Luke 1:59 Kommentar

The narrative which this evangelist gives us (or rather God by him) of the life of Christ begins earlier than either Matthew or Mark. We have reason to thank God for them all, as we have for all the gifts and graces of Christ's ministers, which in one make up what is wanting in the other, while all put together make a harmony. In this chapter we have, I. Luke's preface to his gospel, or his epistle dedicatory to his friend Theophilus (Luk 1:1-4). II. The prophecy and history of the conception of John Baptist, who was Christ's forerunner (v. 5-25). The annunciation of the virgin Mary, or the notice given to her that she should be the mother of the Messiah (Luk 1:26-38). IV. The interview between Mary the mother of Jesus and Elisabeth the mother of John, when they were both with child of those pregnant births, and the prophecies they both uttered upon that occasion (v. 39-56). V. The birth and circumcision of John Baptist, six months before the birth of Christ (Luk 1:57-66). VI. Zacharias's song of praise, in thankfulness for the birth of John, and in prospect of the birth of Jesus (Luk 1:67-79). VII. A short account of John Baptist's infancy (Luk 1:80). And these do more than give us an entertaining narrative; they will lead us into the understanding of the mystery of godliness, God manifest in the flesh.

Luke 1:1 luk 1:1 luk 1:1 luk 1:1Forasmuch as many have taken in hand,.... From hence, to the end of Luk 1:4 is a preface of the evangelist to his Gospel, setting forth the reasons of his writing it; and which he wrote and sent to the excellent Theophilus, for the further confirmation of him in the faith of Christ. It seems that many had took in hand, or attempteo set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us; that is, they undertook to write and publish a very particular and exact narrative of the birth, life, actions, doctrines, miracles, sufferings, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ; things which Luke, and other Christians, had the fullest and strongest evidence, and were confidently assured of, and most firmly believed, even with a full assurance of faith. By these many, he cannot mean the authentic historians of evangelical facts, as Matthew and Mark; for they two cannot, with any propriety, be called many; and besides, it is not so very clear and certain a point, that they had, as yet, wrote their Gospels; nor would this evangelist suggest any deficiency, weakness, and inaccuracy in them, as he seems to do: nor does he intend such spurious writers as the authors of the Gospels according to the Nazarenes, Hebrews, and Egyptians; of Nicodemus, Thomas, Matthias, and of the twelve apostles; and still less, the Gospels of Cerinthus, Basilides, and other heretics; since these would not have passed without a censure from him, for the falsehood, fabulous, and trifling stuff in them, as well as for the wicked and heretical opinions propagated by them; and besides, these pieces were not extant when this Gospel was written: but he seems to design some honest and well meaning Christians, who undertook to write, and did write an account of the above things, which were firmly believed by all; and which they took from the apostles, and first ministers of the Gospel, from their sermons and discourses, and from conversation with them; and which they committed to writing, partly to help their own memories, and partly for the benefit of others; in which, no doubt, they acted an upright part, though attended with weakness: wherefore, the evangelist does not censure them as false, wicked, and heretical, nor approve of them as divine and perfect for though they honestly meant, and designed well, yet there might be many things collected by them, which were impertinent, and not proper to be transmitted to posterity; and what might be wrote with great inaccuracy and deficiency, and in a style the Holy Ghost thought improper things of this kind should be delivered in: and therefore the evangelist, moved and inspired by the Spirit of God, set about the following work, and under the same influence completed it. The phrase, , "to set forth in order a declaration", is as Dr. Lightfoot observes, out of the Talmud (h), agreeably to the Jewish way of speaking, "R. Chasdai said to one of the Rabbins, who was , "setting in order a declaration" before him. &c. or relating in order a story before him. (h) T. Bab. Succa, fol. 53. 1.

