Bible Study Luke 1:36-38

[clark thompson]

Luke 1:36-38
King James Version (KJV)
36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.
37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.
38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

Luke 1:36-38
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
36 And behold, even your relative Elizabeth has also conceived a son in her old age; and she who was called barren is now in her sixth month. 37 For nothing will be impossible with God.” 38 And Mary said, “Behold, the bondslave of the Lord; may it be done to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her.

New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

These are my thoughts, please share yours.

36 It was a miracle or Elizabeth to have a child at her old age. There have been many barren women in scripture: Sarah was barren and also had a child in late years, Rebecca was barren as well, Rachel was barren, Samson’s mother was barren, Samuel’s mother was barren, and God often did His greatest works with those that were barren.

37 God can do all things, He is all powerful. God is all powerful and His plan is perfect. When we struggle we should not forget God is in control.

38 Mary accepted what the Lord had called her to do. God has also chosen us to do something to further the kingdom spread the gospel and influence people to come to Him or even grow in Him, God has not called us to set back with our faith but use our faith and His plan may have one thing for us to do or have many things to do but He has a plan for us.

 

[AirDancer]

Verse 37 has always held great strength with me: "For nothing will be impossible with God." He provides love, strength, comfort, every thing to us!

 

[for_his_glory]

what man deems impossible God says all things are possible as God's timing is not out timing.

 

[About the Son of God]

Luke 1:36-38
King James Version (KJV)
36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.
37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.
38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

It's interesting how the Angel phrases it's message about Elizabeth;

First the Angel says "cousin" ( συγ-γενις ) ( Literally: together-with-generation ) which is a word generally found to refer to relatives spoken of stiffly, as in the "problem" side of the family; and I mean this mildly negative connotation is true throughout the bible; The word is simply never used in a place where a close first or second cousin is provably meant (whereas "sister" or "brother" is very commonly used to mean a well loved cousin) ... and then the Angel goes on to tell us a slur that has been used against Elizabeth for she was "called barren".

I am noticing how strongly the angel is drawing Mary's attention to how despised Elizabeth had been by people, for barrenness is considered a punishment from God who opens and closes the womb:

Genesis 30:1 And when Rachel saw that she bare Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister; and said unto Jacob, Give me children, or else I die.
Genesis 30:2 And Jacob's anger was kindled against Rachel: and he said, Am I in God's stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb?

And it is precisely, here, that Rachel -- the same woman who later brings false idols into Israel for the first time , copies the failed approach from Sarah; eg: when Sarah did not believe in God's promise wholeheartedly because the promise *was* made to her and Abraham *both* that they should have a son of their own flesh.
Given that kind of promise Sarah (and Rachel) still choose to use another women as a mere "womb" to gestate a child for her. A woman abusing another woman.

Genesis 30:3 And she said, Behold my maid Bilhah, go in unto her; and she shall bear upon my knees, that I may also have children by her.

Yet what Sarah did, and Rachel, was displeasing to God. And the promise of the messiah was not brought to Israel through Rachel or her handmaids or Hagar; Rather it came through Leah and Sarah -- the first wife alone was granted the promise. Note: Neither Judah nor Levi come from a handmaid, but only from the true wife.

Considering that, and looking at Luke again -- I see a strange and intense Irony in Luke's writing;
For Elizabeth never stooped to asking for a child through a handmaid but was "blameless" before the Law, and then immediately after we hear of Elizabeth's joy -- Mary gives an almost surreal sounding response: "Behold the handmaid" of the Lord. Mary takes a "low" title upon herself that doesn't fit well if she was to be the first wife of a man, Joseph.... There is a mysterious leap of logic, or faith, or insight in her words; for it points to something subtle in the nature of the promise. ( The virgin shall be with child. )

 

[His_nee (Jeff)]

I never in decades of reading , research, devouring Scripture, trusting ABBA,
saw anything about the women thinking it was any kind of slight, let alone call it abuse, to have children --- as far as I ever saw, they all considered having children a blessing, even when it was for another woman so to speak. i.e. they would rather have a child for another woman, than not have a child. i thought they thought it was good. is there anything in Scripture that says otherwise ? and is there ever a reference in Scripture to angels as 'it'/neutral adjective or noun/ instead of 'he'/masculine noun or adjective ??

