Does it Really Matter if Jesus Wasn’t Born of a Virgin?

I received an email from a reader asking me if it mattered or not whether Jesus was born of a virgin. Apparently this person, while looking for a new church home for their family had been investigating some churches in the area when the “pastor” asked his rather large congregation if they would still follow Christ if He wasn’t born of a virgin……

Seems like a fair question right?

I suppose a case could be made that the gospel accounts of the life of Jesus Christ found in New Testament Canon might be 3rd generation “fish stories” containing exaggerated stories and is really nothing more then a narrative……the same case could be made for Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus Numbers and Deuteronomy as well….more narratives written WAY after the fact……

OK…..but what about the words of Paul concerning the Scriptures;

2Timothy 3:16-17 NIV

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Ah, so Paul says ALL Scripture is God-breathed which means He wrote those “fish stories”……..fish stories like this one below;

Gen 3:15 NKJV

And I will put enmity

Between you and the woman,

And between your seed and her Seed;

He shall bruise your head,

And you shall bruise His heel.”

Women don’t have seeds now do they? So where did this ”seed” come from then?

Luke 1:26-37 NKJV

Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. And having come in, the angel said to her, “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!” But when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and considered what manner of greeting this was. Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name JESUS. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.” Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” And the angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God. Now indeed, Elizabeth your relative has also conceived a son in her old age; and this is now the sixth month for her who was called barren. For with God nothing will be impossible.”

I know the above is quite a “fish story” and as far fetched as the above story may sound, if you believe what Paul stated about the Scriptures being God-breathed then this is how it happened and this must be accepted by faith (Hebrews 11:1). What I’ve provided above is only a sample of what I can provide in defense of the Virgin Birth of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

There are some teachers within professing Christianity today, while they don’t come right out and say it, would attempt to have you question the virgin birth as “not important” or merely write it off as a “fish story” that really isn’t that important but the texts I’ve provided clearly state otherwise.

So, to answer my readers question I would emphatically state that it DOES MATTER that Jesus was born of a virgin because without a virgin birth Jesus can’t possibly be the Christ, the Son of the Living God and 2000 years of Christianity is nothing more then a “fish story”……a fish story each of us has bought hook line and sinker, and no, I wouldn’t follow Jesus if He wasn’t born of a virgin……..would you?

Advertisements

23 thoughts on “Does it Really Matter if Jesus Wasn’t Born of a Virgin?

  1. Hey Phil-

    The business of church is more interested in “popularity” than “accuracy”. My answer to these kind of questions is, “If you don’t believe the Bible then you might as well join the Elks Club or Moose Lodge.”

  2. Yes; it does matter. The virgin birth is the foundation of all that Jesus claimed to be. It is at the core of the Gospel. If he wasn’t born by a virgin, he was a mere man

    …and we are all fools, following a mere man.

  3. Hey Dudes!

    What’s new?

    You would think this would be a non-negotiable doctrine but apparently it isn’t…..if some of these “teachers” can get you to even consider such a thing this sets up a host of other false teachings these charlatans can and sometimes do push forward…….

    Phil

  4. Here’s the Phil I like,

    “You would think this would be a non-negotiable doctrine but apparently it isn’t…..if some of these “teachers” can get you to even consider such a thing this sets up a host of other false teachings these charlatans can and sometimes do push forward…….” [in response to someone questioning whether it matters whether we believe Jesus was born of a virgin (source)]

    Now apply this to whether it matters if someone tries to Christians to “consider” their “teaching” that Jesus came back once and for all in the 1st-century, the the resurrection of the believers was non-physical and in the 1st-century, that the judgment of the wicked and righteous was in the 1st-century and that there is no end of sin? You would think this would be a non-negotiable but instead some are calling for us to treat hyperpreterist “charlatans” as if they are bring forward valid points. Really?

    • Hi,

      Well, a denial of the virgin birth is a denial of Christ Roderick based on a denial of what the Scriptures clearly state……FP, while a dangerous and possibly damnable theological error is an error based on flawed hermeneutics……big difference my friend.

  5. Thank you Phil, and I also believe hyperpreterism to be a denial of Christ — since they deny that He was able to effective relate the truth, as if the day after AD70 people forgot or misunderstood Him, the apostles, and the Holy Spirit. 2000 years of Christians have been duped on the most basic eschatological concepts according to hyperpreterism. To me, that is ever a BIGGER deal than someone wondering if Mary was a virgin.

    • Hello,

      I hate to break it to you but believe it or not there are actually people in the world who have interests other then “hyper-preterism”….and they consider these types of questions as far more important which is why I answer them. If it isn’t a “bigger deal” to you then why did you comment in the first place?

      Just to let you know I’ll be doing plenty more of these types of articles, as time allows of course……..and I don’t see any articles regarding eschatology coming up in the near future unless Brian decides to write one so maybe your time would be better spent somewhere else…….somewhere that you approve of because according to you this site isn’t one of them……..

      *sigh*

      Phil

  6. Hi Phil,

    IMHO, I believe that Hyper-Preterism is more than just a heremeneutical flaw. In reality it is a subtle rejection of Christ’s work on the Cross. I can’t get into all the exegetical details here, but they have been documented elsewhere. H.P. basically denies that Christ’s physical death was substitutionary in nature.

