When the time came for Elizabeth to have her child, she gave birth to a son.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de ho chronos eplēsthē Tē Elisabet tou autēn tekein kai egennēsen huion
The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
The Birth of John the Baptist
Luke 1:57–66 — The Birth of John the Baptist. 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.
When the time came for Elizabeth to have her child, she gave birth to a son.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de ho chronos eplēsthē Tē Elisabet tou autēn tekein kai egennēsen huion
Her neighbors and relatives heard that the Lord had shown her great mercy, and they rejoiced with her.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai autēs hoi perioikoi kai hoi syngeneis ēkousan hoti Kyrios emegalynen autou met’ autēs to eleos kai synechairon autē
On the eighth day, when they came to circumcise the child, they were going to name him after his father Zechariah.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
en tē tē ogdoē hēmera Kai egeneto ēlthon peritemein to paidion kai ekaloun auto epi tō onomati autou tou patros Zacharian
But his mother replied, “No! He shall be called John.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai autou hē mētēr apokritheisa eipen Ouchi alla klēthēsetai Iōannēs
They said to her, “There is no one among your relatives who bears this name.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai eipan pros autēn hoti estin Oudeis ek sou tēs syngeneias hos kaleitai toutō tō onomati
So they made signs to his father to find out what he wanted to name the child.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de eneneuon tō autou patri to ti an theloi kaleisthai auto
Zechariah asked for a tablet and wrote, “His name is John.” And they were all amazed.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai aitēsas pinakidion egrapsen legōn autou onoma estin Iōannēs kai pantes ethaumasan
Immediately Zechariah’s mouth was opened and his tongue was released, and he began to speak, praising God.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de parachrēma autou to stoma aneōchthē kai autou hē glōssa kai elalei eulogōn ton Theon
All their neighbors were filled with awe, and people throughout the hill country of Judea were talking about these events.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai pantas tous perioikountas autous egeneto epi phobos kai en holē tē oreinē tēs Ioudaias dielaleito panta tauta ta rhēmata
And all who heard this wondered in their hearts and asked, “What then will this child become?” For the Lord’s hand was with him.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai pantes hoi akousantes ethento en autōn tē kardia legontes Ti ara touto to paidion estai kai gar Kyriou cheir ēn met’ autou
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.
The unit opens on a passive verb with no agent: ἐπλήσθη (G4130), “the time was filled full.” Benson reads the pace of it: the child “was conceived in the womb by a miracle” but “continued in the womb according to the ordinary course of nature,” and so “promised mercies are to be expected when the full time for them is come, and not before.” Poole does the arithmetic that makes the point checkable, counting Luke 1:36 and Luke 1:56 forward to a full term. Then the neighbours speak, and Luke gives them a verb far larger than their occasion: ἐμεγάλυνεν (G3170, rare, 8 verses), with his mercy as its object. Ellicott is the one who hears it: “The verb is the same as that which opens the Magnificat, and may well be looked upon as a kind of echo of it.” Gill supplies the Hebrew idiom behind the construction, citing Genesis 19:19. ⚙ So the gossip of a village and the song of a girl in the same chapter use one root: what Mary's soul does to the Lord, the Lord has done to his mercy. Poole then turns the scene on the reader, noting how ordinary such congratulations are and how rarely the God “who openeth the womb” is taken notice of in them.
Everything in this movement turns on one lexeme, G2564 kaleō, in four forms. The kinsfolk use an imperfect of attempted action, ἐκάλουν: Cambridge, “Rather, they wished to call... the imperfect by an idiomatic use often expresses an unfulfilled attempt”; JFB, “were for calling.” Ellicott explains the presumption, that “in the dumbness of the father, the duty devolved on them,” and Gill adds from the rabbinic blessings that a mute father could not even pronounce the father's blessing at the rite. The mother answers with a future passive, κληθήσεται: not what we will do, but what has been settled. The kinsfolk answer with a present, καλεῖται, appealing to living custom, and Barnes gives that custom its dignity (the tribes were kept distinct, the tables kept clean). Then they turn to the father with a New Testament hapax, ἐνένευον (G1770), nodding at a man who cannot hear; JFB, four words: “showing he was deaf, as well as dumb,” while Cambridge grants the inference and calls the question unimportant. Zacharias asks for a πινακίδιον (G4093, also a hapax) and writes a present indicative. Ellicott: “There is something emphatic in the use of the present tense. It was not a question to be discussed. The name had been given already.” Cambridge, quoting Bengel, sets the tablet against the last word of the old canon: “‘John,’ ‘the grace of Jehovah,’ is the first word written under the Gospel.” And JFB locates the marvel exactly: they wondered “at his giving the same name, not knowing of any communication between them on the subject.”
