| This article recently underwent a major revision or rewrite, and may need further review. You can help Wikipedia by assisting in the revision. |
| Part of a series on |
| Christianity |
|---|
|
|
| A series of articles on |
| Mariology |
|---|
| General perspective |
| Specific views |
| Prayers and devotions |
| Ecumenical |
The virgin birth of Jesus is the belief that Jesus was conceived in the womb of his mother Mary by the Holy Spirit and born while Mary remained a virgin.[1] The New Testament references are Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-38. The earliest parts of the New Testament, the Pauline epistles, do not mention the virgin birth, nor do the Gospels of Mark or John.
The virgin birth was universally accepted in the Christian church by the 2nd century, was enshrined in the Apostles’ Creed, and, except for several minor sects, was not seriously challenged until the 18th century, and remains a basic article of belief in the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and most Protestant churches; Muslims also accept the virgin birth of Jesus.[2]
Contents |
The virginal conception of Jesus by Mary is sometimes confused with the Roman Catholic Church's doctrine of Mary's "Immaculate Conception", Mary's conception in the normal way, but free from original sin.[3] The Immaculate Conception has been defined as follows: "The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin."[4]
The doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus is also distinct from the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary, which refers to Mary remaining virginal for her entire life.[5][6]
According to standard Jewish custom of the time of Jesus, girls were betrothed around the age of twelve or twelve and a half.[7] During the betrothal period, which lasted about a year, the marriage was not consummated and the bride remained in her parent's house.[8] Betrothal was formalised by a contract regulating such matters as the transfer of property and provision for the wife and children should the husband die; voiding the contract required a divorce document freeing the girl to remarry.[9]
The earliest Christian preaching about Jesus concerned his death and resurrection, and the early Church turned its attention to the chronology of the rest of the life of Jesus later.[10][11][12] Early Christians were hardly monolithic in their preachings, and the Nativity accounts of the gospels may have diverged as a result, but a comparison of the Nativity stories of Luke and Matthew show common elements in terms of the virgin births, the birth at Bethlehem and the upbringing at Nazareth.[11][13]
The Pauline epistles, the earliest surviving Christian writings, refer to Jesus' mother without stating that she was a virgin. Instead Paul focuses on contrasting the birth of Jesus with the fall of Adam, and presents Jesus as the "firstborn of all creation", and a second Adam, in Colossians 1:15-16.[14][15][16]
Some[17] see the silence of Paul on virginity as implying that he knew of no account of the virgin birth of Jesus, while scholars such as Raymond Brown reject the "argument from silence" and state that Paul's letters were composed with a view to ecclesiastical problems with which he had to deal, not to give a narrative of the life of Jesus.
Raymond E. Brown states that given the multiple lines of reasoning, there are no convincing arguments to determine whether Paul knew of the virgin birth or not.[18] Brown writes that it is difficult to decide whether Paul's silence on the question of the virginal conception of Jesus is significant in any case.[18] Brown states that, even if the silence of Paul is taken to indicate ignorance of the virgin birth, it does not disprove it, for a family tradition about it could have circulated among relatively few in the years 30-60, before becoming known to the communities for whom Matthew and Luke wrote.[19] Other authors have noted that the silence of Paul is no indication, given the Pauline Epistles were not intended as chronologies and include very few details of the life of Jesus in general, and that even the Last Supper was only mentioned by Paul in response to problems in Corinth.[20]
Specific passages in Paul's letters include Galatians 4:4, usually translated as: "when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law". (The word translated as "born" literally means "having come to be",[21] and Young's Literal Translation gives the phrase as "come of a woman, come under law".) Some see this silence about a virgin birth as lack of knowledge of it, while others see the phrase "born of a woman, born under the law" as implying that Jesus had no human father.[22][23] The opening of the Epistle to the Romans (Romans 1:1-4) includes the words: "concerning his Son, who was descended from David (or who came from the offspring of David) according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord". Some take "descended from David according to the flesh" to mean that Joseph, a descendant of David, was the physical father of Jesus, thus denying the virgin birth of Jesus, others take it as indicating that Mary too was a descendant of David.[24][25][26][27] Others point out that here, as in Galatians 4:4, Paul does not use the ordinary word for "born" (γεννητός, gennetos, the word used in Matthew 11:11 in relation to John the Baptist being "born of a woman"), but the word γενόμενος, genomenos, literally meaning "become", "come to be",[28][29] a fact that some interpret as an allusion to incarnation of the pre-existent Son of God.[30][31]
The statement in Romans 8:3-4 that God sent his Son "in the likeness of sinful flesh" has been interpreted as meaning merely that Jesus was externally just like any other human being, supported by Paul's remark elsewhere that Christ "knew no sin".[2 Cor 5:21] Others suggest a contradiction between Paul's notion of being "in the likeness of sinful flesh" and his having been born of a virgin.
