The Virgin Birth and Incarnation
by
Charles Graves
In what sense was the conception of the historical man Jesus accomplished without a father? In Christian theology the Virgin Birth of Jesus considers not Joseph or any other human as father, but that Almighty God is his father. In our article on the Divine Family in heaven we have discussed this genealogical aspect of the Divine world and learned that the Holy Spirit is considered the ‘unity’ between God the Father and Jesus, the Son (of this Father). So, in the heavenly world, as noted in the ordination hymn ‘Veni Creator’, the Holy Spirit unites the Father and the Son in a sort of conception process. Perhaps this is one of the concepts lying behind the ‘Virgin Birth’ i.e. that Jesus is and has been forever, the Son of the Father by means of the Spirit, and that Jesus’ sonship is mystical, ‘heavenly’ and non-carnal.
But the concept of a Virgin birth for Jesus, a man of Nazareth, is not presented in such a way biblically. He is considered as ‘born of a virgin’, without a human father. And the doctrine of the Virgin birth, supplemented in the Roman Catholic church by the ‘Immaculate Conception’ emphasizes certain features of Jesus’ earthly existence which cause skepticism among some religious researchers. But it could be that these doctrines are simply reflections of meditation upon Jesus and the reality of his having a heavenly Father related to him not by carnal conception but by the Holy Spirit, a ‘feminine’ essence (sometimes equated with Holy Sophia).
Hence we may be able to accept the concept of the ‘virgin birth’ of Jesus in the sense that, in his heavenly origin, he is ‘conceived’ spiritually (by the holy Spirit which is the unity between Father and Son) and that on the historical level, in Nazareth, he is conceived carnally, being however an ‘echo’ of the heavenly Jesus, Son of God the Father; that his earthly conception was as normal as ours was, but that he was God ‘Incarnate’ in the sense that his origin was from a Divine Heaven. In the context, then, that Jesus was originally ‘born’ in heaven, he was ‘born of a virgin’ (since there was no earthly conception in heaven), And somehow in the sense that Jesus’ earthly birth echoed his birth in heaven, it was ‘virginal’, yet still required a man as father. This existence ‘in and out of history’ of Jesus is a feature not only of Jesus but also of humans in general who have ‘lives on earth’ and ‘lives in heaven’ after death. They also have lives on earth as ‘pre-existing lives’ in the DNA of their ancestors. Jesus, however, is different, we believe, i.e. he is of ‘divine origin’. Thus, he can be considered the product of a ‘virgin birth’ in a certain sense, as described above.
This discussion leads us, finally, to consider what is called the Incarnation of God as seen in Jesus. Certain skeptical persons, as with the ‘virgin birth’, ask questions about such a doctrine as do representatives of most non-Christian religions. St. John tells us ‘God became flesh and dwelt among us’. This is obviously even more challenging a doctrine than the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Of course, there are some preambles to such a belief, namely that God ‘revealed’ himself as the god of the people called Israel (historical persons who were descendants of Abraham and Isaac along with Jacob - whose name was changed o ‘Israel’) this meaning a community of people belonging to the same clan or race. Yet the Creator God was never ‘incarnated’ in Israel, no matter how closely God was seen as accompanying Israel in its historical existence. In this sense it was a certain kind of God for a specific population.
But the Christians saw some progression in the revelation of the God of Israel in that this God was ‘incarnated’ in Jesus of Nazareth (Jesus as descendant of the family of Israel’s king David). This Incarnation included not only linear descent from a tribe and its king but also, secondly, non-linear ‘descent upon earth’ from the heavenly realm. Jesus had both descents and this fact created an entirely new religion. The Jews had no such ‘incarnation’ of the Deity and Jewish leaders could not accept the Christian concept which they believed was against the theological position that God could not be incarnated in a human body. But Jewish tradition did propose a ‘Messiah’ or ‘Christ’ (person anointed with divine chrism like a king) within the accepted literature (the ‘Old Testament’). The ‘Christ’ was to be present as a human being who, like a loving monarch, would ‘set things right’, would help the helpless in society, and would bring justice. His ‘coming’ might even herald the ‘End of the World’ and the justification of humanity.
