The Hidden Prophet Bursting Forth: John the Baptist’s Appearing According to Luke

Abstract

This study offers a fresh reading of John the Baptist’s infancy and childhood narratives in the Gospel of Luke. It argues that Luke utilizes the motif of “hiddenness” to create tension so that John bursts forth into his public ministry in Israel from a place of obscurity. John suddenly appears in public to prepare the way for the messiah. This reading offers for a unifying concept of “concealing-then-revealing” which provides an explanatory lens for several opaque textual units in Luke’s Gospel.

Luke’s Gospel offers a series of vignettes that follow John the Baptist across his life, from the womb, to a child, to an adult and then his untimely death. He is Israel’s last prophet of the Mosaic Covenant and the forerunner of the messiah. The infancy narratives in Luke are well known and often covered, and we know what they say; but it is not always clear what Luke is doing with what he says. ¹ Scholars continue to struggle with the significance of certain features of the narrative panels. This study offers a comprehensive solution that aims to unify Luke’s purposes across what some have identified as disparate texts. This study demonstrates that hiddenness–then–revelation provides the key to unlocking the difficult features of John the Baptist’s infancy narratives. Specifically, it argues that the motif of hiddenness–then–revelation unites John’s infancy and childhood with the inauguration of his public ministry before the dawn of the messianic age. ²

This study proceeds in four main sections before the conclusion. The first section focuses on the Zechariah’s divine punishment of being mute as a result of his response to the angelic visit to the priest Zechariah during his rotation in the temple (Luke 1:5-25). The second section addresses the very short and curious description of Elizabeth being hidden during pregnancy (Luke 1:24–25). The third section considers Mary’s visit to Elizabeth and the description of John’s response to the presence of Jesus while both were in utero (Luke 1:39–45). The fourth section explicates the short but important description of John’s life in the wilderness before his public ministry (Luke 1:80).

Public Desires, Hidden Promises

John is associated with the motif of hiddenness before he is even born. The scene of Zechariah engaging with the angel in the temple has led many commentators to attribute Zechariah’s divine discipline at the hand of Gabriel as reflecting two things: (1) his desire for a sign, and (2) his questions reflecting unbelief. ³ He was left mute and possibly deaf until the birth of his son John. ⁴ However, a collectivist reading reminds us of an additional implication: the concerns of the people. ⁵ Luke’s narrative makes it clear that Zechariah was not able to perform the expected priestly blessing for the Tamid service (Num 6:22–27) upon the people when he came out of the temple. Thus, his muteness left the people without the ‘word of the Lord’ they were expecting. The details about Zechariah’s return home after his service (1:23) drives home the point that there was no blessing, just a silent and anticlimactic ending for everyone.

At the opening of the scene in Luke 1:5-25, Luke draws attention to the priestly function of intercession and mediation within the temple: Zechariah will represent the entire nation of Israel as he goes before Yahweh and gives the incense offering. As he goes about his tasks, he encounters an angel who announces a range of promises and expectations, including a son whom the Lord will use the prepare the nation for his purposes. Yet his response draws the ire of the angel who renders him mute until his son is born. When Zechariah comes out of the temple, those in the courtyard would have expected him to pronounce the blessing from Numbers (6:22–27) over the congregation, and by their representation, over the entire nation. Luke narrates that, ‘when he came out, he was unable to speak to them, and they realized that he had seen a vision in the temple. And he kept making signs to them and remained mute’ (1:22). Whatever motions, gestures, or writing in the dirt that Zechariah may have been able to do, Luke is content to leave the scene as one in which Zechariah could not communicate. More importantly, the audience at the courtyard apparently learned nothing. For Zechariah is said to simply return home after his ‘time of service was ended’ (1:23).

The salient point for our study is that Zechariah’s inability to speak to the people about Gabriel’s promise deprived the people (and arguably the entire nation) of the ‘word of the Lord’ that they people were not even expecting (but the reader knows about). The people never know of the joy to come at the birth of John, the coming presence of God’s Holy Spirit, and the work of this new Elijah-like figure. All of this is initially hidden from the public.

