscripts give "no word from God shall be without power." Then the promise rests on what God has spoken, not only on what He can do.
- Response — Mary answered by calling herself the Lord's servant. Zacharias doubted first, then added his Amen. Faith like that grows only "out of the soil of a broken will."
And Mary said, Behold the bondmaid of [the] Lord; be it to me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
An angel has just told a young woman that she will bear a son who will be called the Son of God. Her answer is short, and it gives away everything: she calls herself the Lord's servant and asks only that His word be done.
Mary does not pick a title of honour. She uses the word for the lowest place in a household; older translations read "handmaid" or "bondmaid." She is not the first believing woman to use it of herself:
In Scripture these words often mean a female slave, as with Hagar the Egyptian, Genesis 25:12. But women also used them of themselves as a term of humility. Hannah spoke this way to the Lord and to Eli, 1 Samuel 1:11, 16, 18. Abigail spoke this way to David, 1 Samuel 25:24-41. And Mary and Elizabeth used it as handmaids of the Lord, Luke 1:38, 48.
By taking that place she claims nothing and controls nothing. One writer sees this as the very thing that makes her great:
The angel tells her of the blessing God's almighty power has given to Elizabeth. Mary bows to the will of her God, the submissive vessel of His purpose. In her piety she sees a height and greatness in these purposes. They left her one place only: subjection to the will of God, as their passive instrument. This was her glory, through the favour of her God.
Earlier in the chapter Zacharias questioned an angel, and God struck him dumb. Mary asked a question too, and nothing like that happened to her. The difference lies in the heart, not in the wording:
"But Mary said to the angel, How will this be, since I am a virgin?" She does not doubt. She asks with confidence. So God does not strike her dumb, and there is no sign of unbelief, as there was with Zacharias, who asked, "How shall I know this?" A question may rise in the spirit and need an answer, yet show no lack of faith. Another question could look much the same and still spring from unbelief. God does not judge by appearance. He judges the heart.
Her answer is not the calm of someone with nothing to lose. It cost her, and one writer shows how faith acts when the cost is plain:
In all the range of Scripture there is no instance of a more exalted faith nor of a more complete submission. She could not be blind to what this might cost her in this world. Matthew tells us that she became an object of suspicion and inner trouble even to Joseph. But faith never reasons and is never confused. It counts on God. If He calls us to any service, or to walk in any path, He will both guide and sustain us, whatever the trial or persecution. The calm of a soul which rests in the will of God is beyond words, and this was Mary's inheritance at this moment.
Her closing words tie her whole future to what God has said. What comes of it is the Son of God coming in flesh:
To Mary the whole thing was supernatural. Her faith marks her as a true-hearted and dependent saint. She could only say, "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word" (v. 38); and the angel departed from her. She places herself completely in the hands of God, to be His honoured vessel for the incarnation — the coming in flesh of "that holy thing," "Son of the Highest" and "Son of God."
The title she takes here is the one she keeps. Scripture's last picture of her shows nothing changed:
This is the last time Scripture shows Mary the mother of Jesus. She simply takes her place with the rest, humbled by God's grace towards her, not exalted by it. What a grief it would have been to her to know the place a church that had fallen away from the truth would later give her! No one prays to her, and she does not even lead in prayer. She remains what she was at the beginning, "the handmaid of the Lord," and with this she passes out of the history.
At the wedding in Cana her one recorded instruction points away from herself:
And Mary understood it, saying to the servants, Whatever He says to you, do it. She was still the meek bond-servant of the Lord... He, not she, is the One above all to be heard... She herself could not save others, nor plead for them as He does. She needed to pray herself, since she was a sinner like others, to be saved by faith.
- Servant — Mary's word for herself means a household slave. Hannah and Abigail used it too, as a term of humility.
- Servant asks — Her question carried no unbelief. God judges the heart, not the form of the words, so no rebuke came.
- Servant yields — Bowing to God's will left her nothing of her own. That was her glory.
- Servant pays — Even Joseph suspected her. Faith does not reason out the cost; it counts on God to guide and sustain.
- Servant stays — At the end she is praying with others, not prayed to. She is still what she called herself here: the Lord's handmaid.