Virgin birth

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mosaics of the Annunciation in the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Kiev

In ancient times, the virgin birth is a common narrative . Christian theology in particular describes the conception of Jesus by the Holy Spirit and his birth from the Virgin Mary , which some verses of the New Testament (NT) proclaim as a miracle of God, as a virgin birth. Since the 2nd century this has been a creed of Christianity in all three early church creeds , including the Apostolicum :

"... received by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary ..."

The Catholic and Orthodox churches also teach the perpetual virginity of Mary before, during and after the birth of Jesus. The virgin birth is to be distinguished from the teaching of the immaculate conception of Mary.

New Testament

Matthew and Luke

The birth of Jesus from a virgin is told in Mt 1.18–25  EU and Lk 1.26–35  EU in the context of other texts on Jesus' origin. Below are two lists of ancestors . These paternal lineages emphasize Jesus' origins from the chosen people of Israel and lead to Joseph . While in the list of Matthew 39 times in a row it says that the father “fathered” the son (Greek active: ἐγέννησεν egénnēsen ), Luke emphasizes that Jesus “brought forth from Mary” (passive: ἐγεννήθη egennḗthe , but not ἐτέχθη etéchthē , "born") was:

“Jacob became the father of Joseph, Mary's husband; of her was born Jesus, who is called the Christ. "

- Mt 1.16  EU

"He was considered the son of Joseph."

- Lk 3.23  EU

Then the Gospel of Matthew states that Jesus was the Messiah, although he was not a physical descendant of King David . After all, according to the prophetic announcement, he was born in the city of David ( Mt 2,1-11  EU ). Joseph, a descendant of David, was Jesus' foster father; he looked after Mary so as not to shame or cast off his pregnant fiancée. Mary received through the work of the Holy Spirit, cited Mt 1,23  EU as a biblical promise according to the Septuagint and with the addition of the name explanation:

“Διὰ τοῦτο δώσει κύριος αὐτὸς ὑμῖν σημεῖον ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν κοητηντνταμτοητη καντεομτη κοητυτνταμοητη κοητυτντλὸεοαμτη κτντητητοητυτητντητοητη κοητυτητὸτοητη κοητυτστα κοητητηττα κοητυ κλμτη κοητυ κλμτη κοητυ κλμτυτοητυ κοητυτστα ”ομτη κοτυττα υαὸν κοητινταὸε”

"That is why the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will conceive and give birth to a son and will call his name Immanuel."

- Isaiah 7:14  LXX ELB

In the version of Matthew (Mt 1,23) the quote reads:

“Ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Έμομανοήλ, ὁ ἡστενενεθεθεθε ἡσότνεμνμνεθεν σότνενενεθενεθενεθενενεθενεθενεθενεθεθενεθενεθεθενεθενεθενεθενεθεν ΄εσμτενενεθενενεθενενεθενεθενεθενε ἐἡσμτενενεθενεθε ἐ΄σμτεε”

“Behold, the virgin will be with child and give birth to a son, and they will call his name Emmanuel, which is translated: God with us.”

- Novum Testamentum Graece : Novum testamentum Graece et Latine / Mt 1.23  ELB

This was literally fulfilled because Joseph had no sexual intercourse with Mary before Jesus was born ( Mt 1.25  EU ).

In Luke 1.26ff, an angel announces the birth of the Messiah to Mary. When she asked how this is possible with an untouched woman (v.34), the angel points out the creative power of the Holy Spirit (v.35). This surpasses God's appropriate intervention in the life of Mary's friend (v.36ff.). In contrast to Zacharias (v.18ff.) Mary accepted the angel's message in obedient faith (v.38). Then she is blessed (v.45) and thanks God with a hymn of praise for the grace of the Messiah's birth (v.46-55).

Both birth stories share common motifs:

  • Joseph and Mary are engaged, not married,
  • Joseph is the descendant of King David,
  • an angel announces the birth of Jesus,
  • this is received or created by the Holy Spirit,
  • he is the Son of God with an unsurpassable, ultimate commission from God for all Israel and all peoples.

The evangelists use these statements in the context of theological statements about Jesus' identity and mission: He would redeem his people from their sins (Mt 1:21), he would be the only and unique Son of God (Lk 1:35) and Lord (Lk 1 , 43). Her reports about his subsequent life no longer explicitly refer to a virgin birth. Texts such as Mt 12: 46–50, Lk 2: 22–52 and John 2: 1–11 speak impartially of Jesus' parents and at the same time distance him from them - alluding to his completely different origins.

According to Ulrich Luz , the “prophecy evidence” in Mt 1.22 f. exegetically not tenable, since the Hebrew Alma in Isa 7:14 clearly does not mean an untouched woman. The Jewish exegesis, according to which the birth of a king was announced here, was always justified. Some Roman Catholic theologians, such as Hans Küng , also followed this view.

On the other hand, the Old Testament scholar Otto Kaiser is different : he is of the opinion that the Hebrew Alma , which was rendered as Parthenos in the translation of the Hebrew text into Greek , does not consistently designate a young wife who has not yet given birth, but rather in Genesis 24:43 is applied to a young woman (Rebekah) who is still unmarried; He is of the opinion that the Hebrew word Alma designates a young woman in the period between sexual maturity and first conception, so that the Greek translation Parthenos ("virgin") does justice to the Hebrew word Alma .

