Commentary on the Gospels

Birth of John the Baptist
Luke 1:57-80

Exposition

Verses 57-58. After nine long months of waiting, the time finally came when Elisabeth gave birth to John. The angel Gabriel, who had prophesied John's entrance into the world, said also, "Many shall rejoice at his birth" (v. 14), and in this detail as well as in every other respect, his words proved to be fully true. The news that the aged couple now had a little son spread quickly among their village neighbors and close relatives, all of whom greeted it with celebration. This was an occasion not only for congratulating Zacharias and Elisabeth, but also for praising God, because everyone recognized that the child’s birth was a divine miracle. The couple was too old to produce a child by a happy work of nature.

It is interesting that these friends of the couple saw the child’s arrival not just as a blessing in a general sense, but more specifically as an outpouring of divine mercy. Here is an allusion to all the shame, both self-inflicted and inflicted by society, that she had endured as a barren woman, for in the Jewish world, a woman who failed to produce children was viewed as a burden on her husband. He and others were tempted to blame her for taking his support even though she had not made her expected contribution to the family’s welfare. Children were not only a source of pride, but also an essential provider of income as they grew older and worked in the family business. We see now another reason why achieving motherhood was understood as God’s mercy upon Elisabeth. Besides giving her something good, it took away something evil—her shame.

Verses 59-63. God ordained that the circumcision of a male child should be performed on the eighth day after birth (Gen. 17:12). Among ancient Jews, the customary way to express time intervals was to use inclusive reckoning. When measuring the number of days between two events, they counted calendar days including the partial days at both ends. Thus, throughout history even until modern times, the Jews have circumcised a male child when he is one week old.¹ The day one week after birth is eighth on the calendar if the day of birth is first.

The Jews viewed circumcision as a requirement of the law, but the rite was not invented by the law of Moses. It originated centuries before Moses was born, back in the days of Abraham. God had commanded Abraham to circumcise every male member of his household as well as every male descendant who would be born in the future. This physical mark would serve as a sign of God’s covenant with Abraham (Gen. 17:3-10). The obvious meaning of circumcision is that the people of God would set themselves apart from the world and show their loyalty to a holy God by living not as slaves to the flesh, but as masters over the flesh.

At the time of John's birth, the longstanding custom was to name a male child on the day of his circumcision, when in a sense he became a member of the nation.² In Old Testament times, a child's name was sometimes chosen by his mother (Gen. 29:31–30:24; 1 Sam. 1:20; 4:21) and sometimes by his father (Gen. 16:15; Exod. 2:22). In New Testament times, it is likely that both parents usually had a voice in making the decision. But when friends and family gathered to celebrate the new child of Zacharias, the priest was unable to tell them the name chosen for his son. Why? Because he was still unable to speak. He had been suffering from dumbness ever since Gabriel had announced that he and his wife would have a child. This affliction was God’s chastening for his failure to receive the message by faith and for instead voicing doubt that it was true.

But the affliction was only temporary. The angel said that it would last only until his prophecy was fulfilled. So why, a week after John’s birth, was Zacharias still silent? The exact words of Gabriel had been that Zacharias would be deprived of speech until "these things shall be performed" (v. 20). Yes, he was referring to John's birth, but he was also referring to the things that Zacharias himself was called upon to perform, and on the day of circumcision, the priest had not yet given the child his divinely appointed name.

The relatives visiting the aged couple took the initiative and tried to name the baby after his father. In this attempt to pay tribute to Zacharias, they apparently expected no opposition from either him or his wife. Yet the mother spoke up in protest, saying decidedly that the child should be called John.

We need not think that what followed was a family argument. There is no evidence here of any heated exchange. The disagreement merely produced a discussion back and forth of what the child’s name should be. The relatives pointed out that no male figure in the family, whether among living relatives or dead ancestors, bore the name John. Yet they did not presume to override Elisabeth’s choice. They took the question to Zacharias, and by means of hand gestures, they asked him what the little boy should be called. He replied, no doubt by means of hand gestures also, that he wanted them to bring him a writing tablet. When one was brought to him, he fulfilled his role as the boy's father by spelling out the boy's future name. At the same time, he fulfilled his duty as God’s servant by conferring upon the boy the very name that God had already chosen, the name John.

The assembled group of well-wishers responded with surprise, even to the extent of great wonder. They marveled that this older couple should forsake custom and tradition by giving their son a name wholly without precedent among his forebears.

