Is the virgin birth of Jesus a myth?

Christmas. It is the season to rejoice in the birth of Jesus, the Son of God in song, praise and fellowship. It is a time when some examine what they profess to be in terms of the faith. They examine their conviction to see if it is firm. They examine the testimony of their words with their deeds. In some instances some people come to terms with themselves. They realize there is a need for them to step up in order to be ready to give an account for themselves as Christians or as disciples of Jesus.

Christmas is also the season for some to mock the virgin birth of Jesus as being nothing more than a myth. One writer admonishes believers to forsake the virgin birth with these words: “Virgin birth: it’s pagan, guys. Get over it”. Do not make the mistake to assume that he rejects, at least not that it is apparent in his article, that which is pagan over that which is holy or divine. However, it is what has prompted me to write this article.

the subtlety of a mother

I feel a certain sense of futility about writing this article. Certainly, there is no ‘deep anxiety’ (Carrier). It is not pessimism, doubt or unbelief. Rather, it is because it pertains to something which every human being, simply by virtue of being alive, has experienced, namely, their birth. We say it’s a done deal. Truly, we’ve been there and although it is not an event that we remember we say we've done that. (Our mothers would probably have a something to say anyone of three different ways: YOU'VE done that? You've DONE that? You've done THAT? Mothers have a subtle but very effective way of putting in our place as in, You did nothing.)

Such is our own birth that although it is an event that began our life that we do not need to understand it in order to believe it, live it, love it and rejoice in it. There is a bit of a similarity to that lack of understanding for Christians and many people about their birth. It is that there is a similar lack of understanding which generally holds true about the virgin birth of Jesus. After all, it’s not our birth. It’s someone else’s birth. But, this birth, that is, the virgin birth of Jesus pertains to our faith and how we live.

The claim concerning the virgin birth is understandably something difficult, not to remember, but to grasp. Like our own birth, it is a one-time experience. The conception of Jesus in the womb of Mary through what, in modern terms, was nothing less than sexless teleportation of a fertilized egg into her womb by the Holy Spirit. Even then the virgin birth would be of no significance or consequence if there were nothing like an extended belief system beyond the single event of that virgin birth. But, for the followers of Jesus, the Christ, the virgin birth of Jesus is just one example of extended support to the overall premise of faith in Jesus as the risen Son of God. The virgin birth is mentioned briefly in the gospel accounts of Matthew and Luke. The apostle Paul makes a passing reference to Jesus being born of a woman, but makes no reference to the virgin birth.

The point of all this is the reality of the virgin birth was not a major tenet in the message of Jesus or his disciples, the apostles. This true to a much lesser extended of the deity claims in the message of Jesus and the apostle. Make no mistake about, the scriptures assert and uphold the virgin birth and the deity of Jesus. In the terms of the skeptic and scientist the virgin birth is a falsifiable prediction. This ought not to alarm the saints in Christ. Anything that one professes to be true must be able to bear up under the scrutiny of scientific theory. This is not to say that the virgin birth of Jesus has been proven to be false and nothing more than a myth. Skeptics are quick to cheer that the virgin birth is false without even bothering to scrutinize it's claims.

the ancient myth of virgin birth

I want, in this article, to respond briefly to the very popular spin by the unbelievers on the virgin birth as a just another ancient myth stolen and cleaned up by first century Jews in order to separate the virgin birth of Jesus from the unseemly aspects of ancient virgin birth myths. Richard Carrier [1] is one such unbeliever. Carrier prides himself as a self-professed Ph.D. expert to know and expose Bart Ehrman’s “lazy writing (or thinking? or research?)’’errors (for example Carrier corrects Ehrman's error: ‘remains’ a virgin versus ‘was’ a virgin) on the ancient myths. (Ehrman who self-describes himself as agnostic and his own pride on discoveries on New Testament concerning the ‘real’ Jesus is hardly a faithful witness to either the scriptures or of the faith that is in Jesus.) Carrier’s own supposed enlightenment of ignorant believers concerning ancient myths and the virgin birth and his opposing arguments are no better or stronger than the weak arguments on the virgin birth which he attempts to eviscerate at his altar of unbelief.