Even the Reformed theologian Karl Barth referred in his Church Dogmatics exegetical knowledgeable in clearer delineation of liberal theology, the virgin birth of Jesus as miracle actually basic premise of the talk of the divine sonship was Christ. In his view, it was less an exegetical than a theological problem, since the various theologians approached the biblical text with different worldviews.

Remaining New Testament Scriptures

The other scriptures of the NT do not mention the virgin birth of Jesus. The Gospel of Mark calls Jesus from the beginning the Son of God ( Mk 1.1  EU ) but not reported his birth. Mark 1.11  EU emphasizes the divine election of the adult Jesus at his baptism with allusions to Hosea 11.1  EU and 2 Samuel 7.14  EU : “You are my beloved son”. Accordingly, Jesus represents the already chosen people of Israel and, as the designated Messiah, embodies God's new act of liberation for this people. According to Mark 6.3  EU , he was known in Nazareth as the “son of Mary” and had siblings .

According to Gal 4,4  EU , Jesus was "born of a woman [γυνή, gynḗ ]". According to Rom 1,3  EU he is a "descendant of David". In Joh 1,45  EU a disciple calls Jesus "son of Joseph" after knowing his messianship. Jn 7.42  EU emphasizes that the Messiah descends from David , as predicted in the Old Testament . Rev 12,1.5  EU speaks of his birth from a "woman" who appears symbolically in heaven.

Teaching development

Old church

In patristicism , the belief in Mary's virginity developed into a doctrine ( dogma ) in two variants:

  • Mary received Jesus as a virgin through the Holy Spirit and did not associate with any man before Jesus was born.
  • She remained a virgin during and after the birth of Jesus and was only married to Joseph by name ( Joseph's marriage ).

Both views coexisted; the second only became a dogmatic point of contention since the 6th century - see also the perpetual virginity of Mary .

Ignatius of Antioch was the first to speak of Mary's “virginity” (Greek παρθενία parthenía ) and her “giving birth” (τόκος tókos ), which God performed “in silence”, so that this miracle remained hidden from the “prince of this world” . He was the first to introduce this motif into the regula fidei , the doctrinal summary of the Christian message.

Justin the Martyr , in his dialogue with the Jew Tryphon (written 155–160), was the first to deal with Jewish opposition to the belief in Jesus' virgin birth. He interpreted Isa 7: 10–17 as their prediction for the “Christian believers” and set the Septuagint translation of this passage against the Hebrew original text and the Septuagint revisions of Theodotion , Aquila and Symmachus , the alma in Isa 7:14 with Greek νεᾶνις neánis ( young woman, girl), not translated with παρθένος parthénos (virgin). With reference to the Persian legend, he emphasized that only Jesus Christ had ever proclaimed a virgin birth. He explained this with his preexistence to overcome original sin (Gen 3):

“Anyone who did that which is general, by nature and eternally good, is pleasing to God and will therefore be ranked through our Christ at the resurrection [...] in the number of those who recognized the Son of God in our Christ, who was before Lucifer and was before the moon and who through the mentioned virgin from the house of David wanted to accept flesh and be born, so that through this fact of salvation the serpent, the wrongdoer in primeval times, and the like-minded angels would be struck down and death would lose its prestige. "

Christ thus became the antype of Adam, Mary the antype of Eve.

Gnostics like Kerinth and Carpocrates denied the virgin birth. Some groups of Jewish Christians, such as the authors of the pseudo-Clement letters, saw him as a purely human, naturally begotten Messiah. In doing so, they relied on the revisions of the Septuagint . Opposite them, Irenaeus of Lyons made belief in the virgin birth in his treatise Adversos haereses (around 180) the criterion for true Christianity and declared those who contested it to be heretics , equating Gnostics and Jewish Christians, whom he called Ebionites . Unlike Justin, he excluded these from Christianity. Jerome passed this verdict against the Nazarene , although these other Jewish Christians believed in the virgin birth of Jesus.

Around 300 the new expression " Theotokos " ( Θεοτόκος Theotókos , Latin Dei genitrix ) became common for Mary in prayers and liturgical texts. As a result, some theologians warned against worshiping Mary as a goddess next to Jesus. Ambrose of Milan wrote:

“Don't let anyone distract you from the Virgin. Mary was the temple of God, not the god of the temple; consequently only he who was active in the temple is to be worshiped. "

Athanasius emphasized: "Mary is our sister, since we are all from Adam." So she is just as dependent on redemption through Jesus Christ as all other people.

Nestorius permitted the expression to the joyful devotee of Mary; "Only he should not make the virgin a goddess". In order to prevent this, he unsuccessfully suggested the alternative terms “recipient of God” and “the bearer of Christ”. Because of the dispute over these proposals, the Council of Ephesus was convened in 431 . There Cyril of Alexandria had Nestorius condemned as a heretic . The term Theotókos was dogmatized. In popular piety , Mary was now also referred to as “Mother of God”, “through whom the Holy Trinity is glorified […], through which the foundation stone for churches has been laid everywhere.”

The statement "born of" or "of the Virgin Mary" was included in the early church confessions, first the ancient Roman and Apostolic Creed. The Nicano-Constantinopolitanum emphatically excluded Mary's divinity:

"For us humans and for our salvation he came from heaven
, became flesh through the Holy Spirit from the Virgin Mary
and became man."

