In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to a town in Galilee called Nazareth,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de En tō tō hektō mēni tou Theou apestalē apo ho angelos Gabriēl eis polin tēs Galilaias hē onoma Nazareth
The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
Gabriel Foretells Jesus’ Birth
Luke 1:26–38 — Gabriel Foretells Jesus’ Birth. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to a town in Galilee called Nazareth,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de En tō tō hektō mēni tou Theou apestalē apo ho angelos Gabriēl eis polin tēs Galilaias hē onoma Nazareth
to a virgin pledged in marriage to a man named Joseph, who was of the house of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
pros parthenon emnēsteumenēn andri hō onoma Iōsēph ex oikou Dauid kai to tēs parthenou onoma Mariam
The angel appeared to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai eiselthōn pros autēn eipen Chaire kecharitōmenē ho Kyrios meta sou
Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Hē dietarachthē epi tō logō kai dielogizeto potapos ho aspasmos houtos eiē
So the angel told her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai ho angelos eipen autē Mē phobou Mariam gar heures charin para tō Theō
Behold, you will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to give Him the name Jesus.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai idou syllēmpsē en gastri kai texē huion kai kaleseis autou to onoma Iēsoun
He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
houtos estai megas kai klēthēsetai Huios Hypsistou kai ho Kyrios Theos dōsei autō ton thronon autou tou patros Dauid
and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever. His kingdom will never end!”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai basileusei epi ton oikon Iakōb eis tous aiōnas kai tēs autou basileias estai ouk telos
“How can this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Pōs touto estai Mariam Eipen pros ton angelon epei ou ginōskō andra
The angel replied, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the Holy One to be born will be called the Son of God.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
ho angelos Kai apokritheis eipen autē Hagion Pneuma epeleusetai epi se kai dynamis Hypsistou episkiasei soi dio kai to hagion gennōmenon klēthēsetai Huios Theou
Look, even Elizabeth your relative has conceived a son in her old age, and she who was called barren is in her sixth month.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
idou kai Elisabet sou hē syngenis autē kai syneilēphen huion en autēs gērei kai tē kaloumenē steira houtos estin autē hektos mēn
For no word from God will ever fail.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
hoti ouk rhēma para tou Theou pan adynatēsei
“I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May it happen to me according to your word.” Then the angel left her.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Idou hē Kyriou doulē de Mariam Eipen genoito moi kata sou to rhēma kai ho angelos apēlthen ap’ autēs
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
Luke dates the scene by a pregnancy, not by a reign: en tō mēni tō hektō, in the sixth month, counted from Elizabeth’s conception in v. 24 and confirmed by the angel himself in v. 36. Cambridge notes that this is the only datum in Scripture fixing John the Baptist’s age, half a year older than our Lord. The verb is a passive, ἀπεστάλη (apestalē), and Poole draws the right inference from it: God is the one moving, since “without whose command the angels do not move.” The Verifier records the same lexeme, apostellō, shared with Luke 1:19, where this same Gabriel told Zechariah he had been sent: two commissions, one sender, six months apart. Then the geography, which every commentator here treats as the point. Gill: the whole country of Galilee “was mean and contemptible with the Jews,” and Nazareth worse. Cambridge sees Isaiah 9:1-2 beginning to move in that very obscurity. Ellicott adds, carefully hedged as “probably,” the derivation of the town’s name from Netzer, a branch; Luke himself makes nothing of it, and we should not make more. The last two words of v. 27 are the girl’s name in its Semitic form, Μαριάμ, Miriam.