How much they knew about Zacharias’s encounter with Gabriel in the Temple is uncertain. They must have heard the basic facts, the same facts that, for all the priests and worshippers at the Temple on the day when Zacharias’s affliction began, became common knowledge. The friends and relatives who came to the boy’s naming ceremony on the day of his circumcision had doubtless heard that while the aged priest was performing the important duty of offering incense, he had seen some sort of vision that left him speechless (Luke 1:22). But Luke’s account leaves us with the impression that otherwise they knew nothing. They were unaware that God’s messenger Gabriel had promised Zacharias the very son who had now come into the world, and that the affliction now silencing him was chastening for his failure to believe God. Nor did they know that the child’s appointed name was John.

As we have said before, John (in Hebrew, Yohanan or Yochanan) means "God is gracious."³ The name refers to the boy’s future ministry. Through him, God would graciously offer the nation an opportunity to repent of their sins and regain a close relationship with Himself, the God of their fathers. If they humbly confessed their backslidden condition, He would reach out to them with unlimited forgiveness and love.

On the day of circumcision, the one person besides Zacharias who knew the right name for the child was Elisabeth. Somehow he had already revealed this name to her. We suggest in another lesson that he made her aware of it in the same way that he shared it with the whole family—by inscribing it on a writing tablet. If so, Elisabeth must have been literate, even though many women in her culture were not.

Verses 64-66. Calling the child John prompted great wonder in those gathered around, but their wonder soon gave way to feelings even deeper and more unsettling. As soon as Zacharias obeyed God by giving his child the name God chose, the fetters on his tongue were loosed so that he was able to speak, and his first words were what God wanted to hear. He opened his mouth and praised God for the gift of a son. He expressed exceeding joy and gratitude, exactly as he should have back when this wonderful gift was promised to him by Gabriel.

Application

We too should not fail to praise God when we receive some divine blessing. Indeed, praising Him should be uppermost in our daily spiritual life. It is easy to become preoccupied instead with negative thoughts. There is always come circumstance of life—perhaps some personal affliction, or some disappointment caused by another person's childishness or foolish thinking, or some difficulty in meeting a responsibility, or some personal failure—there is always something to distract us from rejoicing as we should in God's goodness. But our clear duty is to rejoice always (Phil. 4:4).

Exposition

The impact upon those who stood by was to put fear into their hearts, and as the story of what happened spread throughout the villages nearby in the hill country of Judea, it had the same effect. People responded with fear. Why? We will suggest two probable reasons.

1. The circumstances of Zacharias’s affliction clearly pointed to the hand of God. He lost his speech while in the Temple right after he showed disbelief in God's Word, and he regained it at the very moment when he had a great desire to praise God not just in the silence of his own heart, but also in a public gathering so that others might hear of God’s goodness. The timing of these events clearly points to a supernatural cause. It was obviously by God’s power that he both lost his speech and regained it. The normal reaction of human beings when they witness a divine miracle is to feel afraid. As a result of sensing both the closeness and the sovereign might of God, they are stricken with a sharp awareness that they are mere sinners by comparison. If they have never repented of their sins, they now have some vision of the awful consequences. Even if they have won the peace that comes with knowing that past sins have been forgiven, they still respond with a fear of God that may be described as reverential fear. It is not a fear of judgment for sins already committed, but a fear holding them back from sinning again. It is also a larger vision of God’s awesome majesty.
2. Luke says that the fear spreading to the region round about was stirred up by "all these sayings." Apparently he is referring not just to Zacharias’s first words after his speech was restored, but also to his succeeding words recorded in verses 67 to 79. As we study them, we will discover why everyone found them so deeply moving.

Verse 67. The message that proceeded from Zacharias after his faculty of speech had been renewed was not strictly his own invention. The Spirit came upon him and filled him so that he might devise words with the authority and truthfulness of inspired prophecy. Christ later referred to John the Baptist as both a prophet and more than a prophet (Matt. 11:9-10, 13). But we often forget that he was preceded in a prophet’s role by his own father. Zacharias’s message looks ahead to two great works of God in the future, one soon, another far away. In the nearer future, he foresees the special role of his own son. In the more distant future, he foresees God’s plan for the whole nation.

Verses 68-75. Like two other inspired pronouncements in Luke 1—the Annunciation in verses 28 to 36 and the Magnificat in verses 46 to 55—Zacharias’s words have a name fixed by long tradition. The name is based on the first word in the Vulgate, an ancient Latin translation. We read it in our version as "blessed." In Greek, the word is the source of our English word "eulogy."⁴ But in Latin, the word is benedictus,⁵ which now serves as the familiar name for the whole passage from verses 68 to 75. The meaning of this word is essentially the same in all three languages. It refers to the transfer of something good from one person to another.

