Our theme for this advent season is “The Miracles of
Christmas”. Last week we looked at the whole idea of the incarnation. This
week I want us to look at the miracle of the virgin birth. These, I know,
are huge themes. The scope of them is certainly beyond our realm of
experience and may even be beyond the realm of our imagination. It’s
difficult to preach to on such themes because they are so complex, and the
history of thought and opinion about them is varied and sometimes difficult
to navigate. I mean, you might as well ask me to describe to you the
beauty of a sunset or the fragrance and delicacy of a rose. Who can capture
such things with words? So with the virgin birth – who can describe the
wonder of it, the mystery of it all with words? It is difficult.
Indeed for that very reason many people have said that
the virgin birth is a myth and they have come up with one theory after
another to discount the reality of it. 1
For instance there are those who argue against the
truth of the virgin birth by saying that since only Matthew and Luke mention
it in their gospels, then it must be false. “It finds no validation outside
of those to gospels,” they say.
But this is poor thinking. The fact that only Matthew
and Luke mention the virgin birth does not discount its authenticity. If
you think that it does, then I need you to do me a favour – turn to the
gospel of John and rip it out of your Bibles. Why? Because in the gospel
of John we find a great deal of material that is only mentioned in the
gospel of John. The “I am” statements, for instance, are only found in the
gospel of John. (“I am the way the truth and life.” “I am the
bread of life.” “I am the resurrection and the life.” etc.)
Jesus washing the disciples feet is only found in the gospel of John. Jesus
raising Lazarus from the dead is only found in the gospel of John. Do we
discount these stories because of this? No. Or turn to the gospel of Luke
and there you read what we call the parable of the prodigal son. It is only
found in the gospel of Luke. Would you tear that wonderful story out of
your Bible for that reason? Of course not. The idea that the virgin birth
needs to be validated in other Scriptures to be true does not hold water.
The fact that it is mentioned in two gospels should be validation
enough.
Another supposed argument against the virgin birth goes
like this – “We can’t believe the virgin birth is true. In fact it is an
idea dreamed up by Luke and Matthew in order to substantiate Christian
claims about Christ. It is only a myth that has been used to validate
Christian claims.” So we are to believe that the accounts that we have are
late accounts dreamed up by a desperate church looking to validate their
beliefs.
But the fact of the matter is what we have in our hands
are early accounts – not late. We see this especially with the gospel of
Luke. When we look at this gospel we discover that the first four verses
are written in perfect Greek. It has been called one of the finest examples
of Greek writing in the ancient world. It is a perfect example of Greek
style – all one long run-on sentence. The NIV breaks it down into two
sentences, the KJV leaves it as one long sentence. It is perfect Greek
style – the kind of style that was used at the time Luke was writing his
gospel.
But then an interesting thing happens between verse 4
of chapter one in the Gospel of Luke and verse 5 – there is a dramatic shift
in style and content. Now the style is not perfect Greek – but is Semitic,
that is, it is Jewish in style, content and form. All the way from 1:5 to
the end of chapter 2 – the whole birth story of Jesus is told not in the
Greek style but in the Jewish style. We see this in the themes that are
stated – they are Jewish themes, not early Christian themes (in as much as
they are not the “new” themes of Christ’s crucifixion, resurrection, and
return) See Mary’s song (Luke 1:46-55) and Zechariah’s song (Luke 1:67-80)
and Simeon’s words of praise. (Luke 2:29-32), and Anna – who is “looking
forward to the redemption of Jerusalem” (Luke 2:38).
We see this in the style of writing – it is decidedly
Jewish – the use of parallelism.
What this leads us to believe is that Luke is not using
late sources – which would be influenced by Greek style and form – but
instead he is using very early sources – sources that would be influenced by
Hebrew thought and style. In fact he tells us that he uses eyewitness
accounts. He is writing the birth stories – using not late sources, but
early sources – Mary, Elizabeth, Zechariah, and maybe even Simeon and Anna.