The angel’s first word is a verb of joy in the imperative, Χαῖρε, and his second is the perfect passive participle κεχαριτωμένη (kecharitōmenē, G5487), among the rarest words in this unit: the Verifier finds it in exactly two verses of the Greek New Testament, here and Ephesians 1:6. Ellicott, JFB, Cambridge and Pulpit converge on the same reading and the same correction: the perfect passive says grace received, not grace possessed or dispensed, and the Vulgate’s plena gratia overreaches. Cambridge puts Bengel’s epigram on it: “Not a mother of grace, but a daughter.” Benson, quoting an unnamed writer, presses the same lexical point into open polemic. On the textual question the witnesses agree against the received text: Ellicott, Cambridge and Pulpit all judge “blessed art thou among women” an importation here from v. 42, and BSB rightly omits it. Mary’s reaction is measured by an intensified compound, διεταράχθη, and by the imperfect διελογίζετο, a word of reckoning rather than of feeling: she was still calculating when the angel cut in. Pulpit draws the comparison Luke plainly wants drawn, between this and Zechariah at the altar: she “simply wondered,” and asked no sign. Then mē phobou, a present imperative addressed to a fear already running, and the Septuagint formula Geneva names outright: she has found favor, as Noah and Moses and David found it.
The promise arrives in four plain futures: you will conceive, you will bear, you will call, he will be. συλλήμψῃ ἐν γαστρὶ is the Septuagint’s idiom, and here the commentators divide honestly. Gill says the angel “manifestly refers” to Isaiah 7:14; JFB, citing Calvin, says he “purposely conforms his language” to it; Ellicott says flatly that “St. Luke does not refer to the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14,” while granting that Mary’s own answer shows she took the words as Matthew takes the prophet’s. We record the disagreement rather than resolving it. The naming is handed to her, not to Joseph, in an imperatival future, καλέσεις; Cambridge supplies the philology of the name (Yehoshua, ‘The salvation of Jehovah’) and Matthew, not Luke, supplies its meaning. Henry supplies the affection: “Jesus, a Saviour!” The throne clause is where the Old Testament crowds in. Cambridge files the whole prophetic dossier behind v. 32 (2 Samuel 7:12, Isaiah 9:6-7, Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:5, Ezekiel 34:24, Psalm 132:11) and lets Daniel 2:44 stand behind v. 33: “a kingdom which shall never be destroyed.” Barnes fixes the specific promise: there should never fail a man to sit on David’s throne. Gill refuses the merely ethnic reading of “the house of Jacob,” and Ellicott, who watched the disciples still asking about a restored kingdom in Acts 1:6, calls this one of the most memorable instances of a prophecy fulfilled in quite another fashion than its first hearers could have imagined. Pulpit, alone among these voices, insists the words are still unfulfilled. The last word of the sentence is τέλος, an end or limit, and it is negated.
Mary’s question is a future indicative, not a modal: pōs estai touto, how will this be, with a causal epei and a present indicative, οὐ γινώσκω ἄνδρα. Gill names the construction for what it is, “an euphemism, or a modest way of expressing carnal copulation; see Genesis 4:1.” JFB draws the contrast with Zechariah precisely: not “whereby shall I know this?” but, taking the fact for granted, how. Cambridge sharpens it into an image, the village maiden with a readier faith than the aged priest in the Holy Place. Poole, to his credit, records the minority view that her words are “hardly excusable from all guilt,” and we keep it in view rather than flattening the tradition. The answer comes in two parallel clauses and one rare verb. ἐπισκιάσει (episkiasei, G1982) is “to cast a shade upon,” and Cambridge reads it as Shechinah language, the Cloud of Glory, cross-referencing Luke 9:34 where the same verb covers the mount of transfiguration. Pulpit hears Genesis 1:2 instead, the Spirit brooding over the deep. Poole keeps both hands open, calling the term “a modest phrase” for a divine creating power supplying what no man supplied. Then the inferential dio kai and the neuter participle: τὸ ἅγιον γεννώμενον, the holy thing being born. JFB draws the boundary we take as the mature reading: neither a double Sonship, “harshly and without all ground,” nor a denial of the connection here plainly expressed between the human birth and the personal Sonship.