At the same time, the Council of Chalcedon in 451 affirmed the term Theotokos for Mary:

"Before all time he was begotten from the Father according to his divinity, but in the last days he was born for us for the sake of our salvation from Mary, the Virgin, the Mother of God, according to humanity."

The dogma of the virgin birth thus followed historically and logically the general church explanations on Christology and the doctrine of the Trinity : From the essential unity of the Eternal Son of God with God and his equally essential personal unity with the man Jesus, the necessity arose to accept his human nature in Mary's womb without to testify to any human activity. For those who believe in Jesus Christ, Mary was the one who gave the godlike Son of God his human nature by conceiving and giving birth as a virgin. This is why the Athanasian Creed said:

“He was created to God from the essence of the father from eternity, and man he was born from the essence of the mother in time.”

Inspired by the devotion to Mary and the liturgy , the Second Council of Constantinople in 553 formulated the following sentence:

"The Logos assumed flesh from the holy, glorious Theotokos and ever-maiden [ semper virgo ] Mary and was born of her."

The statement was intended to emphasize Mary's lifelong virtue, which corresponds to her role as the "Theotokos". This suggested that Mary had as much part in the making of Jesus Christ as God and remained as sinless as God.

Roman Catholic Church

Since, according to the old church, Jesus could only free all people from original sin as a completely sinless person, Mary, who gave him his humanity, must also have been sinless. The Lateran Synod in 649 under Pope Martin I therefore declared in Canon 3 the belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary and her immaculate conception ( immaculata conceptio ) as necessary for salvation:

"Whoever does not confess with the Holy Fathers in the actual and true sense of the holy and always virgin and immaculate Mary as the bearer of God, since she [...] the divine word itself, which was begotten by the Father before all time, in the last times, without seed, received from the Holy Spirit and gave birth unharmed, while her virginity remained unharmed even after the birth, let him be excluded. "

Jews have been persecuted by Christians for around 300 years, first in Spain since the 7th century and later in large parts of Europe because of their rejection of the virgin birth of Jesus (see anti-Judaism ). The translation of Isa 7:14 played a key role.

The doctrine of the immaculate conception relates to freedom from original sin during the (normal biological) conception of Mary in her mother's womb, not to the virgin birth of Jesus; these two dogmas are often confused.

In scholasticism in the 9th century, another dispute arose over this question: Paschasius Radbertus defended the integrity of the virginity of Mary after Jesus was born, whereas Ratramnus von Corbie taught a natural birth of Jesus after divine conception. In 1546 the Council of Trent reaffirmed the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. In 1854 Pope Pius IX dogmatized the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary.

Joseph Ratzinger , who later became Pope Benedict XVI., Took the view in 1968 that the conception of Jesus is not a conception by God, but a new creation: "God does not become the biological father of Jesus ...". Because this would mean that one would have to assume that Jesus was half God, half man. But his divinity does not make him less of a man. Ratzinger described it as always fundamental to the Christian faith that Jesus should be completely God and completely human.

1987 Uta Ranke-Heinemann of the Catholic Church ecclesiastical teaching license revoked after she publicly expressed that they do not believe in the virgin birth. In her 1992 work, No and Amen , the theologian again commented on this problem that it would be “a theological schizophrenia” if Catholics should say that Jesus was the son of David, but were never allowed to say that he was the son of Joseph, about whom alone he was the son of David.

Reformed churches

The reformers Martin Luther , Jean Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli adopted the ancient church doctrine of the virgin birth. Luther rejected the accusation of Catholic opponents that he denied them, in 1523 in his writing That Jesus Christ was a born Jew . With the Bible he established both Jesus' supernatural conception and his descent from Abraham, i.e. his Judaism. Alma in Isa 7:14 is to be translated as “virgin” and announces the birth of Jesus from a virgin. In contrast, the veneration of Mary as an everlasting virgin is idolatry. This teaching is unimportant for the belief in the Incarnation of the Son of God, since the Bible shows no interest in the question of whether Mary remained a virgin after Jesus was born. Therefore one should not make an article of faith out of it. In all Christian expressions of faith, the veneration of Christ should be striven for, not Mary primarily.

The Schmalkaldic Articles of 1537 reaffirmed the Apostolicum with the statement that the Son of God was "received by the Holy Spirit without masculine help and pored by the pure, Holy Virgin Mary"; the Latin text also adopted the perpetual virginity ( ex Maria pura, sancta, semper virgine nasceretur ). The formula of concord of 1577 declared that the Son of God had shown his divine majesty “in the womb that he was born of a virgin without penitence to her virginity; that is why she has truly remained God's mother and at the same time a virgin. "

Islam

In the Koran , Jesus is always called Isa bin Maryam ("Jesus, Son of Mary"). With this his divine descent is rejected. On the other hand, the virginity of Mary is taken over and emphasized ( Sura 19 : 17-21):

“She separated herself from them by a curtain, and We sent her Our Spirit, which appeared to her in the form of a well-formed person. She said: 'I ask God, the Merciful, to help you. You may be godly. ' 'I am a messenger from your Lord, so that I may bring you a pure son.' Then she said: 'How could I have a son where no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?' He replied, 'That's right. So said your master: 'It's easy for me. We make him a sign for people as a mercy from us. ' It's a done deal. "

The Holy Spirit, often in the form of the Archangel Gabriel in the Qur'an , brought this message to Mary: The Qur'an thus shares faith in Jesus' conception without a biological father as a miracle of God and a sign of his power.