So what we have in our hands is not a dream of a man
trying to justify Christian thought, but early accounts of eyewitnesses.
Others would point to the fact that Matthew uses a
quote from Isaiah 7:14 which says, “The virgin will be with child and
will give birth to a son and they will call him Immanuel – which means God
with us.” They say, that word for virgin in the book of Isaiah doesn’t
really mean virgin, but in fact means young woman. And they say, “Matthew
has it wrong.”
Well, let’s think about this for a moment. The word
that Isaiah uses does indeed mean “young woman”. He could have used another
Hebrew word that means “virgin” only, but he doesn’t. He uses a word that
means “young woman.” But scholars tell us that when you look at the use of
this word in the Bible you discover that while it does indeed mean, “young
woman”, it never applies to a young woman who is not a virgin. So it means
a young woman who is a virgin. 2
So Isaiah uses an open-ended word. Why? Well, here’s
my thought. Isaiah knew what he was doing. He was a prophet. He was one
who saw God and who faithfully communicated the word of God to the people of
his time AND to the people yet to come. So, being a prophet who spoke to
his time - he used a word that meant “young woman”.
He was speaking to King Ahaz at the time. King Ahaz
and the nation was hard up against it, the enemy was at the gates. Isaiah
said, “Ahaz, ask for a sign from God.” Ahaz, being extra super pious says,
“No I won’t ask for a sign.” Isaiah says, “Fine, God will give you one
anyway. And this is the sign – the virgin will be with child and will give
birth to a son … “
He was speaking to his time. He uses a word that means
“young woman”. BUT he was a prophet and he had before him the whole sweep
of history before him and he uses a word that is open-ended – so that when
the time comes for Immanuel to be born he is truly born of a virgin.
Matthew understood this, because when he translates
Isaiah’s word he uses a Greek word that can only mean “virgin.”
These are difficult ideas to wrestle with. I’m not
saying that this argument is air tight. But I am saying that there are
answers to the objections. It’s not totally without explanation.
At the same time, it takes a step of faith to believe
in the virgin birth.
But there is another argument against the virgin birth,
and that is that Matthew was influenced by Greek myths. There were in the
time of Matthew and Luke many popular Greek myths in the culture about the
gods coming to earth and having sex with mortals and creating a whole new
line of being.
So what these folks would have us believe is that as
Matthew was sitting down to write his gospel, he came to the birth of
Christ. He didn’t have to go too far – verse 18 – and when he got to that
point he put down his pen and scratched his head and said, “Hmmmm” what am
I going to write about the birth of Christ? Ohhh, I know. I’ll copy a Greek
myth about how a god came down and impregnated a woman.” And so he wrote.
The problem with this theory is that a copy is never
better than the original. Do you know anyone who collects art? Do they
collect the originals or do they collect copies? They collect originals, of
course. Why? Because the original is of high quality than the copy.
So if you were to compare the birth account of Jesus
found in the gospel of Matthew with the Greek myths you would think
Matthew’s story would be of equal quality or less. But in fact what you
find is that Matthew’s account is far above the Greek myths in purity and
holiness, and its content is different. He transcends everything that is in
the Greek myths.
In the Greek myth about Romulus, one of the founders of
Rome. We read that his father, the Greek god Mars comes down to earth and
violently violates a woman. It is a horrendous act of rape. But in
Matthew’s account there is no hint of that – Mary is a willing participant,
the Holy Spirit is a gentleman, there is a cooperation. There is a beauty
about this story that is so far beyond the Greek myths that it cannot be a
copy.
One last argument against the whole idea of the virgin
birth – some would say, “Well what does it matter if we believe in the
virgin birth? Why do we need to bother with the facts? The facts probably
aren’t true anyway, why bother with the facts? As long as we get the gist
of what Matthew is saying – isn’t that enough? We understand that Matthew
is trying to tell us that Jesus is special. That’s all we need to know.”