In verse 68, the person Zacharias blessed was the Lord Himself, and the good thing he offered up to the Lord was his own love and praise. To explain why God was worthy of blessing, he cited God's goodness to Israel.

In verse 71, Zacharias said that this same goodness would lead to decisive action on Israel's behalf. God would at last save the nation from all her enemies. The instrument of this great deliverance would be the man described in verse 69 as "an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David." The obvious reference is to the man that all godly Jews in Zacharias’s day awaited with great longing: the Messiah Himself, the one foreseen in ancient prophecy as arising from the lineage of David.

Zacharias's reference to the Messiah as "a horn of salvation" is metaphorical language borrowed from Psalm 18:2: "The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler, and the horn of my salvation, and my high tower."⁶ The term "horn" is used throughout the Old Testament as an image of strength (1 Sam. 2:1, 10; Ps. 75:10; 89:17; 92:10; 148:14; Ezek. 29:21), sometimes with particular reference to the power of a great king. Because it is the offensive weapon of an animal to be feared, like a bull, it often signifies military might. For example, in Daniel’s prophetic picture of the ten rulers who will dominate the world scene at the time when the Antichrist emerges, he compares them to ten horns (Dan. 7:7-8). Also in other passages, the horn represents the might of wicked men as embodied in an army serving a wicked king (Jer. 48:25; Lam. 2:17; Zech. 1:18-21). Yet the same image is often used with specific reference to the people of Israel (Lam. 2:3). At least once, in Psalm 132, it describes the royal authority exercised by the house of David (Ps. 132:17). This last text is significant as another possible source of Zacharias’s words. We see in the surrounding passage, especially in verses 10-12, that the future rebudding of the horn of David points to a king in David's line who will rule in perfect righteousness over an everlasting kingdom. Who is this coming king? The word translated "anointed" in verses 10 and 17 is translated "Messiah" in some other contexts.⁷ We therefore conclude that the Messiah is the great king who will deliver Israel from her enemies and reestablish her as a great nation. He is the "horn of salvation."

Yet when the Messiah came, He did not immediately fulfill Zacharias’s words. He did not sweep away Israel’s oppression by foreign powers and reestablish the throne of David. In fact, He did nothing to terminate, or even to limit, Roman rule over the land of Israel. How then should we understand the prophecy of Zacharias? The specific hope he expresses was a deeper probe into the future, reaching all the way to events still to come, when Christ descends to this world a second time and makes Himself world ruler.

During the Tribulation, the nation of Israel will suffer horrible persecution, taking a toll of lives amounting to fully two thirds of all Jews (Zech. 13:8-9). But at the Battle of Armageddon, Christ and the armies of heaven will enter the realm of this world and decisively put down the Antichrist and all the assembled forces of evil (Rev. 19:11-21). Then Christ will set up His own kingdom on the earth, with Jerusalem as the capital city and Israel in a place of prominence among nations. This way of structuring human society will continue a thousand years. Then God will destroy our world that permits decay and death and create a new heaven and earth of a radically different nature, for they will be perfect in design and perpetual in existence.

Armageddon will be a battle unique in history, for it will feature only one warrior: Christ Himself. All others on His side will not be needed. All on the opposing side will be powerless to do anything. Christ will extinguish the enemy host with the sword from His mouth, which will be an actual visible sword as well as a symbol of the power it wields, for it will picture His Word (Eph. 6:17). Indeed, Christ Himself is the Word (John 1:1-3), and as such He has always been and will always be a sufficient instrument for every work of creation or destruction that God undertakes. In the beginning, all things came into being when God spoke (Gen. 1:3, etc.), and at the end, evil will wither away at the command issuing from Christ’s mouth.

After Christ’s victory at Armageddon, He will gather all Jewish survivors of the Tribulation and establish Israel as the nation chief among nations, and certain lands formerly belonging to Israel’s enemies will pass into her possession. It will be at this time that Zacharias’s vision of Israel’s future deliverance and exaltation, as presented especially in verses 71 and 74-75, will come to pass.