The narrative of Gabriel’s promise to Zechariah (Luke 1:8–23) is intentionally anticlimactic for Israel. The narrative points to a concealment of divine promises for Israel’s future through the presence of an Elijah–like prophet who will turn many to the Lord (Luke 1:17). Gabriel’s promises are for the ‘children of Israel.’ Thus, Zechariah’s silence when stepping out into the courtyard is nothing less than the withholding of good news for the nation. This is especially poignant given the presence of the ‘whole multitude of the people’ (1:10) who were praying and waiting for Zechariah. From the perspective of the reader, Zechariah’s silence is ‘hope deferred’ (Prov 13:12) until the desires of the people find knowledge of God’s plans at John’s birth. ⁶ What is initially hidden is finally revealed. The very act of Zechariah’s prophetic song (1:67–79) is itself emblematic of John’s identity because it bursts forth publicly through the Spirit on the day of his appearing, rather than being expected by the people.

In sum, this section argues that Zechariah’s service in the temple and interaction with Gabriel (Luke 1:8–23) portrays Israel as temporarily deprived of the word of the Lord. The people never receive the priestly blessing, and they never have an opportunity to see God’s promises of salvation, redemption, and a kingdom, flow from the mercy seat of God’s presence in the temple. The good news of hope in a new Elijah-like figure is delayed or hidden. The faithful people of God praying in the courtyard must wait. Zechariah’s silence is a sign and punishment, but it also contributes to the motif of hiddenness-then-revelation: he cannot speak until John is born. Whatever was initially hidden bursts forth through the power of the Spirit in a single moment (1:67).

Hidden Pregnancy, Public Appearance

Immediately following the description of Zechariah’s punishment is a short passage describing Elizabeth’s early months of her pregnancy (Luke 1:24–25). Once again, Luke inserts a summary statement that is relatively straightforward in what it describes. After Elizabeth conceived, she ‘kept herself hidden’ (1:24) for five months. While the text is simple enough to understand, it is not entirely clear what Luke is doing by including it. ⁷ The text is perplexing because Elizabeth should have been shouting this news from the rooftops. She may have been concerned about a miscarriage, but this proposal does not make sense in Luke’s narrative. Nor is there an indication that she was in isolation for the purpose of reflection. ⁸ Her decision to not ‘go public’ may have been driven by a concern to not upstage Mary, but the text makes no mention of this and there is no element of competition in the entire narrative. ⁹ Nor does it make sense for Elizabeth to join her husband in silence as participation in his divine punishment. ¹⁰ A better theory is that her actions are prophetic, an act of hiding and revealing that anticipates John’s future ministry in Israel.

This pericope may be understood as Elizabeth expressing her personal satisfaction and the joy of being pregnant after years of barrenness. Elizabeth is not a priest, but her pedigree and marriage has her sharing in the task of representing the nation, especially through her status as a pregnant woman. ¹¹ The providence of God also extends to the selection of Zechariah through lots (1:9). The fact that this all takes place in the temple ‘shows John standing in continuity with the temple.’ ¹² There are certainly aspects of personal honor and shame at work, for Elizabeth bears a terrible burden of being barren. However, an exclusively individualistic reading will under-interpret the narrative features that emphasize the mediation taking place between the nation and God through this righteous priest and his wife.

There is certainly a dimension of personal reversal of status for Elizabeth at work here. But there is also a collective aspect to this scene as Elizabeth waited, revealed herself first to Mary, and then to her community. ¹³ Elizabeth’s act of hiding is arguably a Spirit-compelled prophetic action. This view is supported by the fact that Luke has Elizabeth speaking with divine insight, being filled with the Holy Spirit, interpreting the joyful behavior of John in her womb (1:42–45). Elizabeth lets Mary be the first person to see her because Mary is carrying the Davidic king, who is the ‘Lord’ (1:43). Elizabeth now points to Mary, just as her son will direct others to Mary’s son. These are pregnancies from God’s people and for God’s people; they are part of those who are collectively pregnant and groaning with anticipation of national redemption. ¹⁴ There are three reasons to consider this view.

