Chapter 4 – Born of Woman

Claim

Jesus was born of Mary. His birth was unique, in that he was conceived by the Holy Spirit, the power of God. Thus Jesus did not have a human father, but he was “the only begotten son of God”. Because Mary had not had sexual intercourse with Joseph [the man to whom she was engaged when she got pregnant by means of the Holy Spirit], Mary was definitely a virgin. This circumstance had been prophesied in the Old Testament Scripture, and was wonderfully fulfilled when Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

Understanding the truth about Jesus being “born of woman” will compel you to reject false teaching on that topic and share the true Bible teaching with others.

This claim is further supported by the following Scripture references:

1. born a human being (Lk 1:31)
2. born son of God (Lk 1:35)
3. born king of Jews (Jn 18:37)
4. born of woman...under the law (Gal 4:4)
5. born of a virgin (Mt 1:23, Is 7:14)
6. the only-begotten son of God (Jn 3:16)

Each of these six Bible references is discussed in terms of relevant teaching Points followed by So What implications, with respect to Jesus and then to his disciples.

#1 & #2 - Luke 1:31, 35 – born a human being, son of God

The context of this verse is the angel Gabriel speaking to a young woman named Mary who was engaged to be married. He is explaining the incredible miraculous events surrounding the conception, birth and glorious future of her baby Jesus.

26 In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. 28 And he came to her and said, "Hail, O favored one, the Lord is with you!" 29 But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and considered in her mind what sort of greeting this might be. 30 And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there will be no end."

34 And Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?" 35 And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God. 36 And behold, your kinswoman Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. 37 For with God nothing will be impossible." 38 And Mary said, "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.

Points:

• God sent Gabriel to explain this extraordinary situation to Mary; it would take an angel of God sent directly from heaven to convince Mary that she would become pregnant without having had sexual relations with her fiancée Joseph.
• Mary was a virgin, but she was not ‘immaculate’ [preserved from all stain of ‘original sin’]cxliv. After the birth of Jesus, she began to have the pleasure of intercourse with her husband (Mt 1:25). God would bless her and Joseph with at least 6 children (Mt 13:55-56).

• The conception of Jesus was by the power of God’s Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the power of God. This allows us to understand that God is the Father, not the Holy Spiritcxlv. Mary was the young woman who was impregnated and bore the child Jesus.
• Mary was specially chosen by God to be the mother of Jesus. The choice was obviously fitting and not arbitrary. A key point was the faith of Mary, as shown in her acceptance of and obedience to God’s message.
• This unique event is, from a human point of view, “super natural”; no human male sperm was involved. Conception of a human being is often regarded as a “miracle of life” and rightly attributed to God the Creator. From this point forward, the development of the embryo and birth of a male child would be the same as every other human being, as it was from the beginning with the children of Adam and Eve. Jesus also inherited and was made of the same human flesh as all mencxlvi. The text of Hebrews 2:14 makes this point very clear.
• The text itself puts forth a list of the outcomes of the birth and life of Jesus. He would:
  • “be great” in character, in deeds, in recognition,
  • “the Son of the Most High”, a title of God (Gen 14:19),
  • be given, by God, “the throne of his fathercxlvii David”,
  • like king David, “reign over the house of Jacobcxlviii”, and
  • his reign will last forever – “there will be no end” to Jesus’ kingdom.
• Mary learned the very happy news that her elderly, barren, kinswoman, Elizabeth (Lk 1:7) was pregnant with a son. This revelation would have helped Mary in her belief that God was working an even greater miracle within herself.

So What:

• To accept the explanation of how Jesus was conceived is to acknowledge that this is when Jesus came into existence like every other human being. It would be misleading to say “as a human being”, since this could imply some other form of existence prior to his birth by Mary. He was a mortal member of the condemned race of Adam, of the same flesh and blood as Mary. Therefore, to think that Jesus had some special nature such as ‘free life’ or ‘clean flesh’cxlix is incorrect.

The man Jesus - a human being in every respect

Correct Teaching	Incorrect Teaching
born of a normal woman	born of an 'immaculate' Mary
had a nature that could sin	had a nature that could not sin
had normal 'flesh & blood' body	had 'clean flesh', not defiled in any way
had free will, and feared God	a God-man with God's will, and no fear

The correct teaching shows why Jesus was "not ashamed to call [believers] brethren".

