Commentary on the Gospels

The Annunciation
Luke 1:26-38

Exposition

Verses 26-27. Already in Luke’s Gospel, we have read about a high-ranking angel emerging from the hidden spiritual realm and confronting a mere mortal with a message from God Almighty. That angel was Gabriel, and he met Zacharias the priest while he was performing his duties in the Temple to tell him the glad tidings that he was going to have a son in his old age, a son with the unique mission of preparing the nation for the coming of the Messiah. The birth would be miraculous because Zacharias and his wife were beyond the age for producing children. All the angel predicted came to pass. Within a short time, Elizabeth became pregnant, and the son who was born grew up to be the spiritual giant known to history as John the Baptist.

Luke’s narrative picks up the story at the time when Elisabeth was six months along in her pregnancy. The Lord then sent Gabriel on a second mission similar to his earlier one to Zacharias, for he was to announce the birth soon of a son who would be miraculously conceived. But otherwise the two cases were very different. The recipient of the good news would not be an old man, but a young woman. The conception would not be achieved by ordinary means, but wholly without a human father. And the child to be born would not be outstanding because he was merely a good man, but because He was the God-man.

To carry out his assignment, Gabriel descended to the village of Nazareth, a small Jewish settlement in Galilee far from Jerusalem, the center of Jewish culture and religion. Nazareth was burdened with a bad reputation among Jews (John 1:46). Various explanations have been proposed, but the best points to evidence that Nazareth was close to a Roman military garrison, and therefore was frequented by gentile soldiers.¹ Perhaps some Jews in the village made a living by doing business with the hated Romans. But as often happens in the way of human affairs, reputation is one thing, but reality may be another.

Whatever the reputation of Nazareth, a strong synagogue was located there, as we learn later in the account of Jesus’ career (Matt. 13:54–58; Luke 4:16), and it was the home of at least two godly families. One was the family of Mary, the young girl Gabriel went to see, and the other was the family of Joseph, a man of humble trade but noble descent. He was a carpenter, as we learn elsewhere in the Gospels (Matt. 13:55), a man whose occupation did not register very high on the Jewish social ladder. Yet he was a descendant of David. Later, when we consider Jesus’ ancestry, we will show that Joseph was in the direct line of kings, and if the Jews had still retained a king in the royal succession arising from King David a thousand years earlier, he would have been Joseph. But you say, if his ancestry was so special, would he not have been regarded by other Jews as a man of importance? No, centuries of time tend to erode any prestige inherited from forefathers. Consider my sisters. They are actually my half-sisters, daughters of my father's first wife, who died several years before my father married my mother. Genealogical research has established that on their mother's side, they are direct descendants of the Swedish king known as King Gustav I, who founded Stockholm about five centuries ago, but no one thinks them important as a result even though their connection to Gustav is much closer in time than Joseph's was to David.

Our basis for supposing that the families of Mary and Joseph were devoted to God is that they produced two young people of sterling character and exceptional maturity. They were prime examples of the benefits of being reared under careful instruction in the ways of God. Later in the account we will see that Mary’s mind had been shaped by an intimate knowledge of God’s Word. Also, we will see in Joseph’s behavior that he accepted without any reserve his duty to give God instant and full obedience. God looked upon this young man and woman with such approval that He entrusted them with a responsibility of monumental significance. He called upon them to do no less than serve as parents to Jesus Christ.

At the time the angel came to Mary, she and Joseph were betrothed. Among the Jews, betrothal (or engagement, as we would say) was considered as binding as marriage. It was impossible to end it without going through the procedure required for actual divorce.² If a betrothed woman proved unfaithful to her fiancé by having sexual relations with another man, she was considered guilty of adultery, a capital offense.³

But although betrothal was regarded as a lifelong commitment, it was initiated in a very simple manner, without any elaborate ceremony or great expense. It was customary among the Jews for property to be exchanged at the time of a betrothal. A man generally gave something for his bride, either a piece of money or a written statement of intent to marry the girl.⁴ Among Jews who were reasonably prosperous, betrothal and marriage were formalized by written contracts,⁵ specifying how much the wife would receive in the event that her husband died or divorced her.⁶ At the same time, fathers agreed to provide their daughter with a dowry.⁷ This was generally quite substantial, with 10% allotted to the bride so that she could purchase clothing, perfumes, and other beauty enhancers.⁸ Considering the low social class of Mary and Joseph, however, any financial commitments made by their elders must have been rather modest.⁹

