John 1:51 – “I tell all of you the solemn truth—you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”
The allusion is to the experience of Jacob (later re-named Israel), Gen 28:17. While on his way to see Laban, he had a dream in which he say angels ascending and descending between heaven and earth. He concluded that ‘the Lord is in this place’, and named it ‘Bethel’, meaning ‘the house of God’.…
In 1930, the redoubtable scholar and apologist J. Gresham Machen published his 400-page defence of The Virgin Birth of Christ.
Towards the end of his book, Machen deals with the question of the importance of this doctrine. Helpfully, he steers a path between saying, on the one hand, that belief in the Virgin Birth is essential to salvation, and, on the other hand, saying that it is of relatively little significance.
Machen maintained that belief in the Virgin Birth is not simply a matter of private judgement, but is, rather ‘essential to the corporate witness of the Church.’…
In the interest of paying attention to what those on the ‘other side’ think about the narratives of Jesus’ birth as found in Matthew and Luke, I note the following from Jonathan Pearce. Some of the objections are trivial. Others merit more careful consideration.
The only general point that needs to be made here is that no-one is required to be able to answer all possible objections before an event can be considered historical.
Anyway, here’s what Jonathan Pearce writes:
‘In order for the Christian who believes that both accounts are factually true to uphold that faithful decree, the following steps must take place.…
John 14:27 “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you; I do not give it to you as the world does. Do not let your hearts be distressed or lacking in courage. 14:28 You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am.…
The New Testament accounts of the Virgin Birth (more properly, the virginal conception) of Christ make good historical sense, says N.T. Wright. In an article entitled ‘God’s Way of Acting’ (The Christian Century, December 16th 1989) Wright sets out his argument. What follows is a summary.
Of course, we make much of the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke, even though the New Testament itself places much more stress on events of Calvary, Easter and Pentecost.…
Do we need to postulate a physiological mechanism for the Virgin Birth? Is it not best to regard it as a miracle, pure and simple? Possibly. But the question then arises as to how this safeguards the doctrine of our Lord’s humanity. Moreover, if it is the case that God loves natural processes (he created them!) and uses ‘pure’ miracles sparingly (often preferring ‘miracles of timing’) then we have further reasons to enquire if any account can be given of the genetics of the virgin birth.…
Of course, the notion of Christ’s virgin birth (more correctly, ‘virginal conception’) is as commonly ridiculed outside the Christian church as it is disputed within it. Many theologians insist that we cannot take it literally: that it is a mythical way of expressing who Jesus was.
It is pointed out by critics that the virgin birth is recognised only by Matthew and Luke, and is conspicuously absent from the other New Testament writings, including those of Paul. …
Daniel Florien lists five reasons why he no longer believes in the virgin birth of Jesus:-
1. “There is no reliable evidence”. No DNA samples, for example, and no medical confirmation. Well it is plain silly to suppose that there might be that kind of evidence. Florien adds that there are ‘no eyewitness accounts’. That’s a pretty silly complaint, too: I don’t think that, under the circumstances, it is reasonable to expect there to have been a human witness to Mary not having sexual relations with Joseph (or anyone else for that matter).…
Those who are sceptical of the historicity of the biblical accounts of the virgin birth of Jesus largely base their objections on supposed parallels with other supernatural birth stories in the ancient world.
As long ago as 1796 Charles Dupuis suggested that the biblical account borrowed from the stories surrounding the birth of Krishna. Early Christians ‘drew on’ such stories, it is claimed, in order to find ways of demonstrating the uniqueness of Jesus. This idea was popularised by James Fraser, in The Golden Bough (1890, 1912).…
‘The first and most indisputable fact about the birth of Jesus is that it occurred out of wedlock. The one option for which there is no evidence is that Jesus was the lawful son of Joseph and Mary. The only choice open to us is between a virgin birth and an illegitimate birth.’ (J. A. T. Robinson, Twelve More New Testament Studies (SCM, 1984), 3–4.)
Luke announces the heavenly origin of Mary’s firstborn in unmistakable terms. …