First, Elizabeth is indirectly but substantially connected to the Mosaic ministry of covenant mediation as previously discussed. The details about Zechariah and Elizabeth’s pedigree, along with the temple scene bring attention to the role of priestly mediation. Luke indicates that Elizabeth is a ‘daughter of Aaron’ (1:5). Although she is not a priest, Luke views her and her husband as integral to the priestly ministry of mediating between Israel and God. Zechariah makes the offering and gets the promises from Gabriel, but Elizabeth is the one who bears the child. Only a woman can fulfill this task. When Elizabeth is viewed as part of Israel’s covenant mediation, it is possible to understand her pregnancy as prophetic and collectively important for the nation.

Second, the combination of pregnancy-out-of-barrenness and the presence of songs of redemption associate these events with similar events in salvation history. There are five narratives of barren women in the OT: (1) Sarah gave birth to Isaac, the child of promise (Gen 21:1), (2) Rebekah gave birth to twins Jacob and Esau (Gen 25:25–26), (3) Rachel gave birth to Joseph and Benjamin (Gen 46:19), two of the twelve progenitors of the twelve tribes of Israel, (4) the unnamed mother who gave birth to Samson (Judg 13:24), and (5) Hannah, who gave birth to Samuel (1 Sam 1:20). At each of these junctures, a child was born for Israel’s benefit. The reader of Luke’s Gospel knows there are two significant pregnancies: Elizabeth’s and Mary’s. And Mary is carrying the ‘Son of the Most High’ and a new Davidic king (1:32). When these narratives are read in light of wider canonical patterns of salvation–history, it is all but certain that the messianic age is arriving. ¹⁵ When Elizabeth’s pregnancy is read in light of this OT pattern, it is possible to see her pregnancy as something that will contribute to God’s redemptive work for the entire nation, just as Isaac, Joseph, and Samuel did.

Third, there is a pattern of canonical texts that associate the messianic age with imagery of God’s people giving birth and/or being pregnant. Pregnancy can be used negatively, as in Isaiah’s portrait of Israel: ‘we were pregnant, we writhed, but we have given birth to wind’ (26:18). However, at the end of the book of Isaiah (66:7–10), this image is transformed into a robust description of Zion being pregnant and joyfully bringing forth children. Similarly, Micah (4:10) depicts Israel as being ‘like a woman in labor’ as she seeks redemption from exile. In the NT, the book of Revelation (12:2) uses this exact imagery for the people of God: ‘She was pregnant and cried out in labor and agony as she was about to give birth.’ The Gospel of Luke is certainly not the book of Revelation, but the infancy narratives must be read with a just a touch more apocalypticism than is typically attributed to them.

To summarize, the collectivist reading promoted here offers a solution to the riddle of Elizabeth’s hidden pregnancy: she embodies the nation as she carries in her body the nation’s last prophet before the messiah. She represents the nation groaning and longing for redemption. Her actions of hiding and then revealing herself are prophetic as she draws attention to herself in relation to Mary. She hides herself so that her appearance after five months would be striking. Her sudden public appearance takes away her reproach because she has the satisfaction of bearing a son. But her actions are prophetic because she suddenly appears to Mary and then to Israel as her actions anticipate John’s dramatic inauguration of his public ministry in Israel.

Hidden Joy in the Womb Prophetically Revealed

Yet another text that contributes to the hiddenness motif of John is the visit of Mary to Elizabeth’s home while both were still pregnant (Luke 1:39–45). Commentators observe there is something eschatological going on here, at least an act of divine fulfillment. ¹⁶ And Elizabeth uses a Christologically important title, identifying Mary as the ‘mother of my Lord [κυρίου]’ (1:43). ¹⁷ Again, the details of this scene are well established. But the question remains as important as ever: what is Luke doing with what he is writing? Why does this scene matter? How does it relate to the whole narrative? The theory that the elder (John) is blessing the younger (Jesus) does not seem to fully account for the timing of this event, as both of them were still the womb. ¹⁸ The hypothesis that Luke is promoting dialogical knowledge through the Spirit does not seem to account for the narrative dynamics. ¹⁹ This section argues that Luke 1:39-45 is yet another scene in which John’s infancy is characterized by hiddenness-then-revelation through Spirit–empowered prophecy.