• “Son of ...” indicates a father who existed prior to the son. By His very nature, God exists forever. He obviously can be the Father of Jesus. However, if Jesus were part of an always-existing triune God, the father-son sequence disappears. To argue this is a ‘mystery’ is simply avoiding the plain meaning of the termscl.
• Like other humans, Jesus had a family tree. It is described in Matthew chapter 1 and Luke chapter 3. Thus Jesus could trace his ancestry right back to Adam and Eve. Luke 3:38 says “the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God”. The last phrase is easily understood as meaning Adam was “the son of God”, in the sense of being created by God. However, it could also be interpreted as the final entry in the list of “son of” entries of Jesus’ ancestors, i.e., Jesus is not only a descendant from Adam downwards, he is also the literal descendant of God!
• God would have a son. Of course this son will be great! He was a normal human being in every respect, except God was his literal Fathercli. This is the man God said He would raise up to deliver all other human beings from their bondage to sin and ultimate perdition. What a plan!

#3 - John 18:37 – born king of Jews

The context of this verse is when Jesus has been brought to the Roman governor to hear the accusations of the Jewish religious authorities. On hearing their charges, Pilate now goes in to confront the accused:

33 Pilate entered the praetorium again and called Jesus, and said to him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" 34 Jesus answered, "Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?" 35 Pilate answered, "Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have handed you over to me; what have you done?" 36 Jesus answered, "My kingship is not of this world; if my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight, that I might not be handed over to the Jews; but my kingship is not from the world." 37 Pilate said to him, "So you are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is of the truth hears my voice."

Points:

• The interchange in vv. 33-36 reads like real-life drama, which of course it was. Pilate’s repeated question in v.37 led to Jesus declaring that he was born king.
• Being born king was a fact of lineage, since his ancestor David was king and of the royal tribe of Judah (Gen 49:10).
• Being born king of the Jews was also a future role to be fulfilled literally in the city of Zion, i.e., Jerusalem which is built on Mt. Zion (Ps 2:6-11).

So What:

• Jesus was born of a woman who came from the lineage of David. This is a very important point, as verified in Mt 1:1, Lk 2:4, Rom 1:3 and Acts 2:30. Jesus is that special descendant [offspring, seed] mentioned in God’s promises to David. See the clarity and significance of that prophecy as recorded in 1 Chronicles chapter 17:

  11 When your days are fulfilled to go to be with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, one of your own sons, and I will establish his kingdom. 12 He shall build a house for me, and I will establish his throne for ever. 13 I will be his father, and he shall be my son; I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from him who was before you, 14 but I will confirm him in my house and in my kingdom for ever and his throne shall be established for ever.'"

• In Revelation 5:6, Jesus is presented as the sacrificial but conquering “Lamb of God” who died and lives again forever. In v.5, the Lamb is introduced as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David”. The first phrase makes connection with the kingly tribe; the second makes an interesting reversal: Jesus is the root, not the branch. It is the explanation for how Jesus, clearly a descendant of David, is really his Lord (cf. Mt 22:41-45).
• Jesus demonstrated his kingship during his 3½ -year ministry to the people of Israel in the first century. However, that was just a taste of what he will do when he returns and sets up the Kingdom of Godclii on earth. [More details on this subject will be discussed in Chapters 9 and 10.]
• Jesus was born a Jew. He was born a king. Therefore he is king of the Jews. He is still alive, and plans to make his kingship on earth in Jerusalem a reality. The Jews will have no choice in this matter, and a few of them will see Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah. Though there will be resistance (e.g., Psalm 2), the Gentile nations will also have no choice in this matter when Jesus takes over the rulership of the entire world. Disciples of Jesus will see this reign of Christ the King as being the fulfillment of Daniel 2:44, 7:13-14, 27 and Revelation 11:15-18.
• Jesus’ kingship would extend far beyond Jerusalem and the Kingdom of God would fill not only the whole land of Israel but the whole world (e.g., Is 2:2-4, 9:6-7, 11:1-11)! See how the Isaiah 9 passage ties a son’s birth to David’s throne and kingdom, both accomplished by “the zeal of the LORD”:

  6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David, and over his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and for evermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this. (Isaiah 9)