“When the angels said, 'Mary! God proclaims a word of himself whose name is Jesus Christ, the son of Mary! He will be respected in this world and in the hereafter, one of those who are close (to God). And he will (already as a child) speak to people in the cradle, and (also later) as an adult, and (will) be one of the righteous. ' She said, 'Lord! How should I have a child where no man (yet) has touched me? ' He (i.e., the angel of the Annunciation or God?) Said, 'This is God's way (of doing). He creates what he wants. When he has decided on a thing, he just says to it: be !, then it is. And he will teach him the scriptures, the wisdom, the Torah and the gospel. '"

As with the creation of Adam , the first person who had no parents, God only said: “Be!” - and it was done (3:59). However, despite this divine origin, Jesus is not a god or part of God for Muslims and cannot be compared with him (see Tawheed ).

Modern questioning in the 19th century

The historically founded criticism of Christian doctrines ( dogmas ) that began in the Age of Enlightenment was also directed against the doctrine of the virgin birth. It was first formulated by the philosopher Bruno Bauer . The contradictions in the New Testament, insoluble in his view, made it necessary to regard the marriage of Jesus' parents as a normal marriage. It is also not known whether Jesus was the firstborn son.

David Friedrich Strauss has counted the virgin birth since 1835 among the mythical motifs that the early Christians had unintentionally forged in order to express their ideas. He named some of the exegetical objections that are customary to this day: The lists of ancestors are constructed, incompatible and only make sense if they originally wanted to express Jesus' natural son of David, i.e. Joseph's fatherhood. Mt and Lk had subsequently adapted this to the virgin birth motif they created (Mt 1.16; Lk 3.23). Their respective birth announcements are also incompatible and therefore without historical information value. Lk 1.32f. announce only the son of David in the sense of 2 Samuel 7:14 and Ps 2,7; those in Lk 1,34f. announced virgin birth of Jesus was added secondary. Matthew 1:21 also depicts Jesus' mission as messianic, so that the reception of the Spirit in v. 19 and the reflection quote from Isa 7:14 according to the LXX must come from the evangelist; he related it to Jesus in an out of context. The motif is missing in all other writings of the New Testament and also in the two Gospels themselves that mentioned it at the beginning. It contradicts passages that name Joseph as father (Lk 2.48; Jn 1.46), Mary and Joseph as parents (Lk 2.41). It contradicts all natural laws as well as pre-Christian Judaism. Christians had adopted it from Greco-Roman ideas in order to surpass God's intervention in the birth of important Jews, as described in the Bible.

Because of such criticism, German-language liberal theology in the 19th century interpreted the virgin birth of Jesus as a symbolic metaphor , not a historical and biological fact. Friedrich Schleiermacher rejected both variants of the dogma for exegetical and theological reasons: It contradicted the lists of descent and could not justify Jesus' sinlessness, since then all maternal ancestors, not just Mary and her mother, would have to have been sinless.

1846 formulated Karl Immanuel Nitzsch for the first general synod of the Uniate Evangelical Church in Prussia a new creed without the sentences to mind conception, virgin birth, descent into hell, resurrection of the body and Christ's return to the court. 1871, the pastor presented Adolf Sydow and Gustav Lisco the beliefs of virgin birth and descent into hell in the Apostles' Creed publicly questioned, and sparked the ongoing intra-evangelical Apostolikumsstreit out. In 1892, Adolf von Harnack stated that the virgin birth was not at the center of Christianity; its presence in the apostolic is a “real emergency”, since this statement can hardly be interpreted symbolically in order to remove its offense for enlightened Christians. However, it is not an original component of the early Christian faith and was not derived from the pre-existence statement, but expresses Jesus' divinity in this contradicting way. He therefore suggested that the apostolic should not be included in the Protestant order of worship and that it should be supplemented with a form limited to Protestant beliefs that could reach consensus.

This exacerbated the dispute. The main opponents of Harnack were Hermann Cremer (1834–1903) and Theodor Zahn (1838–1933). The Lutheran church authorities rejected the creed formulated by Nitzsch and declared the virgin birth to be the indispensable foundation of the Christian faith. An "Eisenach declaration" by 24 theologians rejected this in October 1892.

Research on the history of religion

The emerging research on the history of religion had a significant influence on the progress of the dispute. The New Testament narratives of the virgin birth and its motifs were compared with ancient oriental and Hellenistic mythical narratives of the divine descent of important people, mostly male rulers, but also with biblical narratives of wonderful past or announced births in order to explain a possible origin. She describes the motifs and tries to organize them factually and historically.

Old Orient

In the advanced cultures of the ancient Orient, the respective ruler was regarded as god or son of God. In Babylonia he was worshiped as the seed of a god, born of a goddess; the motif of a virgin birth is missing. In ancient Egypt , his natural procreation was mythically represented as theogamy : the god Amun-Re announces the heir to the throne to the still virgin king's wife, who later lives with her in the form of the pharaoh and begets his son with her. When he is enthroned, he recognizes him in heaven as his son. In Persia , the end-time savior Saoshyant was thought to have been conceived by the seed of Zarathustra , which a maiden bathing in the lake received from the water.