The release is instantaneous (παραχρῆμα, G3916) and passive (ἀνεῴχθη, G455), closing the bracket opened by the passive of v. 57. JFB ties cause to effect: the mouth opened “on thus palpably showing his full faith in the vision, for disbelieving which he had been struck dumb.” Poole reads the angel's sentence at Luke 1:20 as a term with a stated end, now served. Barnes measures the cost honestly: “For one act of disbelief all this calamity had come upon him, and it had not come without effect.” Cambridge catches the tense change (aorist for the opening, inceptive imperfect for the speaking), and Ellicott notes that “loosed” has to be supplied because the single Greek verb “applied strictly only to the mouth.” Henry compresses the whole verse: unbelief closed his mouth, and believing opened it again. Then the circle widens by two rare words. ὀρεινῇ (G3714, 2 verses) reaches back to Luke 1:39 and the same hill country Mary climbed; διελαλεῖτο (G1255, 2 verses) sends the report round with no speaker named. Ellicott traces “the gradual spread of the report... from the immediate neighbourhood to the wider district,” and Cambridge sets it in an age whose minds “were full of dread and agitated expectancy.” The unit ends not with an answer but with a filed question, Τί ἄρα, and with a Hebrew idiom Luke does not bother to smooth into Greek: the hand of the Lord was with him.
⚙ This is the tool's own fallible reading, offered to be tested. Luke has built these ten verses around a single question: who has the right to name. The family has custom, blood and the tables of genealogy on its side, and Barnes shows that its case is a good one. It loses anyway, and it loses to grammar before it loses to argument: every human naming in the scene is active and fails (ἐκάλουν, καλεῖσθαι), while the naming that stands is a passive with an unnamed agent (κληθήσεται) and then a bare present indicative (ἐστὶν). The same shape governs the frame: the time was filled (v. 57) and the mouth was opened (v. 64), both passive, both agentless, both God. Between those two passives sits the one thing a human being contributes, a man writing down a word he was given nine months earlier and had not been able to say. That is what the unit means by faith, and it is why the tongue is loosed at the tablet and not at the birth: Zacharias is restored not when the promise comes true but when he signs his name to it. Notice too what the crowd does with it. They talk (διελαλεῖτο), and they lay it up in the heart (ἔθεντο, middle voice, Geneva: “printed them in their hearts”), and their question, “what then will this child be,” is left unanswered by the narrator on purpose, because the answer is a person the child has not yet pointed to. The forerunner's whole office is already in his name: grace, given before he could ask, spoken by God before the family could vote.
The mouth is opened not when the promise comes true, but when the man writes down the word he could not say. (⚙ synthesis, not Scripture.)
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
Luke 1:13 is the promise this unit pays out: Elizabeth (Ἐλισάβετ, G1665) will bear (γεννάω, G1080) a son (υἱός, G5207) and “you shall call his name John.” Verses 57 and 60 and 63 use the same lexemes in the same order of events, which is why Gill can say the son came “according to the angel's prediction both to Zacharias and Mary,” and why Poole reads the delivery as evidence “to show the truth of God's promises.” The link is internal to Luke and internal to Greek, so the shared vocabulary is a real verbal tie and not a translator's coincidence.