• This is really exciting information for faithful believers, since Jesus promised to share his reign with those “who conquer and who keep my works until the end” (Rev 2:26-27, 3:21, 5:9-10, 20:4). It is also a clear and powerful warning to those who have drifted away from the teaching of Scripture as well as those who are living without any intention of serving God now or then. They will be punished and destroyed! (e.g., Mt 24:48-51, 25:41-46, Rev 19:19-21, 20:7-15).
• Jesus told Pilate the governor that his kingship was utterly different than that experienced in the Roman world (Jn 18:36). Earlier, he instructed his disciples on what they must accept if they were to be servant-rulers in the Kingdom:

  25 But Jesus called them to him and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. 26 It shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever would be first among you must be your slave; 28 even as the Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

• Jesus taught and practiced this servant-leadership. He expected his disciples to follow the same path and take the same course of action (e.g., Mt 10:16-39, 24:9-13) and they did (e.g., Acts 5:27- 33, 26:16-18). That expectation is the same for disciples today. If a disciple of Christ wants to imitate his Lord, then he must be serving now in this life, so that he can serve forever in the Kingdom, as Jesus will be (cf. Lk 12:37). God, the ultimate Ruler, will still be a serving God in the Kingdom. He remains the Sustainer of all life, the Provider for mankind, and Dad of His family.

#4 - Galatians 4:4 – born of woman ... under the law

The context of this verse is Paul setting up an argument for why the Galatian believers must not go back to the law of Moses.

4 But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons

Points:

• “born of woman” is a clear, unambiguous statement. Mary was the woman.
• “born under the law” is also a simple statement of fact. Mary was a Jewess, Jesus was her boy, and both were obliged to keep the law of Moses.
• Jesus was obligated to keep the law of Moses, and he did. But he went much, much further. Instead of an animal sacrifice, Jesus made a voluntary, single sacrifice of himself (Heb 9:12, 26) that God would use to justify those who had faith. Works of the law could justify no one (Gal 2:16).
• “adoption as sons” alludes to being legally-recognized as part of another family. In this case, it means to stop being a slave under the law of Moses, which could not promise life, and start being a person free to serve Christ – who did promise life! There was not only a switch of masters, from Sin to God (Rom 6:11-22) but an elevation of status from slave to son (Rom 8:14-16). See the following table.

  Freedom in Christ	Law of Moses
  does promise life	could not promise life
  commanded to follow, freedom of a son	obliged to keep, bondage of a slave
  if break command, need to repent of sin, still considered to be ‘in Christ’	if break one law, guilty of all, but can be reinstated
  reality: can follow Christ’s example	reality: cannot keep this law
  the pleasure of grace	the sense of guilt
  the prospect of eternal LIFE	the prospect of eternal DEATH

So What:

• God is the Redeemer, while Jesus is the means of redemption. God’s plan required a man under the law, so Jesus was born of Mary.
• The law could not save. Those who were redeemed from its bondage now became eligible for inclusion into God’s family. The metaphor is that of purchasing a slave from its owner, and then giving it liberty with the opportunity to accept adoption into the family of a new master. The means of this accomplishment is by faith in Jesus, “for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God through faith” (Gal 3:26). They were no longer slaves, but sons; and if a son, then an heir (Gal 4:6-7).
• This change in relationship with God is a tremendous privilege, to be enjoyed by Jew and Gentile alike. Participating in this relationship requires the act of baptism, and the outcome of the association makes the person an heir to the promise God gave to Abraham (Gal 3:27-29). Note the conditional statement: “if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise”.
• In describing salvation in Christ, Scripture uses different metaphors and words to capture the richness and significance of how God is showing His mercy. Here are some scenarioscliii:

  Scenario	Word Used
  An accused person; a guilty person	Justification
  An estranged person; an enemy	Reconciliation
  A debtor, who cannot pay	Forgiveness
  A slave, serving the wrong ‘master’	Redemption
  An orphan, with no hope/inheritance; a redeemed slave	Adoption
  Common, ordinary...[need something special]	Sanctification
  Unclean, impure...[need cleansing]	Purification
  In trouble or danger...[need deliverance]	Salvation

• “born of woman” is confirmation of how Jesus fulfilled the prophecy about ‘the seed of the woman’ (cf. Gen 3: 15). Discussion of the passage was done earlier in Chapter 2, Reference #4, under So What.
• There is an evident tie to the symbolic passage in Revelation 12:1-7, which speaks of a pregnant woman (threatened by a hostile serpentcliv) who gives birth to a male child. This child was to “rule the nations with a rod of iron”, a detail that is said to apply to Jesus (Rev 19:15, Ps 2:9). He was also “caught up to God”, a phrase comparable to the ascension of Jesus to God’s right handclv. Here’s what verse 5 says, but you should read the entire passage for yourself.

