The Virgin Birth—Fact or Fiction?
MOST people know of the Bible account of Jesus’ being born of a virgin. But not all accept it as true. Do you think the virgin birth reasonable? Does it matter if you believe in it or not?
Among persons who reject the Bible record are those who view a virgin birth as biologically unacceptable. Yet some such persons may now be rethinking their position because of current scientific developments in genetic management. Is it possible that something of that kind was involved in the virgin birth of Jesus?
Other persons have been put off by the Roman and Orthodox Catholic Churches’ embellishments of the simple Bible account of the virgin birth. For example, the elevation of adoration of the virgin Mary has soured the whole story for some.
Still others find the idea of the virgin birth somewhat distasteful. ‘Surely,’ they think, ‘if God is all powerful he does not need such a device to accomplish his purpose.’ They may treat the virgin birth as simply an illustrative story, a parable.
We shall consider each of these views and see how the matter might affect our life and beliefs. But first it will pay to look briefly at what the Bible actually says about the virgin birth.
What the Bible Actually Says
There are two reports, both written by intelligent men who were on the scene when Jesus was on earth. Appropriately, one is by a physician, Luke. The other is by Matthew, a man who was used to the discipline of working with accounts and who had been selected by Jesus as one of the 12 apostles.
Matthew’s account focuses on the role of Joseph, “the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born.” (Matthew 1:16) Mt Chapter 1, verse 18, explains that Mary, a virgin, was found to be pregnant before she was united with her fiancé, Joseph. On learning of this, Joseph, a “righteous” man, determined to end their engagement secretly so as not to expose Mary to public shame. However, God let him know that the conception had been by the power of holy spirit and that he had chosen Mary for a special role as the mother of the Savior. With this assurance, Joseph took Mary home, “but had no intercourse with her until her son was born.”—Matthew 1:25, The New English Bible.
Luke, on the other hand, presents the account from Mary’s point of view. The essential facts are the same, but he gives details of the conversation between Mary and the angel who revealed to her the privilege of motherhood that she was being offered. Astonished, Mary responded: “How is this to be, since I am having no intercourse with a man?” To her it all seemed beyond belief, as it may seem to you. The angel then explained to her that the conception would be miraculous, by holy spirit, by the power of the Most High, whose son the child thus would be. Mary accepted the honor readily and duly gave birth to a son, Jesus.—Luke 1:26-38.
The Bible has comparatively little to say about Mary after the birth of Jesus. She is mentioned in connection with him a few times, but there is no suggestion that she was prominent among the disciples. Certainly she held no influence over Jesus after childhood. On occasion he had to remind her and others of this. (John 2:4; Matthew 12:46-50) Still, he had affection for her. Even as he was dying, Jesus charged the apostle John to care for her.—John 19:26, 27.
Mary was also among the disciples after Jesus’ resurrection and likely was present at Pentecost when about 120 were filled with holy spirit. (Acts 1:13, 14; 2:1-4) Clearly, Mary’s role in her later years was that of a faithful, humble disciple, without any hint of prominence, authority or special distinction.
Having looked at what the Bible has to say about the virgin birth, we may now consider the questions that arise in many minds as to whether it is scientifically acceptable or even reasonably credible.