Download an outline of the Creed.
Go to the beginning of this study of the Creed.
Download the handout
Table Talk: “Uneducated people in pre-scientific times could believe in things like the virgin birth, but now we know better.” How would you respond to that statement?
[“Table Talk” is an opening question or topic for discussion at the beginning of our time together. The intent is to help group members (around tables, with four to six at each table) build connections with each other, as well as to guide thinking in a direction related to the passage.]
Our discussion began with the “Table Talk” question above, the modern skeptic’s view of the Virgin birth (and possibly of all miracles). The Bible itself illustrates the false and even foolish assumption behind the question. Pregnancy was not exactly a mystery in the first century. Both Mary (Luke 1:34) and Joseph (Matthew 1:19) were confused (“how can this be?”) or even alarmed (“he planned to send her away secretly”) at the news. Modern education and science add nothing to what Joseph and Mary knew. The difference for them (and for Christians) is faith in God’s ability to do the impossible (Luke 1:37).
For those without faith, the Virgin birth (sometimes referred to as the Virgin conception) is “one of the most objectionable and mocked beliefs of the Christian faith.” At the same time, it was the “touchstone of orthodoxy at the height of the fundamentalist vs. liberal controversy in the early twentieth century.”[1] One of the staunchest defenders of conservative, orthodox faith during that controversy was J. Gresham Machen.[2] Machen wrote, “Everyone admits that the Bible represents Jesus as having being [sic] conceived by the Holy [Spirit] and born of the Virgin Mary. The only question is whether in making that representation the Bible is true or false.” If you think the Bible is the Word of God, God’s revelation to His people, then you cannot deny the miraculous conception of Jesus. That is, not without calling into question the validity of all the other things the Bible teaches.[3]
Our group discussed the question, “How important is the Virgin birth?” One reason the question is sometimes raised is the relative lack of emphasis in the New Testament. Two of the Evangelists report it (Matthew and Luke, cited above), but Mark and John make no direct mention of it. (Some interpreters see an indirect reference in the accusation of the Jews in John 8:41 when they seem to question the legitimacy of Jesus’ birth.) Paul mentions one “born of woman” one time (Galatians 4:4), but that Semitic phrase was used elsewhere (Job 14:1, 15:14, 25:4) to describe normal human birth. [4] So the question remained, how important is it?
How important is the Virgin Birth?
With his usual insight, J. I. Packer offers a helpful observation covering the entire span of the earthly ministry of Jesus:
The Bible says that the Son of God entered and left this world by acts of supernatural power. His exit was by resurrection-plus-ascension, and his entry by virgin birth, both fulfilling Old Testament anticipations (see Isaiah 7:14 for the virgin birth and 53:10-12 for resurrection-ascension). The entry and exit miracles carry the same message. First, they confirm that Jesus, though not less than man, was more than man. His earthly life, though fully human, was also divine. He, the co-creator, was in this world-his own world-as a visitor; he came from God and went to God.[5]
Our group has previously studied the Gospel according to John, and the end of Packer’s phrase brought back similar words from that Gospel. As He prepared to wash feet, Jesus is described as “knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come forth from God and was going back to God” (John 13:3). Miraculous events provide the bookends of His ministry, and they demonstrate most clearly His divine nature and mission.
Why is the Virgin Birth Important?
We discussed the reasons the Virgin birth is important. What does that belief contribute to our understanding of God and His work in the world in the mission of Jesus? Michael Bird provides a helpful summary:
The virgin conception:[6]
- underscores the dominant role of the Holy Spirit in Jesus’s ministry
- is the first reminder of the role of the Spirit in Jesus’s life
- provides a clarification to Jesus’s identity as the preexistent and eternal Son of God made flesh.
- is the first expression of the belief that Jesus is both a human son of Adam and the divine Son of God.
- speaks powerfully of new creation, something fresh happening within the old world.