I think it is significant to mention the matter about weak arguments for which Carrier upbraids Ehrman and other mythicists (Carrier’s term). Carrier chastises them and dismisses their claims as a fallacy because of their focus on the weakest proponents of arguments on ancient myths in order to create support for the virgin birth of Jesus. Yet, Carrier plays into that of which he accuses others, namely, that they are misleading and disingenuous because for focusing on ancient virgin myths Carrier fails to examine the response of those who believed in Jesus even unto death. Those disciples did not lay down their lives because of or on the basis of an ancient belief of the virgin birth or even because of the virgin birth of Jesus.

Ra, Perseus and Hephaestus

I am not going to present details on those ancients beliefs. However it is safe to say that there are elements in those ancient virgin birth myths which share much in common with Jesus and his birth. Those claims include 1) a virgin birth through sexless conception, 2) a being such as a god, daughter or son of the gods being born through that virgin birth, and 3) the resurrection from the dead by that same being who was born of a virgin birth. I will mention the three ‘secure exemplars’ which Carrier cites as being the strongest examples of the very pagan precedent involving the virgin birth. These three are Ra, Perseus, and Hephaestus and which share a core message about a virgin birth. I am confident that Carrier is aware that he has presented nothing new in his article. What he has presented may be as old as the ancient myths themselves.

I think Christians, specifically, self-professed scholars and theologians are misguided and have seriously erred in their attempts to uphold the virgin birth of Jesus by needlessly trying to discredit those myths so as to distance the virgin birth of Jesus from that of ancient myths. (I would add that this is even worse in the case of those who purport to lead, teach and preach before the congregation of the Lord’s people and whose preoccupying message during the Christmas season is usually about Christmas trees and pagan holidays.) I can only attribute this to their own lack, not so much of knowledge, but of understanding of the scriptures. Hence, a corresponding lack of confidence in the sufficiency of the scriptures. This is their weakness in the discussion with unbelievers and which makes them easy prey. There are plenty of poster children on YouTube who do not so much as profess their new found, default atheism as much as they lament their utter helplessness, shock and dismay to learn during their days in Jesus that, _ What? The virgin birth of Jesus is a myth? Thus, they ran off with that falsehood.

The gospel narrative accounts by Matthew and Luke on the virgin birth of Jesus was nothing new. Narratives of the virgin birth had been around for many centuries. In the case of the virgin birth of Jesus any discussion is likely to fall into the proverbial quandary of damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don’t. What I mean is that if the Christian acknowledges the precedent, prior existence of the virgin birth myth the virgin birth of Jesus is then promptly dismissed as being nothing new. On the other hand any attempt by the Christian to deny the prior existence of the ancient myth of the virgin birth with proclamation of the virgin birth of Jesus he is similarly damned, similarly dismissed by the unbelieving.

differences which distinguish

There are some vast differences between those ancient virgin birth myths and the virgin birth of Jesus and which are conveniently ignored by opponents, and tragically, by proponents, too. Those differences include the fact of the lesser point (as far as unbelievers are concerned) that the virgin birth is matter of ancient Jewish prophecy. The greater point is the open proclamation by Jesus himself while he was alive. He claimed in the hearing of friend and foe alike that he would lay down his life and then take it up again and rise up from the dead. So far neither Jewish prophecy nor the claims by Jesus himself distinguish him from the ancient myths involving the ancient myth of the virgin birth.

the falsifiable predictability of the virgin birth

What does distinguish Jesus from all prior ancient myths concerning a virgin birth is the fruits of his labor, the resounding faith that blossomed and bore fruit in those who believed in him following his resurrection.