In all classes of Jewish society, the betrothal ceremony itself was an unpretentious affair conducted before a small number of witnesses. The couple spoke words of promise to each other according to an accepted formula, and some respected person in attendance pronounced a benediction. Afterward there was no grand feast, merely the sharing of a cup of wine between the engaged couple.¹⁰

The normal custom was to wait about a year after the betrothal before the couple actually came together as man and wife.¹¹ One likely reason is that they were usually quite young at the time of betrothal. The girl was normally in her early teens, often only twelve,¹² and although the boy was nearing completion of his apprenticeship in a trade that he could use to support a family, he was normally only a few years older than his future wife. Many boys at the time of engagement were only sixteen or seventeen. Few were older than twenty.¹³

Application

Should we follow ancient Jewish practice and marry off our children when they are still fairly young? No, for several reasons.

1. Kids today are much less mature.
2. Our children will not be ready to enter the world of adults until they get as much education as possible.
3. Divorce today is much easier. Therefore, a young person is wise to stay away from marriage until his or her choice of a partner will surely be a stable choice capable of surviving the trials of life.

Even though Mary and Joseph probably were still quite young when they came together in marriage, they succeeded in establishing a God-honoring home full of wisdom and love. We learn from their example that the best way to prepare our children for marriage and all other adult responsibilities is to give them a solid foundation in the precepts and principles of the Christian life. That's the key to becoming a happy adult with a successful marriage.

Exposition

Why was it the Jewish custom to begin married life at such a young age? Probably two factors were most decisive.

1. The Jews were highly motivated to prevent immoral conduct before marriage. Under Mosaic law, a woman whose husband discovered that she had been immoral before marriage could have her stoned to death (Deut. 22:20-21). Later we will discuss why Mosaic law included this provision. Its severity is probably one reason why the rabbis taught that a father should betroth his daughter to his slave rather than keep her unbetrothed beyond puberty.¹⁴
2. Jewish culture differed from ours in a profound way that is easy to miss as we look backward in time. It does not occur to us how dramatically the customs and attitudes of a nation can be shaped by life expectancy. In modern America, according to statistics for the year 2020, average life expectancy at birth for all classes and ethnic groups was 77.0 years. For women it was a bit higher, standing at 79.9 years, and for men it was somewhat lower, just 74.2 years.¹⁵ By comparison, in light of good evidence, longevity in Jesus’ day was not even half as much. Some years ago when archaeologists excavated the tomb near Jerusalem of a wealthy Jewish family during the first-century AD, they found the remains of seventeen individuals. Five had died before reaching the age of seven, three fourths had died before reaching age 37, and only two lived beyond age fifty.¹⁶ You can see that in a society where life was so short, it was advantageous for many reasons to marry as soon as possible.

Application

God has gifted us with long lives. How have we used them? A believer in the early church had only a few years to lay up treasure in heaven. We have been given far more time to do God's work, and God will hold us accountable for how we have used it. You say, I'm retired now, and I have a right to take it easy. God certainly does not expect you to go beyond your physical limitations. But there is no such thing as retirement from God's service. Some of you older folks are in a better position to give time to ministry than younger folks because you are no longer tied down to making a living or caring for children. Your golden years can also be the years when you lay up for yourself golden treasure in heaven.

Exposition

Verse 28. When we read the account of Gabriel’s visit to Mary, we see why Luke placed this account in close proximity to his account of Gabriel’s visit to Zacharias, for the two accounts are full of instructive contrasts. They introduce a theme that runs throughout Luke’s Gospel—the difference between a merely external religion that is scrupulous in keeping all points of God’s law, and an internal religion that is more concerned with keeping the heart warm toward God Himself.

No doubt Zacharias was a genuine saint, a man redeemed by faith in the coming Redeemer. Yet he had allowed his religion to become overly formal. He had slipped into a preoccupation with meeting his outward obligations, so that although in all matters of duty he was blameless (Luke 1:6), his heart was a bit cold and his faith a bit weak when the angel appeared to him.

But not so with Mary. As we will see, her heart was warm indeed and her faith mighty in degree when the angel came to her. The most notable difference between the old man and the young woman lay, however, in their view of self. The religion of looking good that Zacharias had adopted in some measure is always founded on self-esteem. He had become too proud in God’s sight. No doubt his special privilege to offer incense in the Temple had boosted his pride somewhat on the day of the angel’s visit, and we see pride in his behavior. Imagine telling the angel Gabriel that he lacked credibility. But we see both in the angel's dealings with Mary and in her reaction that she was a girl of exceptional humility.