  5 she brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,

• Mary is the mother of Jesus, not God. She existed prior to Jesus’ conception, as implied by the term “mother”. This makes sense. Those who argue for a triune God regard Mary as mother of the human Jesus, but not the divine Jesus. This line of reasoning quickly turns into non-senseclvi.
• Mary was a faithful, but ordinary woman. The Roman Catholic Church seeks to pay special honor to her, and in fact worship her. This is not Bible teaching, but church traditionclvii. Not only is the worship of Mary misguided, it is wrong because it sets up someone other that God as the One to worshipclviii. To ensure that Jesus could not be defiled by being born of Mary, Catholics claim she had an ‘immaculate conception’, i.e., there was no uncleanness or sin in herclix. This teaching is not found in Scripture. Finally, the Catholic doctrine of ‘perpetual virginity’clx deduces that Mary had no other children. That teaching is flatly contradicted by the Bible text (cf. Mt 1:25, 15:55-56).

  Teaching Position on Mary

  Bible Teaching	Catholic Teaching
  no special conception	immaculate conception
  had several children (both sexes)	no children besides Jesus
  died, remains dead untilresurrection	died, went to heaven
  just a "saint" like all other believers	an object of worship

  Catholic teaching is obviously at odds with the teaching of Scripture.

• Because Mary was a Jew, Jesus was born a Jew. Jesus lived and died as a Jew. God deliberately made Jesus to be of that race. Let the reader understand: Jesus the Christ was a Jewclxi. He was not white European, black African or brown Indian. He was not Anglo-Saxon, Hispanic or Chinese. He was not a Gentile but a Jew, a race of people despised, hated, slandered, oppressed, persecuted and killed by Gentiles from the time of Mosesclxii up until today. Why do men so dislike the Jews? Many reasons are given, but the truth of the matter was predicted in Scripture long agoclxiii. The good news is that God does not make race or color a criterion when offering eternal life through His Son Jesus.

• “Anti-Semitism” [“semite” comes from “Shem” – one of Noah’s three sons – Gen 6: 10] is a word used today to refer to racial hatred against the Jews. Whether it actually occurs is hardly debated; it is manifest in many ways by many nations. In the past, Christian Gentiles had often called the Jews ‘Christ killers’ – a cursed people deserving of persecution and elimination. Such Gentiles [who carry the Christian label] seem to forget that the Lord Jesus was not only a Jew, but he instructed his followers to forgive their enemies. Being Anti-Semitic is wrong. The term “Jew” is derived from “Judah”, one of 12 sons of a man God called “Israel”. [At birth, this man was named “Jacob”.] Scripture teaches that God knew that the descendants of Israel (including Judah) were a stubborn, rebellious people (Dt 31:27-29). They would easily and quickly corrupt themselves and become the object of His discipline. That race eventually would put Jesus to death – the Messiah sent to save them from their sins. How tragic! However, the Gentiles were equally involved in that killing (cf. Acts 4: 25-28). Thus there is no basis in believing that only Jews should be cursed, since Gentiles also share the blame.

  All men, regardless of race or color or upbringing, are wayward, sinful people who need the deliverance provided in Jesus Christ (Rom 3:20-24). The good news is: God is still calling out to people to believe in His Son and join the family.

#5 - Matthew 1:23, Isaiah 7:17 – born of a virgin

The first reference is part of the story which describes events leading up to the birth of Jesus. The second reference is the OT source of the quote.

18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit; 19 and her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. 20 But as he considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit; 21 she will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins." 22 All this took place to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: 23 "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel" (which means, God with us). 24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took his wife, 25 but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.