The Virgin conception and birth of Jesus is a testimony both to His divine nature and to His human nature. Both aspects of the Incarnation were questioned and even attacked in the early centuries of the church, and the inclusion of that line in the Creed was a response to those questions and attacks. “He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary” is a helpful summary of the Biblical account: “The angel answered and said to her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.’” (Luke 1:35). One pastor points out the presence of the Trinity in that verse:
You have God the Father sending God the Son, and God the Son being conceived in Mary by God the Holy Spirit, and all of this is a type of divine invasion. It is our God, the God of the Bible, showing that one of the attributes of the Godhead is he is a God of initiation. … He is a God who takes the initiative. God the Father sends God the Son, conceived by God the Holy Spirit. The triune God is dancing for the salvation of men.[7]
The Humanity of Jesus
Most studies or discussion of the Virgin birth concentrate on the Biblical accounts in Matthew or Luke, or in Isaiah’s prophecy (Isaiah 7:14). Instead, we considered a passage that displays a particular aspect of the human nature of Jesus: Hebrews 2‑4. The handout for the discussion included to main sections (Hebrews 2:14-3:1 and 4:11-16). In order to provide some of the context of those passages, Hebrews 2:1, 3:12 were also included. The writer of Hebrews provides several ominous warnings about not drifting away (2:1) or falling away (3:12), along with exhortations to “pay closer attention,” “take care,” “be diligent,” and “hold fast.” In the midst of those admonitions and encouragements, we find the amazing statements about the humanity of Jesus, that He was tempted and can help us in our temptation (2:18). He can sympathize because He was tempted in all things, yet without sin (3:15).
A member of our group summarized the extended passage well: “Better listen, better learn!” Another commented on the uniqueness of Christianity in asserting that God could take on flesh and experience temptation and death. Like many things in our faith, these truths (affirmed in the Creed) are found ridiculous or even offensive by others. However, the idea of a sympathetic God goes along with those troubling beliefs. One person brought up the miracle when Jesus fed the 5,000. He knew they were hungry. More importantly, because of the Incarnation, He had been hungry. He helped them because He know what it was like to be hungry.
One factor is absent from the passages in Hebrews about the sinlessness of Jesus. There is no mention of the Virgin birth. That omission raises the question of the connection between these two important beliefs. Was the Virgin conception and birth a necessary condition for Jesus to be sinless? (This is where our usual level of controversy, always civil and friendly, escalated to a new level!)
The traditional and conventional viewpoint is expressed well by J. I. Packer:
Virgin-born, he did not inherit the guilty twist called original sin: his manhood was untainted, and his acts, attitudes, motives, and desires were consequently faultless. The New Testament emphasizes his sinlessness (see John 8:29, 46; Romans 5:18ff.; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Hebrews 4:15; 7:26; 1 Peter 2:22-24; etc.).[8]
However, there is another perspective to consider:
The virgin conception is definitely not necessary for Jesus to be sinless. If one is operating with the assumption that human characteristics are transmitted seminally, that is, exclusively through the male line, then the absence of a father would be necessary for Jesus to be born without a human propensity for corruption and without its associated guilt (i.e., original sin). However, there is nothing in the nativity accounts that suggests that Jesus’s sinlessness is at stake. In addition, we know that children receive DNA from both of their parents, mother and father, and Jesus evidently possessed human DNA at least from his mother.[9]
J. I. Packer is one of my heroes. I was reading his books not long after I became a Christian in college. However, I would point out that while all the references in his quotation above speak to the sinlessness of Christ (which is not in question), none of the passages have any mention of the Virgin birth. The clearest and most direct statements (found in Hebrews) likewise remain silent about the conception and birth of Jesus. Our group considered the view that sin is carried by the father. That would require conception with Joseph’s participation. But as Bird points out, Jesus had Mary’s DNA as part of His genuine humanity.
