Christology : Incarnation and Virgin Birth

Introduction:  In this paper we will deal with incarnation and virgin birth of Jesus.  The first part of the paper will dwell on the incarnation and the later portion will contain the virgin birth of Jesus

1. Incarnation: The idea that God or the gods have made themselves present amongst men in human form is widespread in the history of religion.  The Christian doctrine of the Incarnation represents this strand in its most highly developed form.  This central Christian doctrine states that God, in one of the modes of his triune being and without in any way ceasing to be God, has revealed himself to mankind for their salvation by coming amongst them as a man.  The man Jesus is held to be the Incarnate Word or Son of God.

             A.   The subject of incarnation:  It was not the triune God but the second person of the Trinity that assumes human nature.  For that reason it is better to say that the Word became flesh that that God became man.  At the same time we should remember that each of the divine persons was active in the incarnation (Mt.1:20; Lk.1:35; Jn.1:14; Acts 2:30; Rom.8:3; Gal.4:4; Phil.2:70.  This also means that the incarnation was not something that merely happened to the Logos, but was an active accomplishment on his part.  In speaking of the incarnation in distinction from the birth of the Logos, his active participation in this historical fact is stressed, and his pre-existence is assumed.  It is not possible to speak of the incarnation of one who had no previous existence.  This pre-existence is clearly taught in Scripture (Jn.1:1; 6:38; 2 Cor.8:9; Phil.2:6-7; Gal.4:4).  The pre-existent Son of God assumes human nature and takes to himself human flesh and blood, a miracle that passes our limited understanding.  It clearly shows that the infinite can and does enter into finite relations, and that the supernatural can in some way enter the historical life of the world.

             B   The necessity of the incarnation: Since the days of Scholsticism the question: whether the incarnation should be regarded as involved in the idea of redemption, or as already involved in the idea of creation, has been debated.  Popularly stated, the question was, whether the Son of God would have come in the flesh even if man had not sinned.  Rupert of Deutz was the first to assert that the Son of God would have become incarnate irrespective of sin.  This view was shared by Alexander of Hales and Duns Scotus, but Thomas Acquinas took the position that the reason for the incarnation lay in the entrance of sin into the world.  The Reformers shared this view, and the Churches of the Reformation teach that the incarnation was necessitated by the fall of man.  Some Lutheran and Reformed scholars, however, were of the contrary opinion.  They said incarnation must have been included in the original plan of God.  If a Mediator is necessary now, he must have been necessary also before the fall.  However, it should be noted that Scripture invariably represents the incarnation as conditioned by human sin.  The force of such passages as Lk.19:10; Jn.3:16; Gal.4:4; 1 Jn.3:8; Phil.2:5-11 is not easily broken.

             C.  The method of incarnation:         

                             (i)  Virgin birth:  The Church Confession affirms that the human nature of Christ was “conceived in the womb of the blessed virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Ghost, without the means of man.” 

                             (ii) Not his origin, but simply the door of entrance:The Church Confession emphasizes the fact that the birth of Christ was not at all an ordinary but a supernatural birth, in virtue of which He was called “the Son of God.”  So it is not original but simply an entrance to enter the world.  God used the Blessed Virgin Mary’s womb without using sinful seed.  The most important element in connection with the birth of Jesus was the supernatural operation of the Holy Spirit, for it was only through this that the virgin birth became possible (Mt.1:18-20; Lk.1:34-35; Heb.10:5).

             D. Changes involved in incarnation:            

                             (i)  The Word (Logos) became flesh (Jn.1:14):The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.  When we are told that the Word became flesh, this does not mean that the Logos ceased to be what he was before.  As to his essential being the Logos was exactly the same before and after the incarnation.  The verb egeneto in Jn.1:14 (the Word became flesh) does not mean that the Logos changed into flesh, and thus altered his essential nature, but simply that he took on that particular character, that he acquired an additional form, without in any way changing his original nature.  He remained the infinite and unchangeable Son of God.  Again, the statement that the Word became flesh does not mean that he took on a human person.  The word sarx (flesh) here denotes human nature, consisting of body and soul.  The word is used in a somewhat similar sense in Rom.8:3; 1 Tim.3:16; 1 Jn.4:2; 2 Jn.7).

                             (ii)  From heaven to earth (Jn.6:51): He is the living bread coming down from heaven to earth in order to give his life for the world.  Providing eternal life would be costly to the giver.