Where did Gabriel meet Zacharias? In the Temple as the old man was performing an important ceremony. Here was the center of Jewish worship. Here was a professional priest, a member of the religious establishment, standing before God as a representative of the whole nation, carefully and exactly following a ritual mandated by law and tradition. At the moment the angel appeared, Zacharias was the embodiment of formal religion, and yet he fell short of pleasing God and God rebuked him and chastened him with an affliction.

Where did Gabriel meet Mary? Very likely she was inside her home in Nazareth (v. 28). In sharp contrast to the Temple, it was a humble dwelling in a despised city. What was she doing? She was alone, so it was probably not at night, for a poor family in those days did not have separate bedrooms. They all slept on the floor on separate mats in the main room of the house.¹⁷ During the day, however, a woman might be left alone in the house as others went about their business. From Luke's account, it does not seem that the angel suddenly appeared to her in all his angelic glory. When she saw him, she was troubled not by his splendor, but by his words. It is likely that with gentle concern not to frighten the young girl, Gabriel simply came to the door of her house and stood there in the form of an ordinary man. The door of a poor house might be left open during the day because otherwise it would have been dark inside. Any windows were small and placed high in the wall.¹⁸ Thus, it is very possible that Gabriel spoke to Mary from the doorway. His voice was no cause for alarm, for a man might be standing there and greeting her for some legitimate reason. Yet what he said did raise concern.

What was Mary doing immediately before his arrival? I suspect that she was praying. Certainly she was at that moment close to God in her heart, for she was ready to receive the angel's message. So when Gabriel appeared to her, she was the embodiment of heart religion, of the kind that depends in no way on where you are and what you are doing.

Let us consider now how Gabriel's approaches to Zacharias and Mary differed, for here also we find a sharp contrast. When Gabriel addressed Zacharias, he used only his name, and throughout his message he kept the spotlight on God’s goodness—not only to Zacharias and his wife, who would receive the blessing of a son, but also to the whole nation, for John would be God’s instrument to restore many to a right relationship with God. He said nothing whatever to exalt Zacharias.

But Gabriel’s approach to Mary was altogether different. He greeted her with words of strong praise (vv. 28, 30). It was a fourfold salutation.

1. He said, "Hail." A casual reader might think that the word he used was roughly equivalent to "hello." Although "hail" is an acceptable translation, the actual Greek word carries a more definite meaning. Often translated "rejoice," it expresses a desire that the greeted person will be happy as a result of receiving some good thing.¹⁹ It is similar to the English greeting, "Good day."
2. The angel continued, "thou that art highly favored." The Greek word rendered "favor" is closely related to the word for "hail," and both are variations of the word normally translated "grace."²⁰ The basic thought of the greeting is that because divine grace will soon be poured out upon Mary, she should be glad.
3. Then Gabriel said, "The Lord is with thee." There is no possibility of misunderstanding the meaning here. It is a plain idea clearly expressed. One of its purposes must have been to prepare Mary for the revelation that she would conceive a child solely through the overshadowing power of God.
4. The conclusion of the greeting was, "Blessed art thou among women." It may surprise you that these words are actually missing from all modern translations that depend on the so-called critical text of the New Testament.²¹ This text ultimately derives for the most part from the two earliest complete manuscripts, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, both dating from the fourth century AD. They share many of the same peculiar readings because they both come Alexandria, Egypt. For over a hundred years, most textual scholars have regarded these sources as closest to the original, but in the last fifty years a growing faction of scholars has come to a different perspective. They point out that the differences between the received text, which was employed by the translators of the Bible we use, the KJV, and the critical text show a clear pattern. In the vast majority of cases, a reading in the received text is either missing from the critical text or there in simplified form.²² A classic example is John 7:8. According to the critical text, Jesus said, "Ye go up to the feast; I am not going up to this feast, because my time has not yet been fulfilled." The problem in this version of His words is that shortly afterward, He went up to the feast. But the received text remembers that He said, "I go not up yet unto this feast." In other words, the received text has Him telling the truth, whereas the received text has Him telling a lie or waffling back and forth. Speaking to you frankly, I believe that many liberal scholars prefer the version in the critical text simply because it pictures Jesus as a flawed human being. It is far more reasonable to suppose, however, that a late copyist working in haste simply failed to preserve the little word "yet."²³
        On my website you will find a paper I wrote that argues at some length that all the peculiarities of the critical text represent late corruptions.²⁴ Many seem to reflect some bias or point of ignorance that might be expected in a copyist who lived centuries after the New Testament was written and who belonged to a state church that was wandering away from sound doctrine. By contrast, many of the readings unique to the received text exist in writings of the church fathers before the fourth century AD.²⁵ I digress to discuss this matter because you deserve to know why many churches still use the KJV. The basic reason is that they see it as the English translation closest to what the writers of Scripture actually said.