She asked for no sign, so one is given. Gill states it plainly: “though Mary asked no sign, yet one is given her,” and JFB calls it an unsought sign in reward of her faith. The proof is a relative: συγγενίς, which Cambridge corrects from “cousin” to “kinswoman,” adding that what the actual relationship was “we do not know.” Luke’s grammar does the arguing: Mary’s conceiving is future (syllēmpsē, v. 31), Elizabeth’s is perfect (syneilēphen), already done and standing. And the woman in question is στείρᾳ, called barren, the word that in the Septuagint belongs to Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel and Hannah. Then v. 37, seven words in Greek, with a Semitic negation (ouk ... pan, “not every” for “no”) and a noun the older English hides: Cambridge corrects “nothing” to “no word,” and both Cambridge and JFB name Genesis 18:14, the LORD to Abraham at the tent door, as the source. Poole guards the sentence from abuse with a scholastic’s care: nothing is possible to God “the contrary to which he hath willed, but God can do whatsoever he can will.”
She answers with the angel’s own pointing word, idou, and a noun the English softens: δούλη (doulē, G1399), a female slave, which the Verifier finds in only three verses of the Greek New Testament, and one of them is Mary’s own Magnificat eleven verses later. Then γένοιτό, an aorist optative of volition, the Septuagint’s word for amen: not “it shall be” but “let it be.” Gill hears it exactly: “she set her ‘Amen’ to the angel’s message.” Cambridge finds her speaking Scripture back, 1 Samuel 3:18, “If it be the Lord let Him do what seemeth Him good.” Poole guards the sentence from the use later made of it: the phrase does not speak her “the lady and queen of heaven,” but her humility. Ellicott and Pulpit both hear the cost in it, Ellicott anticipating the words of her Son in the garden, Pulpit quoting Godet on a consent “at once simple and sublime.” The last clause is the loneliest in the unit: kai apēlthen ap’ autēs ho angelos. The messenger leaves, and she is left with the word and its consequences.
⚙ Reading this unit under Scripture alone, the hinge is a single noun used twice: ῥῆμα (rhēma, G4487), an utterance, a spoken thing. In v. 37 the angel says that no rhēma from God will be powerless; in v. 38 Mary asks that it happen to her according to his rhēma. Luke puts the same word on both sides of the exchange, and the second is her answer to the first. She does not verify the promise, negotiate it, or ask for a sign; she takes the word as the operative thing and consents to its outcome in her body. That is what faith looks like here, and it is measured against three other reactions in the immediate context that the text itself supplies: Zechariah, who asked how he should know (1:18); Elizabeth, who is the accomplished proof (1:36); and Mary, who asked only how it would be done. Note also what the angel does not say. He does not quote Isaiah 7:14, although his idiom is the Septuagint’s there, and Ellicott is right to refuse the citation that Gill and Calvin supply. He does not explain the mechanism of the Incarnation; Ellicott concedes that the message was “a partial, not a complete, revelation of the mystery,” and we should not fill the gap the angel left. What he does do is speak Old Testament back into a girl’s room: the greeting of Judges 6:12, the found favor of Genesis, the throne of 2 Samuel 7, the endless kingdom of Daniel, the impossible word of Genesis 18:14, and the overshadowing cloud of Exodus 40. Not one of these is quoted with a formula. All of them are spoken as though they had been waiting. ⚙ Our own reading, offered to be tested and corrected: the annunciation is not the beginning of a new covenant so much as the arrival of an old one at an address nobody was watching, and the only human act in it is a verb in the optative.
Not a verse, a synthesis line offered for testing: the promise was never repealed, only unaddressed, and in Nazareth it found a name and an answer.
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
The perfect passive participle κεχαριτωμένη at v. 28 comes from a verb the Verifier finds in only two verses of the Greek New Testament. The other is Ephesians 1:6, where the same verb describes the grace “wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.” Ellicott makes the link (“the verb is the same as that which is translated, ‘hath made us accepted’ in Ephesians 1:6”), JFB makes it, and Cambridge makes it; all three use it to strike down the Vulgate’s plena gratia. The force of the link is lexical and one-directional: it tells us that what was said of Mary is said in Paul of the whole church, which is the reverse of the use often made of the verse.