Greco-Roman antiquity

In ancient Greece , important men were often seen as god- begotten and therefore endowed with special abilities . Only a few of these myths indicate the virginity of their mothers: Ariston was kept away from sexual contact with his wife until she gave birth to Plato , who was conceived by Apollo with her . The hitherto untouched Danaë received the seed of the god Zeus asleep as a golden shower and thus became pregnant with Perseus . Alexander the Great was conceived by Zeus or Amun in the form of a snake or a bolt of lightning on his mother's wedding night. All the examples depict procreation in the manner of human sexuality , in which the seed of a god replaces or precedes that of a man.

The fourth eclogue by the Roman poet Virgil , was written in 40 BC. BC, heralds the return of a virgin from heaven and the birth of a child, with which a new and final age begins, as currently imminent.

The Christian theologian Lactantius interpreted these statements in the 3rd century as a pagan prophecy about Jesus Christ. However, the announced child is not born of the aforementioned virgin; with this the Roman goddess Justitia was meant, whose return at the beginning of the golden age proclaimed older Roman legends. Virgil expected this entry here from the conclusion of peace by a newborn future ruler, probably from a son of Asinius Pollio or the later emperor Augustus .

Judaism

The Tanakh tells several times of wonderful births from patriarchs , saviors or prophets of the Israelites , but never by virgins, but by women who are considered sterile such as Sarah (Gen 18: 10-14), Rebekah (Gen 25: 21-26), Rachel ( Gen 30,1f.22ff.), Samson's mother (Judges 13,2-5.24) and Samuels (1Sam 1,2.5.11.19f.27; 2.20f.). In the 6th chapter of prehistory ( Gen 6: 1-5 EU ) we learn about the intercourse between mythical sons of  God and human women. This process is placed in the context of apostasy from God and increasing sin ; from the undesirable connections no godmen emerge, but mortals with a shortened lifespan. In this way, Genesis distances itself from the theogamy conceptions of Israel's environment.

The Deuteronomic history contradicts the ancient Near Eastern divine king ideology by the dependence of all rulers of God's predestination emphasized and their revocability. Jewish heirs to the throne are sometimes referred to as the “begotten” son of God when they are enthroned, analogous to ancient oriental court language ( Ps 2.7  EU ; 110.3 EU ), but they are always used as a pictorial expression for an adoption that prompts the chosen to obey the Torah Obliged to God and confiscated. So leaves 2 Sam 7,12ff. EU no doubt that the heir to the throne chosen by God as his son comes from the seed of his ancestor David . In addition, the Son of God title is not limited to the king, but can be applied to all righteous Israelites and the entire called people of Israel (e.g. in Hos 11.1  EU ).

The Savior, announced in prophetic texts since Isaiah , is never referred to as the Son of God and never portrayed as born of a virgin, but as a human descendant of David. Is 7,14  EU is translated today according to the Hebrew wording:

"That is why my Lord himself will send you a sign: Behold, the young woman becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son, and she will name him Immanuel ."

In pre- and post-Christian Judaism, this passage was never interpreted as a prediction of the Messiah , but of a Jewish king. The around 250 BC Greek Bible translation begun by Jews , the Septuagint , translated the Hebrew word עלמה (alma, "young woman" from marriage to the birth of their first child) only this once with παρθένος (parthenos) ("virgin").

Jewish theologians did not teach the virgin birth of humans even in the sphere of influence of Hellenism . Philo of Alexandria taught only one conception of humans through angels : This is how the elderly wives of the patriarchs gave birth to the promised offspring. He did not understand this procreation sexually, but allegorically for the giftedness and virtue of mothers and sons.

The first-century Slavic Book of Enoch, revised by Christians, contained a Jewish legend in chapters 71, 1–23, according to which Melchizedek was born to a virgin. His mother's husband, a brother of Noach , then wanted to expel them. Jewish legends tell of the mother of Moses not a virginity, but a wonderful rejuvenation before her pregnancy. Other motifs from Moselle legends such as the announcement of the birth and order by angels, the naming and explanation of names have influenced the New Testament birth stories.

The rabbis contested the sonship of Jesus and the virginity of Mary by polemically depicting Jesus as an illegitimate child, conceived by a Roman legionnaire (see Panthera legend ), from about AD 100 ( Shabbat XIV, 4 and Tosefta Chullin II, 22 -24 in the Babylonian Talmud ). In the early Middle Ages , this Talmudic polemic was extended in the Toledot Yeshu to an impurity of Mary.

Exegesis of the history of religion

In exegesis of the history of religion since 1924, a direct influence of ancient oriental, ancient Egyptian and Hellenistic motifs on the New Testament birth stories and the Septuagint version of Isa 7:14 has often been assumed. Their supposed takeover was explained out of missionary interests of the early Christians: They wanted to make plausible of Jesus' importance for educated Greeks and Romans, who were familiar with the motif of a divine procreation of heroes and emperors.

Newer exegetical and systematic-theological interpretations

Rejection of deductions from the history of religion

Other New Testament scholars point to the problems of older religious history derivations: To Matthew and Luke, Jesus did (in a non-Jewish concept of the heroic Godman aner theios classified), the einebne its particularity. Her portrayal of Jesus' fidelity to the Torah contradicts this: for her he is the obedient Jew who only fulfills the well-known will of God and also accepts the shameful death on the cross. In contrast to ancient analogies, Jesus' procreation is not depicted, and the Holy Spirit is not a witness, but only a mediator of procreation by God. In biblical usage it is female (Hebrew) or neutral (Greek), not male.