Application

Although we view the KJV as the true Word of God, at the same time we recognize that it is becoming more inaccessible to the average reader. Why is that? One main reason is that the younger generation has become so immersed in electronic media that their minds are becoming less capable of sequential reasoning; that is, linear thought. They can decipher written words, but they find sustained reading difficult and unpleasant. Today's slippage in reading skills has created an enormous problem for Bible-centered churches like ours, for we are people of The Book. How should we deal with this problem? Christians have always promoted universal education as the best way to assure that all the brethren will be good readers. But given today's crisis, we must do even more. We should pursue a true remedy by adopting three measures.

1. We should encourage the use of study Bibles which are modern translations based on the received text rather than the critical text.
2. We should give our children a Bible-centered education.
3. In some settings we should consider offering adult education classes on how to read.

Exposition

In my paper on the critical text I do not discuss this particular verse, Luke 1:28. It seems to me very possible that some copyist left out "Blessed art thou among women" because, on the surface, it seems to contradict a text later in Luke’s Gospel. "And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it" (Luke 11:27-28). But is there a contradiction? Not at all. What Jesus meant was that His mother deserved no special blessing simply because she was His mother. She had to win God’s blessing in the same fashion as everyone else, by hearing and keeping the word of God. The angel’s declaration that Mary was blessed among women must therefore be understood in the light of what Jesus said. In comparison with other women, it was not her performance of a maternal role, but her heart of surrender that marked her as special. Nearly every woman is willing to be a mother. But hardly any would accept Mary’s role if they knew what she suffered as a result. When the angel came to Mary, she did not know exactly what lay ahead either, not fully. For example, she did not comprehend the horror she would endure in seeing her son hanging on a cross. But God foreknew that she would bear it all with a sweet spirit, always in submission to what God ordained.

Let us return to the first word of the angel: "Hail." In the rosary, the word "Mary" is added so that in its familiar Latin version, the greeting is "Ave Maria," words that have figured prominently in countless musical compositions in the classical tradition, as well as in the folk and popular traditions. We are taking an extended look at Gabriel’s greeting for the simple reason that no words of Scripture have been more often recited than these. In the Catholic rosary, which is a prayer of adoration directed to Mary, the angel’s greeting is repeated no less than 150 times. The one who prays holds a string of beads and, with completion of each required prayer or each repetition of certain words, shifts his or her fingers to hold the next bead.²⁶ Upon coming to the end of the string, the person knows that the ritual has been performed correctly.

As Protestants, we of course believe that Catholics have a wrong view of Mary. Since we are examining one text that Catholics use to support their view, I think it is relevant here to state our objections. Our motive is not to demean Catholics or to stir up strife. Certainly not. Rather, we feel that love requires us to clearly present our side on important issues. Why? Because the Bible tells us to speak the truth in love (Eph.4:15). Catholic veneration of Mary is a serious departure from Bible-based religion. Therefore, it is a harmful practice based on wrong thinking. One possible way to escape from wrong thinking is by the thinker himself probing matters more deeply, but often the only way that succeeds is by someone else explaining to him why it is wrong. In a free society, we should uphold free discussion of ideas as the only possible road to truth.

Catholics claim that they do not worship Mary or the saints, only venerate them. But there is a fine line between worship and veneration, and worship of any false god is a violation of the very first commandment (Exod. 20:3). We believe that adoration of Mary crosses the line into worship in three respects:

1. Catholics make images of her and bow down before them when they pray. In the Second Commandment, God Himself defined this as worship and forbade it (Exod. 20:4-5).
2. Catholics present their prayers and petitions to Mary rather than directly to the Father, expecting her to serve as their intercessor. But God has reserved an intercessory role for Christ alone (1 Tim. 2:5), because no one but the divine man can plead for us on the basis of His own merits. To treat Mary as qualified to speak on our behalf is a form of worship.
3. Catholics assign Mary attributes deserving of adoration, such as sinlessness. To pay tribute to her for a perfection of this kind is also worship.

