Luke 1:38. Behold the handmaid of the Lord! without a verb. Comp. Luke 1:36; Luke 5:12; Luke 5:18.

γένοιτο] λοιπὸν οὐ μόνον ἐπίστευσεν, ἀλλὰ ηὔξατο γενέσθαι αὐτῇ, καθὼς ὁ ἄγγελος εἵρηκε, Euthymius Zigabenus; “eximio fiduciae exemplo,” Grotius.

REMARK.

The natural explanation of the annunciation to Mary (Paulus) is at variance with the evangelic account; and as the latter unfolds simply, clearly, and delicately an external procedure, the objective is not to be rendered subjective and transferred, as a reciprocal operation of the theocratic Spirit of God and the emotional feeling of the Virgin, by means of poetic colouring to the soul of the latter (Lange, L. J. II. 1, p. 67). As history, believed even as it is related, the narrative arose, and that too independently of the preliminary history of Matthew, and even incompatibly with it,[26]—in consequence of the circumstance that the divine sonship of Jesus was extended to His bodily origination (see on Matthew 1:18), an idea, which gave shape to legends dissimilar in character and gaining currency in different circles. Thus, e.g., it is clear that the history, adopted at Matthew 1:19 ff., of Joseph’s perplexity and of the angelic message which came to him does not presuppose, but excludes the annunciation to Mary; for that Mary after such a revelation should have made no communication to Joseph, would have been not less psychologically unnatural, than it would have been a violation of the bridal relation and, indeed, of the bridal duty;[27] and to reckon on a special revelation, which without her aid would make the disclosure to her betrothed, she must have been expressly directed by the angelic announcement made to her, in order to be justified in deferring the communication of her pregnancy to her betrothed. We make this remark in opposition to the arbitrary presuppositions and shifts of Hug (Gutacht. I. p. 81 ff.), Krabbe, Ebrard, and others. According to the view invented by the last-named, it is assumed that Joseph had learned Mary’s pregnancy, immediately after the appearance of its earliest signs, from the pronubae (“suspicious women”); that immediately there ensued the appearance of the angel to him, and forthwith he took her home; and that for all this a period of at most fourteen days sufficed. Mark and John have rightly excluded these miracles of the preliminary history from the cycle of the evangelical narrative, which only began with the appearance of the Baptist (Mark 1:1); as, indeed, Jesus Himself never, even in His confidential circle, refers to them, and the unbelief of His own brothers, John 7:5, and in fact even the demeanour of Mary, Mark 3:21 ff., is irreconcilable with them.[28]

The angelic announcement made to Zacharias, which likewise withdraws itself from any attempt at natural explanation (Paulus, Ammon), appears as a parallel to the annunciation to Mary, having originated and been elaborated in consequence of the latter as a link in the chain of the same cycle of legends after the analogy of Old Testament models, especially that of Abraham and his wife. As in the case of the annunciation to Mary the metaphysical divine Sonship of Jesus, so in the announcement to Zacharias the extraordinary divine destination and mission of John (John 1:6) is the real element on which the formation of legend became engrafted; but to derive the latter merely from the self-consciousness of the church (Bruno Bauer), and consequently to take away the objective foundation of the history, is at variance with the entire N. T. and with the history of the church. For the formation of the legend, moreover, the historical circumstances, that John was the son of the priest Zacharias and Elizabeth, and a son born late in life, are to be held fast as premisses actually given by history (in opposition to Strauss, I. p. 135), all the more that for these simple historical data their general notoriety could not but bear witness. This also in opposition to Weisse and B. Bauer, who derive these traditions from the laboratory of religious contemplation. Further, as to what specially concerns the late birth of John, it has its historical precedents in the history of Isaac, of Samson, and of Samuel; but the general principle deduced from such cases, “Cum alicujus uterum claudit, ad hoc facit, ut mirabilius denuo aperiat, et non libidinis esse quod nascitur, sed divini muneris cognoscatur” (Evang. de Nativ. Mark 3), became the source of unhistorical inventions in the apocryphal Gospels,[29] as, in particular, the apocryphal account of the birth of Mary herself is an imitation of the history of John’s birth.

[26] Comp. Schleiermacher, L. J. p. 59 ff.