Leonard Goppel therefore emphasized the relationship between the synoptic natal legends and biblical traditions and the connection between the virgin birth and the lists of ancestors:

“He came much more than those chosen by the Old Testament like Isaac and Samuel from the spirit of God, who created new things in history. This is what the references to the virgin birth out of the Spirit in Mt 1.18-20 and Lk 1.34 f. say. They are far from the Egyptian myths of the divine procreation of the God-King. "

Heikki Räisänen sees a creation theological proposition of the evangelists:

“The idea emphasizes that the Messiah comes into the world ' ex nihilo ', as it were, through God's act of creation . The eschatological dignity of Jesus is no longer only dated to Easter (Rom 1,3f) or baptism (Act 10,38), but already to the hour of conception. The virgin birth appears at the same time as the extreme intensification of the Old Testament motif of God's intervention in the birth of important men. "

For Martin Karrer , the motif of the virgin birth is said to indicate that Jesus' godliness is based on God's eternal plan before his birth, not just in his baptism or resurrection .

Karl Barth

The Reformed theologian Karl Barth represented the doctrine of the virgin birth as a necessary part of the Christian faith since his first draft dogmatics on the Apostolic Credo (1927) and implemented it in his Church Dogmatics in 1936 .

He admitted that this ecumenical belief in the New Testament was only weakly founded, since Matthew and Luke themselves did not come back to it and the mission sermons of the early Jerusalem church did not mention it. On the other hand, neither evangelist had seen any contradiction between the virgin birth and the son of David, who emphasized their lineage. Instead, Mt 1:24 confirms that the descendant of David, Joseph, adopted Jesus as his rightful son on God's command. Accordingly, Rom 1: 3, according to which Jesus descended from the seed of David, should not necessarily be understood biologically. The other Gospels and Paul also did not mention Joseph as father, but conspicuously Mary as mother of Jesus, and thus possibly implicitly considered her peculiarity. The NT testimony therefore does not require the abandonment of this dogma.

However, this cannot be proven historically and biologically, but only to be believed as a sign of the incarnation of God, which is singular in space and time and only possible in God himself. Just as the empty tomb alone could not establish faith in Jesus' resurrection, the virgin birth itself could not reveal the miracle “God was in Christ” (2 Cor 5:19). But this sign is not arbitrary but have in the NT a very specific function: it rule out God's incarnation docetically than just spiritual, even a divinity fehlzudeuten all people without Christ accessible knowledge. Because precisely the human origin of Jesus is stated here as a mystery that is unimaginable for Jews and non-Jews, only possible for God, with which he breaks his order of creation in order to create something completely new. These passages in the text cannot therefore be explained as adopting mythical motifs from divinely begotten Godmen and cannot be dismissed as an insignificant form of content that can be expressed without them.

Barth thus interpreted the virgin birth as a radical criticism of every natural theology and every synergism : That is why he criticized its interpretations in Schleiermacher, Reinhold Seeberg , Paul Althaus and Emil Brunner . Jesus is conceived and born as a real human being, but different from all others, because human nature in itself is not capable of receiving God. The person in the form of Mary is not in itself suitable for God's free grace , not a reflection of man's ability to be God, but receives this ability for God only in the act of the conception of Christ himself.

Wilfried Harle

The Protestant systematist Wilfried Härle interprets the virgin birth as one of the metaphorical answers of the NT to the question of the divine origin of Jesus Christ. It is a more recent answer that was already controversial in early Christianity; this is already indicated by the lineages that would initially presuppose Joseph's natural fatherhood.

He pointed out two dangers of this metaphor. One could understand it in such a way that the Holy Spirit replaces the male part in procreation: Then Jesus appears as a demigod who has inherited divine nature from the spirit and human nature from Mary, i.e. is neither true God nor true man. One could also conclude that human sexuality should be excluded from Jesus' divine origin: Then this would be equated with sin and could no longer be assessed positively. The doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary corresponds to an idealized asexual image of women which, together with the Christian separation of eros and agape, promoted sexual and misogynistic tendencies with negative consequences for both sexes.

Nevertheless, the metaphor points to a theological problem, namely human participation in incarnation. Here Härle Karl Barth's interpretation follows: The actively willing, disposing, creative and sovereign man - whether man or woman - is revealed in and through Jesus' special birth as unsuitable for God's revelation; only pure receiving and consenting to God's creative power is appropriate to this. Seen in this way, every person who receives Jesus in faith is begotten and reborn by the Holy Spirit (Jn 1:12 f). Traditional Mariology should therefore be accompanied by a “Josephology” that considers the male-fatherly assumption of his exclusion from God's incarnation (Mt 1.24; Lk 1.38).