Luke 1:13
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G1665 Ἐλισάβετ (in 8 vv, rare), G1080 γεννάω (in 65 vv), G5207 υἱός (in 344 vv); Greek to Greek within one author, and the later verse narrates the fulfillment of the earlier verse's own wording
ὀρεινός (G3714) occurs in only two verses in the New Testament, and both are in this chapter: Mary “went into the hill country” at Luke 1:39, and at Luke 1:65 the whole hill country is talking. ⚙ The rare word functions as a bracket around the visitation: the same region that received the mother of the Lord without a word of public notice now cannot stop repeating what happened in one house in it. Ellicott describes the district as the plateau south of Jerusalem reaching its height at Hebron, and Gill places Zacharias's household there.
Luke 1:39
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G3714 ὀρεινός (in 2 vv, rare) plus G2250 ἡμέρα (in 368 vv). The lexeme is rare enough to be a genuine verbal tie, but the claim made here is a narrative frame, not a quotation, so the tier is deliberately downgraded
διαλαλέω (G1255, “to talk throughout a company”) occurs in only two verses in the New Testament. Here the hill country passes round the wonder of a birth and a loosed tongue; at Luke 6:11 the scribes and Pharisees, filled with fury, “talked among themselves what they might do to Jesus.” ⚙ Luke also uses the same lexeme G4130 (plēthō, filled) in both places, of a filled term here and of filled rage there. The observation is a reader's, not a commentator's: no voice in this brief draws it.
Luke 6:11
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G1255 διαλαλέω (in 2 vv, rare, the only two occurrences in the New Testament) and G4130 πλήθω (in 24 vv); Greek to Greek within one author. No quotation is claimed, only the rare shared vocabulary
Luke does not cite the law; he assumes it. Genesis 17:12 sets circumcision at eight days old for every male of Abraham's house, and Leviticus 12:3 repeats it for Israel. Poole gives both references and notes what Scripture does not legislate: neither the circumciser nor the place. Gill, Cambridge, JFB and Ellicott all cite Genesis 17:12 here, and JFB adds that the eighth day held even when it fell on a sabbath (compare John 7:23). Benson gives the older rationale from Leviticus 12:1-2, that mother and child were unclean for seven days.
Genesis 17:12 · Leviticus 12:3
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew), so no shared Strong's number is possible and no verbal tier may be claimed. The recorded basis is the statute itself plus the unanimous citation of Genesis 17:12 and Leviticus 12:3 by Poole, Gill, Cambridge, JFB, Benson and Ellicott on this verse
Why was a name given on the eighth day at all? Benson: “The law did not enjoin that the child should have his name given him at circumcision; but it was customary to do it then, because at the institution of the rite, God changed the names of Abraham and Sarah, Genesis 17:5; Genesis 17:16.” JFB and Cambridge say the same, Cambridge citing Genesis 17:15. Poole is the dissenting voice, arguing that naming at circumcision “appeareth not from Scripture” and that the name was only declared then. ⚙ Either way the custom the kinsfolk invoke was itself born from an occasion on which God, not the family, chose the name, which is exactly what happens again here.
Genesis 17:5 · Genesis 17:15
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): no shared Strong's lexeme is possible, so the tier cannot be verbal. Basis is the explicit appeal to Genesis 17:5 and 17:15 by Benson, JFB, Cambridge and Gill at this verse, with Poole recorded as dissenting on whether the naming custom is scriptural
Genesis 21:3-4 puts the two acts together for Isaac: Abraham “called the name of his son... Isaac,” and “circumcised his son Isaac being eight days old.” Poole cites the sequence and JFB cites it as the origin of naming at the rite. Genesis 21:6 gives the neighbours' part: Sarah says all who hear will laugh with her, which is what Elizabeth's kinsfolk do (συνέχαιρον, G4796). ⚙ Read figurally, John stands in the line of children given where nature had closed the way, a line that runs Isaac, Samuel, Samson, and ends in the only birth that needed no womb opened but a virgin's consent. This is an old and widely held figural reading, but Luke himself does not name Isaac here, and the thread is offered as figure, not as proof.