 

[for_his_glory]

It's interesting how the Angel phrases it's message about Elizabeth;

First the Angel says "cousin" ( συγ-γενις ) ( Literally: together-with-generation ) which is a word generally found to refer to relatives spoken of stiffly, as in the "problem" side of the family; and I mean this mildly negative connotation is true throughout the bible; The word is simply never used in a place where a close first or second cousin is provably meant (whereas "sister" or "brother" is very commonly used to mean a well loved cousin) ... and then the Angel goes on to tell us a slur that has been used against Elizabeth for she was "called barren".

I am noticing how strongly the angel is drawing Mary's attention to how despised Elizabeth had been by people, for barrenness is considered a punishment from God who opens and closes the womb:

Genesis 30:1 And when Rachel saw that she bare Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister; and said unto Jacob, Give me children, or else I die.
Genesis 30:2 And Jacob's anger was kindled against Rachel: and he said, Am I in God's stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb?

And it is precisely, here, that Rachel -- the same woman who later brings false idols into Israel for the first time , copies the failed approach from Sarah; eg: when Sarah did not believe in God's promise wholeheartedly because the promise *was* made to her and Abraham *both* that they should have a son of their own flesh.
Given that kind of promise Sarah (and Rachel) still choose to use another women as a mere "womb" to gestate a child for her. A woman abusing another woman.

Genesis 30:3 And she said, Behold my maid Bilhah, go in unto her; and she shall bear upon my knees, that I may also have children by her.

Yet what Sarah did, and Rachel, was displeasing to God. And the promise of the messiah was not brought to Israel through Rachel or her handmaids or Hagar; Rather it came through Leah and Sarah -- the first wife alone was granted the promise. Note: Neither Judah nor Levi come from a handmaid, but only from the true wife.

Considering that, and looking at Luke again -- I see a strange and intense Irony in Luke's writing;
For Elizabeth never stooped to asking for a child through a handmaid but was "blameless" before the Law, and then immediately after we hear of Elizabeth's joy -- Mary gives an almost surreal sounding response: "Behold the handmaid" of the Lord. Mary takes a "low" title upon herself that doesn't fit well if she was to be the first wife of a man, Joseph.... There is a mysterious leap of logic, or faith, or insight in her words; for it points to something subtle in the nature of the promise. ( The virgin shall be with child. )

I wouldn't call it a woman abusing another women as it was consensual as the other woman could have said no and went about her business. When Mary said "behold the handmaid" that is who she was before the Lord as being a faithful servant like all of us today as we are all Gods handmaid as we serve Him.

 

[Tony Hyman]

I think we should bear in mind ,that what seems strange to us today was normal customary practice in the early OT .We might not find direct evidence of this in the Bible but since the discovery of cuniform tablets(20,000 so far)Dating 1500bc, which would resemble contracts between parties in current times at a place called Nuzi 1925-31(now Yorgan Tepe Iraq) by the American Schools Of Oriental Research and other institutions, The learned Prof. Howard Vos(Archeology in the Bible Lands) explains:

"What they thought and did provides interesting parralles to patriarchal customs .At Nuzi there is evidence of the sale of the birthright(cf Esau) ,use of he oral blessing (cf Isaac, Jacob),practice of the wife's giving a slave girl to her husband to bear children
(cf Sarah, Leah, Rachel)..It is interesting to observe these customs in action in the same general area of northern Mesopotamia where Abraham lived for a while and where some of his relatives continued to live."

This brings me tothe conclusion that the only real mistake(the rest being normal accepted practice) which Sarah made was that she, more out of shock I suppose; is where the Lord asks Abraham Gen 18:13-15"Why did Sarah laugh and say.' Will I really have a child, now that I am old?' showed a lack of "faith" .Shame! She even tries to redeem herself by lying "I did not laugh" to which God answers "Yes you did"
which was not the case with Elizabeth in Lukes Gospel under discussion. In both cases we find almost an enshrined concrete dupilicate lesson ,for the benefit of us all ,regarding faith and God's almost abhorance regarding doupt in His omnipotance " Gen 17:14 "Is there anything to hard for the Lord" already refered to here.