First, the meeting of these women is a Spirit–empowered and eschatological event being directed by God. There is no reason given for the occasion of this visit, suggesting that Luke would have the reader associate it primarily with the same peculiar providence that attended the roll of lots when Zechariah was chosen to give the incense offering. Nothing is happenstance. Mary is described as arising and traveling with σπουδή (1:39), typically translated as ‘speed’ or ‘haste.’ This word can just as easily be understood here as meaning ‘zeal’ (BDAG s.v. σπουδή). In either case, it is unusual to be given details about the manner in which a person travels when there is no reason for the travel at all. ²⁰ However, the connotations of zeal followed by Mary’s song point to the conclusion that this trip is a movement of the Spirit. ²¹

Second, the emotional tone of the scene is characterized by the emotion of joy, a signal of a messianic age of peace. ²² That joy functions this way is particularly evident in the pregnant Zion scene of Isa 66:7–11. In this text, the nation is brought forth ‘in one moment’ at the birth of a son (66:7) who brings ‘peace’ (66:12), ‘comfort,’ (66:13) and defeats her ‘enemies’ (66:14). The promise from Gabriel to Zechariah emphasizes the presence of joy with his birth: ‘And you will have joy and gladness and many will rejoice at his birth’ (1:14). This is fulfilled when Luke narrates John’s birth and the neighbors who ‘rejoiced with her’ (1:58). It is in the context of this joy that Zechariah’s mouth is open and he prophecies in the Spirit, blessing God (1:64). After Mary meets Elizabeth, her song also draws attention to the joy attending God’s plans for the baby Jesus (1:47). Sandwiched in the middle of promise and fulfillment about joy attending John’s birth is John’s own emotional response to being physically near Jesus (1:44). Luke’s interest in the joy surrounding John’s birth points to John’s function as the one who prepares the way for the joyful messianic era.

Third, the entire visitation of Mary to Elizabeth’s home is relatively secret in Luke’s narrative. It does not lead to widespread public knowledge, even though it is a step toward public revelation of Elizabeth’s pregnancy. In the visitation of Mary to Elizabeth, the joyful evidence of the dawn of the new age is hidden in the womb, only known by those who heard Mary’s song (1:46-55). Additionally, Elizabeth’s neighbors only appear when John is born (1:65), as news of the birth goes out to ‘all the hill country of Judea’ (1:65). Again, the concept of hiddenness–then–revelation explains the narrative dynamics of Luke 1:39–45 and 1:57–66. John is not only hidden in the womb; he remains relatively hidden even after Mary arrives. His joyful response to Jesus is only directly known to his mother. His birth is an eschatological sign of what his future public ministry will look like, as it will go throughout the hills of Judea as described in 3:3 (‘he went into all the region around the Jordan’). ²³ In other words, the spread of the news of his birth foreshadows the spread of his message and ministry.

Fourth, John recognizes that Jesus is the Lord in the womb as though he were an adult. The presence of the Holy Spirit is so strong in him that this unborn infant functions as a man. This indicates the fulfillment of Gabriel’s promise: ‘he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother’s womb’ (1:15). The yet–unborn John has the same joyful response to Jesus’ presence that Elizabeth (1:42) and Mary do (1:47). Elizabeth ‘anticipates that child’s relationship to Mary’s child: John’s role as the one who prepares for and proclaims the Messiah.’ ²⁴ In other words, Elizabeth responds to Mary as John will eventually respond to Jesus. What commentators fail to see is that John’s response to Jesus as though he were a man is hidden; it is known only to Elizabeth and to Mary by second–hand knowledge. This strange scene is best explained by Luke’s interest in keeping John and his Spirit-empowered pre-natal joy a family secret.

To summarize, the Spirit of God moves Mary to visit Elizabeth. This is why Luke is interested in the manner rather than the reason for Mary’s trip. John’s joyful response to the presence of the messiah in Mary’s womb is hidden from sight, only to be revealed through the prophetic words of his mother. The timing of this event ensures that both John and Jesus are still in utero. This ensures that the signals of the messianic age are hidden, but then revealed, first to Mary and then to Elizabeth’s neighbors—but only when John is born.