To worship any human creature of God is grossly insulting to the Creator Himself, for it ignores the vast superiority of the sinless to the sinful.

But having said all this, we must balance it by giving Mary her due. She was an unusual girl. The angel did not tell her that she was unusually good. Rather, he said that she would receive unusual grace. Still, it was obvious that God chose her for the reason that she was unusually good. She was in fact so good that God could implicitly commend her without any danger that she would lose her humility. He knew that she would be able to hear the angel’s words without swelling up in pride.

There is another consideration here that is easy to overlook but extremely important. How would Mary herself want to be regarded by fellow believers in Christ? Would she welcome being adored as a sinless supersaint? No, as we said, she was a young woman with exceptional humility. She would have been shocked, to say the least, or even scandalized to think that others would raise her almost to the same plane as her son, remembering her in numberless paintings and images where she rather than Christ is the center of attention. If we really respect Mary, we will honor her own wishes, and certainly chief among these would be the desire to remain out of the limelight, in the background of the Gospel story rather than in the forefront. It is appropriate to focus on her when we remember Jesus' birth, but otherwise we should hardly notice her at all, in keeping with what she herself would prefer.

Verse 29. We see Mary’s humility in her reaction to the angel’s words. The first feeling in her heart was not vanity, but agitation.

It was not the angel’s visit that troubled her. As we said before, we may surmise that when Gabriel came to Mary, he did not simply materialize before her, nor did he at first display his angelic glory. He was after all appearing to a young girl, and his purpose was not to frighten her. He wanted to be as nonthreatening as possible.

You remember that when the women went to Jesus’ tomb on Sunday morning and found the door rolled away, they went inside and saw angels in the form of men (Luke 24:2–5). We gather from the account that although these exalted beings wore shining garments, their countenances were not shining, merely human in appearance. Since the women were already deeply upset, the angels doubtless did not want to upset them even more by assuming an appearance that was too unearthly and intimidating.

Mary was even more vulnerable, since she had never seen the supernatural, unlike the women who followed Jesus. So, we may assume that Gabriel was much more careful in his manner toward her than he was toward Zacharias, for instance. He manifested himself to Zacharias in a way that quickened fear in the priest’s heart (v. 12). The story suggests that he appeared suddenly and with a show of splendor, for one of his purposes was to remind Zacharias that he was a mere mortal by comparison, and therefore a creature whose heart should stay humble.

When Gabriel came to Mary, it was not his appearance but his words that caused her to quake inside. What did this stranger mean by his greeting? What legitimate purpose could possibly justify praise that, from her perspective, seemed to verge on flattery? Perhaps she was even afraid that the newcomer had evil designs. Besides, she was so meek that any sort of commendation made her feel unworthy and uncomfortable.

Verses 30–33. Gabriel quickly relieved her troubled heart. He began by speaking the reassuring words, "Fear not," which she knew through the Spirit was a command she should heed, and which she doubtless heeded by deliberately calming herself. To help Mary be still in her soul, the angel continued by telling her that she had found favor with God. By now the thought had perhaps dawned in Mary’s mind that the speaker was no ordinary person. Perhaps he had allowed her to see a glimmer of his glory, or to notice perfect facial or bodily features altogether missing from the tribes of fallen man, or to hear a heavenly resonance in his voice, or to sense the penetration of his eyes into her soul, so that now she recognized him as God’s messenger. But then, as a humble and self-effacing girl, her first reaction might have been fear that his mission was to announce God’s displeasure with her in some fashion. The angel immediately addressed that reaction by saying in essence, "No, I am here because God is pleased with you."

Then Gabriel began to unfold the marvelous message that God intended for this small person on planet earth. He told Mary that God chose her to be the mother of a son so important and so central in the larger scheme of things that He could not truly be compared with anyone else. It was sufficient to say of Him that He would be "great." To call Him greater than all or the greatest of all would assign all others too much significance. He alone deserved the name Jesus in its fullest sense. And He alone could be called the Son of the Highest. And He alone was able to revive the languishing house of David and raise it again to preeminence. And He alone had in Himself both the power and the authority to reign forever.