But I would then ask, “Well if the facts don’t matter
and we can simply dismiss them, who decides what the gist of the story is?
If we take away the facts as the basis for what we believe then who
interprets what the text means? Who tells us what is true and what is
false?”
And the people reply, “We do.” And I say, “Well thanks
very much. I’m not interested.”
And they say, “Why?” And I say, “Because I know who you
are.”
I would much rather take the word of God to be the word
of God than to take the word of some person who says, “That’s what God’s
word means. No thanks, I know who you are, you are fallible. God is
infallible. And as great as the mystery is, I will take the facts and the
facts will tell me what God is trying to say.
But the people persist – they say, “Well we have the
Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit will tell us what the text means.”
So you are telling me that the Holy Spirit got it wrong
the first time when he told Matthew what to write – they’re not really facts
– but he got it right the second time when he told you what the text means?
Come on. Let’s say that the Holy Spirit got it right the first time and
what the text says is what the text means.
Now I understand that there is difficulty with that.
We can’t read that Psalm that speaks of the trees clapping with joy and
believe that the trees actually clapped. We have to use our brains. We
understand that the Psalmist is using language to tell us that all creation
is expressing joy before God. But in this case, in this text, we can
understand that this is what happened.
So I have a different theory. My theory is – what
God’s word says is God’s word.
I know – so many in this world would label me as stupid
and naïve. Another Christian who has checked their brains in at the door,
they say. But you know what, as I was studying the whole idea of the virgin
birth I came across a quote from a man who said, “I believe that Christ was
born of a virgin because I have read it in the Gospel.” 3
Do you know who that man was? Augustine. He was not
intellectual lightweight.
And it is the virgin birth that Matthew is speaking
about. He speaks about the whole idea at verse 16. Notice how he speaks of
Joseph. Joseph is not described as the father of Jesus, but he is described
as the husband of Mary. Then verse 18 – again underlines the idea of the
virgin birth. “She was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.”
Verse 19 – Joseph wants to divorce her because she is
pregnant. He didn’t do it – otherwise why divorce her?
(Note, you need to understand that there are three
stages to the Jewish marriage. There is first the arrangement. A husband
and wife are chosen. Then there is the engagement. Now the engagement
stage is a little more serious than our engagement. There are agreements
made, and pledges and the couple are considered to be husband and wife –
even though the marriage has not been consummated. That is why our text
will talk of Joseph as Mary’s husband – and of divorce. He was essentially
her husband because they were at this engagement stage. The third stage is
when the husband takes the wife home to consummate the marriage. Joseph has
not yet done this.)
Matthew if very concerned that we understand that this
is a virgin birth – that Joseph was not involved. Verse 20 – What is
conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. Verse 25 – he had no union with
her … It is the virgin birth that Matthew is speaking of here.
Now why is this so important? Why is it important to
believe in the virgin birth?
Well the virgin birth is a miracle and like all
miracles they are meant to point us to something or someone in this case and
that someone is Jesus Christ. If you look at the gospel of John he uses the
word “sign” to refer to miracles. He uses a word to help us understand that
the miracles are meant to point us to something beyond the miracle. The
miracle is meant to point us to Christ.
And so the virgin birth points us outward. To what
does it point?
Well it points us to the fact that our God is
all-powerful. Our God is all-powerful. A lot of people don’t believe the
way I do – and that’s fine – but the reason they don’t believe the way I do
is because they have a different starting point than I do. Let me tell you
where the starting point is for my faith.
The starting point for my faith is Isaiah 40. Do you
know what you read there in Isaiah 40:27?
”Why do you say, O Jacob, and complain, O Israel, ‘My way is hidden from
the Lord; my cause is disregarded by my God?’ Do you not know? Have you not
heard? The Lord is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the
earth. He will not grow tired or weary, and his understanding no one can
fathom.”
