Structure and Literary Form
CHAPTER 5 Luke 1:57 – 80
IV. Summary: The growth of John in spirit and withdrawal to the wilderness (1:80)
Explanation of the Text
1:57 – 58 Now for Elizabeth the time of her bearing was fulfilled and she bore a son. Her neighbors and relatives heard that the Lord had magnified his mercy with her, and they rejoiced with her (
). Luke
concentrates on the reaction to the birth of the child rather than the actual birth. Since Elizabeth had hidden herself and Zechariah was mute, the news of the birth comes as a sudden surprise for the neighbors and kin. They react appropriately, rejoicing in God’s remarkable demonstration of mercy, knowing that God has done such things in the past. Their rejoicing is a fulfillment of the angel’s prediction in 1:14. Joy and praise are strains that run through the infancy narrative (1:14, 64; 2:10, 14, 28), and rejoicing with others in community is a theme that runs throughout the gospel. That God
“magnified” ( ) his mercy recalls the verb in 1:46 where Mary
“magnifies” ( ) the Lord. As humans magnify the Lord, the Lord magnifies his mercy. The reference to God’s mercy recalls 1:50, 54 (see 1:72).
1:59 – 60 And it happened on the eighth day that they came to circumcise the child, and they were calling him Zechariah after the name of his father. His mother responded, saying, “No! He will be
called John!” (
). Circumcision on the eighth day reflects conformity to traditional Jewish piety (Gen 17:12; 21:4; Phil 3:5). The rite is mentioned but not narrated. The anonymous “they” who gather for the custom of the circumcision assume that the parents will follow tradition and name the son after the father. With the father mute, they “were calling” ( ) him “Zechariah,” which is not to be taken as a conative imperfect
(i.e., “they were trying to call him Zechariah”). They actually are doing so until they are brusquely corrected by the mother.
“He will be called” ( ) reminds the reader that God is the one
“who has chosen the name” (1:13).3 Luke does not narrate how Elizabeth knows this, but it confirms that God’s plans are being worked out.
Zechariah does not figure in this decision, and neither do the family and friends. They object that she violates what was customarily done in naming a child. But Elizabeth will not submit to the pressure of the community, which hints that traditional expectations will be overturned by God’s new work. The conflict over the name underscores that just as this child’s birth is extraordinary, he will play an extraordinary role in God’s plan.
1:61 – 62 They said to her, “No one of your relatives is called by this name.” Then they were making signs to his father to find out what he
would want him to be called (
). The bystanders reject this announcement from the mother and turn to the father, expecting him to follow normal conventions and overturn her decision. The optative “what he would want him to be called” ( ) ties it to a human decision. That they need to make signs to communicate with him assumes that he is deaf as well as mute.
1:63 He asked for a little wax writing tablet and wrote, “John is to be his name.” They all marveled [at this] ( ). Zechariah, still speechless, must communicate on a writing tablet. The bystanders may be amazed that he substantiates what his wife said independently, because he could not have heard her insistence that the child be called John. Since
“John” was not an uncommon name for priests, their amazement may signal instead that they realize that something numinous is happening. Zechariah’s confirmation of the name means that “he has read rightly the signs of God’s action and that he reads the larger promise differently in the light of the fulfillment he has witnessed.” He now understands and accepts “the divine plan at which he baulked in the first episode.”4
1:64 – 65 Immediately, his mouth was opened and his tongue [was loosed] and he began to speak blessing God. And fear came upon all their neighbors, and all these events were talked about throughout the hill country of Judea (
). Belief opens Zechariah’s mouth (cf. 24:31), and praise is the proper response when one understands what God has done. Byrne remarks, “What is so consoling about Zechariah is that he got a second chance — and, in the end, is given the best lines (the Benedictus).”5 This event evokes fear in the crowd, and it is a normal response to evidence that something transcendent has touched their lives (1:12, 30). The bystanders spread the news of these events far and wide, which prepares for the report on John’s celebrated ministry (3:1 – 18).