In 1Timothy 1:4, the author urges people not to "occupy themselves with myths and endless genealogies which promote speculations...". Some scholars see this passage as reflecting a negative view of the developing virgin birth stories and their variant genealogies.[32]
The accounts of the birth of Jesus appear in only two of the four Canonical Gospels, the Gospel of Luke and the Gospel of Matthew. Luke's story centers on Mary, while Matthew's story centers on Joseph, and in both gospel accounts (Luke 2:1-7 and Matthew 2:1) Jesus is conceived without a human father.[33][34][35]
While Luke's introduction does assert that its author has "carefully investigated everything",[Lk. 1:3] neither Luke nor Matthew attribute their birth narratives to the direct testimonies of either Mary or Joseph.[36] James Hastings and separately Thomas Neufeld have expressed the view that the circumstances of the birth of Jesus were deliberately kept restricted to a small group of early Christians, and were kept as a secret for many years after his death.[37][38] Ronald Brownrigg suggests that the narrative in Luke was obtained via a path from Mary, while the narrative in Matthew was obtained from a path on Joseph's side.[39]
"18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus,for he will save his people from their sins.” 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: 23 “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (which means, God with us). 24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, 25 but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus."
The Gospel of Matthew (c 80-85) begins with a genealogy leading from Abraham to Joseph, but then calls Joseph "the husband of Mary, of whom (Mary) was born Jesus, who is called Christ."[1:16] The Greek text, which has "ἐξ ἧς" (feminine singular), shows that the phrase "of whom" refers to Mary, not to Joseph or to Mary and Joseph together.[1:16] It then states that, when Mary was found to be pregnant, she had not lived with Joseph, to whom she was engaged,[1:18] and that he did not have marital relations with her before the child was born.[1:25]
Matthew then states: "That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit",[1:20] in fulfillment of the prophecy of the prophet: "A virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."[Mt. 1:22-23] Scholars interpret "prophet" as a reference to Isaiah 7:14.[40] Some 5th and 6th century manuscripts read "Isaiah the prophet".[41]
The Hebrew of Isaiah uses the word "almah", meaning "young woman." When Matthew 1:22 states: "Behold the virgin shall be with child" it uses the Greek term "parthenos" as "virgin" as in the Septuagint translation of Isaiah, while the original Masoretic Isaiah uses the Hebrew "almah".[42] This Greek translation "alters or refines the meaning of Isaiah's original Hebrew: where the prophet had talked only of a ‘young woman’ conceiving and bearing a son, the Septuagint projected ‘young woman’ into the Greek word for ‘virgin’ (parthenos)."[43] Raymond Brown suggests that the translators of the Septuagint may have understood the Hebrew word "almah" to mean virgin in this context.[42]
"26 In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. 28 And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” 29 But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. 30 And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.” 34 And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” 35 And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God. 36 And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. 37 For nothing will be impossible with God.” 38 And Mary said, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her."
The Nativity is a prominent element of the Gospel of Luke (c 85-90), and comprises over 10% of the text, being three times the length of the Nativity text in the Gospel of Matthew.[44] In Luke 1:30-35 Mary asks how she is to conceive and bear a son, since she is a virgin; and she is told it will happen by the power of God. Luke 3:23-38 gives a genealogy, different from that given by Matthew. Scholars differ on which of the two, Matthew or Luke, is the legal genealogy via Joseph, and which the physical descent via Mary.[45]
When the angel Gabriel tells Mary that she will bear a son conceived by the Holy Spirit,[Lk. 1:26-38] she responds with what is known as the Magnificat,[Lk. 1:46-55] a prayer of joy.[46]
Therefore, the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold, the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel. Cream and honey he shall eat when he knows to reject bad and choose good. For, when the lad does not yet know to reject bad and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread, shall be abandoned."