The Christians pointed to all these ‘sayings’, prophesies etc. in Jewish belief concerning the coming Christ or Messiah (Jewish term for Christ) as proofs of the belief in Jesus of Nazareth as this Christ. Subsequently he was called Jesus the Christ or Jesus Christ. Then, at least, the Jews could, if they so wished, understand Jesus in the sense of their own ancestors’ prophesies. Many Jews accepted such a link but others could not believe Jesus was ‘the Christ’ of the Jews. In theory, the Incarnation of God in Jesus the Christ was a possibility for Jews (after all, such an advent was in their theology) but it was difficult for most of them to see such an Incarnation in the person named Jesus of Nazareth.
Incarnations of the deity are not unreasonable concepts and one sees many such incarnations in the gods venerated by humanity across the centuries. But Jesus as Incarnation of God is alone related to Jewish tradition – his being interpreted as the Messiah of the Jews, i.e. as the Christ. The Biblical texts about Jesus mention him often as Jesus Christ, i.e. the Messiah or Saviour for whom the world has awaited according to Jewish prophesy. So Jewish theology was not against Incarnation theologically, but questioned the particular historical person whom Christians were proclaiming as ‘the Christ’,
Are we moderns against the idea of Incarnation of the deity? Most people today have not read the Jewish bible or its prophesies. Many people have had some experience of ‘miracles’ or contact with the ‘supernatural’ etc., however, and the Incarnation of God’s action in this present world would not be rejected out of hand. But the incarnation of Almighty God in the historical Jesus is another matter – and many people reject the concept. But this is the genius of Christianity and its major claim. To call the man Jesus ‘divine’ is not for everyone, even for many who have been baptized in the Christian religion.
But, if one follows traditional Christian theology, we cannot call Jesus divine, or call him Christ, except the Holy Spirit leads us to do so. And the Holy Spirit is with each of us, supposedly, since the time of our baptism ‘in the name of Christ’ and the Holy Trinity (God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son and the Holy Ghost (Spirit)). The only foundation for belief, according to Christian theology, is when the Holy Spirit leads us to believe.
But what the Holy Spirit, working together with our own spirit, asks us to believe, is that Jesus is the Incarnation of God Almighty, and that the historical and post-historical Jesus is the same essence as Almighty God the Creator of the universe.
Aside from such belief, the Christian Church, as an existential reality in history, does not exist except for such belief within its membership. The ‘cement’ that keeps its members together in a fellowship is only this: the Holy Spirit inspiring the members to believe that Jesus of Nazareth was God incarnate. Members of other religions do not believe this but it is a hallmark for Christians.
Of course, Jesus did not remain incarnate in history after his death and this is something of a relief for Christian believers in their encounter with members of other religions. Christians believe that some kind of continual ‘incarnation’ is to be seen in the ‘Church’ which is a human, fallible symbolic remembrance of God’s incarnation once in history. So, if a non-believer wishes to accept Jesus’ divinity, he/she can ‘join the church’ and thereby exhibit that new belief, since the Incarnation is ‘continued’ in the Church.
Another feature of Jesus’ incarnation in a continuing sense is the Holy Communion, in which believers ‘eat his body’ (i.e. the body of Jesus) and ‘drink his blood’ in the Communion bread and wine (or grape juice for some Protestants). This is certainly an aspect of the Incarnation and a very ‘existential’ one. As these elements are swallowed and digested Jesus’ incarnated body and blood become part of the believer’s body and blood and thereby our most primitive need is fulfilled, i.e. food and drink, but in this case spiritual food and drink are strengthening us in a heavenly sense. Here is a symbolic experience of what Christians might find ‘in heaven’. But taking the Holy Communion is ‘heaven on earth’ just as the Incarnation is a heavenly body on earth.
The Incarnation and the Brain
What are some cerebral features of God’s incarnation in Jesus? We have mentioned in earlier articles the ‘echoing of Jesus’ baptism in our baptism, and the parallels of Holy Communion with the ‘Last supper’ held by Jesus with his disciples, and also how the ordination of clergy brings a heavenly Holy Spirit in contact with church administration, and that all these are accomplished by an ‘echoing’ of the events of the Incarnation with receptivity among believers.