And it came to pass that on the eighth day,.... The precise time fixed in the normal restitution of the ordinance of circumcision, Gen 17:12 though this was not always attended to, but circumcision was sometimes deferred to another time; yet keeping the exact time was judged most commendable and praiseworthy; see Gill on Phi 3:5. they came to circumcise the child; that is, the neighbours and cousins of Elisabeth, who were at the time of her delivery; eight days after they came again to be at the circumcision of the child: who was the operator is not known; nor was there any particular person appointed for this service; but any one might do it, whether ecclesiastic or laic, men or women, father or mother, or any other friend; for the rule is (n), "all are fit to circumcise; even an uncircumcised person, and a woman, and a minor, may circumcise in a place where there is no man; but a Gentile may not circumcise at all. The circumcision of John seems to be performed in Zacharias's house, and by one of those that came; for Zacharias, being dumb, could not say the blessing which the circumciser was obliged to say: nor indeed could he say that, which, as the father of the child, belonged to him; concerning which, take the following account (o): "the circumciser blesses before he circumcises, "saying", blessed is he that hath sanctified us by his precepts, and hath commanded us concerning circumcision: if he circumcises the son of his friend, or if he circumcises his own son, he blesses him with "this blessing"; and hath commanded us to circumcise a son: and the father of the son blesses with another blessing; blessed art thou, O Lord our God, the King of the world, who hath sanctified us by his precepts, and hath commanded us to enter him into the covenant of Abraham our father.----If his father is not there, they do not say this other blessing.----And if there are any standing there, they say, as he hath brought him into the covenant, so bring him to the law, and to matrimony, and to good works; and after that the father of the child, or the circumciser, or one of those that stand by, bless, "saying", blessed art thou, O Lord our God, the King of the world, who sanctified the beloved (Isaac) from the womb, &c. How many of Elisabeth's neighbours and relations were present at this ceremony, is not related; but the Jews require ten persons as witnesses of it; for they say (p), that "testimonies worthy of belief, in Israel, are ten, the witnesses of the covenant of circumcision are ten, the witnesses of a dead person ten, &c. and at this time also it was usual to give the child a name, which was not by divine appointment, but was a custom that prevailed among them; which took its rise from Abraham, having his name changed at the time when circumcision was enjoined him, Gen 17:5 and from the naming and circumcision of Isaac, mentioned together, . and they called him Zacharias, after the name of his father: as the neighbours of Naomi gave a name to the son of Boaz and Ruth, calling him Obed, Rut 4:17. This they took upon them to do, because that Zacharias was deaf and dumb; but why they should call him by his name, cannot well be accounted for, it not being usual to call the father, and the son, by the same name; unless they were desirous of continuing the same name in the family, which had been famous in Israel for a prophet, and a priest: to call children by Gentile names was not lawful. In the Targum on Amo 6:1 it is said, "woe to them that name their children after the names of the Gentiles. (n) Maimon. Hilch. Milah, c. 2. sect. 1, (o) Ib. c. 3. sect. 1, 2, 3. (p) Pirke Eliezer, c. 19.

The holy Evangelist has especially remarked, that many thought the child should be called after his father Zacharias, in order that we might understand, not that any name of his kinsfolk was displeasing to his mother, but that the same word had been communicated to her by the Holy Spirit, which had been foretold by the Angel to Zacharias. And in truth, being dumb, Zacharias was unable to mention his son's name to his wife, but Elisabeth obtained by prophecy what she had not learnt from her husband. Hence it follows, And she answered, &c. Marvel not that the woman pronounced the name which she had never heard, seeing the Holy Spirit who imparted it to the Angel revealed it to her; nor could she be ignorant of the forerunner of the Lord, who had prophesied of Christ. And it well follows, And they said unto her, &c. that you might consider that the name belongs not to the family, but to the Prophet.

(in Gen. Hom. 39.) The rite of circumcision was first delivered to Abraham as a sign of distinction, that the race of the Patriarch might be preserved in unmixed purity, and so might be able to obtain the promises. But now that the promise of the covenant is fulfilled, the sign attached to it is removed. So then through Christ circumcision ceased, and baptism came in its place; but first it was right that John should be circumcised; as it is said, And it came to pass, that on the eighth day, &c. For the Lord had said, Let the child of eight days be circumcised among you. (Gen. 17:13.) But this measurement of time I conceive was ordered by Divine mercy for two reasons. First, because in its most tender years the child the more easily bears the cutting of the flesh. Secondly, that from the very operation itself we might be reminded that it was done for a sign; for the young child scarcely distinguishes any of the things that are around him. But after the circumcision, the name was conferred, as it follows, And they called him. But this was done because we must first receive the seal of the Lord, then the name of man. Or, because no man except he first cast aside his fleshly lusts, which circumcision signifies, is worthy to have his name written in the book of life.

