Luke 1:35 is often used by Socinians to argue the author of the Gospel did not believe Jesus personally pre-existed his miraculous conception. As one example, Anthony Buzzard, Gabriel Was Not a Trinitarian: Recovering the Biblical Son of God. In a footnote to a recent study on “Messianic High Christology,” Ruben A. Būhner noted that:
In contrast to an often-repeated
assumption, it is important to note that the idea of Christ’s preexistence is
not necessarily excluded by Luke’s portrayal of Jesus’ conception. Luke’s
narrative excludes the concept of preexistence only if it is read in light of
the doctrine of the two natures of Christ. In contrast, in light of a more
dualistic Christology even Luke’s birth narrative would be compatible with the
idea of preexistence. Therefore, Luke 1-2 surely neither implies the idea of Christ’s
preexistence nor excludes it. Rather, it simply ignores it. (Ruben A. Būhner, Messianic
High Christology: New Testament Variants of Second Temple Judaism [Waco,
Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2021], 102 n. 19)