John Calvin Commentary Luke 1:32

"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:" — Luke 1:32 (ASV)

He shall be great. The angel had said the same thing about John the Baptist, and yet he did not intend to make him equal to Christ. But the Baptist is great in his own class, while the greatness of Christ is immediately explained to be such that it raises him above all creatures. For to him alone this belongs as his own unique prerogative: to be called the Son of God. So the apostle argues.

To which of the angels did he say at any time, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee? (Hebrews 1:5).

Angels and kings, I admit, are sometimes dignified with this title in Scripture; but they are commonly called the sons of God on account of their high rank. But it is perfectly clear and certain that God distinguishes his own Son from all the others when he addresses him specifically with the words, Thou art my Son (Psalms 2:7).

Christ is not to be confused either with angels or with men, so as to be one of the multitude of the sons of God; but what is given to him no other has a right to claim. Kings are called sons of God, not certainly by natural right, but because God has bestowed on them such great honor. Even angels have no right to this distinction, except on account of their high rank among creatures, in subordination to the Great Head (Ephesians 1:21). We too are sons, but by adoption, which we obtain by faith, for we do not have it from nature: Christ is the only Son, the only-begotten of the Father (John 1:14).

The future tense of the verb, he shall be called the Son of the Highest, is distorted by that filthy dog²⁶ Servetus to prove that Christ is not the eternal Son of God, but began to be so considered only when he took on our flesh. This is an intolerable slander. He argues that Christ was not the Son of God before he appeared in the world clothed with flesh, because the angel says, He shall be called.

On the contrary, I maintain, the words of the angel mean nothing more than that he, who had been the Son of God from eternity, would be manifested as such in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16); for to be called denotes clear knowledge. There is a wide difference between the two statements: that Christ began to be the Son of God, which he was not before, and that he was manifested among men so that they might know him to be the person who had been previously promised.

Certainly, in every age God has been addressed by his people as a Father, and hence it follows that he had a Son in heaven, from whom and by whom men obtained sonship. For men presume too much if they venture to boast of being the sons of God in any other respect than as members of the only-begotten Son (John 1:18).

It is certain that confidence in the Son alone, as Mediator, inspired the holy fathers with confidence to employ so honorable an address. That more complete knowledge, of which we are now speaking, is elsewhere explained by Paul to mean that we are now at liberty not only to call God our Father, but boldly to cry, Abba, Father (Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6).

The Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David. We have said that the angel borrows from the prophets the titles which he bestows on Christ, so that the holy virgin might more readily acknowledge him to be the Redeemer previously promised to the fathers.

Whenever the prophets speak of the restoration of the church, they direct all the hope of believers to the kingdom of David. Consequently, it became a common maxim among the Jews that the safety of the church would depend on the prosperous condition of that kingdom, and that nothing was more fitting and suitable to the office of the Messiah than to raise up again the kingdom of David.

Accordingly, the name of David is sometimes applied to the Messiah: “They shall serve the Lord their God, and David their king,” (Jeremiah 30:9); again, “my servant David shall be a prince among them,” (Ezekiel 34:24; Ezekiel 37:24); and “They shall seek the Lord their God, and David their king,” (Hosea 3:5).

The passages in which he is called “the son of David” are sufficiently well known. In a word, the angel declares that in the person of Christ the prediction of Amos would be fulfilled: “In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen” (Amos 9:11).

²⁶ The use of such epithets may not be easily reconciled to the refinements of modern taste; but, three centuries ago, few readers would be startled by them, and they are much more sparingly employed by Calvin than by many of his contemporaries. Not to mention that Paul says, Beware of dogs, ((Philippians 3:2,) and that the statement, ,) and that the statement, Without are dogs, ((Revelation 22:15,) bears the impress of the ,) bears the impress of the Alpha and Omega, ((Revelation 22:13,) Servetus, to whom the epithet ,) Servetus, to whom the epithet “filthy” is applied, had denied the fundamental doctrine of our Lord's supreme Divinity, and had luxuriated in the most revolting and blasphemous expressions. — is applied, had denied the fundamental doctrine of our Lord's supreme Divinity, and had luxuriated in the most revolting and blasphemous expressions. — Ed.