Current assessment

In recent times the virgin birth has been widely questioned in the context of Protestant theology. Occasionally, this point of view also penetrates the free church area. The director of the Baptist Theological Seminary , Eduard Schütz , had to resign in 1985 due to his doubts about the virgin birth.

literature

in the order in which they appear

New Testament
  • Ernst Nellessen : The child and his mother. (Stuttgarter Bibelstudien Volume 39) KBW, Stuttgart 1969, ISBN 3-460-03391-6 .
  • Joseph A. Fitzmyer: The Virginal Conception of Jesus in the New Testament. In: ders .: To Advance the Gospel. New Testament Studies . Crossroads, New York 1981, ISBN 0-8245-0008-3 .
  • Hartmut Gese : Natus ex Virgine. In the S. (Ed.): From Sinai to Zion. Old Testament contributions to biblical theology. Christian Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1990, ISBN 3-459-00866-0 , pp. 130-146.
  • Luise Schottroff : virgin birth. Luke 1: 26-33.38. In: dies .: experiences of liberation. Christian Kaiser Verlag, Munich 1990, pp. 257–263.
  • Peter Knauer : Received by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary . In: Klaus Hofmeister, Lothar Bauerochse (Hrsg.): Confession and Zeitgeist - The Christian creed reconsidered . Echter, Würzburg 1997, ISBN 3-429-01938-9 , pp. 82-94.
  • Gerd Lüdemann : virgin birth. The story of Mary and her son Jesus. Edition Deister, Springe 2008, ISBN 978-3-86674-028-0 .
Extra-Christian analogies and influences
  • Melford E. Spiro : Virgin Birth. Parthenogenesis and Physiological Paternity: an Essay in Cultural Interpretation. In: Man . Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, NF, Vol. 3 (1968), pp. 242-261.
  • Joachim Kügler: Pharaoh and Christ? Study of the history of religion on the question of a connection between ancient Egyptian royal theology and New Testament Christology in the Gospel of Luke (BBB 113), Philo, Bodenheim 1997.
  • Stephen Benko: The Virgin Goddess: Studies in the Pagan and Christian Roots of Mariology. Brill Academic Publications, 2nd edition, Leiden 2003, ISBN 90-04-13639-8 .
  • Roger David From: Matthew 1–2 and the Virginal Conception: In Light of Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaic Traditions on the Birth of Israel's First Redeemer, Moses. University Press of America, Lanham 2004, ISBN 0-7618-3038-3 .
  • Jan Assmann : The procreation of the son. In: Jan Assmann: Egyptian secrets. Verlag Wilhelm Fink, 2004, ISBN 3-7705-3687-8 .
  • Gregor Emmenegger : How the virgin had a child. On the influence of ancient medical and natural philosophical theories on the development of Christian dogma . Academic Press, Friborg 2014, ISBN 978-3-7278-1752-6 .
Church history
  • Hans von Campenhausen : The virgin birth in the theology of the old church. Winter publishing house, Heidelberg 1962.
  • Giovanni Miegge: The Virgin Mary. Study on the history of the doctrine of Mary . Revised and expanded transmission of the 2nd Italian edition. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1962.
  • Hermann Josef Brosch: virgin birth yesterday and today. Publisher Hans Driewer, Essen 1969.
  • Anton Ziegenaus (Ed.): "Born from the Virgin Mary". Clarifications (= Mariological Studies, Vol. 19). Verlag Pustet, Regensburg 2007, ISBN 978-3-7917-2080-7 .
Dogmatics and Practical Theology