1:66 All who heard [these things] stored [them] in their hearts, saying, “What then will this child become?” For the hand of the Lord
was with him (
). Coleridge contends, “The act of storing in the heart implies not only incomprehension, but also an openness to clarification in the future, a preparedness to live with unclarity in the hope that there will come a time when the puzzling signs will disclose their true meaning.”6 The people do not ask who the child will be but what ( ) he will become. They have only an inkling that he is a child of destiny, but little more. To their question Luke adds a rare narrative aside that shifts the perspective with the use of the imperfect tense, “For the hand of the Lord was [ ] with him” (see Acts 11:21). This divine hand will be most evident when John reappears preaching and baptizing in the wilderness (3:3).
1:67 – 68 And Zechariah, his father, was full of the Holy Spirit and prophesied, saying, “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, because he has visited and brought about redemption for his people” (
). Attention turns back to Zechariah, who moves from dead silence to praise. Luke characterizes his
speech as prophecy, which is always directed to others, not God.7 It is guidance for those gathered for the circumcision.8
Jewish intertestamental literature suggests that Spirit-inspired prophecy had waned in this era. Prophets became apocalyptic seers, mystics, and scribes. Greenspahn argues that the later rabbis relegated the Spirit to the past because their legitimacy was based on the interpretation of a previous revelation, and they wanted to protect themselves from those claiming a more direct link to the divine while undermining the theological basis for such figures' antiestablishment activities.9 Scribes do not depend on direct inspiration by the Holy Spirit as the prophets did. Luke reveals, however, that the Holy Spirit is active, moving Elizabeth, Zechariah, and Simeon to prophetic speech.10
Zechariah answers more than the question raised in v. 66, “What then will this child become?” He declares what this child’s birth reveals about God’s faithfulness to the promises made to Abraham and David, but, surprisingly, he also declares that it signals the advent of the Messiah to deliver Israel.
The verb “visit” ( ) forms an inclusio around Zechariah’s ode (1:68, 78). It refers here to God’s action in saving or helping his people (see 7:16; Acts 15:14). Zechariah declares that God has “brought about redemption” ( ; lit., “made redemption”).11 He looks to the past to what God has done, and from that memory of God’s fidelity and power he celebrates a victory yet to be narrated. Bock contends that political redemption is in view, but that it “is delayed, because of the failure of much of the nation to respond (13:31 – 35; 19:44).”12 I would argue instead that Zechariah’s hope for political redemption for the nation is mistaken. After Jesus' crucifixion, the disciples dejectedly travel to Emmaus and tell their fellow traveler that they “were hoping” that Jesus “was about to redeem Israel” (24:21). The truth is, he has, but it was not the redemption they were expecting, limited as it was by their narrow, self-centered worldview.
1:69 – 71 And he raised a horn of salvation for us in the house of David his servant. Just as he spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets from ages gone by, salvation from our enemies and from the
hand of all who hate us (
). What follows in vv. 69 – 75 amplifies why God is to be blessed. Zechariah does not refer to his son but to the coming of the Davidic Messiah (“the house of David”). To accomplish his purpose, God raised up “a horn of salvation,” an image that denotes power and strength and is applied to the royal descendant of David (Pss 89:17 – 24; 132:17; 148:14). That the prophets are “from ages gone by” reminds the reader that God fulfills the promises of the past and that the present and future must be understood in terms of what God has said and done in the past (see Acts 3:21). God is not finished speaking, however, because a new outbreak of prophecy is occurring.
The language “salvation from our enemies and from the hand of all who hate us” resonates with a militaristic understanding of national redemption (Ps 106:10, a reference to the deliverance at the Red Sea). But Zechariah understands that the purpose of this “salvation” is to enable Israel to serve God unceasingly and assiduously without the distraction of external conflict or persecution (vv. 74 – 75; see 4:8; Acts 24:14; 26:7).
