Dr.
Dan Hayden
God the Son had existed forever. The Apostle John said "In the beginning"
(John 1:1). Micah the prophet said "from long ago, from the days
of eternity" (Micah 5:2). The infinite expanse of the endless universe
was His dwelling place and He filled it in His immensity.
He never knew want, for all things necessary to His existence flowed
within Himself -- for in Him was life. He spoke the word and the Milky
Way spun in the palm of His hand. He sprinkled the stars with His fingers
and with macroscopic perfection set the planets as jewels in a watch --
moving with precision to record the first increments of time. His artistic
genius splashed across the canvas of earth in a spectrum of colors and
shapes, while a myriad species of living things tumbled out of His sculpting
hand to glory in the splendor of His world.
He never knew travel, for wherever it was, He was already there. He never
knew confinement, for there were no boundaries in the starless expanse
and no limits upon His personal desire. He never knew exhaustion, hunger,
thirst, suffering, or pain -- for the riches of heaven bedecked Him in
His glory, and His formidable strength procured every desire. For the
immense, infinite Son of God, this was how it was -- in beginning.
Then, in the fullness of time, The Son of God humbled Himself -- and
entered into a single cell in a woman's womb -- and allowed Himself to
be confined in the embryonic fluid of His fetal home -- and was born of
Mary with all of the limitations of a newborn infant. There are many wonders,
but this is truly a wonder of wonders. The angels must have stood in awe.
The universe must have gasped in disbelief. There must have been silence
in heaven as the cherubim were gripped in speechless wonder. It was impossible!
Yet it was done. A virgin had conceived.
Totally Unique
Many unusual births have taken place in the history of the world, but
there has only been one unique birth. Only One has ever been born as no
other has been born. Contrary to all natural law, Jesus Christ was born
of a virgin.
The Bible records for us numerous unusual births. The birth of Isaac,
for instance, was certainly a newsworthy event. Sarah was unquestionably
beyond the years of her reproductive cycle as seen by Paul's use of the
phrase, "the deadness of Sarah's womb" (Rom. 4:19). Abraham
was 100 years old and his ability to provide a viable seed was virtually
impossible. That is why Paul said that Abraham was "In hope against
hope" (Rom. 4:18) with regard to God's promise for a posterity that
would rival the sand of the sea and the stars of the heavens for number.
Therefore, when the angel of the Lord told Abraham that Sarah would become
pregnant, the Bible says that Sarah laughed (Gen. 18:12). "No way,"
she obviously thought. Yet she conceived -- and Isaac was subsequently
born in the old age of his parents. That was very unusual, but it was
not unique. The natural process of fertilization by sperm and egg was
the means of Sarah's conception. Isaac was born just like every other
child has ever been born.
There are other stories of miraculous births in the Bible, as well. Both
the first prophet of Israel (Samuel) and the last prophet of Israel (John
the Baptist) were conceived in their mothers' wombs after years of barrenness.
The parallels between these two men are striking in many respects, but
the similarity of their birth accounts sets them apart as men of unusual
beginnings. In each case, their conception was not unique, however. Elkanah
and Hannah both participated in the conception of Samuel, and Zacharias
impregnated Elizabeth in the conception of John. Unusual to be sure, but
not unique.
In recent years the world has been amazed at the occurrence of multiple
births. 1934 saw the birth of the Dionne quintuplets, but it wasn't too
long before there were also the Fischer quintuplets. The Rosenkowitzs
of South Africa gave birth to the first surviving set of sextuplets in
1974 as multiple births became more frequent due to the increased use
of fertility drugs. Even more recently (November 19, 1997), the whole
world converged on Carlisle, Iowa (via unprecedented media coverage) to
celebrate the birth of the McCaughey septuplets. Bobbi and Kenny McCaughey
are perhaps the most well-known parents in the world as a result of the
unusual event of the birth of their seven babies. These kinds of multiple
births don't happen every day. They are unusual in the sense that they
are infrequent. Yet in every case there was a natural conception. They
were unusual, but not unique.
Furthermore, we live in a day of unprecedented scientific progress that
is continually introducing us to amazing wonders of conception and birth.
In vitro fertilization, artificial insemination, and genetic manipulation,
all have us on the edge of our seats questioning the propriety and resultant
moral implications of man's intrusion upon the prerogatives of deity.
Still, in every case, scientists must take the sperm of a man and the
egg of a woman to make it happen. It is all very unusual, but it is still
not unique.
Virgin born, on the other hand, is unique. It defies the natural laws
of conception and, prior to the birth of Jesus Christ, it had never been
known. Even today, after two thousand years, and in spite of man's scientific
intrusion into the process, it is still unique. There has never been anything
like it in the history of the world. It stands as one of God's great miraculous
interventions into the affairs of men. God became a man -- and He did
it by a virgin birth.
Parthenogenesis
"But," someone will say, "there is a reproductive process
known as parthenogenesis, where creatures are conceived without the benefit
of fertilization. Aren't such creatures virgin born? Maybe it's not unique
after all!"
Parthenogenesis is defined by the Encyclopedia Americana as "reproduction
by means of an unfertilized egg or, very rarely, an unfertilized male
gamete." The article goes on to say, "It is common among various
species of lower animals, including many insects." The word parthenogenesis
actually means "virgin born," and describes a reproductive process
whereby the eggs of certain species do not need to be fertilized to develop
into adults.