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. Evangelical Lexicon for Theology and Congregation (ELThG), Volume 2, Wuppertal / Zurich 1993, ISBN 3-417-24642-3 , p. 1025
  2. A Syrian translation from the late 4th or early 5th century, the Codex Syriacus Sinaiticus (cf. en: Syriac Sinaiticus ) offers the different wording for Mt 1,16.21.25: “Joseph, with whom the Virgin Mary betrothed was begotten Jesus, who is called the Christ. [...] She will bear you a son. […] She bore him a son. ”(Quoted by K. Barth: Kirchliche Dogmatik Volume I / 2: Die Doctrine of the Word of God , Protestant Verlag Zollikon, 4th edition, Zurich 1948, p. 191). But this manuscript also attests to the virginity of Mary at the birth of Jesus in the verses Mt 1,18.20.23.
  3. Ulrich Luz: The Gospel according to Matthew , Volume I, p. 152: “Instead of Bible verses, which the Church triumphantly opposed to Judaism, embarrassment occurs. The traditional church interpretation of Mt 1.22 f. becomes a bit of a documentation of Christian sin and is just so very relevant. "
  4. ZDF, April 3, 2005: Jerusalem at the time of Jesus ( Memento from July 15, 2005 in the Internet Archive )
  5. Otto Kaiser, Old Testament German, Part 17, The Book of the Prophet Isaiah Chapters 1–12, Göttingen 1981, p. 151
  6. ^ Karl Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik Vol. I, 2, Zurich 1990, pp. 194f.
  7. Luce Petri (Ed.): The History of Christianity Volume I: Time of the Beginning , Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau 2003, p. 817
  8. ^ Justin, Dialogue with Tryphon 43: 3-7
  9. ^ Justin, Dialogue with Triphone 45.4
  10. Luce Petri (Ed.): The History of Christianity Volume I: Time of the Beginning , Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau, pp. 220, 469, 482–491
  11. a b c d quoted from Heiner Grote: Maria / Marienfrömmigkeit II ; Theological Real Encyclopedia, Volume 22; P. 121f.
  12. quoted from Alfred Läpple: Reading book on the Catholic adult catechism ; Aschaffenburg: Pattloch, 1986; ISBN 3-557-91345-7 ; P. 201
  13. Daniel Marguerat u. a. (Ed.): Jesus de Nazareth. Nouvelles approches d'une enigme , Geneva 1998, ISBN 2-8309-0857-0 , pp. 477-487
  14. ^ Kurt Dietrich Schmidt: Church history ; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990, p. 235
  15. ^ Joseph Ratzinger: Introduction to Christianity . Munich 1968, ISBN 3-466-20455-0 , second main part: Jesus Christ, second chapter
  16. Uta Ranke-Heinemann: The Pope and the holey condoms. To the Pope's visit to Germany. September 9, 2006
  17. Uta Ranke-Heinemann: No and Amen. My departure from traditional Christianity . (supplemented new edition). Heyne, Munich 2002, ISBN 3-453-21182-0 , p. 98.
  18. Reinhard Frieling: Article Maria / Marienfrömmigkeit, III. Dogmatic / 1. Evangelisch , in: Theologische Realenzyklopädie Volume 22, S. 138f.
  19. ^ The confessional documents of the Evangelical Lutheran Church , Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 7th edition, Göttingen 1976, pp. 414 and 1024
  20. Bruno Bauer, “Critique of the Evangelical History of Synoptics”, Leipzig 1841
  21. ^ David Friedrich Strauss: The life of Jesus, edited critically , 1836, pp. 105–158; Lecture based on Hermann Josef Brosch (ed.): Virgo birth yesterday and today. Essen 1969, p. 38f.
  22. after Ulrich Luz: The Gospel according to Matthew , Volume I, p. 155.
  23. ^ Adolf von Harnack: In Matters des Apostolicums , 1892; The Apostles' Creed , 1892; Reprinted in Kurt Nowak: Adolf von Harnack as a contemporary , 2 volumes, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1996, ISBN 3-11-013799-2 , pp. 500–544; Anton Ziegenaus: The virgin birth in the Apostles' Creed. Your interpretation by Adolf von Harnack. In: Heinrich Petri (Ed.): Divergences in Mariology. On the ecumenical discussion about the mother of Jesus. Pustet Friedrich KG, Regensburg 1989, ISBN 3-7917-1198-9 , pp. 33-55
  24. Gerhard Ruhbach: Article Apostolikumsstreit , in: Evangelisches Lexikon für Theologie und Gemeinde Volume 1, 2nd edition, Wuppertal 1998, p. 104f.
  25. Emma Brunner-Traut : The Ancient Egyptians. Hidden life among pharaohs. Kohlhammer, 4th edition, Stuttgart a. a. 1987, ISBN 3-17-009664-8
  26. ^ Gerhard Delling: Parthenos . In: Gerhard Kittel (Hrsg.): Theological Dictionary for the New Testament Volume 5, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1990, ISBN 3-17-011204-X , p. 828
  27. ↑ Collection of materials from Martin Dibelius : Jungfrauensohn and Krippenkind , pp. 25–35 and 44ff.
  28. ^ Virgil Fourth Eclogue
  29. ^ Hans J. Klauck: Religion and Society in Early Christianity: New Testament Studies. Mohr / Siebeck, Tübingen 2003, ISBN 3-16-147899-1 , p. 290ff ( online )
  30. Otto Michel, Otto Betz: Von Gott gezeugt , in: Walther Eltester : Judentum, Urchristentum, Kirche. Festschrift for Joachim Jeremias , Verlag Alfred Töpelmann, Berlin 1960, pp. 3–23
  31. Jews for Judaism: Rejection of Christian "Evidence Texts" ( Memento of December 23, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
  32. Ulrich Luz: The Gospel according to Matthew , Volume I; Evangelical-Catholic Commentary on the New Testament I / 1; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2002 5 ; P. 144f.
  33. Eduard Norden : The Birth of the Child ; Teubner, Leipzig 1924; Martin Dibelius : son of a maiden and crib child ; Carl Winter, Heidelberg 1932; E. Brunner-Traut: The history of the birth of the Gospels in the light of Egyptian research , ZRGG 12 (1960), pp. 97–111
  34. Martin Rösel: The virgin birth of the eschatological Immanuel. Isaiah 7 in the translation of the Septuagint , Jahrbuch für Biblische Theologie 6 (1991), pp. 145-148
  35. ^ EP Sanders, Margaret Davies: Studying the Synoptic Gospels , SCM Press, 1989, ISBN 0-334-02342-4 , p. 31
  36. Ulrich Luz: The Gospel according to Matthew Volume I, p. 104
  37. Leonhard Goppel: Theology of the New Testament. UTB 850, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1978, p. 73
  38. Heikki Räisänen: Maria / Marienfrömmigkeit I: New Testament , in: Theologische Realenzyklopädie Volume 22, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1992, p. 118
  39. Martin Karrer: Jesus Christ in the New Testament . Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1998, p. 323f
  40. Karl Barth: Church Dogmatics Volume I / 2: The Doctrine of the Word of God , Evangelischer Verlag Zollikon, 4th Edition, Zurich 1948, § 15: The Secret of Revelation Paragraph 3: The Miracle of Christmas , pp. 187–221
  41. Wilfried Härle: Dogmatics. Walter de Gruyter, 3rd revised edition, Berlin / New York 2007, ISBN 3-11-019314-0 , p. 349ff.
  42. In a SPIEGEL interview, the interviewer said: “The fact that the virgin birth is not historical is a firm Protestant conviction.” In the further interview with New Testament scholar Andreas Lindemann, it was only about the extent to which such a point of view is shared by Catholic theologians. In: Thomas Mayer, Karl-Heinz Vanheiden (ed.): Jesus, the Gospels and the Christian faith . Gefell, Nuremberg 2008, p. 13.