Chapter # 1 Paragraph # 5 Study # 4
Lincolnton, NC
August 8, 2004
(084)
AV Translation:
64 And his mouth was opened immediately, and his tongue loosed, and he spake, and praised God.
65 And fear came on all that dwelt round about them: and all these sayings were noised abroad throughout all the hill country of Judaea.
1901 ASV Translation:
64 And his mouth was opened immediately, and his tongue loosed, and he spake, blessing God.
65 And fear came on all that dwelt round about them: and all these sayings were noised abroad throughout all the hill country of Judaea.
Textual Issues:
There are no textual variations between the Textus Receptus and the Nestle/Aland 26 in this set of verses.
Luke's Record:
- I. Luke records the fact that Zacharias was restored to the ability to speak once he had identified the baby's name as "John".
- II. His first speech after the long period of silence was "blessing" God-ward.
- III. The impact of John's birth was felt throughout the hill country in "fear" terms.
Notes:
- I. Luke emphasizes Zacharias' return to the ability to speak.
- A. This emphasis is introduced by a very common figure of speech: "his mouth was opened". The words are not to be taken literally, but in the sense that an "opened mouth" means "he began to utter words".
- B. That it is emphatic is revealed by the epexegetical phrase "and his tongue".
- 1. This phrase is verb-less [the translators add "was loosed"] and continues the non-literal figures of speech. The inability to speak had almost nothing to do with Zacharias' ability to open and close his mouth and even less to do with his ability to move his tongue around inside of his mouth. The problem was more likely that his vocal cords were rendered inoperative for the duration of his muteness, but these "manners of speaking" (i.e. the figures of speech) for describing his problem were, and are, common to the understanding of men even though they are not technically accurate. Technical accuracy is never the point in figures of speech; the only thing that is critical is "meaning" as it is derived from the ways men communicate.
- 2. The verb-less phrase is attached to the initial description by an "and" which is to be understood epexegetically (as a further expression of the same truth). That it is included in Luke's record is either redundant or emphatic (we do not need to have two figures of speech to inform us that Zacharias could now talk). Since every word of God is profitable, none are redundant; thus, we call it emphatic.
- C. That Luke wanted to emphasize Zacharias' return to speech indicates that he wanted Theophilus to ponder the seriousness of two realities: 1) the problem of disbelief when God speaks; and 2) the mercy of God in rescinding His discipline once the "lesson" has been learned.
- 1. In some ways, all of the problems of our fallen world can be summarized under these two issues.
- 2. Man typically discounts God's words and, then, when the consequences come upon him, he tends to magnify his foolishness by discounting the reality of God's mercy because he has been overwhelmed by His discipline.
- a. Men are typically so self-centered that they will not accept the discipline of God as both deserved and good.
- b. This causes them to attack the character of God rather than accept the legitimacy of His response to their sin. The thought seems to be that one cannot be "good" and impose retribution and, since retribution is justice, the tendency is to over-emphasize judgment to the exclusion of mercy. This is precisely the reason for the name, "John".
- c. The attack generally blinds them to the reality of His mercy. Man is an extremist; he wants God to only be beneficent without discipline, and this "wanting" drives him to extreme Theology.
- d. Being thus blinded, they often never experience that mercy simply because they refuse to see it since they are blaming God for their predicament rather than themselves.
- 3. It is little wonder, then, that Luke wanted Theophilus to ponder the release Zacharias experienced as soon as he demonstrated his, now developed, confidence in the words of God.
- a. Zacharias was speechless because he did not believe.
- b. Zacharias returned to the ability to speak just as soon as (immediately) he did what God had told him to do: name him "John". This was the obedience of faith and it proved that God was not so much interested in penalizing Zacharias for his sin as He was in getting him past it. After nine months of no speech because of unbelief, it wasn't going to be easy to get Zacharias to reject the words of God again.
- c. The sins of men are many; thus, the discipline of God is often. This "oftenness" can be used by men to justify their rejection of the graciousness of God, and is.
- D. Luke then adds to his emphasis: Zacharias "began speaking" (an ingressive imperfect).
- 1. This was implied in "his mouth was opened".
- 2. Being necessarily implied, the overt expression in words becomes emphatic.
- E. Luke then tells us the general content of Zacharias' speech: "blessing God".
- 1. The word "blessing" was originally coined to describe the use of speech to "build a reputation for the one 'blessed' in the mind of the hearer".
- 2. This is exactly what Zacharias was attempting to do: he wanted everyone to know God in the way he was coming to know Him -- magnified in mercy in the face of retributive discipline.
- II. Interestingly, Luke's next statement is his record of the impact: "fear" came upon all who heard of the record of these events.
- A. One would think that Luke's interest in magnifying the "grace" of God would preclude the mention of "fear".
- 1. The word translated "fear" means "fear"...the attitude of apprehension from the mildest form (unease) to the strongest (men faint for fear--Luke 21:26).
- 2. The mention of fear is deliberate: men need to be apprehensive when they live in the context of a false theology. But, mark this, John pointedly says "there is no fear in love". This means that "fear" is not rooted in "love" in the right understanding of "love". That "fear" is a theme in Luke 1 (1:12,13,30,50,65) shows that Luke considered it both in a positive sense and in a negative one. On the one hand it is a good thing to "fear" the Lord (1:50), but, on the other, "fear" generally means that one's "Theology" (perception of God) is not developed to the point of "love" (and, these days, whose is?).
- B. Clearly, Luke wants to maintain his distinction between the fearful holiness of God and the fearless mercy of God. None need to fear who are willing to apply for mercy; all need to tremble in terror who think themselves capable of standing in His Light on their own merits.
- C. Interestingly, only those who begin with "fear" end with "praise".