Ephesians 1:6
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G5487 charitoō, which occurs in only 2 verses of the Greek New Testament (Luke 1:28 and Ephesians 1:6). A rare shared lexeme within one Testament, not a quotation of one text by the other; Ellicott, JFB and Cambridge all record the link independently.
Luke 1:37 turns on ἀδυνατήσει (adynatēsei, G101, future of adynateō, to be powerless). The Verifier finds the lexeme in only two verses of the Greek New Testament: here, of God’s word, and Matthew 17:20, of the faith that moves a mountain, where Jesus tells the disciples “nothing shall be impossible unto you.” The same verb thus stands once over the word God speaks and once over the faith that takes him at it. Cambridge cross-references the parallel thought at Matthew 19:26 and Jeremiah 32:17; Poole notes the saying was proverbial.
Matthew 17:20
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G101 adynateō, in only 2 verses of the Greek New Testament (Luke 1:37, Matthew 17:20). Rare shared lexeme within the Greek New Testament; neither verse cites the other.
Both Cambridge and JFB name Genesis 18:14 as what stands behind v. 37, JFB explicitly: the angel is “referring to what was said by the angel to Abraham in like case (Ge 18:14), to strengthen her faith.” The Septuagint of Genesis 18:14 is close to Luke’s wording, and the situation is the same one twice: a barren womb, a promise, laughter or fear, and a question that is really an answer. Elizabeth in v. 36 makes the parallel concrete, since the word steira (barren) belongs first to Sarah. We do not tier this verbal, and the reason is a rule and not a hedge.
Genesis 18:14 · Genesis 11:30
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): shared Strong's numbers cannot exist between these texts, so the Verifier can compute no verbal basis and the link may never be tiered verbal. Recorded basis: the wording of Luke 1:37 follows the Septuagint of Genesis 18:14, and Cambridge and JFB each name Genesis 18:14 as the source, within the shared pattern of a barren womb receiving an impossible promise.
The dynastic clause of vv. 32-33 (the throne of his father David, the house of Jacob, a kingdom without end) is the language of Nathan’s oracle at 2 Samuel 7:12-16, with Psalm 132:11 as its liturgical form. Cambridge files the whole dossier under v. 32 and names 2 Samuel 7:12 and Psalm 132:11 directly; Barnes fixes on the promise that there should never fail a man to sit on David’s throne (1 Kings 2:4, 8:25, 9:5); Isaiah 9:6-7 supplies the increase of government with no end, which JFB calls the sublime prediction of which this is “but an echo”; Daniel 2:44 and 7:14 supply the kingdom that shall never be destroyed, cited by Cambridge and by Gill. Luke uses no citation formula at any point. He simply has the angel speak the promise as though it were still in force.
2 Samuel 7:12-16 · Psalm 132:11 · Isaiah 9:6-7 · Daniel 2:44 · Daniel 7:14
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): no shared Strong's numbers are computable, so the Verifier supplies no verbal basis and the tier may not be verbal, however close the borrowing. Recorded basis: Cambridge names 2 Samuel 7:12 and Psalm 132:11 on v. 32, Cambridge and Gill name Daniel 2:44 on v. 33, and JFB names Isaiah 9:6-7 on both; the shared pattern is the unending Davidic throne.
The verb of v. 35, ἐπισκιάσει (G1982, to cast a shade upon), is the verb the Septuagint uses at Exodus 40:35, where the cloud covered the tent of meeting and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle so that Moses could not enter; 1 Kings 8:10-11 says the same of the house Solomon built. Cambridge reads it exactly so, “as with the Shechinah and Cloud of Glory,” and points to Luke 9:34, where the same verb covers the mount of transfiguration. Pulpit hears a second resonance, Genesis 1:2, the Spirit brooding on the deep, and Gill reports the Jewish reading of that verb as a bird on the nest. The figure is that the woman becomes the place the glory fills, which is a figural reading and is tiered as such.