Hidden Child, Absent Parents, and the Pattern of the Prophets

Zechariah’s prophetic song about the messiah and his own son John (1:68–79) is followed by a one–sentence transitional text that segues between the growth of John and his public ministry in Israel. The short sentence that follows may get passed over by those eagerly looking for the birth of Jesus in the next section. According to this text (1:80), John is described as being a child who ‘grew up and became strong in spirit, and he was in the wilderness’ until his public ministry began. The description of John being a growing child is rather commonplace, but it is not immediately clear what Luke intends to communicate by providing this short summary. ²⁵ Perhaps he intends it to function as a literary feature that closes the textual unit, thus moving onto the account of the birth of Jesus. ²⁶ This may be true, but such a function does not exhaust the meaning of the text. This section argues that this passage (1:80) is not merely ornamental, but reflects Luke’s wider motif of a hidden John, a feature that anticipates his sudden public ministry.

The important point here is that Luke paints John as a perpetual ‘child’ in the wilderness. Luke’s interest in promise and fulfillment is evident by the way that he refers to John as a ‘child’ (παιδίον). This is a strange word to use because this word παιδίον is not used for young men who might have the capacity for extreme independent living but for young children who would function as dependents. Strictly speaking, Luke does not state that the ‘child’ was in the wilderness, but that ‘the child grew. . . and he was wilderness’ until his public appearance. Still, the flow of Luke’s discourse here merges John’s childhood with his young adult years. The nominative use of παιδίον functions as the subject of the imperfect active indicative verb ‘he was’ (εἰμί). Thus, there is a sense in which Luke portrays John as the ‘child. . . in the wilderness.’ It is possible that Zechariah and Elizabeth raised John in the wilderness from a very young age, but they do not appear, and their absence is striking given the fact that Luke could have easily inserted a reference to his parents rearing him in the desert. We also know that Elizabeth and Zechariah had a home ‘in the hill country’ in a town in Judah (1:39), at least while John was an infant.

Zechariah’s status as a priest would have created similar vocational expectations for his son John, although we already know that his calling is special. The literature of first–century Judaism provides a strong foundation for requiring priests to be thirty years old. There is a very strong antecedent theology from Numbers that requires the sons of Levi to be thirty years old when they begin their service. The strength of this age–requirement theme is evident from the repetition. This age requirement (from age thirty to fifty) is repeated for the Kohathites (Num 4:3), Gershonites (Num 4:23), and the sons of Merari (Num 4:30). This age requirement is repeated again for summary statements in four further passages (Num 4:35, 38, 43, 47). This element of strong repetition in Numbers 4 establishes the age of thirty as a clear requirement for Levitical priesthood in Israel. So, John’s life just before public ministry most likely consisted of his years as a young man, a twenty–something and not a small child. This historical background, together with Luke’s own interest in Jesus’ age, begs the question: why was Luke so interested in portraying John as a ‘child. . . in the wilderness’? There are four considerations.

First, John began his public ministry as a fully grown adult, likely around age thirty. John most likely presented himself as a prophet to Israel at age thirty, so his wilderness years were likely his twenties. The age of thirty was the full expression of adulthood. When describing Jesus, Luke (3:23) uses the adverbial comparative ‘about’ (ὡσεὶ) thirty years old to indicate his approximate age. Jesus’ public ministry in Israel began he was about thirty years old. The use of ὡσεὶ points to Luke’s desire to use a round number. ²⁷ This may indicate that Luke himself wants the reader (or auditor) to see something significant about this age. In this case, it arguably that John appears as a fully grown adult at the outset of his public ministry, a significant element for developing a motif of hiddenness–then–revelation.

Second, the summary in 1:80 reflects Luke’s penchant for promise and fulfillment. ²⁸ Specifically, this text demonstrates intra–Gospel fulfillment of Gabriel’s promise to Zechariah (1:5–25). This short text (1:80) is partially related to the angelic promise to Zechariah (for those reading backwards). This verse demonstrates the veracity of the word of the Lord and the certainty of God’s promises: (e.g., ‘For the hand of the Lord was with him [John]’ 1:66). Whatever the angel of the Lord promised Zechariah about his son, it begins to be fulfilled in John’s life. For readers who doubt like Zechariah did, this verse offers assurance that God’s promises about John were continuing to be fulfilled according to the divine plan. ²⁹