Notice the rich meaning in each of the names that Gabriel used for the coming child. He would be called Jesus. This is the English rendering of the Greek word Iasous, which in turn is the Greek rendering of the Hebrew word Yeshua, a name prominent in the Old Testament.²⁷ Two Old Testament figures called Yeshua appear in our English Bibles with the name Joshua. One was Moses' successor who led Israel into the Promised Land; the other was a high priest in Jerusalem after the return of Jews from exile in Babylon (Zech. 6:11–13). The name of the prophet Hosea is apparently a translation of the same name in abbreviated form.²⁸ These three prominent Old Testament figures are types of Christ in His three offices, which are prophet, priest, and king. Hosea the prophet pictured His prophetic office, Joshua the high priest His priestly office, and Joshua the conqueror His kingly office. Just as Hosea was rejected by his own wife, so Christ the prophet would be rejected by His fellow Jews. Just as the Joshua central to the Book of Zechariah served the nation of Israel as a high priest, so Jesus would be a high priest offering His own body as a sacrifice for our sins. Just as the Joshua who succeeded Moses led Israel into Canaan, so Jesus will lead us into our land of promise.

The name, Yeshua, is full of spiritual meaning. It combines components of two root words, one referring to Jehovah, the other to salvation.²⁹ So, contained in this name is a powerful message, which can be understood in either of two ways: either as "God the Savior," or "God is salvation." In other words, the name of Jesus tells who He is. He is God taking upon Himself the role of saving us from our sins. Therefore, the name speaks not only of His deity, but of His humanity as well, for only as a man could He die in our place.

Gabriel also called the coming child "Son of the Highest." Lest Mary misunderstand the meaning, the angel later said even more plainly that the child would be the Son of God (v. 35). The emphasis upon Jesus’ place in the Trinity was no doubt intended to help Mary grasp the need for a miraculous conception, achieved without a human father. The angel said in essence that Jesus’ real father was the eternal being that we know as our heavenly Father. Yet we should always remember that we are entitled to call Him Father only because we as believers have been incorporated into the body of Christ, his true Son.

Lastly, Gabriel identified the child as the one who would inherit the throne of his father David and rule over the nation of Israel forever, as king of an eternal kingdom. Mary, as a young woman well versed in the Scriptures, knew that the prophets had spoken of such a ruler arising from David’s line. The promise of an eternal kingdom perfect in justice and righteousness is a theme of Old Testament prophecy. God had told David himself that one of his successors would reign forever (2 Sam. 7:11-13, 16; Ps. 89:3, 34-37). Later prophets reaffirmed the promise (Isa. 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer. 23:5-6; 33:15). How could God be His father if David would also be His father? No doubt neither this question nor its answer had yet dawned on Mary, but the answer is that His Davidic ancestry would pass through His mother only. Although Joseph was a descendant of David, he would not be the biological father of Jesus, so that Jesus could be both the divine Son of God and the human son of David. The Jewish nation in Jesus’ day was keenly aware of all the prophecies pointing to the great leader who would arise in their midst and achieve mastery of the whole world, which He would rule from Jerusalem, His place of enthronement. For many Jews, the main reason they longed greatly for His coming was that they wanted to escape from Roman oppression. But for godly Jews, such as Mary and her family, a fervent hope for this coming descendant of David sprang from their vision of the kingdom He would introduce. It would be a kingdom replacing the present evil world, full of injustice and suffering and personal ruin through sin, with a world governed by a righteous king with power to make righteousness the norm throughout society. Gabriel’s words to Mary must have awakened in her the breathtaking realization that she herself would be one instrument God would use to fulfill all His promises of a happy future forever.

Soon after the day of Pentecost, the church began to call Jesus by a new name. Before that time, He was known as Jesus of Nazareth to His enemies, as Master or Rabbi to His disciples. But on the day marking the beginning of the Church Age, Peter announced that henceforth Jesus would be known as the Lord Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus the Lord, or Jesus Christ the Lord (Acts 2:36). The New Testament teaches that to be saved, we must believe on His name (John 1:12; John 3:18; Acts 20:21; Acts 4:12; Romans 10:13; 1 John 5:13), and the name we are given to believe and confess is the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31). The requirement is not that we address Him according to a certain formula when we call upon Him to save us, but that we believe He is in fact the Lord Jesus Christ: first, that He is Lord, a divine Being who has the right to expect our perfect obedience and to punish any disobedience; second, that He is Jesus, the real man whose life and death and resurrection are reported in the New Testament; and third, that He is Christ, the One anointed by God to carry out the work of our redemption through His death on a cross.