Exodus 40:34-35 · 1 Kings 8:10-11 · Luke 9:34
basis: Figural, and cross-Testament for the first two refs, so no shared Strong's basis is computable and no verbal tier is permitted. Recorded basis: episkiazō (G1982) is the Septuagint verb at Exodus 40:35; Cambridge names the Shechinah and the Cloud of Glory, and the reading of the tabernacle and temple as types of the incarnate body is ancient and widely held, not novel to this synthesis.
Three of our voices send the same signal independently. Benson: “The Lord is with thee, was said to Gideon, Jdg 6:12.” Gill: “so the angel to Gideon, Judges 6:12.” Cambridge: “With this address comp. Jdg 6:12.” The pattern is a set piece: an angel appears to an obscure person in an obscure place, greets them with the Lord’s presence, is met with confusion, says do not fear, and gives a commission that the person cannot execute. Benson adds the other half of the pattern from the same book, Jael at Judges 5:24 (“Blessed shall she be above women”), and uses it against the elevation of Mary. Zephaniah 3:14-17 holds the same three elements in prophetic form, the daughter of Zion told to rejoice, told not to fear, and told that the LORD is in her midst.
Judges 6:12 · Zephaniah 3:14-17
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): shared Strong's numbers are not computable and the verbal tier is therefore excluded. Recorded basis: Benson, Gill and Cambridge each independently cite Judges 6:12 as the formula behind Luke 1:28, and the shared structure is the call scene (greeting of presence, fear, do not fear, impossible commission).
This is the contested one, and we flag it rather than settle it. Gill says the angel “manifestly refers” to Isaiah 7:14. JFB, citing Calvin, says he “purposely conforms his language” to it. Poole says the angel “plainly minds her” that the prophecy should be fulfilled in her. Cambridge simply cross-references it under the word virgin. Against them all, Ellicott: “St. Luke does not refer to the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14,” while granting that Mary’s answer shows she took the angel’s words in the sense Matthew gives the prophet’s. The observable facts are these: Luke uses parthenos and the idiom syllēmpsē en gastri, both of which stand in the Septuagint of Isaiah 7:14; Luke supplies no citation formula anywhere in this unit; and it is Matthew 1:22-23, not Luke, who quotes the prophecy explicitly and names it as fulfilled. The provenance of the claim is therefore disputed among our own sources, which is what the flag records.
Isaiah 7:14 · Matthew 1:23
basis: Contested provenance: Gill, JFB (citing Calvin) and Poole assert a deliberate reference to Isaiah 7:14 at Luke 1:31; Ellicott denies it outright. Luke supplies no citation formula. Matthew 1:23 is the only explicit quotation of Isaiah 7:14 in the Gospels, and the Verifier's Matthew 1:23 candidate rests on the shared Greek lexemes G3933 parthenos (in 14 vv) and G3686 onoma (in 214 vv), which is a Greek-to-Greek overlap with Matthew and not evidence of a Lukan citation of Isaiah. Cross-Testament in any case, so the verbal tier is excluded.
Mary calls herself δούλη (doulē, G1399), a female slave, a word the Verifier finds in only three verses of the Greek New Testament. One of the other two is her own Magnificat, Luke 1:48, where she says God looked on the low estate of his doulē; the third is Acts 2:18, Peter quoting Joel on the day the Spirit falls on the menservants and maidservants alike. The rare noun thus runs from her consent, through her song, to Pentecost. Gill reads v. 38 as her Amen; the Verifier confirms that the same rare lexeme is the one she reaches for again when she sings.
Luke 1:48 · Acts 2:18
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G1399 doulē, in only 3 verses of the Greek New Testament (Luke 1:38, Luke 1:48, Acts 2:18). A rare shared lexeme within the Greek New Testament; Acts 2:18 is itself a quotation of Joel, but the link asserted here is the lexeme, not a citation of Luke.
