obtain a good sense only if no mention of a conception by the
supplied by the Evangelist. Probably the meaning of LÊÎH 2,@L$ in connection with what precedes should not be pressed too far. On any view, however, ver. 35 would make Jesus LÊÎH 2,@L$, even though He might also have been called that on less definite grounds.
4. The words in vers. 36, 37 (pointing to the example of Elisabeth), obtain a good sense only if no mention of a conception by the working of the Holy Spirit has gone before; for if the most wonderful thing of all has already been promised, then it is weak and not convincing to point in support to Elisabeth's conception in her old age. This, so far from being a support for Harnack's position, is really an argument against it. There could, in the nature of the case, be no parallel for the unique miracle. But what the angel could do was to point to a miracle which was at least sufficient to illustrate the general principle that @Û6 •*L<"JZF,4 B"D( J@L$ 2,@L$ B"$< Õ0$:".47 And it is almost necessarily required for the logic of the passage that the greater event in which the belief was solicited, should be in the same sphere with the example used. If merely vers. 31–33 had gone before, then we should expect that the angel would point rather to the promised career of John than to something miraculous in his birth, to which miracle there was to be no counterpart in the case of Jesus. Zimmermann admits the weakness of the argument drawn from vers. 36, 37, against the integrity of the passage; but I must go still further. To me it will always be a mystery how the argument ever came to be formulated from vers. 36, 37, against the integrity of the passage rather than in favor of it.48 /pg. 57/
5. The question of Mary, BT$H J@L$J@, ¦B, –<*D" @Û (4<fF6T; is open to objection in two respects:
(a) Since Mary was betrothed to Joseph, and since he was of the house of David, it would have been perfectly natural for Mary to apply the promise of the angel to the fruit of the coming marriage (FL88Z:R® future). So the question is a mere device of the redactor to introduce ver. 35.