The third point on our statement of faith reads:
Jesus Christ was begotten by God, conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. (Matthew 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-38; John 1:1-2, 18)
pbs.org
We’re going to break this statement into two parts. First, the virgin birth.
The doctrine of the virgin birth repeats the Scriptural teaching that Jesus was conceived in his mother Mary’s womb by the Holy Spirit, without the help of a human father, as told in Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-38. A more accurate way to say it would be “the virgin conception of Jesus.” (Two Catholic dogmas are not at issue here: that Mary was born without sin—called the “Immaculate Conception”—and that Mary remained in a state of “perpetual virginity” for the rest of her life. There is no biblical support for these doctrines.)
Why does the Virgin Birth Matter?
In the late 1800s and early 1900s, many Christians were rejecting supernatural claims of the Bible in favor of a more humanistic and “scientific” approach. Many dismissed the virgin birth out of hand as an obviously legendary account added by the Apostles after the fact to make Jesus more god-like.
There are good reasons to accept the straightforward biblical teaching of the virgin birth, and many reasonable people do so. Listen to my sermon to find out.
However, the underlying issue is the authority of Scripture. Those who reject the clear teaching of the virgin birth also tend to reject other clear teachings of the Bible. Visit a liberal protestant church today and you will find that Jesus’ miracles, his atoning work on the cross, the Bible’s teaching on sex and gender, and more, are rejected or revised to fit a postmodern world.
Two Christs?
Liberal Christian theologians laid the groundwork for how Christians could have their cake and eat it too—that is, to reject virtually every historical claim of the Bible and still consider themselves followers of Jesus. How? They split Jesus into two parts: “The Christ of History” and “The Christ of Faith.” The historical Jesus (the Christ of history) may not have actually been born of a virgin, or lived a sinless life, or walked on water, or been literally raised from the dead, but it doesn’t really matter because the “Christ of faith” lives in our hearts. What matters is our present experience of Jesus, not the historical record.
Consider this statement from Marcus Borg, one of the leading liberal biblical scholars of recent decades:
Thus I do not see the story of the virginal conception as a marvel of biology that, if true, proves that Jesus really was the Son of God. Rather, it is an early Christian narratival confession of faith and affirmation of allegiance to Jesus. … The truly important questions about the birth stories are not whether Jesus was born of a virgin or whether there was an empire-wide census that took Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem or whether there was a special star leading wise men from the East. The important questions are, “Is Jesus the light of the world? Is he the true Lord? Is what happened in him ‘of God’?” Answering these questions affirmatively lays claim to our whole lives.
This theology sounds nice, but it is disastrous. Our faith rests on the truth of historical events: the incarnation, Jesus’ death on the cross, his resurrection from the dead, the teaching of the apostles. If these things did not actually happen, Christianity is a sham. In the words of the Apostle Paul, “If Christ has not been raised [from the dead], your faith is futile; you are still in your sins” (1 Corinthians 15:17).
To deny the historical claims of Scripture is to cut off the branch we are standing on. Once we sever our faith from the historic events and teachings of Scripture, we have nothing holding us to Jesus Christ.
“If one does not accept [Jesus’] birth from a Virgin, how can he accept His resurrection from the dead?” - Irenaeus, 2nd century Church Father
One Important Clarification
I must emphasize here that to have a high view of the authority of Scripture does not mean that we will never allow our interpretation of Scripture to be challenged or revised. We must never have a wooden, literalistic understanding of the Bible that shuts us down to what the Bible may actually be trying to teach us.
For example, how should Genesis 1-2 be understood in light of evolutionary theory? Bible-believing Christians come to different conclusions about this. We must discern what Genesis 1-2 is actually trying to teach us about God and the world. Scientific knowledge is not infallible; it is always being revised and challenged. But knowledge that God gives us about the world through science, rightly understood against Scripture, will be in harmony with the truth.
Likewise, as we learn more about the historical and cultural context of many biblical teachings, our interpretation and application should become more accurate. For example, was the Apostle’s teaching about women in leadership universal, or culturally bound (e.g. 1 Timothy 2:11-15, 1 Corinthians 11:3)? We must seek to accurately understand what the biblical authors wanted their audience to know, and then do the careful work of applying it to ourselves in our context today.
However, the case of the virgin birth is clear. It was not presented as a metaphorical statement, but a historical reality. It is not a tall-tale spun by the apostles. As the ancient Apostles creed affirms, “I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary.”
Wonder and Worship
But let’s not miss the point. The virgin birth is not simply a test of orthodoxy or a theological fact to check off. It’s a marvel of grace, a shining thread in God’s redemptive plan. It shows that the Savior we need must be human, yet can’t come strictly from human effort or lineage. The name Jesus means “The Lord saves.” His conception by the Holy Spirit is evidence that through Jesus, God himself has become enfleshed in humanity in order to save us. This can only lead us to wonder and worship.
Christ, by highest heaven adored
Christ, the everlasting Lord,
Late in time behold Him come
Offspring of a Virgin's womb:
Veiled in flesh the Godhead see,
Hail the incarnate Deity
Pleased as man with man to dwell
Jesus, our Emmanuel-Charles Wesley
Further Resources:
An article about Harry Emerson Fosdick, who famously denied the virgin birth in his 1922 sermon “Shall the Fundamentalists Win?”
Questions for Reflection and Discussion
Is the virgin birth hard to believe in? Why or why not?
What does the virgin birth teach us about who Jesus is?
Respond to this quote by Irenaeus: “If one does not accept [Jesus’] birth from a Virgin, how can he accept His resurrection from the dead?”