The most common occurrence of parthenogenesis is among rotifers, microscopic
organisms that live in both salt and fresh water. The presence of a ciliary
apparatus on the anterior end has led many to refer to them as "wheel
animalcules". These little creatures really do reproduce in a virgin
born fashion. Other invertebrates, such as water fleas, aphids and honey
bees, also reproduce parthenogenically. The honey bee is an interesting
study in this regard, in that the queen bee reproduces both parthenogenically
and sexually. The unfertilized eggs (parthenogenesis) develop into drones
and the fertilized eggs (sexually) develop into workers.
The Encyclopedia Americana also says, "Parthenogenesis can be induced
experimentally in eggs of several animals in which the process apparently
does not occur naturally, including sea urchins, frogs, and even rabbits."
In fact, it was a man by the name of Pincus in 1940 who actually produced
several rabbits simply by inducing chemical and temperature effects upon
the ova. The interesting thing here, however, was that all of the offspring
produced in this fashion were females. You see, in mammals, all females
have two X chromosomes, while all males have one X and one Y chromosome.
Therefore, if the unfertilized female egg duplicates its chromosomes in
response to some artificial stimulation, it can only produce other X chromosomes.
The point is that artificially induced parthenogenesis in mammals can
only result in female offspring, since the introduction of a male Y chromosome
can only happen through fertilization.
So what does all of this have to say about the virgin birth of Christ?
Well, even though virgin births (parthenogenesis) do happen naturally
in some invertebrates, and even though they can be induced artificially
in certain vertebrates -- this unusual reproductive process in the animal
kingdom cannot be used to explain the virgin birth of Christ. As Pincus
proved, if Mary had conceived parthenogenically, she would have had a
daughter, not a son. For her to have had a son would have been scientifically
impossible.
The Revelation of God
The virgin birth of Jesus Christ is not something we believe because
we can prove it by some scientific explanation. We believe in the virgin
conception because the Word of God says that that is how it happened.
It is a matter of revelation, not a matter of reason. God said so, and
that settles it for us.
That does not mean, however, that there are not reasonable evidences
to support the biblical claim of the virgin birth. The fact that the Bible
does reflect a virgin birth for Jesus Christ is not hard to prove. There
is the predictive prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 that specifically says that
a virgin would conceive (see the word study on "almah") and
that the product of that conception would be "Immanuel", which
actually means "God (Elohim) with us" (cf. Matt. 1:23). Then
Matthew, in his description of the Messianic conception, included specific
phrases to insure that we not miss the point. Consider what Matthew has
to say:
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows. When His mother Mary had
been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be
with child by the Holy Spirit. And JosephÉ kept her a virgin until
she gave birth to a Son; he called His name Jesus." (Matt. 1:18,
24-25 -- emphasis mine)
Furthermore, Luke in his account tells us that Mary responded to the
angel's announcement of her conception with incredulity -- "How can
this be, since I know not a man?" (Luke 1:34, KJV). There are liberal
clergymen who deny that the Bible teaches the virgin birth of Christ,
but I don't understand how they could miss it. I know Junior Highers that
are more precocious in their understanding of "before they came together"
than those clergymen seem to be. Perhaps those liberals still believe
in the stork. Oh well, forgive me for being facetious. The point I am
making is -- just read it. It's a no-brainer. The Bible does teach it.
The word used by the Septuagint (OT in Greek) translators of Isaiah 7:14,
as well as the word used by Matthew in his first chapter, for the English
word "virgin" was the Greek word "parthenos" -- a
word that means a virgin woman. Therefore, the Bible does say that Jesus
Christ was conceived in the womb of a woman (Mary) who was truly a virgin.
He was born parthenogenically -- not the natural parthenogenesis of lower
forms of animal life, nor the artificial parthenogenesis of external stimulation
on the ova (remember Pincus), but a miraculous parthenogenesis arranged
by God that transcended all of the laws of natural reproduction.
According to Isaiah and Matthew, this is the way it had to be. If the
offspring of the virgin woman, whom Matthew identifies as Mary of Nazareth,
was to truly be "God with us" ("Immanuel"), then the
process of His conception could not have been by natural means. All children
born of men and women since the days of Adam and Eve have been only human
in their nature. It is true that many have become great men who have accomplished
amazing things, but none has ever been "Immanuel" -- "God
with us". For this reason the virgin birth was a necessity.
Furthermore, if the offspring of Mary were to be a genuine incarnation
of deity, then that offspring would have to be both God and man. That
would certainly necessitate a human birth (the Word became flesh - John
1:14), but at the same time it would necessiate an offspring generated
by God. In other words, the virgin birth of Jesus Christ was a necessity
for Him to be "God with us" and at the same time for Him to
be a genuine incarnation of God in human flesh as the God-Man. Even though
the virgin birth cannot be explained apart from the revelation of God,
there is therefore, good reason as to why it had to happen that way.
This Christmas, as you look into the manger at the baby wrapped in swaddling
clothes, remember that the most incredible part of the birth of Christ
happened "before the manger." The miraculous parthenogenic (virgin
born) conception of Mary was perhaps the greatest wonder to ever occur
in the universe -- rivaled only by the death, burial, and resurrection
of the Son of God -- who had been born parthenogenically.
Perhaps we should celebrate Christmas on March 25. Think about it. But,
then again, I think it is doubtful that Jesus was born in December. Something
else to think about. ■
More articles by Dan Hayden |