Dictionary Article

Doctrine, drawn from the birth narratives of Matthew 1 and Luke 1–2, which states that Jesus Christ was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. The whole concept of the Incarnation (as well as Jesus’ divine and human natures) focuses upon this historical event as its foundation. At the same time, rationalists and literary critics deny this miracle, stating that it was created by the early Christians.

Pagan Parallels to the Virgin Birth

Some critics of the virgin birth argue that the early church first propounded the belief that Jesus was the Son of God and then proved it by using Hellenistic parallels. In Greek mythology Zeus, as well as the other gods, bore many children by human mothers, including Perseus and Hercules. These offspring were also men of heroic proportion. In addition, there were tales of the miraculous births of great historical figures, such as Plato (whose father was Apollo) or Alexander the Great (whose father, Philip of Macedon, was kept from consummating his marriage until the child, conceived of Zeus, was born). Interestingly, the church fathers often used these stories in their polemic against their Greek opponents to show that the idea of the virgin birth was not really so incredible to the Greek mind. However, the differences between the pagan and Christian forms are too great. For one thing, the lustful promiscuity of the gods starkly contrasts with the sexual restraint commanded by the NT. Also, in the pagan stories the concept of “virgin” hardly has any stress. In all cases, it is simply a physical union between a god and a human, not a spiritual conception, as in the case of Jesus.

The same is true of the birth of Buddha, for the oldest records state that the entrance of the “white elephant” (representing the spirit of childbirth) into Gautama’s mother took place in a dream, and the story of an actual virgin birth is post-Christian. As for the Persian myths of the birth of Zoroaster or the birth of Mithras from a rock, there is no concept of a virgin birth. Babylonian tales do involve the goddess-mother Ishtar, but again virginity has no emphasis and is actually doubtful.

The KJB of Isaiah 7:14 says that a “virgin” shall “conceive and bear a son . . . Immanuel,” and Matthew 1:22-23 expressly states that this was fulfilled in Jesus’ birth. This passage has been greatly debated, especially since the rsv changed the KJB “virgin” to “young woman,” based on the ambiguity of the term in the original manuscripts. The Hebrew ‘almah refers generally to a young girl who has passed puberty and thus is of marriageable age. Another Hebrew word (bethulah) specifies a woman who is a virgin. The Septuagint translators, nevertheless, translated ‘almah as parthenos, which does denote a virgin.

1. The “virgin” (Is 7:14) was Ahaz’s new wife and the son was Hezekiah. But Hezekiah was nine years old when Ahaz began to reign, so this prophecy must look to the future.

2. She was Isaiah’s wife and the son was Maher-shalal-hash-baz. Many scholars support this interpretation because the definite article with ‘almah seems to indicate that “the woman” was known to Isaiah and Ahaz and because Isaiah 7:14-16 seems to indicate that the prophecy was to be fulfilled in Isaiah’s time. The difficulty here is that Isaiah’s wife already had a son and so she could not be called ‘almah.

3. The prophecy is purely messianic. This is the traditional evangelical position, based on the name of the child Immanuel, “God with us,” and the reference (Is 9:6-7; 11:1-5), which points to a divine person.

4. Many evangelicals recently have opted for a fourth interpretation, which accepts the arguments for the historical fulfillment (in Isaiah’s day) and for the futuristic fulfillment. This view takes into account the historical fulfillment intended in Isaiah 7:15-16 while seeing the future as being fulfilled through the virgin birth of Jesus, as indicated in Matthew 1:22-23.

Neither Mark nor John provides an account of the birth of Christ; the actual event is chronicled only in Matthew and Luke. Both agree that a “virgin,” Mary, conceived of the Holy Spirit and bore a son, Jesus. Matthew’s account is simpler and more direct, attributing the birth of the Messiah to divine origins and highlighting the christological significance. Jesus is called the “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God. As evidenced both by the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy (vv 22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), Jesus is “God with us,” now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). The scene where Joseph decides to privately divorce Mary is added to give even greater stress to the miraculous conception.

Luke told the Nativity story from the perspective of Mary. The angel Gabriel visited her and announced that she would give birth to the Messiah (Lk 1:26-38). She conceived miraculously by the Holy Spirit, as was foretold by the angel Gabriel: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God” (v 35, rsv). Mary was portrayed by Luke as being devoutly submissive to the purposes of God.

From the very beginning of the church, the doctrine of the virgin birth became the foundation of an exalted Christology. Some of the earliest church fathers stressed this more than any other event in Jesus’ life as proof of the incarnation and deity of Christ. Justin Martyr and Ignatius defended the virgin birth against opponents at the beginning of the second century, and even at that early date it appeared to be a fixed doctrine. In the debates of the next three centuries, the virgin birth became a prominent issue. Gnostics such as Marcion contended that Christ descended directly from heaven and so was never truly human. On the other hand, those groups that denied his deity, such as the Arians, also denied the virgin birth, stating that at his baptism Jesus was “adopted” as Son of God. The Council of Nicaea in AD 325 affirmed that Jesus was truly God, and then the Council of Chalcedon in AD 451 stated that Jesus was at the same time human and divine, a “hypostatic union” of the true natures. These were summarized in the Apostles’ Creed of the fifth century, which declares, “I believe in . . . Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, conceived of the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary.” In most of the creeds the virgin birth is also connected to Jesus’ sinlessness, inasmuch as his incarnate, divine nature is the source of his sinlessness.

From the beginning, as attested in Matthew and Luke as well as the early patristic writers, the virgin birth has been a central doctrine of the church. As such, it is a living symbol of the twofold nature of Jesus: born of the Holy Spirit and of woman, he is the incarnate God-man. See Christology; Incarnation; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Virgin.

Tyndale Open Bible Dictionary