Genesis 21:3 · Genesis 21:6
basis: Cross-Testament and figural: no shared Strong's lexeme is possible between Hebrew and Greek. The eighth-day naming of Isaac is cited here by Poole and JFB; the barren-womb typology is the tool's own extension of that citation and is marked as ancient and widely held rather than demonstrated from Luke's wording
Isaiah 8:18 gives the prophet and his children as “signs and wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts,” and Isaiah 8:3 has a child named by divine command rather than family custom. ⚙ Luke 1:66 leaves exactly that shape hanging: a child around whom a whole district asks a question it cannot answer, whose name was fixed before birth, and of whom Luke says only that the hand of the Lord was with him. Honesty requires the flag: none of the ten voices in this brief cites Isaiah 8 here, and the connection is the tool's own reading of a shared pattern, not a quotation and not a received tradition.
Isaiah 8:3 · Isaiah 8:18
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): no shared Strong's lexeme is possible, so no verbal tier. Basis is a shared pattern only (a child named by God before birth who becomes a public sign provoking a question in Israel); no commentator in this brief draws the link, and it is recorded as machine synthesis
The last clause of the unit is Hebrew wearing Greek. JFB reads it as “special tokens marking him out as one destined to some great work” and gives 1 Kings 18:46 (the hand of the LORD on Elijah), 2 Kings 3:15 (on Elisha at the minstrel's playing) and Acts 11:21 (the hand of the Lord with the preachers at Antioch). Ellicott adds Judges 2:15, 2 Chronicles 30:12 and Ezra 7:9, and calls the idiom one the Hebrews could use boldly “because they had clearer thoughts of God as not made after the similitude of men.” Poole restricts the sense here to protecting favour, distinguishing it from the Ezekiel usage where the hand means the spirit of prophecy; Gill allows both. ⚙ That the formula lands on Elijah in one of its clearest Old Testament instances is not nothing, given Luke 1:17.
1 Kings 18:46 · 2 Kings 3:15 · Ezra 7:6 · Acts 11:21
basis: Mixed Testament refs, so no verbal tier is permitted even though the Acts 11:21 leg does share G5495 χείρ and G2962 κύριος with this verse in Greek; the Old Testament legs are Hebrew and can share no Strong's number. Basis is the shared idiom, cited at this verse by JFB (1 Kings 18:46; 2 Kings 3:15; Acts 11:21), Ellicott (Judges 2:15; 2 Chronicles 30:12; Ezra 7:9), Poole (1 Samuel 3:19; 1 Chronicles 28:19; Psalm 80:17) and Cambridge (Psalm 80:17)
Acts 7:8 compresses into one sentence what Luke 1:59 stages as a scene: God “gave him the covenant of circumcision, and so Abraham begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day.” The same author, the same three lexemes, the eighth day (ἡμέρα), the cutting (περιτέμνω) and the begetting (γεννάω). ⚙ Luke 2:21 will do it a third time for Jesus, adding the naming: the third eighth day in the two volumes is the one that matters, and it is the child John is born to announce.
Acts 7:8 · Luke 2:21
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G4059 περιτέμνω (in 15 vv), G1080 γεννάω (in 65 vv), G2250 ἡμέρα (in 368 vv) with Acts 7:8, and G4059 περιτέμνω, G4130 πλήθω (in 24 vv), G3686 ὄνομα (in 214 vv) with Luke 2:21; Greek to Greek within one author. No quotation is claimed, only a shared rite-and-naming pattern, so the tier is structural
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
The one word written under this unit is Ἰωάννης, Yôḥānān, “the LORD is gracious.” Henry: he is called Gracious “because he shall bring in the gospel of Christ, wherein God's grace shines most bright.” Pulpit says the same of the meaning; Cambridge, quoting Bengel, sets the tablet against the closing word of the old canon, so that the first word written in the Gospel age is grace where the age of the Law had ended in curse. Benson runs it straight to the Fourth Gospel: the name was “very proper for him who was to be the first preacher of the kingdom of grace, and who was to point out him from whose fulness we receive grace for grace, John 1:16.” ⚙ The naming dispute of vv. 59-63 is therefore not a family quarrel that Luke happened to record. It is the announcement that the era about to open is not named by ancestry, custom or merit, and the forerunner carries the announcement in his own name before he can speak a syllable of it.