Zacharias understood that the coming of a great deliverer not only for Israel but likewise for all humanity and all the created universe would follow a plan that God laid out long ago, even back as far as the creation of the world (v. 70). He is recalling the foundational prophecy in Genesis 3:15, known as the Protevangelium. There, in God’s sentence upon the serpent who beguiled Eve, He declared that a descendant of the woman would someday crush Satan and all his "seed," a term encompassing the entire body of his deluded followers as well as all the wickedness they have inflicted upon the world.

The promise in Genesis 3:15 is not an isolated thought in the Old Testament. As we read through it, we come time after time to another foreglimpse of Christ. Zacharias reminded his hearers that the clearest foreglimpse directly after Genesis 3:15 appears in the account of God establishing His covenant with Abraham (vv. 72-75). In the most fully developed form of this covenant, which God declared to Abraham in his old age after he had proved his willingness to obey God even to the extent of sacrificing his son Isaac, God said that from his line would come a "seed" (singular masculine in the Hebrew⁸) that would bring blessing to the whole world (Gen. 22:16-18). The seed must be a future king, because he would possess the gates of his enemies. Since His impact would be worldwide, He must be the Messiah.

Verses 76-79. On the occasion of naming his son, Zacharias was full of joy demanding outward expression. One reason for his joy was that history had obviously reached the threshold of Christ’s ministry. The unborn Christ had been lodging until recently in his own house. The priest’s song of praise therefore began with rejoicing that Christ was now upon the earth. But another reason for joy was that his own son John, who was to serve as Christ’s forerunner, was newly born. So, Zacharias attached a second stanza to his song. The second looked forward to what John would accomplish for the benefit of the nation Israel.

Zacharias’s vision of his son’s future work agreed with what Gabriel had prophesied concerning him (vv. 15-17). John would be God’s spokesman calling the nation to repent of their sins. Although the angel had clearly stated that John's preaching would produce many changed lives (v. 16), Zacharias said only that John would guide his people into the way of peace (v. 79). That the aftermath would be spiritual revival was merely implied. Instead of emphasizing results, Zacharias chose to stress the means that his son would use to touch hearts. He would shed light in a dark place (v. 79), the light being a symbol of truth: especially, the truth concerning how to be saved (v. 77). As a prophet of the Highest (v. 76), he would in fact carry out a prophet’s function, which is to speak forth the Word of God.

One subject of his preaching would be the necessity of turning away from sin, and to assure that his hearers would grasp the urgency of repentance, he would alert them to where they stood in the unfolding of redemptive history. He would proclaim that the Redeemer Himself was about to appear in their midst. Because John would have the unique role of announcing His coming, his father could say that he would "go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways" (v. 76).

Gabriel had already identified John as one of the historical giants who would fulfill Malachi’s prophecy of a forerunner (compare Luke 1:17 and Mal. 4:5-6). Jesus said that when Malachi referred to Elijah, he was speaking of two prophets who would appear in the future. One was John; the other was Elijah himself, who would return to this world in the end time (Matt. 17:11-12). Yet in Zacharias’s words he chooses not to look again at this particular prophecy of Malachi, but instead to remember several other prophecies.