    My main trouble with H.P. is that it is exegetically corrupt. For the record, though, and to show that I am not ‘taking sides’ in this dispute, I disagree with the position held by Roderick, William Hill, K. Mathison, and others, which holds that the Scriptures must be interpreted through a “creedo-traditionist” lens. In my view, this is a subtle form of Romanism. In reality, I agree with the H.P.’s that the debate between Preterism vs. Futurism must be settled exegetically. I’ve found that the historicity argument can be tailor-made to fit most any system, as most sects of Christendom have certain beliefs that they can trace to early times.

    I can’t accept such an argument as the ‘silver bullet’ which slayeth the Preterist monster. To say that the visible church can never err in matters of doctrine is to surrender to Rome’s arrogance of infallibility, denying that doctrines like justification by works, veneration of icons and images, sale of indulges, etc. are themselves the products of an apostate church.

    The matter is this. God hath left us His word. We either believe the Word, or we don’t. It’s that simple. The issue of belief or disbelief has been the ground of controversy from day one — since Cain and Abel. My position is that Hyper-Preterism, through its liberal rationalizing of the Scriptures, destroys the systematic theology laid down in the N.T., and creates another Gospel. Paul warning of Galatians 1: 8-9 ought to make any Christian run as fast as he can when he hears what these people are preaching and teaching.

    Peace & Health,

    Brian

  7. Roderick said in a comment above that “hyperpreterism . . . is even a BIGGER deal than someone wondering if Mary was a virgin.”

    A couple of weeks ago, Roderick also said the following:

    “What hyperpreterism does is make Arianism (anti-Trinitarians) look like a trifle disagreement. [Arianism] pale[s] in comparison to what hyperpreterism proposes . . . . ” (http://www.preteristblog.com/?p=2757#more-2757)

    According to Roderick, “hyper-preterism” is a worse heresy than denying the virgin birth and denying the Trinity and denying the deity of Christ.

    There are eight preliminary problems with this position:

    1. Jesus and John the baptist both said repeatedly nearly 2,000 years ago that the kingdom of heaven was near/at hand (Matt. 3:2; 4:17; 10:7; Mk. 1:15; Lk. 10:9, 11).

    2. Jesus said that His twelve apostles would finish the cities of Israel only when His Parousia took place (Matt. 10:23).

    3. Jesus said nearly 2,000 years ago that the Messianic age was about to come (Matt. 12:32).

    4. Jesus said that His Parousia –i.e., His coming in His kingdom, in the glory of His Father, with His angels, to reward every man according to his works– was not only about to happen, but would happen before all of His first-century contemporaries died (Matt 16:27-28; Mk. 9:1; Lk. 9:27).

    5. Jesus said that His generation would not pass away before Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed in His Parousia at the end of the age, and all things written were fulfilled (Matt. 24:1-3, 30, 34; Mk. 13:26, 30; Lk. 21:22, 27, 32).

    6. Jesus told Caiaphas, the chief priests, the scribes, the elders, and the whole Sanhedrin that “from now on,” they would be seeing the Parousia (Matt. 26:64; Mk. 14:62; Lk. 22:69).

    7. Jesus implied that the women who were weeping for Him as He was being led to the Cross would live to see the fulfillment of Revelation chapter six (Lk. 23:28-30; Compare Rev. 6:14-17).

    8. Jesus implied that the apostle John would remain alive until the Parousia (Jn. 21:22).

    By the standards of the preterist-anathematizers, the Lord Jesus Christ Himself was guilty of a heresy that is worse than denying the virgin birth and denying the Trinity and denying the deity of Christ.

    And we have not even begun to quote Paul or any of the other New Testament writers.

    Dave 🙂

    • Hi,

      See that. Write a book and you become famous…….or infamous in this case:-) You shot up right past the biggies my friend and have risen to the top of the list……..at least Rodericks list.

      Thanks,

      Phil

  8. Thank you Phil, If you haven’t already done so, please remove all of my articles from your website. Your hostility toward fellow Christians is intolerable — take care

    • Hello,

      You mean my “hostility” at the way you go about “exposing” your obsession is intolerable…….and my “hostility” for the way you disrespect men like Dr. Talbot and make insinuations about them………..and my “hostility” at your inferences that questions like the one in the OP aren’t “bigger” then your obsession………if that makes me hostile towards “christians” then I’ll GLADLY accept that title………

      You take care too………..

      Phil

  9. If I were to answer this quickly without reading my Bible, the answer would be no, it doesn’t matter.

    However, if you read the Bible for all it’s worth and believe it was inspired by God himself. Then you must believe it is truth and that he was born of a virgin mother.

    And if you don’t believe he was born of a virgin, then whats to stop you from believing ANY PART of his word.

    Such as:
    He(Jesus) is the way the truth and the life, No one come to the father BUT THOUGH ME.

    He Rose after three days.

    He is the SON of God.

    Either you believe it all or you think it’s all a bunch of lies. You can’t pick and choose which parts of the Bible you want to believe in.

Comments are closed.