Is the Virgin birth a necessary condition for the sinlessness of Jesus? The problem with attributing sin only to an earthly father (and ignoring Mary’s potential contribution) seems to have been recognized early in the history of the church. In the first few centuries, church fathers such as Irenaeus, Ambrose, and Augustine began to assert a special sinless status for Mary.[10] Those early teachings led to the formalized Roman Catholic dogma that came later (Immaculate Conception, Perpetual Virginity, etc.). If the Virgin birth was needed to eliminate Joseph’s sinfulness from the DNA of Jesus’ humanity, something needed to be done to eliminate Mary’s sinfulness. While Protestants do not seem to share that concern, it is possible that the primary issue of the Virgin birth is not His sinlessness but His deity. Even Gabriel’s announcement to Mary repeated the importance of this miraculous birth as pointing to His divine origin, “the Son of the Most High” (Luke 1:32) and “the Son of God” (v. 35). Likewise, the angelic announcement to Joseph stressed the divine origin of Mary’s pregnancy, “of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20).
Two facts are indisputable: The Bible teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin. The Bible teaches that Jesus was sinless. Those two truths are important, but there seems to be no direct correlation between them in Scripture. The conception by the Holy Spirit confirms Jesus’ deity. The birth of a human mother confirms His humanity. The fact that He was sinless is not explicitly tied to the virgin birth in Scripture. As one of the participants in our group pointed out, the divine element of His DNA allowed or enabled Him to be sinless.
Humanity and Temptation
“Conceived by the Holy Spirit” affirms His deity. “Born of the Virgin Mary” affirms His humanity.” His humanity is the basis for the affirmations in the passage in the book of Hebrews that we considered: “For since He Himself was tempted in that which He has suffered, He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted” (Hebrews 2:18). “One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin” (Hebrews 4:15).
A question that has produced debate for a very long time relates to the connection between our temptation and that of Jesus. The issue can be expressed by multiple possible descriptions of Jesus’ sinlessness:
A. It was possible for Jesus not to sin (He was tempted as we are – Hebrews 4:15).
B. It was not possible for Jesus to sin (God cannot be tempted – James 1:13).
C. All of the above.
D. None of the above.
How much was His temptation like ours? In case there was not enough controversy in our discussion so far, we considered the question, “Did Jesus have a tendency to sin?” We have a fallen nature, a tendency to sin, an inclination to go wrong, a leaning toward bad choices. What, if any, of that weakness did Jesus share? How human was He? How much of our humanness did He carry?
Athanasius could say that ‘the whole Christ became a curse for us’, for in taking upon himself the form of a servant, the Lord transferred to himself fallen Adamic humanity which he took from the Virgin Mary, that is, our perverted, corrupt, degenerate, diseased human nature enslaved to sin and subject to death under the condemnation of God…. Christ triumphed over the forces of evil entrenched in our human existence, bringing his own holiness, his own perfect obedience, to bear upon it in such a way as to condemn sin in the flesh and to deliver us from its power.[11]
In making himself one with us he both took what is ours and imparted to us what is his. In his great compassion he did not reject union with our nature, fallen though it was as the result of sin, but gathered it up in himself in order to purify it and quicken it in his own sinless life-giving life.[12]
Michael Bird makes the point much more succinctly: “Athanasius put it bluntly when he said that “what is not assumed cannot be redeemed.”[13] Jesus redeemed even the most unpleasant parts of our nature.
This is not to suggest that Jesus had the stain of original sin. His sympathy with us (Hebrews 4:15) relates to how He faced sin. How difficult was temptation for Jesus? Jesus was sinless in His nature (no original sin). He was sinless in His behavior, His “active obedience.” Scripture is unequivocal on that important point.
He was certainly able not to sin (option A in the multiple choice) since He didn’t sin. But if He was not able to sin (option B), then where does that leave us? We demonstrate our ability to sin continually. When He was tempted, were there times when He thought about giving in to the temptation? Was there some inclination, just as we have? We all know what that is like. We are tempted to lash out in anger, or offer a sarcastic, cutting response to another person. We know we shouldn’t, but there is a subtle self-obsession that will give us pleasure from such an action.