And all before that verse there is such a picture of
God! He is the one who measures with the breadth of His hand, He is the one
who can hold the water of the earth in the palm of His hand, He is the one
who holds the dust of the earth in a basket (verse 12).
Our God is a great God. He is all powerful. There is
nothing to hard for Him. And the virgin birth points us to the power and
majesty and might of our God. All things are possible, for He is God. The
Living God. Not some idol.
Our God is great. All-powerful. And the virgin birth
points us to the strength of our God. I hope you don’t doubt the strength
and power of our God. In the midst of the situation that we find ourselves
in – in our politics, in our economics – do not doubt the power of our God.
He is able and His plan is being worked out according to His will. Don’t
doubt His promises to you, they are sure and certain. The virgin birth
points us to the power of our God.
Also, the virgin birth points us to the truth of the
incarnation. It is a great mystery. But we worship one who came to earth
in the person of Jesus Christ and He was fully man and fully God. And the
virgin birth points us to that truth. God and humanity are involved in His
birth.
We read in Hebrews 4:14,15 that we have a great high
priest (who is Jesus Christ) “who is not unable to sympathize with our
weaknesses.” That means that our Lord Jesus Christ has experienced life
fully. That is part of the good news of Christmas – we have a God who has
experienced life fully. He didn’t just come to earth and Jesus gradually
became God – some say He didn’t become God until His baptism. No, He was
God from the very start. He experienced all of life. He even experienced
what it means to be born.
I don’t know what your birth was like – but my mother
tells me that my birth was a pure joy. I came out of the womb, laughing and
smiling and cooing. I was an angel. Can you tell that I was the baby of
the family?! You eldest born – I can tell you – you came out of the womb
screaming and crying – you were awful.
But you need to know that Jesus experienced that. He
knows. He knows all of life – even what it’s like to be born. It points
us to the truth of the incarnation.
Well, not only does the virgin birth point us to the
truth of the power of our God, to the truth of the incarnation, - but also
to the mystery of our faith.
There are people who say, “We don’t understand it, or
this is just a myth, or this is only a theory, we don’t need to believe
it.” And I say, “Why would you want to rob the faith of mystery? Why would
you want to rob the faith of that is beyond us? Why would you want to rob
the faith of that which causes us to drop our jaw and speechlessness.”
“Well,” they say, “You can’t really believe in the
trinity. The whole idea after all was dreamed up by the church in the early
300s and you really can’t believe in it.”
And I say, “Why not? It’s taught throughout
scripture. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Why would you rob the
faith of its mystery?”
Or they say, “Well you really can’t believe that the
word of God is the Word of God you know – because it was just written by men
and women.”
I will admit – it is a great mystery. How the word of
God can be the word of God is a great mystery – it was written by God, yet
written by men and women. It is a great mystery. But I’m not prepared to
give up the truth simply because it is a great mystery.
“Well,” they say, “You can’t believe in the virgin
birth. It’s so outside the realm of our experience and what we know to be
scientifically true. You can’t believe in the virgin birth.”
And I say, why? Why rob the faith of mystery? You
need mystery. Because it is the mystery that moves us to worship, it is the
mystery that moves us to the idea that God is so far above us, so far beyond
us, we have not got God in a box.
You read Isaiah 55:8 and what do we read there? ”For
my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,”
declares the Lord.
Our God is mysterious, and works in mysterious ways.
He is so far beyond us. And it causes us to bend our knee and wills and
heart in worship. The virgin birth fills our faith with mystery. It is a
great mystery.
Finally the virgin birth points us to the truth that
Jesus Christ was born fully alive.4 You say, “Hold on pastor.
When I was born, I was born fully alive.”
No you weren’t. When we were born, we were born dead.
Ephesians 2:1 - “You were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which
you used to live.” It is repeated again in Colossians 2:13 - “When
you were dead in your sins …”
My friends, when we were born we were born physically
alive but spiritually dead. So the gospel always tells us that it is not
that we will die for our sins but that we will die in our sins. That is the
problem we face. We can’t die for our sins because we are already dead.