Now in an allegory, the celebration of John's birth was the beginning of the grace of the New Covenant. His neighbours and kinsfolk had rather give him the name of his father than that of John. For the Jews, who by the observance of the Law were united to him as it were by ties of kindred, chose rather to follow the righteousness which is of the Law, than receive the grace of faith. But the name of John, (i. e. the grace of God,) his mother in word, his father in writing, suffice to announce, for both the Law itself as well as the Psalms and the Prophecies, in the plainest language foretel the grace of Christ; and that ancient priesthood, by the foreshadowing of its ceremonies and sacrifices, bears testimony to the same. And well doth Zacharias speak on the eighth day of the birth of his child, for by the resurrection of the Lord, which took place on the eighth day, i. e. the day after the sabbath, (septimam sabbati.) the hidden secrets of the legal priesthood were revealed.

And it happened on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they called him by the name of his father, Zacharias. And his mother answered and said: Not so, but he shall be called John. The holy evangelist thought it well to mention beforehand that many thought the child should be called by the name of his father, Zacharias, so that you might note that the mother did not dislike the name of some relative, but that this name was infused by the Holy Spirit, which had been foretold by the angel to Zacharias before. Indeed, he, being mute, could not intimate the name of the son to his wife, but Elizabeth learned the prophecy, which she had not learned from her husband.

John means “the grace of God” or “in whom there is grace.” By this name are expressed the entire extent of the grace of the gospel dispensation which he was to proclaim, and especially the Lord himself, through whom this grace was to be granted to the world.…As to his subsequent declaration and confirmation of the name of John, and the opening of Zechariah’s mouth and his speaking, blessing God, it is surely evident that once the grace of the new covenant was manifested by the apostles, a large number of priests also became obedient to the faith.

John’s circumcision clearly set forth an image of the Lord’s resurrection because it too occurred on the eighth day, that is, on the day after the sabbath. And just as the former was wont to release people from the punishable state of everlasting death, so the latter displayed the perfect newness of immortal life in our Creator, and revealed that it is to be hoped for in us.

Why was the name given after circumcision? Because one must first receive the seal from God, and only then a human name. In other words: circumcision signifies the rejection of fleshly qualities, for no one is worthy of being called a soldier of God and being inscribed by name in the heavenly book before rejecting and cutting off fleshly qualities.

The preface, or St. Luke's private epistle to Theophilus, Luk 1:1-4. The conception and birth of John Baptist foretold by the angel Gabriel, Luk 1:5-17. Zacharias doubts, Luk 1:18. And the angel declares he shall be dumb, till the accomplishment of the prediction, Luk 1:19-25. Six months after the angel Gabriel appears to the virgin Mary, and predicts the miraculous conception and birth of Christ, Luk 1:26-38. Mary visits her cousin Elisabeth, Luk 1:39-45. Mary's song of exultation and praise, Luk 1:46-56. John the Baptist is born, Luk 1:57-66. The prophetic song of his father Zacharias, Luk 1:67-79. John is educated in the desert, Luk 1:80.

On the eighth day they came to circumcise - See an account of this institution in the note on Gen 17:10-14 (note). Had circumcision been essential to an infant's salvation, God would not have ordered it to be delayed to the eighth day, because, in all countries, multitudes die before they arrive at that age. Baptism, which is generally allowed to have been substituted for circumcision, is no more necessary to the salvation of an infant than circumcision was. Both are signs of the covenant - circumcision, of the putting away the impurity of the flesh; and baptism, of the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, producing the answer of a good conscience towards God. Confer Pe1 3:21, with Tit 3:5. This should never be neglected: it is a sign and token of the spiritual grace. They called him Zacharias - Among the Jews, the child was named when it was circumcised, and ordinarily the name of the father was given to the first-born son.

Luke 1:1 (Luk 1:1-4) set forth in order--more simply, to draw up a narrative.

BIRTH AND CIRCUMCISION OF JOHN--SONG OF ZACHARIAS AND PROGRESS OF THE CHILD. (Luke 1:57-80) eighth day--The law (Gen 17:12) was observed, even though the eighth day after birth should be a sabbath (Joh 7:23; and see Phi 3:5). called him--literally, "were calling"--that is, (as we should say) "were for calling." The naming of children at baptism has its origin in the Jewish custom at circumcision (Gen 21:3-4); and the names of Abram and Sarai were changed at its first performance (Gen 17:5, Gen 17:15).