I've heard recently that some leaders in the current emergent church movement have stated that the virgin birth is not an essential doctrine. It seems the argument stems from the translation of the word virgin from Isaiah 7:14. Some contend the word can be better translated maiden. Even if that is the case, the New Testament makes it clear how the word is to be interpreted in the case of Mary.
Luke 2:26-38 is Mary's dialogue with the angel Gabriel. She questions the statement regarding the possibility of having a child since she has never had sexual relations. King James, I know no man. In Matthew 1:23-25 where the Isaiah passage is quoted, it says that Joseph kept her a virgin until after Jesus was born.
What happens to John 3:16 without a virgin birth? God so loved the world that He gave the son of the local milkman, or traveling goat salesman, or the sly census taker, or even Joseph. How does that fulfill the redemption story? A pretend perfect sacrifice, or a reasonable facsimile. God gave the perfect lamb. A man whose origin is in the creative work of God, much like Adam. Who having been saved from the fall by being born of the Holy Spirit, maintains His perfection and willingly offers Himself as the perfect sacrifice, required by the law, to purchase our freedom from the curse of sin by making full payment for it.
Some theology is trying to avoid some "embarrassing" doctrines of Christianity, and is trying to sidestep truth in order to be more acceptable to the world's embrace. I agree that Christians do not have to be mean-spirited toward homosexuals, abortionists and such. But to abandon truth to appear more "mainstream", reasonable, loving or acceptable (whatever the argument may be) leaves the message of the gospel without the power to save.
Here is the clear Biblical teaching, Jesus was born of a virgin, Mary. He is the Son of God!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree, edunleashed. People might say "I proclaim Jesus is Lord, and I am saved. The virgin birth is not an issue towards salvation." But really need to consider the consequences of their wrangling.
ReplyDeleteYou're right that this thing affects those things, and those things affect other things, and soon the whole is unraveled by one tiny seemingly harmless alteration.
What you point out about the emerging church immediately calls to my mind all the years that I was taught from the Old Testament, and how Israel did this very same thing over and over and over. Seems the lesson of history was not learned, and right on cue many are repeating it.
Jesus, as the prototype for every Christian, was conceived physically in the same way that humanity is born in the Spirit: the Holy Spirit comes upon us and joins Himself to us. It is absolutely vital that his conception occur in this manner otherwise our hope as Sons of God is questionable. His is the reality of the spirit of adoption.
ReplyDeleteNow, I believe firmly that life occurs because of the spirit of God. Conception, while it can be observed physically, is surely the result of a spiritual union as well--whether Christian or no. To understand the virgin birth one must perceive the relative significance of the source of all life: God Himself. We err when we regard His involvement on the same level as "the Big Bang" in which creation occurred in those first few days setting life into a process forever after untouched by God. We tend toward this thinking because we are too affected by theories of evolution.
I suggest we reconsider that every man and woman is a carefully and intricately created being fashioned on a one by one basis throughout all time in the womb by God Himself. If we return to this Biblical truth, the virgin birth is no longer a stumbling block.