John 1:16 · Luke 1:13 · Luke 1:76
Luke frames the unit with two agentless passives: a term filled in a womb long barren (v. 57, ἐπλήσθη) and a mouth opened that had been shut nine months (v. 64, ἀνεῴχθη). Barnes underlines the cost and the cause: “For one act of disbelief all this calamity had come upon him, and it had not come without effect.” Henry states the reversal in a line: unbelief closed his mouth, and believing opened it again. Geneva calls the whole birth an accompaniment of “new miracles.” ⚙ Read forward, the pattern is the Gospel's: the shut womb and the shut mouth are the two impossibilities the coming Kingdom keeps opening, and the first sound out of the opened mouth is not explanation but blessing (εὐλογῶν, G2127), which is what the redeemed always do first. The extension of this pattern to Christ's own opening of ears and tongues is the tool's reading, not a claim any voice in this brief makes here.
Luke 1:20 · Luke 1:68
Luke ends the unit by answering the crowd's question without letting them hear the answer: “for indeed the hand of the Lord was with him.” Benson denies that the phrase here means the spirit of prophecy and takes it as “the grace, protection, and blessing of God” from infancy; Poole agrees, comparing 1 Samuel 3:19 of Samuel; Gill allows the prophetic gift as well, which “in process of time, appeared in him, qualifying him for his high office and work.” Henry: “The hand of the Lord was working with John. God has ways of working on children in their infancy, which we cannot account for. We should observe the dealings of God, and wait the event.” ⚙ That is the christological point of the last clause. The child is not kept for his own greatness; he is kept for a naming still to come, and the same hand that guards him in the hill country will be the hand that points at the Lamb of God. The crowd's question is left open here because Luke intends the reader to receive its answer from John's own mouth later, and from Christ's.
Luke 1:17 · Luke 1:76 · Luke 3:4
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:
⚙ Honesty notes for this unit. Text. The Greek is the Berean interlinear with Strong's numbers; the English base is the BSB. At v. 66 Cambridge reports καὶ γάρ (“For indeed”) with א, B, C, D and L, which makes the closing clause Luke's comment rather than part of the crowd's speech; Barnes records the alternative that the clause belongs to the neighbours' words, and Ellicott notes that “some good MSS. give ‘for the hand of the Lord.’” Both readings are preserved in the verse notes; nothing here depends on which is right.
Sources. Ten public-domain commentators were available for this unit: Benson, Henry, Barnes, JFB, Poole, Gill, Geneva, Cambridge, Pulpit, Ellicott. Two cautions. First, the entries filed under Barnes at Luke 1:57 and 1:58 in the source set are in fact his notes on the Magnificat (Luke 1:46-55) rather than on these verses, so Barnes is quoted here only where his comment genuinely addresses the verse (1:61, 1:63, 1:64, 1:65, 1:66). Second, Henry's entry is a single block covering 1:57-66 and is repeated under every verse in the source; it is quoted once. Poole's comments are grouped (57-58, 59-61, 62-63, 65-66) and several verses carry only a cross-reference stub.
Uncertain. That Zacharias was deaf as well as mute is an inference from the signs of v. 62, drawn by Ellicott, JFB, Gill, Benson and Pulpit; Cambridge grants that the narrative “seems to imply” it but calls the question unimportant. Luke never says it. Whether Elizabeth knew the name by her husband's writing or by revelation is likewise undecided in the text: Ellicott and Barnes assume writing, Gill allows either. Cambridge's claim that messianic expectancy “had spread even to the heathen,” supported from Virgil, the Sibylline Oracles, Suetonius, Tacitus and Josephus, is nineteenth-century synthesis and is disputed. The thread to Isaiah 8 is the tool's own and is labelled as such. Gill's rabbinic citations (Mishnah Gittin, Maimonides) establish custom, not Luke's intent. Minor typographic errors in the source editions (Poole's “religions” for “religious,” Pulpit's “It. was,” “unnsual”) are quoted as printed rather than corrected. The interlinear's placeholder glosses (“vvv,” “. . .”) are artifacts of the Berean word alignment and carry no meaning.
✦ = 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)