1. "For thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways" (v. 76). Here is a clear restatement of the essential thought of Malachi 3:1. What messenger did Malachi intend? He was anticipating the fuller prophecy that he would present at the end of his book, speaking of both Elijah and John the Baptist. In his study of Scripture, Zacharias had obviously come to understand that glimmerings of his son’s ministry appear not only in the one prophecy cited by Gabriel, but also in others. Zacharias's words may reflect not only Malachi 3:1, but also Isaiah 40:1–5, which John later applied to himself (Luke 3:3).
2. "To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission [or forgiveness⁹] of their sins" (v. 77). The allusion here may be to Jeremiah 31:34 even though the wording is not exactly the same. Jeremiah was not pointing specifically to John. Rather, he was rejoicing at the prospect of a new covenant that God would someday establish with Israel—a covenant of eternal blessing made possible through God’s work of removing their sins and transforming their hearts (Jer. 31:31-33). It was appropriate to recall this promise at John’s birth because he would announce the One who would establish the new covenant by His death on the cross.
3. "Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us" (v. 78). The words "dayspring from on high" literally refer to the sun rising in the eastern sky. The priest was comparing the Messiah's advent to a dawn of brilliant sunlight dispelling all the darkness of night.¹⁰ Here, Zacharias’s song returned to Malachi’s vision of the divine initiatives that John would be privileged to announce. The priest’s words specifically recall the text where this Old Testament prophet compares the coming of Christ to a glorious burst of morning light (Mal. 4:2).
4. "To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death" (v. 79). This wonderful promise harks back to Isaiah 9:2, the prologue to one of the most detailed portraits of the coming Messiah that we find in the Old Testament. A few verses later, Isaiah states forthrightly that the figure who would someday become the everlasting ruler of the world—the figure known to the Jews as the Messiah—would be both God and man (v. 6). Although He would enter this world through ordinary childbirth, His name would be "The mighty God." The same prophecy yields further critical information. The Messiah would be a descendant of David (v. 7). Also, we learn where His light would first shine (v. 1). A broad range of scholars including the most conservative agree that "lightly afflicted" should be translated "degraded" or "humbled," and "more grievously afflict" should be translated "glorify."¹¹ Accurately rendered, the verse says, "As the former time when He degraded the land of Zebulon and the land of Naphtali, so afterwards He will glorify the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations."¹² The translation "glorify" rather than "afflict" is obviously the correct description of the Messiah's impact upon Israel. The clever wording of verses 1 and 2 furnishes a prophecy with two meanings, each one foreseeing an amazing fulfillment. The first is that the Messiah would primarily shine His light upon the region of Galilee, the same region once inhabited by the tribes of Zebulon and Naphtali. Indeed, Jesus spent most of His ministry in Galilean towns and countrysides, widely viewed as marginal to the Jewish nation. The second meaning of the prophecy directs our attention to the specific place where the light of Jesus would burst into sight. It would first be seen beyond Jordan on the way to the sea and territory of Galilee.¹³ Indeed, beyond Jordan was where Jesus came to John for baptism. The exact place was Bethabara (John 1:28), which was east of the Jordan River along the road taken by Jews when they were traveling from Judea to the region of Galilee. They avoided roads west of the Jordan because of hostile relations between Jews and Samaritans.¹⁴ Jesus' baptism was His first public manifestation of Himself as the long-awaited Messiah. It was in essence the dawning of the great light that Isaiah said would be the Messiah's gift "to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death." That Zacharias should point to Isaiah’s prophecy in connection with John’s birth is therefore no coincidence. Through the Holy Spirit he foresaw that John would preach his message at the very time and place of the Messiah’s entrance into history. Perhaps John's decision to conduct his ministry at Bethabara was based on this prophecy.
5. "To guide our feet into the way of peace" (v. 79). The Jews in Zacharias’s day lived in a world of horrendous violence. Doubtless they drew great comfort from the promise that Zacharias remembered in his concluding words, another promise in Isaiah 9. According to verses 6 and 7, the Messiah would be the Prince of Peace, and "of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end." Here is the perspective of an elderly man who has seen enough of this world to be weary of all the strife and cruelty, and who revels in the assurance that the Kingdom of Christ will be different. Man will not devour man, but man will love man, and above earthly civilization will sit a king with both the power and the moral determination to guarantee a society knit together in perfect peace forever.

Throughout the Benedictus, it is appropriate that even though Zacharias notices the special contribution of his son to God’s program, he keeps the emphasis on Christ. It is Christ he mentions last (vv. 78–79) and Christ he mentions first (v. 68). But the person named in verse 68 is called the Lord God of Israel. A proper understanding requires that we compare verse 68 with verse 76. Zacharias says that his son will be the forerunner of "the Lord." Unlike most Jews in his day, Zacharias was well enough versed in the Scriptures to understand that the Lord God of Israel was another name for Christ. His dual nature as man and God was a mystery that eluded many Jews at the time of Jesus' coming, but it was not hidden from all. Certainly it was not hidden from the small group of saints who tended Jesus in His infancy. Mary understood it (Luke 1:47), as did Elisabeth (Luke 1:43), Zacharias (Luke 1:76), and Joseph (Matt. 1:20-23).

Application

To ferret out all the traces of the Old Testament in Zacharias’s Benedictus is a sobering exercise, for we who follow Christ discover in Zacharias the kind of person that we should be, and we fall woefully short of the standard he sets. His mind was so steeped in the Word of God that his prophecy brimming with allusions to it came out of his mouth as if he were speaking spontaneously. His words do not seem like a string of quotations from the Bible. No, they seem like his own words, because in fact he paraphrases Scripture and ties the different allusions together with smooth transitions. To do this required an intimate familiarity with all the sources he drew from. It is obvious that much of his life had been devoted to reading and memorizing and pondering the Word of God.

