Matthew 1:23

A virgin. Literally, "'the virgin.” Directly and indirectly Matthew and Luke supply evidence to confirm the truth of the virgin birth: (1) Both affirm that Jesus was born of the Holy Ghost (Matt. 1:18, 20; Luke 1:35). (2) They declare that Mary was to “bring forth a son” who was not to be the son of Joseph (see on Matt. 1:21) but the Son of God (Luke 1:35). (3) Mary remained a virgin “till she had brought forth” Jesus (Matt. 1:25).

(4) Mary affirmed her virginity to the angel (Luke 1:34). Thus the virgin birth of Jesus is fully attested, even apart from the word “virgin” itself, and would stand even if Matthew had never used that word in this setting.

Matthew and Luke, writing as they did under divine direction, would not have related the story of the virgin birth if it had not been true. They knew well how the Jewish leaders had taunted Jesus because of the mysterious circumstances surrounding His birth, and that they were giving critics further opportunity for ridicule by repeating the story (see DA 715).

There can be no doubt that Matthew here uses “virgin” in the strict sense of the word, in reference to Mary as a chaste, unmarried young woman. For a consideration of the objection that the prophecy of Isaiah, “a virgin shall conceive,” applied only to a local situation in his day, see on Isa. 7:14. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Matthew applies Isaiah’s prediction to Christ, and in doing so uses the word parthenos, which strictly means “virgin” and nothing else. For a complete discussion of the problem of Isa. 7:14 see Problems in Bible Translation, pp. 151-169.

Rejecting all miracles, modern Bible critics generally dismiss the idea of the virgin birth as unworthy of an enlightened mind. They direct attention to the fact that, of all NT writers, only Matthew and Luke even mention it. They stress the fact that neither Mark, presumably the earliest of the Gospels, nor John, written to confirm the divinity of Jesus, nor Paul, the great theologian of the NT, so much as allude to it. The critics conclude that Mark knew nothing of the virginity of Mary, and that John and Paul considered the idea too fanciful to be worth mentioning.

These are all arguments from silence, and as such prove nothing. Matthew and Luke refer to the virginity of Mary as one detail of the birth narrative, and since Mark and John do not record the birth narrative at all they have no comparable reason for referring to this particular detail of it. The same is true of Paul, who stresses the incarnation, the union of divinity with humanity, as the great central fact implicit in the birth of Jesus. As the means by which the incarnation was accomplished, the virgin birth is, in a sense, incidental to the greater truth. The Pauline concept of the deity of Jesus Christ is wholly consistent with the virgin birth (see Phil. 2:6-8; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:1—9; etc.). Except for the incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection Paul is almost altogether silent concerning details of the life narrative of our Lord, and he deals with these three events simply as historical facts.

The critics point to the fact that pagans attributed the greatness of such men as Alexander, Pythagoras, Plato, and Augustus Caesar to descent from the gods and to supposed virgin birth. But this is no more valid an argument than to say that the existence of spurious coins and counterfeits of the great masterpieces of art proves that there are no genuine ones.

If the statements of Matthew and Luke relative to the virgin birth are to be dismissed as incredible because the truth thus expressed transcends human knowledge and experience, many other passages throughout the Gospels must be discarded on the same basis. If the human mind is made the standard for determining the reliability of Scripture, the Bible ceases to be the Word of God to man and becomes merely a human document.

It should not be forgotten that the entire plan of salvation is a miracle, a “mystery” (Rom. 16:25; Eph. 1:9; 3:9; Col. 1:27; 2:2; Rev. 10:7). In the first place, it is a mystery that God could love sinners (John 3:16; Rom. 5:8). It is likewise a mystery that infinite wisdom could devise a plan whereby mercy might be combined with justice (Ps. 85:10) so as to meet the just claims of God’s holy law and at the same time save the sinner from its penalty (John 3:16; Rom. 6:23). It is a miracle that man, who is naturally at enmity with God (Rom. 8:7), can come to live at peace with Him (Rom. 5:1). It is a miracle that Christ can deliver from the reign of sin and death a man bent on evil (Rom. 7:24; Rom. 8:1,2), and enable him to live a perfect life in harmony with the divine character (Rom. 8:3, 4). It is a miracle that a man can be born again (John 3:3-9), that an imperfect man (Rom. 3:23) can be transformed (Rom. 12:2) by the grace of Christ into a perfect man (Matt. 5:48) and become a son of God (1 John 3:1-3). The virgin birth, the perfect life, the vicarious death, the glorious resurrection of Jesus, are all mysteries of the human mind. The Christian religion makes no apology for the great mysteries of the plan of salvation, for God’s redeeming love is itself the greatest of all mysteries.

The incarnation of the Son of God is the sovereign fact of all time, the cornerstone of the Christian faith. But apart from the virgin birth there could be no true incarnation, and without the incarnation and virgin birth the Bible becomes mere fable and legend, Christianity a pious hoax, and salvation a disappointing mirage. See Additional Note on John 1.

With child. That is, by the Holy Spirit, as Luke also testifies (Luke 1:35). “When the fulness of the time” came (Gal. 4:4), God brought His Son into the world, having prepared for Him a body (Heb. 10:5).

Emmanuel. The Greek transliteration of the Heb. ‘Immanu’ El, literally, “God with us.” The Son of God came to dwell, not only among us, but to be identified with the human family (John 1:1-3, 14; Rom. 8:1-4; Phil. 2:6-8; Heb. 2:16, 17; DA 23). See Additional Note on John 1; see on John 1:1-3, 14. “Emmanuel” was not so much a personal name as it was a title descriptive of His mission (cf. Isa. 9:6, 7; 1 Cor. 10:4).