In this passage from the Book of Isaiah the prophet predicts to King Ahaz that a young woman will give birth to a son who will be called "Immanuel", meaning "God with us", and that Ahaz's enemies will be destroyed before this child learns the difference between good and evil, i.e., before he reaches maturity. The Hebrew word is "עלמה" (almah), which scholars agree means a young woman of child-bearing age, without any connotation of virginity, and the context of the passage makes it clear that Isaiah has in mind events in his and Ahaz's near future. The Greek-speaking author of Matthew, however, used the Greek translation of Isaiah, in which the word is given as "παρθένος", parthenos, meaning a virgin.[47]
The Qur'an says that Jesus was the result of a virgin birth. The most detailed account of the annunciation and birth of Jesus is provided in Sura 3 (Al Imran) and 19 (Maryam) wherein it is written that God sent an angel to announce that she could shortly expect to bear a son, despite being a virgin.[48]
The account in Sura 19 [Quran 19:1] of the Qur'an is close to that in the Gospel of Luke.[49] The Annunciation to Mary is mentioned twice in the Quran and in both instances Mary is told that she was chosen by God to deliver a son. In one case, the bearer of the news, who is believed to be archangel Gabriel, delivered the news in (3:42-47) as he takes the form of a man (19:16-22).[50][51] The details of the conception are not discussed but when Mary asks how she can bear a son in view of her chastity she is told that God creates what he wills and that these things are easy for God.[50] However, elsewhere the Quran states (21:91 and 66:12) that God breathed "His Spirit" into Mary while she was chaste.[50][51]
Although not specifically mentioned in the Quran, Muslims believe that Jesus and Mary were the only two children not to be touched by Satan at the moment of their birth, for God placed a veil between them and Satan.[52]
The modern scholarly consensus is that the doctrine of the virgin birth "rests on very slim historical foundations."[53] Some writers[54][55][56][57][58] take it as significant that two separate gospels attest to the virgin birth, although their details vary. In this view, the virgin conception and birth constitute a tradition that fits within the criterion of multiple attestation. The accounts of Matthew and Luke are taken as independent testimonies of the tradition.[59] The mutual independence of the two attestations is shown by the differences between the accounts of Matthew and Luke regarding Jesus' birth, to which scholars have drawn attention.[60][61]
According to Matthew, an unnamed angel informs Joseph of the virginal conception; in Luke the angel Gabriel informs Mary before the conception occurs. Two rival explanations are put forward for the "double attestation" of Matthew and Luke regarding the virgin birth of Jesus:[62][63][64]
Among other hypotheses that have been proposed as explanations of the origin of the accounts in Matthew and Luke of the birth of Jesus from a virgin is that of Stephen L Harris, who proposed that these were written to answer Jewish slanders about Jesus' illegitimate birth,[65] of which there is evidence from the 2nd century, but which may have been a subsequent polemical Jewish response to the account in Matthew and Luke.[66] Helmut Köster sees the narratives of Jesus' virgin birth as having roots in Hellenistic mythology.[67]
Psilanthropists argue against the virgin birth and contend that Jesus was a "mere human".[68] Psilanthropism existed among early Jewish Christian groups such as Ebionites who considered Jesus the Messiah, but rejected Apostle Paul as an apostate.[69] [70] However, in the 4th century the Nicene Creed rejected the teaching that Jesus was a mere human.[71]
In the 2nd century, Celsus, a pagan anti-Christian Greek philosopher wrote that Jesus's father was a Roman soldier named Pantera. The views of Celsus drew responses from Origen who considered it a fabricated story.[72][73] Raymond E. Brown states that the story of Pantera is a fanciful explanation of the birth of Jesus which includes very little historical evidence.[74]
In the Middle Ages as part of the conflicts with Christians, a satirical parody of the Christian gospels called the Toledot Yeshu was written by the Jews, perhaps as a tool for warding off conversions to Christianity.[75] The book referred to the name Pantera, or Pandera as the father of Jesus, and also portrayed Judas Iscariot as a hero.[76][77][78] The book accuses Jesus of illegitimate birth as the son of Pandera, and of heretic and at times violent activities along with his followers during his ministry.[76][78] Robert E. Van Voorst states that the literary origins of Toledot Yeshu cannot be traced with any certainty, and its medieval composition without a fixed form, it is "most unlikely" to have reliable historical information.[79] The Blackwell Companion to Jesus states that the Toledot Yeshu has no historical facts as such, and was perhaps created as a tool for warding off conversions to Christianity.[80]
Historically notable psilanthropists have included figures such as the translator of the first Bible in Byelorussian, Symon Budny (who was excommunicated by the Polish Unitarians[81]), and Joseph Priestley and Samuel Taylor Coleridge in the 18th and 19th centuries.[82][83]
Modern psilanthropists include some members of the Unification Church. Although the church's textbook, the Divine Principle does not specifically mention the teaching that Zacharias was the father of Jesus, according to Ruth Tucker[84] some members of the church hold that belief[85][86] - which is based on the work of Leslie Weatherhead.[17]