1:72 – 75 To show mercy to our fathers and to remember his holy covenant, the oath that he swore to Abraham our father, to give to us to serve him without fear in holiness and righteousness before him all our days, having been rescued from our enemies (
). The string of infinitives here defines further how God has helped and reveals the purposes and future results of God’s action. God shows mercy by remembering his holy covenant, which he made in an oath to Abraham. The content of that oath is expressed in an infinitival clause: “to serve him without fear in holiness and righteousness before him all our days.”
In Gen 17 and 22, God specifically promised to make Abraham’s offspring as numerous as the stars and required him to circumcise every male among them, a command that both John’s and Jesus' parents obey. In Gen 26:3 – 5, however, God promised Isaac to fulfill the oath to Abraham because “Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees and my instructions.” Zechariah is a model of one who is righteous and who serves God in the temple. But the narrative will redefine what it means to keep God’s statutes and laws. The verb “to serve” ( ) will mean more than carrying out cultic religious duties (see Phil 3:3).
“Having been rescued from our enemies” recalls the defining event in Israel’s history when God freed his people from the shackles of slavery in Egypt. The biblical account of what happened after that liberation reveals God’s concern to establish a spiritual relationship with the people and concern for social justice. These twin concerns will manifest themselves in the gospel’s narrative of the new liberation brought about through Jesus.
Who “the enemies” are is not specified and need not be limited to the Roman overlords. Hendrickx observes, “To a peasant, enemies are all those who try to get what is rightfully his.”13 The identity of the enemies will be expanded beyond earthly foes to include the far more deadly demonic powers opposed to God.
1:76 – 77 And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins (
). Zechariah now directly addresses his own son, and the finite verbs switch from the aorist to the future tense. The angel Gabriel announced John’s future role (1:14 – 17), and Zechariah’s recapitulation of that promise reveals that he both remembers and believes it. John’s role is therefore announced by a heavenly messenger and by his father prophesying under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.14 The prophet Malachi (4:1 – 6) had also prophesied his role. He will go before the Lord (1:17, 76; 7:27), which is synonymous with preparing the way (1:76; 3:4; 7:27). He will lead the people to repent for the
forgiveness of sins (1:17, 77; 3:3), and he will herald the coming of salvation (1:77; 3:6).15
1:78 – 79 By the compassionate mercy of our God, upon whom the dawn from on high will visit us, to shine light for those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to direct our feet into the path of peace (
). God’s
“compassionate mercy” ( , lit., “the bowels [vital organs] of mercy”) drives the action. The future tense “will visit” ( ) finds support among widespread early witnesses and is to be preferred over the aorist tense “visited,” which also has strong, but later, textual support. It is plausible that a scribe changed the future to an aorist to make it conform to the aorist in v. 68. The future tense refers to the expected coming of the Messiah.
The messianic metaphor changes from “a horn of salvation” to “the dawn from on high.” The word translated “dawn” ( ) can refer to the sprouting up of a plant and the rising of a star, and its usage gave it a messianic connotation of “branch” (Jer 23:5; Zech 3:8; 6:12). The image of shining a light for those sitting in darkness suggests that it should be interpreted “as a light metaphor” (see Isa 58:8; 60:1; Rev 22:16).16 Coleridge shows that this image transforms the association of ideas evoked by the messianic “horn of salvation”:
The messiah appears as a presence (light) which drives out an absence (darkness) rather than a presence (power) which drives out another presence (enemies). A new depth of mercy is revealed as God’s new and more spectacular display of power. It is this which will be the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham; and it is this which will be the new and final visitation of God which demands recognition.17
The “path of peace” is not simply the path that leads to peace but is itself a peaceful path: “Peace will characterize the walk along this road.”18
1:80 The child grew and became strong in spirit, and he was in the wilderness until the time he was made known to Israel ( ). In a transitional summary, Luke describes John’s maturity into manhood (see 1 Sam 2:21, 26; 3:19) and his departure for the wilderness before he describes the birth of Jesus.
This jump in the chronological sequence is again to be explained by Luke’s use of interlocking panels to tell the story (see 1:56). When the next panel starts, he resets the clock. “He was made known” ( ; lit., “his showing forth”) refers to John’s, not Jesus', public manifestation. Since the noun can refer to an installation into an office, I have used the passive voice to render the phrase in order to reinforce that God is behind his public appearance.
