A 02 - The Birth of Jesus
CHAPTER 2. THE BIRTH OF JESUS
BESIDES the evidence arising from the previously defined ancestors of the Messiah, there was to be one circumstance connected with his birth, so peculiar and extraordinary, as to point him out in distinction from all others — He was to be born, of a virgin. True, a fact of this kind might be of more difficult proof than many others, in the life of the promised Savior. Delicacy too, would naturally cast a veil over it for a time. Still however, it might be proved; and when proved, it would powerfully tend, not only to identify the person of the Messiah, but to demonstrate also, the extraordinary character of his mission. In Genesis 3:15, are these words, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” The reference in this passage is evidently to the Messiah. We have already seen that the term seed, employed in the promise given to Abraham, refers to the predicted Savior. The same allusion is intended by the word in the present instance. The Messiah was to be, not only a son of Abraham by natural descent, but a soil of the woman, by miraculous conception and birth. That which is here affirmed of this seed is applicable only to the Messiah.
He was to bruise the head, that is, to overthrow the kingdom of the serpent, or Satan. But who is competent to a work of this kind, save the chosen of God, the Savior of men? Nor was Eve the specific woman alluded to in this promise. The Messiah was not born of her; for, he was afterwards promised to Abraham and David. Eve, therefore, could not be the woman here meant. The prophecy must therefore refer to some other woman, who should exist in after ages. “He, (Christ) says Scott, is called the seed of the woman, and not the seed of Adam, though descended from both; not only because Satan had prevailed first against the woman, but likewise with an evident prophetic intimation of his miraculous conception and birth of a pure virgin.” 1 “Christ is called the seed of the woman, says Lowth, by way of distinction, as not to be born in the ordinary way of generation.” 2 Bloomfield also speaks of Mary, as “that particular virgin who was prophesied of from the beginning, and whose seed was to bruise the serpent’s head.” The prophet Isaiah, is still more explicit, in predicting the miraculous birth of the promised Deliverer. “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 a sign. Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”
Attempts have been made to explain away the meaning of this passage, by asserting that the Hebrew word hml[ here translated a virgin, denotes also a young married woman, and by applying the language either to the son of the prophet himself, or to some other child, born about that time. This mode of interpretation seems almost inexcusable in Christian commentators, from the fact that the Evangelist Matthew applies the passage directly to Mary and to Jesus. A safer expositor, no plain and honest believer could desire. Gesenius, although he asserts the meaning of the word in this place to be, “a youthful spouse,” yet defines it as generally meaning, “a girl, maiden, or virgin, of marriageable age.” 4 “The primary meaning of the word, says Lowth, is hid, or concealed; from whence it is taken to signify a virgin, because of the custom in eastern countries, to keep their virgins concealed from the view of men.” 5 The Hebrew word, says Scott, most properly signifies a virgin; and so it is translated here, by all the ancient interpreters, and it is never once used in the Scriptures in any other sense.” There is, however, another and very obvious objection to the application of this language in the manner above alluded to. The birth of the predicted child was to be a sign, a miracle. Now, what sign or miracle could it be, that a young married woman should bear a son? Evidently, the force and propriety of the language, are entirely destroyed by such an interpretation. Nor is it any objection to the Messianic character of the passage, that in the context, the prophet alludes so much to the existing state of things among the Jews. It is the usual practice of the ancient prophets, not only to make rapid transitions in their subjects, but also to mingle their predictions of the Messiah, and his kingdom, with the state of the Jewish commonwealth around them. The latter was a sort of prophetic observatory, from which these holy men contemplated and described the more distant objects under the Messiah’s reign, a sort of national prism, casting its various hues upon the glories of the latter day. The name also of the predicted child, forbids the application of this passage to any ordinary Jewish family — “And shall call his name Immanuel.” This name which is made up of three Hebrew words combined, means literally, God-with-us. Now, it is certain, that such a name was really given to no child born at the time, of which we have any account. It is also certain, that such a name could be appropriately given to no ordinary Jewish child whatever. Of whom, but of the. promised Son of David, the Messiah, could such a name be descriptive? He and he only, could be, “God-with-us.” If then we associate these passages together, we have two distinct and positive declarations, the one made immediately by God himself, the other by a prophet in his name, that the promised Savior was to be virgin-born; that he was to be peculiarly and independently the woman’s son. How do these prophecies apply to Jesus of Nazareth? The circumstances and manner of his birth are thus given by Luke: “And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. And the angel came in unto her and said, Hail, thou that art highly favored; the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind, what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her. Fear not Mary, for thou hast found favor with God. And behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her; The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also, that holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God.” Luke 1:26-35. The narrative as furnished by Matthew is the following: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: when as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he 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.
Then Joseph being raised from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife; and knew her not till she had brought forth her first-born son. and he called his name Jesus. Matthew 1:18-25.