Elizabeth is “she who was called barren,” στείρᾳ (steira, G4723), a lexeme the Verifier finds in five verses of the Greek New Testament and which the Septuagint attaches to Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel and Hannah. Within Luke it binds this scene to 1:7, where Elizabeth is introduced as barren, and forward to 23:29, where Jesus on the way to the cross calls the barren blessed and inverts the whole motif. Gill notes the social force of the label: she was “by way of reproach, usually called so.” The sign given to Mary is thus not a new kind of thing at all; it is the oldest pattern in the Hebrew Bible, running one notch further than it ever ran before.
Luke 1:7 · Luke 23:29
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G4723 steiros (in 5 vv) links Luke 1:36 to Luke 1:7 and Luke 23:29, and the Luke 1:7 candidate also shares G1665 Elisabet (in 8 vv). We deliberately decline the verbal tier: 5 verses is only moderately rare, no text here cites another, and what we are actually claiming is a shared motif (the barren woman who bears) rather than a quotation. Tiered down on purpose.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
⚙ The promise of 2 Samuel 7:12-16 had been in default for roughly six centuries when Gabriel repeated it in a house in Nazareth. Barnes states the claim in its plainest form: the promise to David was that there should never fail a man to sit on his throne, “and the promise was fulfilled by exalting Jesus to be a Prince and a Saviour, and the perpetual King of his people.” Cambridge supplies the file of prophetic texts that say the same (Isaiah 9:6-7, Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:5, Ezekiel 34:24, Psalm 132:11) and the apostolic texts that call it fulfilled (Philippians 2:9-11, Revelation 22:16). Gill distinguishes the kingdom of nature, which the Son holds by right, from the mediatorial kingdom, which the verb dōsei says is given and which 1 Corinthians 15:24 says is handed back. Ellicott is the honest one about the shape of the fulfilment: it took events to teach men that a promise which sounded like a restored Israelite monarchy was answered in the Christ’s spiritual sovereignty, and he notes that the Evangelist who recorded this promise also recorded the crucifixion. Pulpit dissents, holding the words still unfulfilled and awaiting a literal restoration. Both readings are here on the page; the apostolic one is the older and the broader.
2 Samuel 7:12-16 · Isaiah 9:6-7 · Acts 2:30-36 · Revelation 22:16
⚙ When the cloud covered the tent of meeting, Moses could not enter, and when the glory filled Solomon’s house, the priests could not stand to minister. The verb for that covering in the Septuagint is the verb Gabriel uses of Mary: episkiazō. Cambridge reads it as the Shechinah and the Cloud of Glory and sends the reader to Luke 9:34, where the same verb covers the mountain and a voice says “This is my Son.” The typology is not our invention and is not novel: the tabernacle and temple have been read as figures of the incarnate body since the apostolic age, and John 1:14 says the Word tented among us. What the grammar of v. 35 adds is the conclusion drawn from the overshadowing by an inferential dio kai: because the Spirit comes and the power overshadows, therefore the one being born is called holy, Son of God. JFB marks the boundary that keeps this from collapsing into adoptionism on one side or a double Sonship on the other: the eternal Sonship is presupposed throughout the New Testament, and here that Sonship comes into “human and palpable manifestation.” Poole adds the pastoral point that the flesh taken is flesh sanctified, and Geneva the reason it must be: “he that was to take away sin must of necessity be void of sin.”
Exodus 40:34-35 · 1 Kings 8:10-11 · John 1:14 · Luke 9:34
⚙ The name given in v. 31 is not a new name. Cambridge notes that the Greek Iēsous is used of Joshua son of Nun at Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8, so that English readers miss the identity that Greek readers could not miss. Poole draws the typology out: there were two of the name before, Joshua and Jeshua, “both of which were great types of Christ, as being great temporal saviours to the Israelites. The one brought them into Canaan; the other led them out of Babylon.” Cambridge sends the reader to Pearson on the Creed for the same reading. Notice what Luke does and does not do: he records the name and its imposition, and he supplies no etymology at all. It is Matthew 1:21 who says why: “for He Himself shall save His people from their sins,” which Cambridge, quoting Bengel, calls the Summa Evangelii. The unit thus gives the name and withholds the gloss, and the reader is left to fetch it from the other evangelist, or from the history the name already carries.
