Commentary on Luke 2:[1-7] 8-20

The birth of Jesus (2:1–7) 

Luke closes John’s story temporarily to continue Mary’s narrative (Luke 1), painting Jesus’ birth in terms of both the emperor’s world and the outworking of God’s purpose. The references to Augustus, Quirinius, and the census serve three functions. First, unlike the earlier chronological reference focused on Judean history (1:5), this one concerns “the world,” implying that, while John’s ministry was focused on Israel, Jesus’ would be universal. Second, power and privilege occupy center stage: Augustus and Quirinius are introduced as wealthy, elite rulers, with Joseph portrayed as their subordinate. Finally, the census locates Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem, fulfilling Micah 5:2:

But you, O Bethlehem of Ephrathah,
     who are one of the little clans of Judah,
from you shall come forth for me
     one who is to rule in Israel.

Augustus, born Gaius Octavian and adopted by Julius Caesar, was recognized as sole Roman leader in 27 BCE. Having restored Roman rule as an empire, he was honored as divine. The Myrian Inscription declares: “Divine Augustus Caesar, son of a god, imperator of land and sea, the benefactor and savior of the whole world.” Even the name “Augustus” identified him as possessing quasi-divine characteristics. His census signals an unwelcome intrusion into Jewish affairs, reminding the people of Israel’s conquered status. Luke’s progression—from “all the world,” to Syria, to Joseph and the newborn—draws Jesus’ birth onto a universal stage, while underscoring its redemptive significance for the world.

Joseph travels to his ancestral town, “the city of David,” Bethlehem. Luke explicitly shows Joseph as having fulfilled Scripture and, with it, God’s purpose. Gabriel had announced that Jesus would receive David’s throne (1:32, 35), and this is echoed in Zechariah’s song (1:69, 78). Luke indicates how this plan, echoing God’s promise of a Davidic dynasty (2 Samuel 7:12–16), is now realized. Like David, Jesus hails from Bethlehem; born there, he is of David’s house (Micah 5:2; see above).

In this opening material, then, we find a conjunction of intentions: Joseph’s journey results from Augustus’s decree, but even universal Roman rule serves God’s greater purpose. This is ironic (Rome unwittingly serves a greater Sovereign) but also prophetic, and it reveals Roman rule’s provisional nature.

Luke records the birth with simplicity. The “fulfillment of the days” signifies both the realization of Gabriel’s announcement and the end of Mary’s pregnancy. The account specifies that this is Mary’s “firstborn,” supporting Luke’s claim of the virginal conception and designating Jesus as the possessor of inheritance rights. Luke’s account attends to the child’s care (with “bands of cloth” and a “manger”), locating Jesus’ birth on the lower level of a typical house, where the livestock would be kept, since there was “no place in the guest room” (2:7, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition). In other words, Mary and Joseph were guests in a home (and a town, Bethlehem) that was overcrowded.

The angelic message and shepherds (2:8–20)

This section, framed by references to shepherds (2:8, 20), recounts interpretive responses to the promised son’s birth (with parallels to responses to John’s birth [1:58–79]). Anticipated through continued references to David (himself a shepherd-cum-king), the shepherds represent the lower rungs of society’s ladder—peasants inadequately resourced, hiring themselves out for wages. Indeed, the contrast between Augustus/Quirinius and these shepherds displays a central motif of Mary’s song: the high and mighty versus the humble and lowly (1:52). As recipients of this divine visitation, shepherds are highly esteemed in Luke’s narrative account, while rulers are overlooked. Good news comes to peasants, not rulers. The lowly are lifted up.

The “angel of the Lord” (2:9) is probably Gabriel, joined by “a multitude of the heavenly host” (2:13). This appearance of divine glory on a farm is astonishing, given the earlier respect for the Jerusalem temple as the presumptive meeting place between humanity and God. At least implicitly, the temple’s socio-religious importance is questioned, putting us on notice that the coming new world is radically different. Holiness, purity, status, and values—all must be reexamined.

The angels interpret Jesus’ birth from a heavenly perspective, pointing toward its universal implications. Good news is “for all the people” (2:10); peace has come “on earth” (2:14). This contrasts sharply with Caesar’s earlier demand on “all the world” (2:1).

The introduction of the shepherds and the angelic message they hear share elements of the birth-announcement-type scene: angel appearance (2:9a), fear reaction (2:9b), birth announcement (2:10–11), and sign (2:12). This one departs from the norm in significant ways, though.

1. 1. 1. Unlike earlier, similar announcements, this one concerns what has already happened on “this day”; for Luke, today emphasizes the present as the moment of eschatological fulfillment (see 4:21; 5:26; 19:9; 23:43).
      2. The announcement goes not to prospective parents but to outsiders—to persons outside Jesus’ family and to society’s outsiders—and this anticipates the boundary-crossing ramifications of Jesus’ birth.
      3. The shepherds do not learn the child’s name, yet in receiving the “good news,” they are given his identity: “Savior,” “Messiah,” and “Lord.”

With regard to this last point, Luke thus straddles cultural fences, drawing both on Greco-Roman “good news,” related to contexts of victorious battle and emperor worship (Augustus’s birthday was celebrated as the beginning of “good tidings”) and to the prophet Isaiah, for whom “good news” signifies God’s coming, God’s salvific reign (Isaiah 40–66). “Savior,” “Messiah,” and “Lord” (Luke 2:11) recall Isaiah too (Isaiah 9:1–7), as well as echoing titles given to the Roman emperor. 

Clearly, Luke presents this newborn child as a counter to Augustus, leaning heavily on the anticipation of a messianic figure in Israel’s Scriptures and associating this baby with the coming of Yahweh. Again, then, Luke transforms Greco-Roman language by vesting it in a baby laid in a manger, with the message of good news directed to peasant-shepherds.

For Luke, the “multitude of the heavenly host” demonstrates the appropriate response to God’s gracious intervention: divine worship (2:13–14). These angels proclaim heavenly glory and earthly peace, drawing on the scriptural hope of shalom—peace with justice, universal healing, the flourishing of creation—grounded in the promise of God’s rule and the coming of salvation (Isaiah 52:7). Note that the expression “those whom he favors” does not limit the scope of the good news. After all, the end-time shalom for Israel introduces cosmic shalom. God’s mercy has fallen on the world.

The shepherds respond like Mary, going “with haste” (1:39; 2:16). They find everything “just as it had been told them” (2:20), authenticating the angel’s message and sounding the note of God’s fidelity. They become, with Anna (2:38), Luke’s first evangelists: “They made known what had been told them about this child” (2:17). Their testimony produces different responses: amazement from those who heard, but also Mary’s further reflection. Even with exalted affirmations of the newborn’s identity, more layers of the importance of God’s work remain to be explored.