Jehovah, to execute his purposes of grace to man, and to fulfill the prophecies previously delivered, sends an angel to Nazareth in Galilee, to make known to a virgin there, that she had been selected as the mother of the long expected Savior. With conscious innocence, but deep interest in the tidings brought, the virgin states, what seemed to her an insuperable barrier to the accomplishment of the event announced. Her doubts however, are removed by the angel, who informs her, that the birth of her son was to be miraculous, and not ordinary. Mary was at the time espoused to a man, also living at Nazareth, whose name was Joseph.
Joseph, in the course of time discovers the condition of his intended wife.
He loves, he esteems her; but being “a just man,” and not willing by a public act of marriage, to cover a crime he considered so heinous and offensive, he resolved to give her a bill of divorce, and thus, according to the Jewish usage, to destroy the contract of marriage existing between them. He determined, however, from the regard he felt for his intended bride, to do this privately. While meditating upon these things, an angel appears to him also, and informs him, not only that Mary had not offended, but that the child she was about to bring forth, was the promised Deliverer of men. So satisfied was this just and good man with the information given him by the angel, that all his fears were dissipated, and he hesitated not publicly to receive Mary as his wife, and thus to become not only her guardian and protector, but the guardian and protector also, during his infancy and childhood, of her illustrious Son.
There is in these simple and undisguised narratives, every possible appearance of truth. There is nothing improbable that the birth of a Savior should be attended with miracle. And if such a birth be miraculous, there is nothing improbable in the visitation of angels on the occasion, and especially, of their visitation to the parties most deeply concerned. The reserve too and modesty of the virgin, the fears and. anxieties of Joseph, the native simplicity which pervades the narratives, all tend to give great probability to the facts here stated.
Besides the testimony of Mary and Joseph to the miraculous conception and birth of Jesus, another witness is introduced by the Evangelists. This witness is Elizabeth. Being informed by the angel that Elizabeth was also about to become the mother of an extraordinary personage, Mary pays her a visit. Upon her entrance into the presence of Elizabeth, the latter is filled with divine and extraordinary influences. Under these supernatural impulses, she announces to her visitor the very facts communicated by the angel to Mary, and with which she supposed none acquainted but herself.
Luke 1:39-45. Elizabeth, herself a woman of great piety, was the wife of a very reputable priest, by the name of Zacharias. Her testimony, therefore, was well calculated to confirm the extraordinary statements made by Mary and Joseph, concerning the supernatural conception and birth of Jesus. Nor would facts like these be apt to be withheld from Zacharias, or from the other relatives of both families, indeed, of the three families. Mary would be likely to narrate them to some at least of her immediate and most trust-worthy friends. Joseph would no doubt, make them known to some of his; and Elizabeth and Zacharias, to some of theirs. By this means, a number of persons would soon be informed of these wonderful events. The near approach too of the long expected and earnestly desired Messiah, would be too good news to be kept altogether a secret. Modesty, it is true, together with the extreme sacredness of the matter, might prevent clamor or commotion. There might be no general fame, no widespread report.
Still, however, there would be found a sufficient number of faithful hearts, to which, like Mary’s, these wonders might be confided. And that this was really the case, there can be no doubt. Matthew and Luke both speak of them as of events well known. Nor can we suppose, that the statements of the Evangelists are themselves but inventions, to embellish their history and to exalt their hero. All the evidence which proves the truthfulness in general of the Gospels written by these two Evangelists, will also go to establish the accuracy of these particular parts of those Gospels. The facts here stated, therefore, must stand or fall with the New Testament itself. Besides, had these statements of the Evangelists been false, that fact might easily have been detected. So that instead of adding to the interest of their composition, or to the dignity of Jesus, the imposture would have produced just the contrary effect. The Evangelists, however, speak of these things, as of facts worthy of the utmost credit; of facts too, which the subsequent and illustrious life of Jesus, served but to confirm and establish in the minds of men. We cannot, therefore, without minds capable of resisting the strongest evidence, capable of denying the positive statements of the most authentic history, disbelieve the miraculous conception and birth of Jesus of Nazareth. His mother, Joseph, Elizabeth, two of his disciples, and many of his most intimate acquaintances, all agree in their testimony on this point. But if the birth of Jesus was miraculous, then have we another, and a most powerful proof of his being the Messiah. According to two express prophecies concerning the Messiah in the Old Testament, he was to be “the woman’s seed,” “a virgin’s son.” He was to be born, not in the ordinary method of human generation, but by the exercise of Divine and supernatural power. A body was to be prepared, for the manifestation of the Godhead in human flesh. These prophecies have been fulfilled in the birth of Jesus. Nor have they been fulfilled in the birth of any other person whatever. Abel, Noah, Abraham, David, John and Peter, were all born in the ordinary way. Even the mythological stories about the birth of Alexander, Romulus, Aeneas, and others, were not believed by the very historians, among the Greeks and Romans, who narrated them. Nor can the history of the world, save the New Testament, produce one probable case, of a miraculous conception and birth. This has been peculiar to one only, of all the multitudes that have lived upon our globe. That one is Jesus. He, and he only, was miraculously conceived; he, and he only, was born of a pure virgin. So far then as these prophecies are concerned, Jesus must be the Christ, must be the promised Savior of men.