What an example for us! See how God rewarded him? God preserved his story in Luke’s Gospel so that he would enjoy the great respect of saints throughout the ages. More than that, God spoke through him so that his words would have a place in the inspired Word of God. Also, God gave him a place in redemptive history. Not only was he the father of the Messiah’s forerunner, but he took care of the Messiah’s mother at a critical moment in her life, while she was bearing the Christ child. So likewise, we can expect God to bless us if we give study of His Word its rightful place in our lives.

Exposition

Verse 80. The closing verse devoted to the earthly background of Jesus’ forerunner, John, summarizes his growth as primarily waxing "strong in spirit." This contrasts sharply with the account of Jesus’ childhood (Luke 2:52), which tells us that Jesus was outstanding in all four arenas of growth: not only spiritual ("in favour with God"), but also intellectual ("in wisdom"), physical (in "stature"), and social ("in favour with . . . man"). It would be improper to infer that John failed to achieve nonspiritual kinds of maturity. Rather, Luke is suggesting that whereas he was a typical child in other respects, his spiritual progress was unusual. He attained a strength of spirit that set him apart from others.

The further information that he "lived in the deserts" until he began his public ministry raises many intriguing questions that will remain unanswered until we get to heaven. Just how old was he when he left home for a solitary life? Since his parents were of advanced age, they may have died when John was fairly young. Perhaps then, rather than live with relatives or enter another established home, he found a way to support himself in the wilderness of Judea. As a mature young man about thirty years old, he came forward as a prophet, attracted great crowds to hear him in the desert east of Jordan, and gathered disciples who wanted to prepare themselves for the Messiah’s coming. At that time, he wore coarse garments made of materials found in the desert—specifically, a cloak of camel’s hair and a leather belt perhaps derived from a camel’s hide—and his sole diet was food foraged in the wild, including locusts and wild honey (Matt. 3:4). We know that some religious zealots in John’s day lived in caves near the Dead Sea.¹⁵ Maybe John’s home was also a cave. From the information provided by Luke, we can be sure that his rough exterior and his primitive lifestyle when he first appeared to the nation were nothing new. He had already for many years been content to live alone in the desert, accepting his destiny as the new embodiment of Elijah, who followed a similar manner of life (2 Kings 1:8).

In his early years of isolation, he remained silent as a preacher, for he knew through the instruction of the Holy Spirit that it was not yet time to announce the Messiah, the Christ. John’s ministry could not begin until shortly before Christ was ready to enter the scene. Did John know who Christ would be? He and Jesus were, after all, relatives. John’s mother, Elisabeth, was the cousin of Mary, Jesus’ mother, so John and Jesus were distant cousins, perhaps first cousins once removed, as we would say. And also they were close in age. Given that Mary conceived the Christ child at the time she went to see Elisabeth, we need not doubt that John was only six months older than Jesus. Since John’s parents knew who Christ was, it seems likely that they told John. It seems likely also that John saw Jesus when they small children. No doubt on many occasions when Mary and Joseph came to Jerusalem for festivals, they fellowshipped with her cousin's family. But after John went into a solitary life, he may not have seen Jesus again. Perhaps they never met as adults. Still, when Jesus came to John and sought to be baptized, John recognized Him and knew that He was the Christ (Matt. 3:13-14).

What then is the meaning of John’s statement in John 1:29-34? John meant that he was not ready to announce Jesus as the Christ merely on the basis of reports he heard as a child. He no doubt felt that it would be irresponsible to position himself as Jesus’ supporter unless he personally witnessed a supernatural sign certifying who Jesus was. God granted John’s desire for such a sign by letting him see manifestations of all three persons of the Trinity at Jesus’ baptism (John 1:32-33; Matt. 3:15-17). Jesus was the Son, the Holy Spirit descended from heaven in the form of a dove, and the Father spoke from heaven, declaring in words audible to John that Jesus was indeed the Son, and therefore the Messiah.

Luke 1 is a story about God’s promises. The conception of Christ and the birth of John are examples of promises fulfilled within a few months after they were given. The ministries of John and Jesus fulfilled promises that their parents heard before these men were born. The work of Christ to deliver Israel from her enemies is a promise yet to be fulfilled in the future.

Application

Notice that the promises already fulfilled give us confidence that God’s remaining promises will also be fulfilled although they linger as mere hope during our time of waiting. One reason God has given us the Bible is to bolster our faith in His promises. From His workings in the past, we can see that He is scrupulous to keep His word. Never does any word of God drop meaningless to the ground. It always controls reality to the exact degree of every detail in its meaning. But how can the Bible reinforce our faith if we fail to read it?