Richard Dawkins dismisses the possibility of virgin birth from a biological perspective, as he generally dismisses all biblical miracles on grounds that they are unproven and unsubstantiated supernatural events.[87]
As part of the conflicts between Christians and other groups during the 1st and 2nd centuries, statements were made by both Jews and pagans that the Christian virgin birth narratives had been derived from pagan sources.[88][89] Early Christians such as Justin Martyr countered the argument about pagan connections to the virgin birth of Jesus.[90] In the 2nd century, Justin presented these arguments in The First Apology of Justin, and in Dialog with Trypho.[90] Justin argued at length against the pagan connection and noted that the word virgin does not even occur in the pagan sources.[91] He also addressed the Old Testament issues in his debates with a Jew called Trypho.[88]
Followers of Mithraism have proposed, from Persian sources, that Mithra might have been born of the union of Mother Earth and Ahuramazda, and that his story influenced both Christianity and Chinese mythology, where he became known as "The Friend".[92] Christian authors have argued that no historical basis for the connection to Christianity has been presented by the Mithraists.[93]
The early Christian document, the Ascension of Isaiah, which may date to the 2nd century, also has a narrative of the virgin birth of Jesus.[94] However, the date and origin of this document is questionable, given that the author disguised his identity behind Isaiah.[95] The narrative of the virgin birth of Jesus can be found also in other New Testament apocrypha, for instance the Protevangelium of James, perhaps written in the 2nd century.[96]
Parthenogenesis has been hypothesized as a possible biological mechanism for the virgin birth of Jesus.[97] But this hypothesis has received no general scholarly support.[98][99]
Christians celebrate the conception of Jesus on 25 March[100] (Lady Day) and his birth at Christmas (25 December) or Epiphany (6 January). Among the many traditions associated with Christmas are the construction of cribs and the performance of re-enactments of elements of the story in the Gospels of the birth of Jesus, a tradition started in the 13th century by the Franciscans.[101][102][103]
The festival of the Nativity which later turned into Christmas was a 4th century feast in the Western Church notably in Rome and North Africa, although it is uncertain exactly where and when it was first celebrated.[104] There has been debate about the reason why Christians came to choose the 25 December date to celebrate the birth of Jesus. One theory is that they did so in order to oppose the existing winter-solstice feast of the Natalis Solis Invicti (Birthday of the Unconquered Sun) by celebrating on that date the birth of the "Sun of Righteousness".[105]
Another tradition derived the date of Christmas from that of the Annunciation, the virginal conception of Jesus.[105] Since this was supposed to have taken place on 14 Nisan in the Jewish calendar, calculated to have been either 25 March or 6 April, it was believed that the date of Christ's birth will have been nine months later.[106] A tractate falsely attributed to John Chrysostom argued that Jesus was conceived and crucified on the same day of the year and calculated this as 25 March, a computation also mentioned by Saint Augustine of Hippo.[105]
The Magnificat, based on Luke 1:46-55 is one of four well known Gospel canticles: the Benedictus and the Magnificat in the first chapter, and the Gloria in Excelsis and the Nunc dimittis in the second chapter of Luke, which are now an integral part of the Christian liturgical tradition.[46][107][108] The Magnificat is one of the eight most ancient Christian hymns and perhaps the earliest Marian hymn.[109][110] The Annunciation, representing the virgin birth, became an element of Marian devotions in Medieval times, and by the 13th century direct references to it were widespread in French lyrics.[111]
The Eastern Orthodox Church uses the title "Ever Virgin Mary" as a key element of its Marian veneration, and as part of the Akathists (hymns) to Mary which are an integral part of its liturgy.[112]
This doctrine of the Virgin Birth is often represented Christian art in terms of the annunciation to Mary by the Archangel Gabriel that she would conceive a child to be born the Son of God, and in Nativity scenes that include the figure of Salome. The Annunciation is one of the most frequently depicted scenes in Western art.[113] Annunciation scenes also amount to the most frequent appearances of Gabriel in medieval art.[114] The depiction of Joseph turning away in some Nativity scenes is a discreet reference to the fatherhood of the Holy Spirit, and the doctrine of Virgin Birth.[115]
Holy Doors, St. Catherine's Monastery, Mount Sinai, 12th century
Giotto (1267-1337)
Sandro Botticelli, 1489–90
Mikhail Nesterov, Russia, 19th century
|isbn= value (help)|
Life of Jesus: Conception of Jesus |
||
|
Gabriel announces John's birth to Zechariah |
Events |
Mary visits Elizabeth |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From msutherland1
From Lawrence OP
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From e-codices
From Waiting...
From Scorpions...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Old Shoe...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
From Waiting...
Here you can share your comments or contribute with more information, content, resources or links about this topic.