Points:

• This account in Matthew dovetails with the details in Luke’s account. The child is “of the Holy Spirit”. Mary is a “virgin”. She is “betrothed” to Joseph, and thus is his intended wife.
• In this passage, the angel speaks to Joseph instead of Mary. It makes sense that he gets direct divine information of this unique conception, so that he will not divorce her. Joseph believes the message, and obeys it. Presumably, part of the angel’s instructions to Joseph was to have no sexual relations with Mary until after Jesus was born.
• Since the record of Joseph awakening does not occur until v. 24, it means that the citation from the prophet Isaiah was part of the dream. He now understood that this amazing prophecy about a virgin conceiving was literal, not symbolic.
• In Luke, the given name is “Jesus”. Here in Matthew, an extra statement provides the significance of that name: “for he will save his people from their sins”.
• The Matthew account also states that Jesus will be given a second name of significance: “Emmanuel, which means ‘God with us’”.

So What:

• The prophecy in Isaiah 7:17 was literally fulfilled. Since He knows all things and inspired the prophets, God can have the exact words He wants conveyed written down. The apostle Peter wrote about this kind of certainty in 2Pet 1:19-21 – its rightness and fulfillment are to be trusted.
• There are two New Testament accounts of the “virgin birth” of Jesus, and one Old Testament prediction that has the equivalence of “virgin birth” in its words. Thus there are three independent sources that present this fact about Jesus. Therefore, it must be accepted as truth.
• When I was 18 and home from college one weekend, I went to speak with the Anglican minister in town. Having been a former member of that congregation, it was easy to initiate a discussion with the new minister, who fancied himself a ‘modern thinker’. By this he meant he belonged to the school of ‘higher critics’, scholars who examined the Bible text in depth, and came away with ‘insights’ not easily found by the ‘amateur’ Bible student – like me. In short, he said he did not believe in the virgin birth of Jesus. Why? Because it would mean God intervening in the course of human history, and it would be a miracle. He did not believe in miracles, regarding them as quaint religious ideas for the immature and ignorant – like me, presumably. And, it turned out, he did not believe in the existence of God, much less His interest in humankind. What a shock! Here was a minister of a major Protestant Christian church who was an atheistclxiv! Conclusion: be a competent Bible student and let the Bible speak for itself.
• In pursuing a degree in honors Mathematics with a major in Computer Science, I took two courses on “Philosophy of Religion” at the university. I was a member of “Intervarsity Christian Fellowship”, an ostensibly non-denominational student group. Three experiences about truth-seeking are relevant to recount here:
  1. Bible not allowed – In the 101 course, we debated the existence of God. The professor initially welcomed all input to the debate, until it became evident that the Bible taken solely as an information source [with no claim of authority] was still a powerful piece of evidence for the existence of a Creator God. Since this was not the conclusion to be reached in his class, citing the Bible as evidence was outlawed in discussion and was explicitly forbidden as a reference source on the exam paper.
  2. Old Testament not used – During one of the Intervarsity Bible reading sessions, we had just read chapter 9 in Romans. I suggested that it would be profitable to research the OT cross references to verses 4-5, which provided the basis for the subsequent discussion on Abraham and the nation of Israel. No one else thought that was a good idea. Why? Because that was OT stuff and thus not needed for New Testament people!

  3. Isaiah not written by Isaiah – During an off-campus discussion with an adult church instructor, the conversation turned to the book of Isaiah. He asserted that modern scholarship had proven that the 66 chapters that were attributed to the prophet Isaiah were in fact not written by Isaiah at all! I had never heard that before. So asked him how he knew. He said he learned it at seminary school. I asked what the evidence was. He cited the work of the higher critics and their argument for multiple authors. I asked what the actual proof was. He said it was evident from the different styles and word choice. I replied that I used different styles and words in the same research paper, but I was still the only author.

     He then asked me what my case was for the single author being Isaiah. I said that while there was a clear change in style after chapter 39, the remaining 27 chapters talked about the same issues, hopes, and purpose of God for Israel. A simple comparative analysis of content in the two sections would clearly show high co-relation and thus prove single authorship. Moreover, NTclxv quotes from Is 6 & 53 attribute both to Isaiah. He said he had never heard that before, and indicated I had made my case!