In Gabriel’s message to Mary, we see allusions to all three names. Because the coming child would be the Son of the Highest (v. 32) and Son of God (v. 35), on the same divine plane as His Father, He would also be Lord. Through the willingness of Mary and Joseph to give Him the human name chosen by God (v. 31), the coming child would be Jesus. That He would be the Christ is implied by the angel's description of His place in the history of mankind. He would be the son of David that God would, in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, raise to kingship over an eternal kingdom (vv. 32–33). He would become ruler of all even though the kings of the earth would vigorously oppose Him (Ps. 2:1–12) and put Him to death (Dan. 9:25–26). Prophecy identifies this coming successor to David as the One anointed by God (Ps. 2:2; Isa. 61:1; Dan. 9:24–25). "Anointed One" is the literal meaning of His title "Messiah" (in Hebrew, Mashiach).³⁰ Likewise it is the meaning of His title "Christ" (in Greek, Christos).³¹ Therefore, Jesus would be the Christ because He would be the Messiah. God will someday lift Jesus to a station higher than all created beings because He has accomplished the first task assigned Him, which was to humble Himself even unto death so that we might be saved (Phil. 2:5-11).

The message that Gabriel brought to Mary from the counsels of heaven has been known down through church history as the Annunciation, an old-fashioned word that simply means "announcement." But actually there were two announcements. In the angel’s opening statement recorded in verses 30 to 33, we learn of a momentous turning point that lay soon in the future of mankind: Mary would give birth to the exalted figure known to history as the Lord Jesus Christ. In other words, God Himself would become flesh and dwell among us. That was Gabriel’s first announcement. Then in his concluding statement he made another announcement no less amazing. The second was prompted by a question rising from all the excitement and wonder now flooding Mary’s mind.

Verse 34. Mary asked the angel, "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" The question certainly expresses doubt. Therefore, it leaves many readers extremely puzzled, for earlier in the chapter they see that when the same messenger brought a similar promise to Zacharias—the promise of a son—the priest also expressed doubt and God chastened him. Yet here it seems almost as if God showed favoritism to Mary. Instead of rebuking her doubt, the angel patiently answered her question. How do we explain the difference?

The difference lay in what they were doubting. Zacharias heard that God intended to give him and his wife a son despite their advanced age. That is, God was going to perform a miracle, and Zacharias recoiled from the promise because he thought it impossible. He refused to believe in the full magnitude of God’s power. Thus, he was chastened for doubting God.

But in Mary's response to Gabriel, we see no doubt in the miraculous. She in no way disputed his announcement that she would give birth to a son descended from David and known as the Son of the Highest. Later, when Gabriel revealed that she would be a virgin mother—a miracle without precedent in human history—she again accepted immediately, without reservation, that God could do as He said. Nowhere in her conversation with the angel do we find her guilty of doubting God. On the contrary, we find what we sometimes describe as childlike faith. She was in many respects still a child, and in her simplicity she had the great advantage of believing whatever God promised, however impossible it might seem to older people whose imaginations have been worn down by years of ordinary life in a humdrum world.

Then what exactly was Mary doubting when she protested that she knew not a man? She was doubting herself; specifically, her own qualifications to fulfill the role that God was bestowing upon her. Her question was basically this: "If God wants me to be a mother, how can I accomplish His will when I am not even married?" She was anxious to please God, but did not know how. Yes, she was betrothed to Joseph, and doubtless she thought that Joseph would be the child’s father, because, after all, Joseph was a descendant of David, just as the child would be. But the decision to proceed with marriage was not hers to make; it was Joseph’s. Mary probably thought that the angel was announcing something that would happen soon, yet conceiving a child in the near future was perhaps not compatible with Joseph’s plans, as she understood them.

Mary’s question after hearing Gabriel’s announcement was therefore in a different category than Zacharias’s question after hearing God’s message to him through the same messenger. Zacharias’s question expressed unbelief. Mary’s expressed lack of comprehension. Her question sought to understand better what the angel was saying, and we see from Gabriel’s response that God never frowns on a good question from a good heart.

Verses 35-37. Indeed, the angel dealt with Mary very gently and graciously by giving her question a full answer. Yes, he said, you will have a child soon, yet you need not fret to make it happen. The conception will not require that you know a man. The reason is that the child will not have a human father. Rather, He will be conceived by the power of God and will, as a result, be rightly known as the Son of God.