Matthew 1:21 · Acts 7:45 · Hebrews 4:8
⚙ A reading we offer as our own and mark as such. Luke uses ῥῆμα twice at the close of this unit and nowhere else in it: in v. 37 no rhēma from God will be powerless, and in v. 38 let it be to me according to your rhēma. Between the two stands a woman’s consent, and after them a conception. The New Testament elsewhere makes the spoken word of God the agent of creation and of new birth (Hebrews 11:3, 1 Peter 1:23-25 quoting Isaiah 40:8), and John 1:14 makes the Word itself the thing conceived. We do not claim that Luke is writing a Logos theology here; he uses rhēma, not logos, and his interest is plainly the reliability of a promise rather than the person of the Son. The observation we do offer, to be tested and corrected, is structural: in this unit the word that cannot fail and the flesh that is formed are not two events but one, and Mary’s optative is the human hinge between them.
John 1:14 · Hebrews 11:3 · 1 Peter 1:23-25
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
⚙ Text. BSB follows the critical text throughout this unit. At v. 28 the clause “blessed art thou among women” is absent, and our voices agree on why: Ellicott says it is “omitted in many of the best MSS,” Cambridge that it is “of dubious authenticity, being omitted by B and various versions” and probably imported from v. 42, and Pulpit that the words “must be struck out.” Readers using the Authorized Version will find it there, and several of the older comments below (Benson, Gill, Geneva, Barnes) comment on it as genuine. At v. 35 Cambridge prefers “which is in thy womb” to “which shall be born of thee”; BSB reads “to be born,” and the participle gennōmenon is present, which leaves the timing open in Greek as it is not in English.
⚙ Interlinear. A few Berean interlinear cells in this unit carry placeholder glosses (“vvv” and “. . .”) where one English phrase covers several Greek words, and the article is sometimes duplicated in the alignment at v. 26. We have treated the Greek surface, transliteration, Strong's number and parse as the sourced data and have not built any claim on the English gloss column alone.
⚙ Sources. Benson comments on vv. 26-27, 29-30, 31-33 and 34-38 in blocks, and Poole on vv. 26-27, 31-33 and 36-37, so several of their entries under single verses read “See Poole on” and carry no text; Henry comments on the whole section 26-38 in one paragraph repeated under each verse. Where we quote those authors we have anchored inside the entry that actually carries the words. Two of the longer entries in the brief (Pulpit on v. 26, Gill on v. 35, Benson on v. 34, Poole on v. 31) are capped in our source extract; we have quoted only from the visible portion and have not inferred what the remainder says.
⚙ Disputed among the sources themselves, and left disputed here: whether “of the house of David” in v. 27 attaches to Joseph or to Mary (Cambridge and Pulpit for Joseph on the grammar, Benson and Geneva for Mary on the sense); whether Luke 1:31 deliberately cites Isaiah 7:14 (Gill, JFB and Poole yes, Ellicott no); whether the kingdom promise of vv. 32-33 is fulfilled in the church (Ellicott, Barnes, Gill) or still awaits a literal restoration (Pulpit); and how Elizabeth, of the daughters of Aaron, is kin to Mary (Ellicott, Poole, Geneva, Gill and Cambridge each offer a different reconciliation, and Cambridge concedes “what the actual relationship was we do not know”).
⚙ Thread tiers. Every link in this unit that pairs the Greek of Luke with a Hebrew text of the Old Testament is tiered structural or typological and never verbal, because shared Strong's numbers cannot be computed across the Testaments and the Verifier therefore supplies no verbal basis, however close the borrowing. That rule bears hardest on two threads where the borrowing is in fact closest: 2 Samuel 7 behind vv. 32-33, and Genesis 18:14 behind v. 37. The basis line on each says so explicitly. The Isaiah 7:14 thread is flagged, not because the connection is implausible, but because our own named sources contradict each other about whether Luke intends it.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)