John waxes strong in spirit ( ), which refers here to “the source and seat of insight, feeling, and will.”19 It means that he develops the “inner resources for the understanding and performance of God’s will.”20 In the infancy narratives, the Holy Spirit fills people so that they can make prophetic utterances, but the power of the Holy Spirit is tied solely to Jesus in the gospel. “The word of God” comes to John in the wilderness (3:2), but the Holy Spirit comes upon Jesus at his baptism (3:22; 4:1, 18).
The surface similarities between elements in the Dead Sea Scrolls and John’s ministry in the wilderness21 have caused some to speculate that John was in some way connected to the community at Qumran. Some suggest that since John’s parents were elderly, he may have been orphaned, and the community took him in to raise and mold him, as Josephus attests that they did with orphaned children (J.W. 2.8.2 §120). Bovon comments, however,
“The theological distance between the historical Baptist and the sect at Qumran seems too large to make a sojourn there probable.”22 Any parallels between John and Qumran do not necessarily indicate a direct association but may only reflect the fact that they shared a similar Scripture and similar expectations that were in the religious air at that time.
John’s connection to Qumran is unlikely for a number of reasons.23 Both John and the Qumran covenanters dwelt in the Judean wilderness and appealed to Isa 40:3, “a voice of one calling” in the wilderness (1QS 8:13 – 14, 9:19 – 20), but this verse sounded a common eschatological hope that imagined the desert to be “the staging ground for Yahweh’s future victory over the power of evil.”24 John and the community at Qumran both had an
ascetic bent, but the purpose of the asceticism at Qumran was self- purification, which was linked to a rigid exclusivism. The members set themselves apart from a people they considered to be unclean. By contrast, John expressed no interest in creating an exclusive, priestly dominated sect.
While both were interested in water rites, the ritual baths at Qumran were limited to members of the sect and were repeated daily to achieve Levitical purity. It was not associated with repentance or the forgiveness of sins.
John’s immersion was open to everyone who repented, had nothing to do with Levitical cleansing, and was not recurring. It was a proleptic experience of the divine judgment and forgiveness that prepared one for the coming judgment of God.
Theology in Application
1. The Visitation of God for Salvation
Jesus will affirm that John is more than a prophet (7:26) and the last of the prophets (16:16), but Zechariah makes clear that “the prophet of the Most High” is subordinate to the “Son of the Most High” (1:32). His prophetic hymn has a christological slant, and it becomes clear that “the main reason for blessing the God of Israel is what He has done for His people in Jesus the Messiah.”25
In that regard, Zechariah says more than he knows. To “go before the Lord” from Zechariah’s point of view would not be the Lord Jesus but the Lord God. Elizabeth’s greeting in 1:43, however, introduces another Lord, and the narrative makes clear that John will prepare the way for Jesus. The ambiguity has theological consequences and is deliberate. John does not prepare the way for either the God of Abraham or Jesus but for both.26 Schweizer scores the point: “the eschatological coming of God is thus identified with the coming of Jesus.”27 The meaning of “the Lord” is therefore transformed to include Jesus, whose mission and person is the incarnation of God’s visitation.
It is remarkable to note how theological terms in Scripture have lost their meaning in contemporary American culture. For example, the term redemption (1:68) is now more often connected with sports than with Christianity. Whatever the sport, if a player has flubbed something that cost his or her team the game and the championship, he or she may live in infamy and have their error played and replayed on TV and in the minds of the fans. Then, that player may do something in another game or season that
“atones” for the poor performance and wins “redemption.” This concept of
“redemption” requires that one must do something that makes amends for previous mistakes. Redemption in a far more profound sense, the biblical sense, cannot be won by our better performance that makes up for past letdowns, flops, and humiliations. It is brought by God and God alone to persons who are unworthy to receive it except that they have placed their hope exclusively in God. God delivers us from evil, provides the atonement for our sins, and saves us from our seemingly irreversible corrupted state.