Question: Where are the followers of Ra, Perseus, and Hephaestus? It is not implausible to imagine their followers waiting around their grave one, two, three or more days for their master and leader to rise up from the dead. Alas, it did not happen. One by one their ranks thinned as they walked away from the graveside to get on with their lives.

This is the single greatest reality which separates, distinguishes, authenticates and validates the virgin birth of Jesus from all ancient virgin birth myths. The falsifiable predictability of the virgin birth of Jesus is neither proven nor established on the testimony of a mere hollow proclamation of that virgin birth by the disciples of Jesus. The burden of proof against the falsifiable predictable virgin birth is the evidence of the readiness, willingness and of the deaths of those disciples who had believed in Jesus. Many of them saw him with their own eyes and those who did not were stirred in their minds and hearts by the testimony of others as they contemplated the significance and meaning of these things. Their thought processes were no different and no less than that of twentieth century man. They were men and women who were no less than twentieth century men and women discerning, critical, insightful in their examination of nature and rare phenomenon like the resurrection. They made their own determination to commit their lives to Jesus as Lord and Savior even unto death. They laid down their lives, not in battle or while taking another life, but for the name and cause of Jesus. The virgin birth as a falsifiable prediction is not falsified.

A theory (to use the familiar and preferred term of the unbeliever and scientist) does not need to be repeatable anymore than the theory of the origin of the universe needs to be repeatable in order for it to be accepted or proven as being true. There is absolutely no comparison between the testimony and deaths of the disciples of Jesus with that of the disciples of Ra, Perseus, and Hephaestus and their myths of a virgin birth. There is a natural progression in the claims 1) a virgin birth through sexless conception, 2) a being such as a god, daughter or son of the gods being born through that virgin birth, and 3) the resurrection from the dead. It is the last of these three, namely, the resurrection which validates or nullifies the previous first two. (The resurrection itself can withstand the scrutiny of testing in accordance with scientific method. I refer you to my blog article on the falsifiable predictability of the resurrection.)

conclusion

It is neither inconceivable nor implausible that those disciples of Jesus laid down their lives on the basis of their belief that Jesus rose up from the dead and is Lord and Savior. Although skeptics can snicker that those disciples were fools because they believed a lie, that is, that they believed an ancient myth, this reveals a marked disingenuous response and perhaps, to borrow Carrier’s term to disparage the faith of believers, the skeptics' own ‘deep anxiety.’ Soldiers and civilians have laid down their lives (in their case, not without taking as many lives as possible before losing their lives) for a belief to which they committed themselves totally.

Lastly, the age of technology (I consider this a very weak argument and present it only as a matter of awareness and because it is so highly touted.) has wrought by the hand of man the reality of sexless, in-vitro fertilization and conception outside of the womb. Although teleportation, as a technology to impregnate a woman through teleportation of a fertilized egg, is not yet a reality its appearance on the horizon, in the prophetic spirit of the Genesis account, may not be far off. What these grand laboratory feats of man represent is the ancient desire of man to overcome death. This is the ball and chain which artificial intelligence is not able to shake free. Artificial intelligence purports to overcome death, not by restoring life to the dead, but by extending life into immortality by means of human intelligence being downloaded unto hardware memory, storage and circuitry. Even such hardware accoutrements of Singularity Man are on the brink of extinction in favor of other technologies which most of us can't even begin to imagine. Jesus, the creator, giver and the sustainer of life not only raised a few people from the dead, but to restore life to the dead. He boldly, unabashedly and unapologetically declared before friend and foe alike that he would lay down his own life and take it up again. Thereby, he demonstrated that death has nothing on him. Death is in the palm of his hand. He can lay down his life and take up at will.

It is an understatement and up in the face of modern man who snickers at the virgin birth as an ancient myth to say that his dreams and ideas for the modern gadgetry of technology is really nothing new whether it involves sexless reproduction or hand-less teleportation. It is the arrogance of twentieth century man, of which undoubtedly there were arrogant first century men to resent with disdain the possibility that his novelties are procreation and teleportation are simply not new. No deep anxiety here.

Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice!