Virgin birth

Christ died for our articles about Christianity

Schismatics

Western (Latin) Catholicism Eastern (Greek) Orthodoxy Protestantism Restorationism

Devil's in the details

True Cross Magdalene laundry Christian rock Trinity Foundation Four Spiritual Laws Holy Spirit Vassula Ryden The Divine Comedy v - t - e

“”"Which is more likely, that the whole natural order is suspended or that a Jewish minx should tell a lie?"

—Christopher Hitchens

According to Christian mythology, Jesus was born to Mary, a virgin. The first mention of the virgin birth in the Bible occurs in the Gospel of Matthew, which was written over 70 years after the supposed birth.

The original texts

Isaiah

Isaiah 7:14 contains the infamously disputed verse:

Therefore the Lord himself will give you this sign: the עלמה shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.

To this day, the question of what the term עלמה ('almah; "young woman") above refers to remains a divisive issue in Bible translations. Importantly, however, the text referred to the mother as 'almah, as opposed to bethulah ("virgin"). This suggests against a virgin birth hypothesis.

The word is rendered παρθενος (parthenos; "virgin") in the Septuagint. The Greek-speaking writers of the New Testament unknowingly wrote their stories to fall in line with the Septuagint, which was in error. Thus we have a myth built upon an error from a previous myth.

In reality, with the exception of the Young's Literal Translation Version, the New King James Version, and the English Standard Version, many instances of "almah" are not translated as "virgin." Proverbs 30:18-19 (NIV) is translated:

There are three things that are too amazing for me, four that I do not understand: the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a snake on a rock, the way of a ship on the high seas, and the way of a man with a maiden.

It would seem problematic to substitute "virgin" in this case.

As Gerald Larue states:

The prophet [Isaiah] referred to an unidentified young woman (Hebrew: 'almah) who was about to bear a child that would be named "Immanuel," signifying Yahweh's support of his people. By the time the child would be weaned, the prophet promised, the military threat from Syria and Israel would be past, the two nations destroyed, and Judah would enjoy great prosperity. This interpretation, which seems to fit the historical situation best, has been challenged.

The word 'almah refers to a young woman old enough to bear a child and does not in itself indicate whether a girl is a virgin or married. The LXX [Septuagint] translators employed the Greek word parthenos, which means "virgin," although the term neanis, which corresponds better to 'almah, was available. When the Christian Church began its mission in the Greek-speaking world and the Gospel of Matthew was written, predictions of Jesus' birth were sought in the LXX version of Jewish scripture; thus, in Matt. 1:18-23, the citation from Isaiah 7:14 is from the LXX, not the Hebrew text. It is argued by some Christian scholars that the sign was far more wondrous than the birth of any child and pointed ahead to the birth of a Messiah, a deliverers promise fulfilled in Jesus. Still others, recognizing that the announcement of a deliverer who would come 700 years later would be of little comfort to Ahaz in his crisis, find a double meaning in the sign Immanuel: an immediate significance relating to the young woman of Ahaz' day and a futuristic one foretelling the coming of Jesus. However, it should be pointed out that within the Hebrew text there is no indication that the child would perform messianic functions; the baby is a sign or signal of Yahweh's intention to save the nation if they would rely on their deity.

And as the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges states:

(LXX. ἡ παρθένος, other Greek versions νεᾶνις.) The Hebrew word (‘almâh) means strictly “a young woman of marriageable age.” Both etymology and usage (cf. esp. Proverbs 30:19; Song of Solomon 6:8) are adverse to the opinion, once prevalent among Christian interpreters and maintained by a few in recent times, that virginity is necessarily connoted (see Robertson Smith, Prophets, Revd. Ed. pp. 426 f.). To express that idea a different word (běthûlâh) must have been employed, although even it might not be wholly free from ambiguity (? Joel 1:8). It is, of course, not disputed that ‘almâh may be used of a virgin (as Genesis 24:43; Exodus 2:8); but even if this usage were more uniform than it is, it would still be far from proving that virginity was an essential of the notion. It would appear, therefore, that the idea of a miraculous conception was not present to Isaiah’s mind at this time, since a prediction of such astounding import must surely have been clothed in unambiguous language. Nor does the def. art., which is used in the original, necessarily denote a particular individual. (Cf. 2 Samuel 17:17, and see Davidson, Synt. § 21 e.) So far as grammar and context go, the expression may mean any young woman, fit to become a mother, whether as yet married or unmarried.

Finally, it's been noted that even if the word 'almah is to be translated as "virgin", it does not carry the connotation that said virgin would be a virgin at the time of birth or forever. It simply means that someone who was then a virgin should conceive. As such, it might be a virgin conception, but not a virgin birth.

Matthew

The Gospel of Matthew 1:20-23 (KJV) reads;

“”But while he (Joseph) thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

—Isaiah 7:14-Deception In The Name Of Jesus

Christians interpret this as fulfilling the prophecy laid out in Isaiah.

It's likely that Matthew has chosen to read almah as "virgin" in order to support the Nativity. Mark did not refer to Isaiah, but then it appears that Mark didn't consider the virgin birth of Jesus to be worth a mention in his gospel.

There is also the problem that Jesus was not named Immanuel. The name Yeshua (Jesus) probably means "YHWH is a saving-cry" or comes from a root that means "to deliver, save, or rescue". The name Immanuel means "God with us".

Etymology of "virgin"

The New Testament uses the Greek word parthenos in relation to virginity. It appears 14 times in ESV. ESV translates parthenos as "betrothed" 3 times, "daughter" once, and "virgin" 8 times.

According to LSJ Dictionary, parthenos can refer to "the Virgin Goddess, an unmarried woman, a chaste maiden, an unmarried man, a pupil, or Samian earth".

Alternate fulfillments

Several other mother-son pairs have been proposed.

Mahershalalhashbaz

The first is Isaiah's wife and her son Mahershalalhashbaz. Isaiah 8:1-4:

Moreover the LORD said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen concerning Mahershalalhashbaz. And I took unto me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah. And I [Isaiah] went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name Mahershalalhashbaz. For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.

Interestingly, the last line of Isaiah 8:1-4 lines up with Isaiah 7:10-16:

Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD. And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself shall give you [referring specifically to King Ahaz] a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest [Syria and Israel] shall be forsaken of both her kings.

Mahershalalhashbaz was born and shown as a sign of God to Ahaz; anyone who could not be shown to Ahaz could not possibly be a sign to him. Furthermore, Mahershalalhashbaz is said to be going to refuse evil and to live while Syria and Israel are destroyed. (In this time, both Israel (the northern area of the Jews) and Syria decided to attack Judah (the southern area of the Jews). Why? Because Judah wouldn't help Syria and Israel team up against Assyria, which was getting extremely powerful and scary.)

However, it's hard to call Mahershalalhashbaz the son of the 'almah — his mother had already given birth, and the word 'almah, even though not strictly requiring virginity, does heavily emphasize sexual innocence.

Strangely, Jesus does not fulfill these requirements. Were both Syria and Israel dethroned before Jesus learned ethics? Nope, because they'd been crushed and incorporated by the Romans before he was born.

Hezekiah

Another proposed fulfiller is Abi and her son Hezekiah. 2 Kings 18:1-12:

Now it came to pass in the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, that Hezekiah the son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign. Twenty and five years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Abi, the daughter of Zachariah. And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that David his father did. He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan. He trusted in the LORD God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor any that were before him. For he clave to the LORD, and departed not from following him, but kept his commandments, which the LORD commanded Moses. And the LORD was with him; and he prospered whithersoever he went forth: and he rebelled against the king of Assyria, and served him not. He smote the Philistines, even unto Gaza, and the borders thereof, from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced city. And it came to pass in the fourth year of king Hezekiah, which was the seventh year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, that Shalmaneser king of Assyria came up against Samaria, and besieged it. And at the end of three years they took it: even in the sixth year of Hezekiah, that is in the ninth year of Hoshea king of Israel, Samaria was taken. And the king of Assyria did carry away Israel unto Assyria, and put them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes: Because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD their God, but transgressed his covenant, and all that Moses the servant of the LORD commanded, and would not hear them, nor do them.

There is weak scriptural support for this. First, Hezekiah reigns while Syria and Israel are destroyed, as required. Second, Hezekiah is pious, as required.

This is problematic when squared with Isaiah 7:20-22:

In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired, namely, by them beyond the river, by the king of Assyria, the head, and the hair of the feet: and it shall also consume the beard. And it shall come to pass in that day, that a man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep; And it shall come to pass, for the abundance of milk that they shall give he shall eat butter: for butter and honey shall every one eat that is left in the land.

Immanuel is supposed to "shave" the king of Assyria (gain true independence) and bring the honey and butter (have prosperity). Neither is true, because soon after Israel and Syria were conquered, Judah gets conquered (2 Kings 18:13).

In classical tradition

Greeks and Romans were fond of claiming their great leaders and/or saviors of their people were born of miraculous births. This included Alexander the Great, the Roman emperor Augustus, and even Plato. There are alternative claims that Alexander and Augustus were born of gods such as Zeus. Alexander the Great recorded of a virgin after birth of Christ in Plutarch's "Lives".

In fact, it has been suggested that being born of a virgin was the ancient equivalent of being "born with a silver spoon in one's mouth" (i.e. never meant to be taken literally) and signified the "extraordinary personal qualities exhibited by an individual" as well as being an "attempt to explain an individual's superiority to other mortals. Generally, Mediterranean peoples looked at one's birth or parentage to explain one's character and behavior" and "veneration of a benefactor."

Extraordinary claims

... require extraordinary evidence. To support the claim that Jesus fulfilled this prophecy, it would be necessary to demonstrate that he was born of a virgin.

The only evidence that this occurred is in the statements of Matthew and Luke. The writers of the Gospel are not exactly the most unbiased authors and have shown previous factual inaccuracy.

Contradictions

There may be a contradiction inherent in this myth, because the Bible also states that Jesus was a "direct" descendant of King David through the male line. Obviously, if Jesus had no human father, he couldn't have been a biological descendant of King David through the male line. Ancient Hebrew culture did allow adopted sons to be counted as descendants (alongside other interesting cases of legal descent), so Jesus could have been legally descended from King David. It's debatable to what extent this is in keeping with the original intent of the prophecy, however.

Additionally, it is worth noting that Matthew and Luke's claim of the virgin birth is inconsistent with how, in the Book of Mark, Jesus' family called his ministry crazy. You would think that Mary and Joseph would remember something so significant as an angel telling them they were picked to raise God's kid.

However, Joseph makes no appearance in Mark's Gospel, in which Jesus is referred to as the "Son of Mary"; his biological father hadn't stuck around, and his name was not known, so in this Gospel Jesus is — literally — a bastard. It has been suggested that Joseph is pasted into the story in later Gospels to make Jesus' family life seem all respectable and proper, but never actually existed. For some, this clear indication that Mary brought up Jesus as a single parent lends weight to the Pantera theory (see below), for which there is already good evidence.

Which genealogy is that of Mary?

The only way for Jesus to have had some sort of genetic link to King David would be if this was passed down through Mary. CARM states that the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew must be Joseph's, noting that it includes Jeconiah, who was barred from having a descendant who would sit on David's throne. Then, the genealogy in Luke becomes the genealogy of Mary.

23 Jesus himself, when he began to teach, was about thirty years old, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Joseph, the son of Judah, 27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmodam, the son of Er, 29 the son of Jose, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonan, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menan, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Salmon, the son of Nahshon, 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Aram,[a] the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. (Luke 3:23-38)

The problem is, Luke does not explicitly state that the genealogy is that of Mary. Instead, it states that it was believed to have been traced down from Joseph. CARM argues that due to historical and cultural conventions, Luke actually attributed Mary's lineage to Joseph.

Apologetic responses

Many Christians believe and want to believe that the virgin birth of Jesus fulfilled an Old Testament prophecy and defend the flawed translation.

John Oakes

Oakes:

The virgin (literally young woman, almah) will give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel (literally God among us). It is true that the Hebrew here is alma which means young woman, and not necessarily a virgin. However, for a married woman to give birth to a son is certainly not a sign. The prophecy states that this birth will be a miracle. Given that a miracle is prophesied, the most reasonable interpretation of the Hebrew is a virgin, not simply a married young woman. Add to this the fact that when the Jews translated the Old Testament into Greek about 250 years before Christ, they used a Greek word which is definitely for a virgin. This proves that the Jews understood this to be a prophecy of a virgin birth before Jesus was born. Either way, in what way is this evidence that the Bible has an error? Even if the prophecy is not of a virgin birth, in any case, Jesus was born of a young woman. So, how does this prove that the Bible cannot be trusted? Why do these critics even mention this when in absolutely no way does this undermine biblical accuracy? Hmmm.....

Note the logic here: Oakes agrees that the Hebrew actually refers to a(ny) "young woman", not necessarily a "virgin", and that A young woman giving birth is not an earth-shattering miracle, but then that must mean that it can't just refer to such a mundane event, and that The authors of the Septuagint must have been divinely inspired to choose the Greek word "virgin", which means that The Jews realised that this really was a prophecy (but just forgot to tell anyone, apparently...), and anyway Even if the correct translation is "young woman", the Bible isn't technically wrong. So there... Furthermore, no Jews claimed that Isaiah 7:14-16 was a prophecy about anything else than Isaiah 8:3 prior to the advent of Christianity (and those who remained Jews have stuck to this straightforward interpretation). That Christians started claiming that Isaiah predicted the birth of Jesus is yet another example of the reinterpretation/retconning of Old Testament texts by Christians who suddenly found all kinds of prophecies post facto. Jewish apologists argue that the Greek word parthenos does not necessarily denote "virgin" and that some historical sources indicate that Jewish scholars only translated the five books of Moses, not the entire Old Testament, so Isaiah in the Septuagint was not translated by the Jews. Furthermore, the Jews do not use the Septuagint, seeing it as having been corrupted by the church. Also, the passage does not simply state that a virgin or a young woman will have a child and leave it at that. It states that the child will go on to do other specific things. Thus, it still could work as a sign when alma is translated as "young woman". Finally, Matthew 1:22-1:23 states Now all this has happened, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall give birth to a son. They shall call his name Immanuel”; which is, being interpreted, “God with us.” (Matthew 1:22-1:23, WEB, Public Domain) right after an account of the virgin birth. This would imply that Jesus being born of a virgin was an important part of fulfilling Old Testament prophecies. This has two major implications. Firstly, if the Old Testament prophecies do not actually state that the Messiah will be born in a virgin birth, then the importance of this verse is lost. Secondly, this implies that Matthew thought that the Old Testament prophecy meant a virgin birth. If Matthew was wrong in saying that, then the Bible is not inerrant.

Additional theories

If any of these stories are true, it's pretty cool how Joseph took it all in stride.

Perpetual Virginity

One of the more remarkable aspects of the virgin birth is the belief in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary held by some Christian religions. The believers of this doctrine hold that Mary not only was a virgin when she conceived, but she continued to be a virgin after giving birth and for the rest of her life, even though Jesus had siblings, and more importantly Matthew 1:25 specifically states that Joseph "knew" Mary after the birth. They argue that those siblings were Joseph's children from a previous marriage, and Mary was their adoptive mother. (So much for Biblical literalism.) As said by Rufus in the film Dogma: "The nature of God and the Virgin Mary, those are leaps of faith. But to believe a married couple never got down? Well, that's just plain gullibility."

Interestingly, there is a 2nd-century text known as the Infancy Gospel of James, which never made it into the Bible, but which is the source of many Catholic and Orthodox beliefs about Mary. In this text, it is stated that Joseph was already very old at the time of his marriage with Mary (and that he had sons from a previous marriage). If so, he may not have been, shall we say, up to the task anymore.

Pantera

Another theory is that a Roman soldier called Pantera was the true father of Jesus, though the support for this theory is quite weak. These claims come from the Babylonian Talmud Tractate Sanhedrin 107b; while weak evidence and most likely an attack on Christianity, many Jews will cite this as proof that Jesus was not born of a virign.

Special conception in other religions

Okay, let's go into a little more detail and try to figure out if a pattern is emerging here.

Greek mythology

• Leda: Leda's father was the Aetolian king Thestius. The story goes that Zeus (the dude with the lightning bolts and thunder clouds) admired Leda very much. So, like any randy god, he took the form of a swan and seduced her. Ew. Anyway, the result of this celestial gettin' down were two eggs. From these eggs hatched Helen of Troy, Clytemnestra, and Castor and Pollux. Technically, this isn't virgin birth since Zeus (and Thestius) physically did the deed, but the sentiment is more or less the same: a "miraculous birth-event", semi-divine, semi-human.

• Perseus: son of Danae, who was locked away in a room as a child and impregnated by Zeus (busy fella, that Zeus) in the form of a shower of gold (no, really).

• Zeus would later impregnate Alcmene by disguising himself as her husband Amphitryon (grandson of Perseus; seriously, Zeus had no sense of shame). The child, Heracles, would later perform many great deeds, including bringing one person back from the dead. Heracles eventually died painfully as a result of treachery and ascended to godhood. Nope, never heard about anyone like that.

• Hephaestus: According to some accounts, the goddess Hera was so annoyed at how Athena had sprung forth from Zeus' head that she conceived Hephaestus without the aid of a man, by force of will alone. Apparently, it didn't go so well, as she threw him off Mount Olympus after seeing his ugly face. Hephaestus is the only Greek god who is lame — compare the effect of nails through the feet.

• Hestia, Athena, Artemis, and Hecate were all virgin goddesses in Greek mythology, having had no children, save Erichthonius of Athens for Athena if you stretch out the definition of "son".

Hinduism

The idea of a miraculous conception occurs commonly in Hindu scriptures.

• Krishna descended directly into the womb of his mother, Devaki.

• Avatars (incarnations of a god, living in the human realm), in order to appear, descend into human women's wombs, i.e., without intercourse.

• Karna resulted from Queen Kunti asking the god Surya for a child, without taking Kunti's virginity, just before she married King Pandu.

• The Pandavas: Brahmin laid a curse upon King Pandu, telling him not to touch either of his two wives sexually or he'd die. Queen Kunti, ever resourceful, simply asked the other gods to give her and her co-wife children. The gods gave them the Pandavas.

Egyptian mythology

• The popular idea that Horus was born of a virgin Isis is confounded by the fact that Herodotus records that the Egyptians believed that Isis was impregnated by having intercourse with the spirit of the dead Osiris. However, Herodotus also stated this:

The relation between the Egyptian Isis and the Greek Io was probably this, that Phoenicians in early times had carried to Argos the worship of the moon, under the symbol of a heifer, or a woman with heifer's horns. The symbol itself and the name of lo, which is Coptic for the moon… the origin of it was forgotten, and the invention of the Greek mythologists supplied its place by the legend of an Argive princess, beloved by Jupiter, turned by him into a heifer, and driven through Phoenicia into Egypt, where she became the goddess Isis.

• Aeschylus in his Greek tragedy Prometheus Bound stated "Again and again in the night, visions would appear to me (Io) in my room and entice me with seductive words: "O blessed maiden, why do you remain a virgin for so long when it is possible for you to achieve the greatest of marriages?" It is important here to remember that Ancient Greek did not have a separate word for virginity, the concept was intrinsically connected with the unmarried woman, the parthenos.

• "My divinity is adored throughout all the world in divers manners, in variable customs and in many names, for the Phrygians call me the mother of the Gods: the Athenians, Minerva: the Cyprians, Venus: the Candians, Diana: the Sicilians, Proserpina: the Eleusians, Ceres: some Juno, others Bellona, other Hecate: and principally the Ethiopians which dwell in the Orient, and the Egyptians which are excellent in all kind of ancient doctrine, and by their proper ceremonies accustom to worship me, do call me Queen Isis." (Apuleius (2nd century CE) The Golden Ass or Metamorphoses)

• "In the most remote age it appears that Osiris, Isis, Horus, and Set were all independent and unconnected deities, belonging probably to different tribes. Isis was a virgin goddess at Buto in the Delta, Horus came to be worshiped with her,..."

So in reality, depending on the group, Isis was worshiped as a virgin goddess before the time of Christ.

Finnish and Karelian mythology

• Marjatta: while herding, she eats a lingonberry and becomes pregnant. She gives birth to a boy who will grow up to be the king of Karelia. (Though researchers currently regard this chapter of the Kalevala as an attempt to reconcile Finnish mythology and Christianity, artificially added by Elias Lönnrot during the compilation.)

Buddhist mythology

The Buddha, who went on to achieve considerable deeds in spiritual matters, features in tales of his mother's miraculous impregnation.

Immaculate conception

Virginal Conception should not be confused with Immaculate Conception (or the Immaculate Reception for that matter). The doctrine of Immaculate Conception arose because the question was asked how Christ could be born of a woman who would inevitably be tainted with original sin. In order to get around the problem, the church decreed that Mary herself was immaculately conceived — without original sin — and this allowed Christ to be born without original sin. (It is not clear how Mary's parents avoided original sin or why an omnipotent God did not make more exceptions, though.)

Virgin birth in science

Parthenogenesis

Parthenogenesis is a form of asexual reproduction in which growth and development of embryos occur without fertilization. More than 2,000 species are thought to reproduce parthenogenically, including plants, vertebrates (such as some fish, amphibians, reptiles, and birds), and invertebrate animals (particularly rotifers, aphids, ants, wasps, and bees). This phenomenon is not naturally observed in mammals, although it has been artificially induced in rabbits, mice, and monkeys. In animals using the XY chromosome system, parthenogenesis always results in female offspring.

However, in 1995 there was a reported case of partial-parthenogenesis; a boy was found to have some of his cells (such as skin and white blood cells) lacking any genetic content from his father. Scientists believe that in the boy's case, an unfertilized egg began to self-divide but then had some (but not all) of its cells fertilized by a sperm cell; this must have happened early in development, as self-activated eggs quickly lose their ability to be fertilized. The unfertilized cells eventually duplicated their DNA, boosting their chromosomes to 46. When the unfertilized cells hit a developmental block, the fertilized cells took over and developed that tissue. The boy had asymmetrical facial features and learning difficulties but was otherwise healthy. This would make him a parthenogenetic chimera (a child with two cell lineages in his body).

Mammalian parthenogenetic (PG) embryos undergo early developmental demise due to imbalanced expression of imprinted genes and exhibit cell proliferation defects and restricted contribution to mesodermal and endodermal tissues when combined with normal embryos as chimeras. However, in both mouse and human, PG embryonic stem cells (ESCs) can be readily derived from blastocysts developing after in vitro activation of unfertilized oocytes; these cells exhibit key characteristics of pluripotent stem cells, including multilineage in vitro differentiation potential.

Haplodiploidy mating system

Many insects, such as wasps, bees, and ants, use a haplodiploidy mating system, where the sex of the offspring is determined by whether it inherits a single or paired set of chromosomes. In this system, an unfertilized egg can be laid without mating, but it will always develop as a male since it inherits only one set of chromosomes from the mother; females are produced via mating with a male, causing the offspring to inherit a set of chromosomes from both mother and father. In this system, virgin births of boys happen quite frequently.

While Christian 'scientists' may applaud these virgin births, you may not want to remind them that one of the evolutionary advantages of haplodiploidy mating is how convenient it makes incest. If no males are available for a young female to mate with, she can get biblical with a few virgin births followed by "getting biblical" with the sons she produced to produce a whole multitude of grandchildren. Hey, it still beats Adactylidium, where siblings mate in the womb before eating their way out of their mother's body and leaving their brothers and cannibalised mother dead while the pregnant sisters all move on to find food to feed the sibling orgy going on in their wombs. Isn't nature beautiful?

Sperm donation

It is quite possible for a woman to get pregnant in the modern day without the need to have sex via sperm donation. If one defines female virginity as never having sex with a man, many lesbian women would count as virgins. Thus, for a religion that celebrates the miracle of virgin birth, surely Christians must be excited for the increased frequency of virgin births resulting from lesbian women more frequently choosing to become parents... right?

External links

• [1] Parthenogenesis
• The myth of the virgin birth at infidels.org
• A virgin birth prophecy? At theskepticalreview.com
• Was she or was she not "a virgin"? - a good contextual refutation from the Hebrew, at messiahtruth.com (via Archive.org)
• Liberals and skeptics on the virgin birth at religioustolerance.org