 

[About the Son of God]

I never in decades of reading , research, devouring Scripture, trusting ABBA,
saw anything about the women thinking it was any kind of slight, let alone call it abuse, to have children --- as far as I ever saw, they all considered having children a blessing, even when it was for another woman so to speak. i.e. they would rather have a child for another woman, than not have a child. i thought they thought it was good. is there anything in Scripture that says otherwise ? and is there ever a reference in Scripture to angels as 'it'/neutral adjective or noun/ instead of 'he'/masculine noun or adjective ??

Scripture has very little in the way of commentary from women, and although children are considered a blessing; I don't think that rape and other abusive means of getting this blessing were psychologically joyful to the women on the receiving end.

For example: I think it very clear that Hagar felt abused by Sarah:

Genes 16:4 And he went in unto Hagar, and she conceived: and when she [Hagar] saw that she had conceived, her mistress [Sarah] was despised in her eyes.

Consider: Hagar's position was clearly that of a slave sold into bondage who did not get to choose to be a slave or not.

Becoming pregnant assuredly gave her certain rights -- but there is a penalty, too; for as the bearer of Children for Sarah and Abraham, she was not free to marry another man, ever. ( Until the child was disowned. )

In the end, *Adultery* is objectively an abuse; I don't care if it be done out of desperation or not; or if it be legally sanctioned as consensual or not.

Jesus quoted to us as legal precedent ( law ), the book of Genesis; and he originally did so against the abuses practiced by the Pharisees by saying "The two become one flesh", and I think that is obviously distinct from "any number of men and/or women"

It's really true that God had already revealed to the Hebrews that marriage is intended to be a permanent union of two, and these two are to be one man and one woman:

Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Matthew 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Matthew 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

-------

Regarding angels: The word "angel" just means message or messenger (either one) in Greek;
In the Hebrew roots of the Angel's names, the names are really attributes of God; as in 'God Heals', or 'the power of God', or even 'The strong-male of God'; etc;

So ... In all cases of angelic 'beings' coming from God; when translated into Greek, the proper gender of their names derive from the person to whom the attribute belongs; eg: God the "Father" (obviously a male)-- That's why all angels are males.

To find an angelic reference that was feminine, the originator of the name or information carried by the angel would be expected to be female; and likewise, for it to be neuter -- the origin should be neuter. People are generally NOT neuter beings, so finding a neuter angel would be quite strange.

But doing some cursory searches, I have found that "angel" has a feminine form, where an added 'iota' is appended just before the declension endings.

For example:
1Samuel 4:19 και νυμφη αυτου γυνη φινεες συνειληφυια του τεκειν και ηκουσεν την αγγελ-ι-αν οτι ελημφθη η κιβωτος του θεου

... and heard the angel/message/messenger (explicitly female) that had-taken the ark of God ....

It's not entirely clear to me if the root word for angel when made feminine means "gossip", "fickle", or female messenger; but generally the explicitly feminine form is usually associated with messages of death and bad news, or gossip; hence, it carries a connotation of "not trustworthy" or "you may not want to hear it!"

2Samuel 4:4 ... εν τω ελθειν την αγγελ-ι-αν σαουλ
2Samuel 4:10 ... με δουναι ευ-αγγελ-ι-α
2Samuel 18:20 ... ευαγγελ-ι-ας (and many others in that chapter of Samuel).

But not without an occasional exception (fickleness):
Proverbs 12:25 Heaviness in the heart of man maketh it stoop: but a good word maketh it glad.
αγγελ-ι-α δε αγαθ-η

Now: Going back to your question; The neuter forms of words in Greek historically are thought to derive from the feminine ones; hence, the feminine forms often can be "made" neuter....

Considering that feminine angels are "fickle" messages, perhaps the following example would be instructive:

An "unreliable" Gospel would be bad -- right? But the word Gospel (Good news or Good angel) is a compound word using the potentially feminine form of angel; So -- notice how carefully Matthew adds (το) before to the word, as a way of insisting that the message is neuter/collective and not feminine, even though the following word "kingdom" is explicitly feminine. eg: Matthew goes out of his way to make sure we know the adjective is neuter, even though that makes it disagree gender wise with the word it modifies.

Matthew 4:23 ... και κηρυσσων το ευ-αγγελ-ι-ον της βασιλει-ας

The Gospel is not fickle... but a truly Good message.