Does the "Unreasonable" Nature of the Virgin Conception Invalidate the Story of Jesus?
For some, the miraculous claim of the virgin conception of Jesus
disqualifies the Gospel accounts as reliable history. The famous writer,
atheist and debater, Christopher Hitchens regularly referred to the
virgin conception as a clear example of the unreasonable nature of the Gospels.
Hitchens would occasionally attempt to demonstrate the illogical,
unreasonable nature of his debate opponent by asking the simple
question: “Do you believe Jesus was conceived miraculously and born of a
virgin?” when his Christian opponent replied, “Yes,” Hitchens would
typically say, “I rest my case.” For many atheists, the virgin
conception is so obviously irrational it disqualifies the story of Jesus
before it even begins.
Skeptics and critics of Christianity reject the mere possibility of the virgin conception because their philosophical naturalism
(their belief that the natural world is all that exists) precludes the
possibility of the miraculous intervention of a supernatural Being. As
it turns out, this presupposition of naturalism lies at the heart of the
dilemma:
Naturalism Is the Worldview Under Examination
When we begin to examine the possible existence of God (the
aforementioned supernatural Being), we are actually examining the
viability of philosophical naturalism. We are, in essence, asking the
questions, “Is the natural world all that exists?” “Is there anything
beyond the physical, material world we measure with our five senses?”
“Is there any way to actually know immaterial, spiritual entities (or
truths) exist?” In asking these questions, we are putting naturalism to
the test.
Naturalism Shouldn’t, Therefore, Be Our Presupposition
It would be unfair, therefore, to begin by presupposing
nothing supernatural could ever exist or occur. If we are attempting to
be fair about assessing the existence of God (or assessing the
reasonable nature of the virgin conception), we cannot exclude the very
possibility of the supernatural in the first place. Our presupposition
against the supernatural would unfairly taint our examination of the
claim. Instead, we ought to remain open to the the miraculous to fairly
examine any claim of supernatural activity.
Naturalism Accepts At Least One “Extra-Natural” Event
Most of us already accept the reasonable reality of at least one
“extra-natural” (aka “miraculous”) event. The Standard Cosmological
Model of naturalism is still the “Big Bang Theory,” a hypothesis that
proposes that all space, time and matter (all the elements of the
natural universe) had a beginning (a “cosmological singularity”). Whatever the cause was, it could not have been something from the natural realm, as this realm was what resulted from the “singularity.”
Naturalism May Not, Therefore, Be An Accurate View of the World
It appears that the beginning of the Universe can be attributed to an
all-powerful “extra-natural” source. If this source was the supernatural
God of the Bible, it would appear that He has the ability to intervene
in the natural realm with creative force. The virgin conception, in
light of this kind of power, is a reasonable prospect.
The virgin
conception defies naturalistic explanation, but that shouldn’t surprise
us. Christianity has always argued that the supernatural (the
miraculous) is reasonable; Christianity has always challenged
naturalism. We cannot reject the virgin conception on naturalistic
grounds without first examining the larger claims of the Christian
Worldview. If there is sufficient reason to believe God exists (and created everything from nothing), then the virgin conception is certainly within His power and equally reasonable.