                             (iii)  From riches to poverty (Lk.9:58; 2 Cor8:9):Though he was rich, yet for the sake of sinners he became poor (he has no place to lay his head on earth), so that through his poverty the sinners might become rich. (The change temporary)

                             (iv)  From glory to obscurity (Jn.1:10; 17:5): (The change temporary)

             E.  The purpose of incarnation:

                             (i)  The Logos became flesh in order to die for sinners and to save them from their sin (Mt.1:21).  Spirit cannot die but the body dies.  So the Son of God has to become flesh to die for the sinners.

                             (ii)  That he might share with men his own eternal life (Jn.10:10)

                             (iii)That he might know human life from the inside by personal experience (Heb.2:1-7). He took on exactly what we are.  He knows everything-sorrow, pain, sickness. 

                             (iv) That he might reveal himself the ideal humanity (1 Jn.2:6; 3:2; 1 Pet.2:21).  People think that human being is sinner.  Jesus is human being but not a sinner. He represented the ideal human being.  One day our sin will be removed and we will be like Jesus.  Though we are sinful now, we will be like Jesus someday.

                             (v)That he might show us an everlasting revelation of God in visible human form (Jn.1:18; 20:28; Col.1:15).  The people of Israel worshipped idols for some time.  They wanted to see God in visible form. They said, “Show us God.” 2000 years ago God appeared in a visible form in Jesus; in that human being the divine attributes are present.  That is,     divine attributes are there in Jesus.  From now on, you can never say: ‘Show us God.’  Invisible God appears in a visible God in Jesus.

2.The Virgin Birth:

             A. Introduction:  Liberal theologians will not accept Jesus’ incarnation and and virgin birth.  We have here some arguments:

                             (i)   The arguments against the virgin birth:

                             (a) Virgin birth mentioned in only two gospels: Matthew and Luke.

                             (b)  Matthew and Luke contradict each other.                                                       
                             (c)  Other NT writers knew nothing about it.                
                             (d)          No practical value and not essential for life.

             B. Church Confession onVirgin Birth: The Church Confession affirms that the human nature of Christ was “conceived in the womb of the blessed virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Ghost, without the means of man.”  This emphasizes the fact that the birth of Christ was not t all an ordinary but a supernatural birth, in virtue of which Jesus was called ‘the Son of God.’  The most important in regard with the birth of Jesus was the supernatural operation of the Holy Spirit, because it was only through this that the virgin birth became possible (Mt.1:18-20; Lk.1:34-35; Heb.10:5).  The work of the Holy Spirit in connection with the conception of Jesus was twofold as given below:

                             (i)  Efficient cause:The Holy Spirit was the efficient cause of what was conceived in the womb of Mary, and thus excluded the activity of man as an efficient factor.  This was entirely in harmony with the fact that the person who was born was not a human person, but the person of the Son of God, who as such was not included in the covenant of works and was in himself free from the guilt of sin.

                             (ii) Sanctification: The Holy Spirit sanctified the human nature of Christ in its very inception, and thus kept it free from the pollution of sin.  We cannot say exactly how the Holy Spirit accomplished this sanctifying work, because it is not yet sufficiently understood just how the pollution of sin ordinarily passes from parent to child.  It should be noted, however, that the sanctifying influence of the Holy Spirit was not limited to the conception of Jesus, but was continued throughout his life (Jn.3:34; Heb.9:4).

             C.  Virgin Birth in the Scripture:

                             (i)  Virgin birth in OT:

                                             (a)  The seed of woman (Gen.3:15)

                                             (b)  The virgin birth was a predicted sign (Isa.7:14)

                             (ii) Virgin birth in NT:

                                             (a) Mt.1:18-2:1 “of whom” refers to a feminine. Joseph says he is not responsible for the child.

                                             (b) Lk.1:26-28; 2:1-11, 21.  Mary claims to be chaste.

             D. Virgin birth in the Church history:The Christian Church always believed in the virgin birth of Christ from the very beginning until now. The denial of the virgin birth is a recent development only in the last 150 years ago.  It is not the issue of virgin birth but the issue of theism.  If we believe in the existence of God, there is no point of impossibility of the virgin birth.

             E. Importance of virgin birth:

                             (i) Essential to the trustworthiness of the Gospel records.

                             (ii) Vital relation to his sinless nature.

(iii)  Virgin birth gives only reasonable explanation of the incarnation of Christ.

(iv)  Virgin birth protects Christ and his mother from the blasphemous alternatives. Joseph denies any procreative responsibility for this child.  Mary denies any unfaithfulness to her fiancé.

(v)   Virgin birth completes the picture of his supernatural life on earth.