Investigating a supernatural claim often means gathering evidence and positions against and for the claim. In the case of the virginal conception, the discussion involves varying perspectives, including scientific, historical, and theological (O’Collins 287).
From the scientific standpoint, some scholars flat out reject the virginal conception as yet another miraculous event that is scientifically out of the question. One core argument is that for Mary to conceive a male child, she would have had to mate her XX chromosomes with a human male who had XY chromosomes, thus making a male offspring much more plausible. Yet if God is already a being that defies the laws of nature, it would fit that God can cause miraculous events. Moreover, as Jesus is considered the divine Word, then God may have wished to make the Word’s conception especially unique (O’Collins 288).
Looking through an historical lens, scholars such as Edward Schillebeeckx argue that the virginal conception is not about being an empirical, historically significant truth; rather, it is simply a component of God’s overarching revelation. However, as with many areas of Christian theology, the accounts and reasons for virginal conception could be a both/and situation — informative data and truth of revelation — instead of either/or (O’Collins 289).
Still, when mostly considering the theological and historical angles, what about the relationship between the Old and New Testaments, particularly where the virginal conception fulfills Old Testament prophecies and allegorical stories? While Isaiah 7:14, based on the Greek translation, may refer to a virgin conceiving the Messiah, Old Testament accounts of other extraordinary conceptions may also help amplify Jesus’ conception. Jesus’ genealogy for instance, includes the stories of older women, with barren wombs, who were granted the miraculous means to reproduce through sexual intercourse and then conceive children. Sarah, Rebecca, and Hannah are among the examples (O’Collins 289, 292).
Linking the Old Testament accounts to the virginal conception not only reveals why the virginal conception was unique, but also leads to two more important connections: the relationship between Jesus’ conception and his resurrection — both are glorious miracles that finish out salvation history — and how the Holy Spirit’s power was a necessary force throughout Jesus’ earthly life and when outpoured to the Apostles (O’Collins 293, 295). As O’Collins states, “a womb at the beginning and a tomb at the end mark the beginning and the end of the first coming of the Son of God?” (294). Furthermore, the Trinity is fully manifested; the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have always worked in tandem to bring out salvation history (O’Collins 295).
Speaking of salvation history, modern scholars have been grappling with the ultimate purpose of Jesus’ sacrifice on the Cross, while reassessing Anselm’s views on sacrifice and atonement. Scholars generally agree that the penal substitution theory, mostly rooted in Protestant-based understandings of Anselm’s and Aquinas’ works, mistakenly depicts an angry God who forced Jesus into suffering as a debt to pay for humankind. Meanwhile, it appears that Anslem was more focused on the Son restoring creation through his loving, familial relationship with the Father, and not so much as a means to appease God (Cahill 419, 421).
In fact, as Cahill points out, the term atonement means to bring unity and not to emphasize punishment. Thus, the relationship between God and humankind is built first on love. If God truly represents righteousness and goodness, then Jesus’ sacrifice was to bring humankind back in accord with God’s love. Additionally, Jesus’ resurrection completed atonement by giving new spiritual life to creation (Cahill 424, 425), and thereby leading to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Therefore, God’s love is enduring; he has always had the power to reconcile humankind from grief and sin. “Neither death, nor life…nor anything else in creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 8:38-39). In turn, and through Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection, humankind can “accept the forgiving and restoring love that already surrounds us” (Cahill, 429, 430).
Works Cited
O’Collins, Gerald. Christology: A Biblical, Historical and Systematic Study of Jesus. 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Cahill, Lisa Sowle. “The Atonement Paradigm: Does It Still Have Explanatory Value?” Theological Studies, vol. 68, no. 2, June 2007, pp. 418–32.