This receptivity occurs, primarily, in the brain of believers, the echoing being directed by the Holy Spirit echoing in ‘our spirits’. The echoes produce healing, conversion and redemption from sin (as we have said previously). These are all elements within the human psyche. In the case of Christianity it means the historical events in Jesus’ life (i.e. baptism and ‘last supper’) which are reflected in neuronal and synaptic structuring and re-structuring, and connections with motor neurons, within the human brain and body. One of the most obvious of this structuring and re-structuring is church liturgy – music, prayer and words in church worship.
‘Church’ is not just an assembly but it is also liturgical worship of the assembly. Here is a further aspect of the Holy Spirit ‘echoing’ the Incarnation inside the Christian community. Worship establishes this contact between the believers and the persons of the Trinity – worship is directed towards ‘God the Father’ through ‘Christ the Son’ and ‘in the Holy Spirit’. The importance of, and the inspiration from, members of the Trinity are ‘incarnated’, or existentially demonstrated, in the liturgy and worship services, directed by the clergypersons whose role is also guided by the Holy Spirit because of their ordination. Thus, the Church. its members, its Holy Communion, its administrators, and its worship are all products of the Incarnation as this is reflected in, and echoed among, the believers.
But there is a still further implication of the Incarnation as used in theology, as described in St. John’s gospel chapter I. ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God and All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life and the light was the light of men, and the light shineth in darkness and the darkness comprehendeth it not.
This was followed by a discussion about John the Baptist and the coming of Jesus as ‘a light into the world’. The expression ‘Word’ in these sentences actually does not mean spoken words but rather means a ‘logic’ after whose model ‘the world was made’. It was a Greek way (English translation of the word logos) of including the structure of the universe within the confines of the Divinity, and also of linking Jesus as the Christ to the origins of the universe. This mysticism of St. John reveals still another aspect of the Incarnation: the ‘Big Bang’ (origin of the universe according to scientists) and Jesus Christ are linked, the implication being that the very existence of, the existential history of, and the eventual demise of, the universe are related to Jesus Christ. When we speak about ‘the Word becoming flesh’ we are discussing the history of the universe as well as the history of Jesus the man. The ‘flesh’ of the universe, also, within the perspective of St. John, has its own inner spiritual life just as Jesus is an illustration of an ‘incarnated’ life.
In other words, the Incarnation not only relates to Jesus’ life, the Church, the sacraments (baptism and Holy Communion), the clergy and the liturgy, but also to the created world, i.e. everything that God created. This is how the Greeks
understood the term translated here (i.e. logos) into English as ‘Word’.
The biblical Book of Revelation, also probably written by or derived from the same St. John, gives some idea of the dénoument of the created world at its end in a picturesque fashion and it reminds us that the Incarnation is all-encompassing as far as theology is concerned. The divine universe of which Jesus is a part, is a ‘groaning’, through tribulation passing, giant incarnated Being with its own beginning and End, and (according to St, John) such incarnation is also a subject for theologians and believers to discuss.
The Greek concept of the Word (logos) as a description of the Divine nature is summed up to some extent in the Eastern Orthodox church’s concept of Divine Sophia (Divine wisdom). No one has expressed it as well as the Russian theologian Sergius Bulgakov, the Dean of St. Sergius Theological Seminary in Paris (died 1944). (1)
Bulgakov’s many writings on Holy Sophia challenged the Russian Orthodox Church and other Christians to understand how the ‘Divine Sophia’ (Bozhestvennaya Sophia) and the worldly Sophia (Tvarnaya Sophia) are related and how they interact with each other all through the history of the universe and how they would ‘come together again’ at the End of time.
Bulgakov, who had been a Marxist teacher in his early professional life, had a keen sense of history and preserved such an historical approach in his theology when he returned to the faith of his ancestors (his father was an Orthodox priest). Although criticized for a certain un-orthodoxy in his Sophia concept, he was always supported by the Patriarch of Constantinople in his teaching career.
For Bugakov, history was an immense drama, characterized by the effort of Divine and Earthly Sophia, separated at the ’Big Bang’, to be re-united at the End of history and that theology should not forget this aspect of Incarnation, mediated by St. Sophia (2)
In conclusion, we have tried in this article, to summarize the various aspects of Incarnation as presented in Christian theology.