#6 - John 3:16 – the only-begotten son of God

This verseclxvi comes immediately after Jesus’ discussion with Nicodemus, “the teacher in Israel”. The words may still be those of Jesus, or the beginning of a comment by the apostle John.

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.

Points:

• “gave his only Son” is a poor translation in this Revised Standard Version. The Greek word monogene is better translated “only begotten Son”, the wording found in the King James Version. This term conveys the idea of one-and-only, which is true of Jesus. He was the only human conceived this way, and the only man declared to be the Son of God.
• “be saved through him” is the outcome reflected in the meaning of Jesus’ name.
• “perish” means more than to simply die; it indicates facing eternal oblivion and being nothing forever.
• It is the love of God that compelled Him to send Jesus to the Jewish world to deliver them from their sins. Gentiles would also be given the good news that they would have the same opportunity to believe and so be saved.

So What:

• “only begotten” is concrete proof that God intervened in the world of mankind. While it may be a challenge for the naturally-skeptical human mind to believe in this teaching, it makes absolute sense for God to provide a unique birth for a unique purpose. Also, what better way to show His kind of love for human beings than to send His literal son into their midst – knowing they would kill himclxvii, but knowing it was the singular way to elicit their conviction and repentance.
• Because Jesus was literally the Son of God, he would want to obeyclxviii. Scripture indicates that God talked with his son every day – would that not be His duty and joy? Passages such as Is 50:4-9, Ps 40:6-8, and Heb 10:5-9 indicate that such interaction and a father’s instruction would establish the way Jesus was able to identify potential sin and then choose to overcome it.
• Besides Bible Christianity, no other world religion has a solution for man’s sinfulness and his inevitable perdition. Other than God-inspired Scripture, no writing of man comes even close to explaining why we exist, and why God had to intervene with His own special Son to reconcile humankind to their Creator. While it is humanly impossible for a virgin to give birth, it is definitely possible with God. It is presented as a fact in Scripture.
• Since God has done such a thing, it becomes easier to expect that He would also be prepared to have His only beloved Son die, and then be resurrected to eternal life, in order to get mankind’s attentionclxix. God would let them see how they too can overcome sin and death, through faith in the man Jesus the Christ.

Conclusion

Jesus was a descendant of both king David and the patriarch Abraham (Mt 1:1). As shown in the family tree given in Luke 3:23-38, Jesus was also an offspring from the first man Adam and his wife Eve. Like every other human being since creation, Jesus was born of a woman. His mother Mary was a virgin, and it was by the power of the Holy Spirit of God that Jesus was conceived. Thus Jesus was the “only-begotten” Son of God. This unique event was a necessary first step in God’s plan to save the world, both Jew and Gentile, both men and women, from sin and perdition.

The diagram below illustrates what true teaching about Jesus is for, and thus what false teachings must be contended against.

Questions:

1. What other ‘miracles’ were done by God to help people believe in such things as the virgin birth?
2. Why would Jesus be given the second name “Emmanuel”? How did he live up to this name?
3. Jesus is a son. God is his father. Clearly there is a father-son relationship here. In the ordinary meaning of the words – as understood on a human level and as taught in Scripture – the father exists before his son is brought into existence by means of some action by the father. Then why use Father and Son terms in the doctrine of a triune God, if those two beings always existed together? Furthermore, when God-the-Holy-Spirit is brought into the relationship of the God-the-Son and God-the-Father beings, what is the appropriate label to use? “Grandfather”? I am not really looking for an answer here, but just trying to demonstrate how rigorously looking at the triune relationship and finding suitable labels quickly runs into brick walls.
4. Why is the lineage connection with king David so important?
5. How might you have to change your thinking to “get it right with Jesus”?

The reader is encouraged to ponder and then answer these questions. If desired, send the answers to the author, whose home address and e-mail address can be found in the Foreword. A response to your effort is promised.

Further Investigation:

1. Look in the Appendix for Strong’s Concordance analysis about the following words: redemption, reconciliation, perdition
2. At the time of writing, there was a most interesting web site featuring the writing [updated 2006] of Mary Ann Collins, a former nun. Her study paper title was “Mary Worship?” and sub-titled “A Study of Catholic Practice and Doctrine”.

The url was: http://www.catholicconcerns.com/MaryWorship.html

Make Your Notes

[Back to top]

End Notes