[27] Lange, L. J. II. p. 83 f., rightly acknowledges this, but, following older writers, thinks that Mary made the communication to Joseph before her journey to Elizabeth, but that he nevertheless (“the first Ebionite”) refused to believe her. This is not compatible with Matthew’s narrative, especially Luke 1:18. And what Lange further (p. 89) adds, that during Mary’s absence a severe struggle arose in his soul, and this state of feeling became the medium of the revelation made to him, is simply added.

[28] Schleiermacher is right in saying, L. J. p. 71: “These occurrences have been entirely without effect as regards the coming forward of Christ or the origination of faith in Him.”

[29] See, in general, R. Hofmann, das Leben Jesu nach d. Apokr. 1851; also Gelpke, Jugendgesch. des Herrn, 1842 (who, moreover, gives the Jewish legends).

38. be it unto me according to thy word] The thoughts of the Virgin Mary seem to have found their most natural utterance in the phrases of Scripture. 1 Samuel 3:18, “If it be the Lord let Him do what seemeth Him good.” For Mary too was aware that her high destiny must be mingled with anguish.

And the angel departed from her] We can best appreciate the noble simplicity of truthfulness by comparing this narrative of the Annunciation with the diffuse inflation of the Apocryphal Gospels. Take for instance such passages as these from one of the least extravagant of them, ‘The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary.’ “The Angel Gabriel was sent to her … to explain to her the method or order of the Conception. At length having entered unto her, he filled the chamber where she abode with an immense light, and saluting her most courteously said, ‘Hail Mary! most acceptable Virgin of the Lord! Virgin full of grace … blessed art thou before all women; blessed art thou before all men hitherto born.’ But the Virgin who already knew the countenance of angels, and was not unused to heavenly light, was neither terrified by the angelic vision nor stupefied by the greatness of the light, but was troubled at his word alone; and began to think what that salutation so unwonted could be, or what it portended, or what end it could have. But the Angel, divinely inspired and counteracting this thought, said, Fear not, Mary, as though I meant something contrary to thy chastity by this salutation; for &c., &c.” The reader will observe at once the artificiality, the tasteless amplifications, the want of reticence;—all the marks which separate truthful narrative from elaborate fiction. (See B. H. Cowper, The Apocryphal Gospels, p. 93.)

Luke 1:38. Γένοιτό μοι, be it done unto me) Compare the assent which David expresses to God’s covenant promise, 2 Samuel 7:25 [The word that Thou hast spoken—establish it for ever, and do as Thou hast said], 28.—ἀπῆλθεν, departed) even as he previously came in, Luke 1:28.

Verse 38. - Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. "God's message," writes Godet, "by the mouth of the angel was not a command. The part Mary had to fulfill made no demands on her. It only remained, therefore, for Mary to consent to the consequences of the Divine offer. She gives this consent in a word at once simple and sublime, which involved the most extraordinary act of faith that a woman ever consented to accomplish. Mary accepts the sacrifice of that which is dearer to a young maiden than her very life, and thereby becomes pre-eminently the heroine of Israel, the ideal daughter of Zion." Nor was the immediate trouble and sorrow which she foresaw would soon compass her round by any means the whole burden which submission to the angel's message would bring upon the shrinking Nazareth maiden. The lot proposed to her would bring probably in its wake unknown sufferings as well as untold blessedness. We may with all reverence think Mary already feeling the first piercings in her heart of that sharp sword which was one day to wound so deeply the mother of sorrows; yet in spite of all this, in full view of the present woe, which submission to the Divine will would forthwith bring upon her, with an unknown future of sorrow in the background, Mary submitted herself of her own free will to what she felt was the will and wish of her God. Luke 1:38Luke 1:38 Interlinear
Luke 1:38 Parallel Texts


Luke 1:38 NIV
Luke 1:38 NLT
Luke 1:38 ESV
Luke 1:38 NASB
Luke 1:38 KJV

Luke 1:38 Bible Apps
Luke 1:38 Parallel
Luke 1:38 Biblia Paralela
Luke 1:38 Chinese Bible
Luke 1:38 French Bible
Luke 1:38 German Bible

Bible Hub