Self-obsession can be defined as the attitude: “Nothing matters more than my comfort, my convenience, my reputation at whatever cost to anyone else.” The alternative to self-obsession is God-obsession: “Nothing matters more than the glory of God, at whatever cost to my comfort, convenience, or reputation.” Self-obsession leads to the sarcasm that makes sure we come out on top of the argument. God-obsession motivates us to respond in ways that display the character of Christ, even at the cost of our status or reputation. Self-obsession leads to broken relationships, even marriages, because the other person is not providing the level of fulfilment we desire. God-obsession endures difficult relationships in order to display the love and mercy of God to the other person.
God-obsession is the choice to reject my self-obsessed tendency in order to display God’s character. Did Jesus ever experience the pull toward self-obsession? If He did, He was 100% successful in overcoming it and perfectly expressed the God-obsession inherent in His perfect human nature. During my preparation for this discussion group, that was a revolutionary thought. Those verses in Hebrews took on a whole new level of significance. If Jesus felt the pull of self-obsession and yet perfectly overcame that tendency, then His sympathy, His ability to help me in my self-obsessed tendencies is a great encouragement. Hebrews tells me that His temptation was like mine “in all things [even my self-obsessed tendency] and yet without sin.” That assurance of His genuine sympathy with me gives added depth to the description of temptation from C. S. Lewis:
Only those who try to resist temptation know how strong it is. After all, you find out the strength of the German army by fighting against it, not by giving in. You find out the strength of a wind by trying to walk against it, not by lying down. A man who gives in to temptation after five minutes simply does not know what it would have been like an hour later. That is why bad people, in one sense, know very little about badness. They have lived a sheltered life by always giving in. We never find out the strength of the evil impulse inside us until we try to fight it: and Christ, because He was the only man who never yielded to temptation, is also the only man who knows to the full what temptation means.[14]
That “only man who knows to the full what temptation means” sympathizes with us and helps us. That may be why the author of Hebrews emphasized His humanness among the urgent warnings about being diligent and not falling away. The One who shares our flesh and blood is the One who comes to our aid as we are tempted. Because He was made like us, He enables our diligence in obedience. Thanks be to God!
[1] Michael F. Bird, What Christians Ought to Believe (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2016), Kindle Edition location 1583.
[2] For a biographical sermon on Machen by John Piper, go to http://www.desiringgod.org/messages/j-gresham-machens-response-to-modernism .
[3] Quoted in Raymond F. Cannata & Joshua D. Reitano, Rooted: the Apostles’ Creed (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Doulos Resources, 2013), Kindle Edition location 1113, emphasis added.
[4] Alan Cole, “The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians” in Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1976), 115.
[5] J. I. Packer, Affirming the Apostles’ Creed (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2008), 73.
[6] Michael F. Bird, What Christians Ought to Believe (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2016), Kindle Edition location 1682, ff; Bird prefers to describe the event as the “Virgin conception.”
[7] Matt Chandler, “Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary” in The Apostles’ Creed (sermon series, The Village Church, September 13, 2015, PDF file), 10;
http://www.tvcresources.net/resource-library/sermons/who-was-conceived-by-the-holy-spirit-born-of-the-virgin-mary , accessed February 3, 2017.
[8] J. I. Packer, Affirming the Apostles’ Creed (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2008), 74.
[9] Michael F. Bird, What Christians Ought to Believe (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2016), Kindle Edition location 1654, emphasis added.
[10] See Robert Schihl, A Biblical Apologetic of the Catholic Faith
https://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/maryc3a.htm accessed February 7, 2017.
[11] Thomas F. Torrance, The Trinitarian Faith: Evangelical Theology of the Ancient Catholic Church (London: T&T Clark Cornerstones, 2016), Kindle Edition, location 3871.
[12] Thomas F. Torrance, The Trinitarian Faith: Evangelical Theology of the Ancient Catholic Church (London: T&T Clark Cornerstones, 2016), Kindle Edition, location 3882.
[13] Michael F. Bird, What Christians Ought to Believe (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2016), Kindle Edition location 1235.
[14] C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: HarperCollins, 2000), 142; Kindle Edition location 1821.