So Jesus had this uncanny knack of looking at people
who were very much alive – breathing, living, walking – and he would look at
them as they walked by and say, “You white washed sepulchres, tombs.” Dead.
There have only been two people born alive fully. The
first one was Adam. Adam the first one born fully alive. He wasn’t born
into sin. God told him, don’t eat of the fruit of the tree or you will
die. Adam, disobeys God. Does he die? Not right away. But he does die
spiritually. He will eventually die physically, the rot of sin will corrupt
everything.
And everyone born after Adam is born into death. And
so we read Romans 6:23, “The wages of sin is death.” Not the wages
of sin will be death. But the wages of sin is death. It’s a present
reality.
But the good news is that a second Adam has come. 1
Corinthians 15:47 - “The first man was of the dust of the earth, the
second man from heaven.”
My friends, the virgin birth points us to the truth
that Jesus Christ was born fully alive. And as one fully alive he can now
die the death we cannot die. He can pay the penalty that we cannot pay. He
can die for our sin. He can truly take away our sin and we can have life.
He was born sinless, so He can bear our sin.
We are in sin outside of Christ. And when we put our
faith in him we receive forgiveness and we receive life. The life that was
in Him. A life that was untainted by sin.
It helps us understand when He cries out, “My God,
my God, why have you forsaken me?” We can understand that He has taken
on all our sin. It is that dark, that heavy.
That’s why we believe in the virgin birth. It points
us to the power of God. Our God can do all things. It points us to the
truth of the incarnation. It points us to the truth that our faith is a
mysterious faith. And what we have we cannot grasp only through the
intellect, we must take a step of faith.
And it points us to the truth that Jesus Christ is one
in whom there is life. And that life is the light of all people. “The
light shines in the darkness but the darkness has not overcome it.”
Copyright MBC and Rev. Dr. Tom Cullen -
December
2008
-
I present five objections against the truth of the virgin birth here. I
was greatly helped in my study of the first two objections by James Boice
in his book, The Christ of Christmas. (Minneapolis, MN: Grason
Publishing, 1983) He gives a thorough defense of the fact that Luke’s
sources are early not late. He notes the Semitic style of Luke 1:5-2:52.
He points to the use of parataxis and parallelism. He also notes that
the subject is definitely pre-Christian and gives examples. Page 27-38.
See also page 45-51.
-
“The woman who would give birth to the Messiah is described as the virgin
(haalmah) and is so rendered by the AV, RV, and NIV. The vast
scholarly discussion surrounding the meaning of almah is best
summed up in the article on the word in Theological Wordbook of the Old
Testament, the heart of which follows: “It seems reasonable to consider
that the feminine form of this word is not a technical word for a virgin
but represents a young woman, one of whose characteristics is virginity.”
The article continues: ”There is no instance where it can be proved that
almah designates a young woman who is not a virgin. The fact that
the Holy Spirit guided Matthew to employ parthenos the Greek word
for a virgin, to translate almah clinches the argument that Isaiah
predicted the Messiah’s incarnation by means of a virginal conception.
Orr offers this summation of the import of Isaiah 7:14 “the vision of the
prophet sweeps far beyond present events … and he beholds in this son that
should be born, this child that should be given … the security for the
fulfillment of the promise to David, and the hope for the future of the
world.” Gordon R. Lewis & Bruce A. Demarest, Integrative Theology
Volume Two, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing, 1990) 264.
-
Gordon R. Lewis & Bruce A. Demarest, Integrative Theology Volume Two
(Grand Rapids: Michigan: Zondervan Publishing, 1990) 261.
-
I was helped in this discussion by material found in Charles Prices’
commentary, Matthew, Focus On the Bible (Great Britain: Christian
Focus Publications, 1998) 24-26.