Charles Graves
But the concept of a Virgin birth for Jesus, a man of Nazareth, is not presented in such a way biblically. He is considered as ‘born of a virgin’, without a human father. And the doctrine of the Virgin birth, supplemented in the Roman Catholic church by the ‘Immaculate Conception’ emphasizes certain features of Jesus’ earthly existence which cause skepticism among some religious researchers. But it could be that these doctrines are simply reflections of meditation upon Jesus and the reality of his having a heavenly Father related to him not by carnal conception but by the Holy Spirit, a ‘feminine’ essence (sometimes equated with Holy Sophia).
Hence we may be able to accept the concept of the ‘virgin birth’ of Jesus in the sense that, in his heavenly origin, he is ‘conceived’ spiritually (by the holy Spirit which is the unity between Father and Son) and that on the historical level, in Nazareth, he is conceived carnally, being however an ‘echo’ of the heavenly Jesus, Son of God the Father; that his earthly conception was as normal as ours was, but that he was God ‘Incarnate’ in the sense that his origin was from a Divine Heaven. In the context, then, that Jesus was originally ‘born’ in heaven, he was ‘born of a virgin’ (since there was no earthly conception in heaven), And somehow in the sense that Jesus’ earthly birth echoed his birth in heaven, it was ‘virginal’, yet still required a man as father. This existence ‘in and out of history’ of Jesus is a feature not only of Jesus but also of humans in general who have ‘lives on earth’ and ‘lives in heaven’ after death. They also have lives on earth as ‘pre-existing lives’ in the DNA of their ancestors. Jesus, however, is different, we believe, i.e. he is of ‘divine origin’. Thus, he can be considered the product of a ‘virgin birth’ in a certain sense, as described above.
This discussion leads us, finally, to consider what is called the Incarnation of God as seen in Jesus. Certain skeptical persons, as with the ‘virgin birth’, ask questions about such a doctrine as do representatives of most non-Christian religions. St. John tells us ‘God became flesh and dwelt among us’. This is obviously even more challenging a doctrine than the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Of course, there are some preambles to such a belief, namely that God ‘revealed’ himself as the god of the people called Israel (historical persons who were descendants of Abraham and Isaac along with Jacob - whose name was changed o ‘Israel’) this meaning a community of people belonging to the same clan or race. Yet the Creator God was never ‘incarnated’ in Israel, no matter how closely God was seen as accompanying Israel in its historical existence. In this sense it was a certain kind of God for a specific population.
But the Christians saw some progression in the revelation of the God of Israel in that this God was ‘incarnated’ in Jesus of Nazareth (Jesus as descendant of the family of Israel’s king David). This Incarnation included not only linear descent from a tribe and its king but also, secondly, non-linear ‘descent upon earth’ from the heavenly realm. Jesus had both descents and this fact created an entirely new religion. The Jews had no such ‘incarnation’ of the Deity and Jewish leaders could not accept the Christian concept which they believed was against the theological position that God could not be incarnated in a human body. But Jewish tradition did propose a ‘Messiah’ or ‘Christ’ (person anointed with divine chrism like a king) within the accepted literature (the ‘Old Testament’). The ‘Christ’ was to be present as a human being who, like a loving monarch, would ‘set things right’, would help the helpless in society, and would bring justice. His ‘coming’ might even herald the ‘End of the World’ and the justification of humanity.
The Christians pointed to all these ‘sayings’, prophesies etc. in Jewish belief concerning the coming Christ or Messiah (Jewish term for Christ) as proofs of the belief in Jesus of Nazareth as this Christ. Subsequently he was called Jesus the Christ or Jesus Christ. Then, at least, the Jews could, if they so wished, understand Jesus in the sense of their own ancestors’ prophesies. Many Jews accepted such a link but others could not believe Jesus was ‘the Christ’ of the Jews. In theory, the Incarnation of God in Jesus the Christ was a possibility for Jews (after all, such an advent was in their theology) but it was difficult for most of them to see such an Incarnation in the person named Jesus of Nazareth.