Some heretics down through the ages, the Mormons among them, have misconstrued the miraculous conception of Jesus as the product of a physical union between God and Mary. But God was not the biological father of Jesus. In fact, we may say that the conception was not accomplished by either a physical union or a spiritual union between God the Father and Mary. Indeed, the angel’s words made it perfectly clear that the conception would not be the work of any single person of the Trinity, but of all three working cooperatively, as in all the great achievements of God.

See, for example, the account of creation in Genesis 1:1-3. Throughout the days when the worlds were being fashioned, the Father was the source of the divine plan that unfolded step by step. He was also the source of the power that made it all possible. The One who spoke to express the Father’s will was the Son, who is the Word of God; that is, He is the person of the Trinity whose role always is to declare the Father’s will (John 1:1-3), as well as to show the Father’s character (John 14:9-10). And the Spirit of God, hovering upon the face of the deep, was the executive agency who carried out the Son’s directions.

We see a similar threefold division of responsibility in the Incarnation. Notice that Gabriel’s message clearly sets forth the doctrine of the Trinity. All three persons appear in verse 35. They are named as the Highest, the Spirit of God, and the Son of God. The power and plan derived from the Father, the Spirit coming upon Mary implanted the new life in her womb, and the new life was the Son, who would be the visible expression of the Father, serving to reveal the Father to all mankind.

Gabriel said that the power of the Father would overshadow Mary. He is called the Highest here as He is also in verse 32 because the Jews did not distinguish the persons of the Godhead, so the concept of a distinct divine person properly known as the Father was unfamiliar to them. It remained for Jesus to teach us that we have a heavenly Father (Matt. 6:9).

What Gabriel announced to Mary must have greatly challenged her faith, because it far exceeded her understanding. He did not want her to sink into doubt because the promise was full of new ideas hard to comprehend. Therefore, in kindness and condescension, the angel gave her faith some strong practical support. He called her attention to the miracle God had recently performed for her cousin Elisabeth. In her old age, she had conceived a son by God’s power, and now was in her sixth month of pregnancy. The lesson for Mary was that anything is possible with God. It is doubtful that Mary’s faith was in danger of wavering. Still, giving her the good news about Elisabeth not only steeled her against doubt, but also made the angel’s visit an even more joyful moment to remember.

Verse 38. Mary’s outstanding character, resting on both emotional and spiritual strength, is evident in her reaction when told that she would be the virgin mother of Christ. A weaker girl might have gone into psychological shock and sputtered in confusion, or slipped into hysterics. A girl with shallow faith might have raised objections. A girl accustomed to assert herself might have tried to engage the angel in lengthy conversation. A girl less humble than Mary might have spoken words of self-congratulation, such as, "Well, I always knew that God must have something special in store for a girl like me." No, none of that.

What did Mary say? "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word." "Handmaid" is an old-fashioned word that simply means "servant girl." She was declaring her full, immediate, and unqualified submission to whatever God ordained in her life. She therefore provides the perfect picture of someone walking in the center of God’s will. In these few words we see why Mary was chosen to receive the greatest honor ever bestowed on a mortal woman—the honor of serving as the mother of our Lord.

Two reactions that Mary did not display greatly increase our respect for her character and greatly enlighten our understanding of her relationship to Joseph. If any other betrothed women in the ancient Jewish world learned that she was going to have a divinely conceived child, she would likely have, in a fairly dramatic fashion, expressed two kinds of fear: first, that she would be labeled an immoral woman; second, that her fiancé would reject her. Since Mary was highly intelligent, we may presume that these concerns flashed through her mind. Yet she did not express them, probably because she did not wish to appear disrespectful of the mighty angel or ungrateful for God's amazing gift. Yet after the angel left, she no doubt gave deep thought to these concerns until she had resolved them. From later developments, we surmise that she decided to tell Joseph about the angel's visit and entrust him with her future. Why? She must have had tremendous confidence in Joseph. She must have expected that he would believe her story, that to protect her reputation he would marry her quickly, not long after her pregnancy began, and that he would raise the child as his own. Her mountain of respect and love for this man must have had a solid basis in previous experience. She must have learned beyond any doubt that he loved her greatly. He must have proved that he was a man of wise judgment. And most of all, godliness must have been a shining feature of his character.