Third, the absence of John’s physical parents suggests he follows in the pattern of the prophets of Israel. ³⁰ The combination of a child reared in the wilderness without reference to parents (or any other adult) is surprising. It is in this silence or absence that the point of this summary text (1:80) is found. John is one who was raised by God himself. This may draw on the texts and traditions of prophets cared for by God in the wilderness. This is especially noteworthy in light of Elijah who was fed by ravens in the wilderness as he fled from Ahab (1 Kgs 17:4–6). There were many other prophets of Yahweh that hid in a cave and were fed ‘with bread and water’ (1 Kgs 18:13). John’s status as one coming ‘in the spirit and power of Elijah’ is reinforced by his status as one hidden away in the desert and reared by God himself. ³¹ John then receives the ‘word of God’ (3:2) just as Jeremiah the prophet did in the LXX version of Jer 1:1-2 (‘the word of God came to Jeremiah son of Hilkiah’). ³² John came ‘in the spirit and power of Elijah’ (1:17a) and his entire life imitated this prophet of Israel.

Fourth, John is described in 1:80 as growing up in the ‘wilderness’ (ἔρημος), a place apart from other people and civilization. This means that John was ‘great before the Lord’ (1:15) and not before people. He did not present himself to Israel until age thirty, so this verse most likely refers to his late teenage years and his twenties. This demonstrates John was filled with the Holy Spirit even from the womb (1:15) and then had a singular purpose and mission through his location in the wilderness. This location also reinforces John’s status as a prophet like Elijah, who was called in the wilderness (1 Kgs 19:4). The desert was outside the realm of the temple and Jerusalem, thus functioning as a source of spiritual renewal. ³³ The desert location sets up John as a figure who was being prepared by God himself to be a person who would ‘prepare’ others; ‘to make ready for the Lord a people prepared’ (Luke 1:17b). ³⁴ Whereas the summary of Jesus’ childhood (Luke 2:39–40) locates him in the town of Nazareth, John’s childhood is hidden away from public view.

To summarize, Luke’s portrait of John as a child hidden away in the wilderness echoes the tradition of Israel’s great prophets being reared by God himself; they are hidden away until the time is ripe for revelation. The Lukan narrative dynamics are such that John is a perpetual παιδίον until he suddenly appears as thirty-year old man, ready for public ministry. This short summary text (Luke 1:80) is important because it contributes to the subtle motif of John as ‘hidden’ until the inauguration of his public ministry. This stands in contrast to Jesus, whose birth was attended by shepherds, a celestial event, and a musical host of angels in heaven (Luke 2:8–21).

Conclusion

This reading of Luke attempts to follow his own emphasis on what the birth of John means for the whole nation of Israel. Each of the major pericopes about John before his public ministry emphasize his hiddenness. The quality of hiddenness-then-revelation is embedded in a range of texts through explicit vocabulary and implicit concepts: (1) in the punishment of Zechariah, (2) in Elizabeth’s emergence at five months pregnant, (3) in John’s joyful worship of Jesus in utero, and (4) in the portrait of John as a child reared in the wilderness. This pattern of exegetical details supports the main conclusion: this motif of hiddenness-then-revelation unifies John’s infancy and childhood with his sudden public ministry in Israel. There is even a sense in which Elizabeth embodies the birth pangs of a pregnant Israel before the sudden arrival of the messianic age. John is the embodiment of Yahweh’s acts of concealment and revelation at the dawn of the messianic era. This quality of hiddenness-then-revelation is embedded within several of the Lukan narratives. The emphasis on John’s status as a hidden child creates narrative tension so that the beginning of his public ministry is as explosive as his provocative message of repentance from sins.

The significance of this study lies in its comprehensive approach to a wide range of textual units in Luke’s opening narratives. It provides a unifying concept of concealing-then-revealing which offers an explanatory lens for several opaque textual units in Luke’s Gospel. This offers a hermeneutical aid for those seeking to under why Luke writes as he does and what he is doing with the narratives he chooses to include. God’s acts of concealing-then-revealing in John’s infancy and childhood further develops the idea that his identity is prophetic. This conclusion follows Luke’s collectivist interest in the way that John and Jesus appear on behalf of the ‘children of Israel.’ This study also demonstrates that Luke has some interest in the use of apocalyptic discourse as Luke integrates the apocalyptic concept of ‘hiding and revealing’ through his collage of narratives and songs that would have resonated with his Hellenistic audience.