Incarnations of the deity are not unreasonable concepts and one sees many such incarnations in the gods venerated by humanity across the centuries. But Jesus as Incarnation of God is alone related to Jewish tradition – his being interpreted as the Messiah of the Jews, i.e. as the Christ. The Biblical texts about Jesus mention him often as Jesus Christ, i.e. the Messiah or Saviour for whom the world has awaited according to Jewish prophesy. So Jewish theology was not against Incarnation theologically, but questioned the particular historical person whom Christians were proclaiming as ‘the Christ’,
Are we moderns against the idea of Incarnation of the deity? Most people today have not read the Jewish bible or its prophesies. Many people have had some experience of ‘miracles’ or contact with the ‘supernatural’ etc., however, and the Incarnation of God’s action in this present world would not be rejected out of hand. But the incarnation of Almighty God in the historical Jesus is another matter – and many people reject the concept. But this is the genius of Christianity and its major claim. To call the man Jesus ‘divine’ is not for everyone, even for many who have been baptized in the Christian religion.
But, if one follows traditional Christian theology, we cannot call Jesus divine, or call him Christ, except the Holy Spirit leads us to do so. And the Holy Spirit is with each of us, supposedly, since the time of our baptism ‘in the name of Christ’ and the Holy Trinity (God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son and the Holy Ghost (Spirit)). The only foundation for belief, according to Christian theology, is when the Holy Spirit leads us to believe.
But what the Holy Spirit, working together with our own spirit, asks us to believe, is that Jesus is the Incarnation of God Almighty, and that the historical and post-historical Jesus is the same essence as Almighty God the Creator of the universe.
Aside from such belief, the Christian Church, as an existential reality in history, does not exist except for such belief within its membership. The ‘cement’ that keeps its members together in a fellowship is only this: the Holy Spirit inspiring the members to believe that Jesus of Nazareth was God incarnate. Members of other religions do not believe this but it is a hallmark for Christians.
Of course, Jesus did not remain incarnate in history after his death and this is something of a relief for Christian believers in their encounter with members of other religions. Christians believe that some kind of continual ‘incarnation’ is to be seen in the ‘Church’ which is a human, fallible symbolic remembrance of God’s incarnation once in history. So, if a non-believer wishes to accept Jesus’ divinity, he/she can ‘join the church’ and thereby exhibit that new belief, since the Incarnation is ‘continued’ in the Church.
Another feature of Jesus’ incarnation in a continuing sense is the Holy Communion, in which believers ‘eat his body’ (i.e. the body of Jesus) and ‘drink his blood’ in the Communion bread and wine (or grape juice for some Protestants). This is certainly an aspect of the Incarnation and a very ‘existential’ one. As these elements are swallowed and digested Jesus’ incarnated body and blood become part of the believer’s body and blood and thereby our most primitive need is fulfilled, i.e. food and drink, but in this case spiritual food and drink are strengthening us in a heavenly sense. Here is a symbolic experience of what Christians might find ‘in heaven’. But taking the Holy Communion is ‘heaven on earth’ just as the Incarnation is a heavenly body on earth.
The Incarnation and the Brain
What are some cerebral features of God’s incarnation in Jesus? We have mentioned in earlier articles the ‘echoing of Jesus’ baptism in our baptism, and the parallels of Holy Communion with the ‘Last supper’ held by Jesus with his disciples, and also how the ordination of clergy brings a heavenly Holy Spirit in contact with church administration, and that all these are accomplished by an ‘echoing’ of the events of the Incarnation with receptivity among believers.
This receptivity occurs, primarily, in the brain of believers, the echoing being directed by the Holy Spirit echoing in ‘our spirits’. The echoes produce healing, conversion and redemption from sin (as we have said previously). These are all elements within the human psyche. In the case of Christianity it means the historical events in Jesus’ life (i.e. baptism and ‘last supper’) which are reflected in neuronal and synaptic structuring and re-structuring, and connections with motor neurons, within the human brain and body. One of the most obvious of this structuring and re-structuring is church liturgy – music, prayer and words in church worship.
‘Church’ is not just an assembly but it is also liturgical worship of the assembly. Here is a further aspect of the Holy Spirit ‘echoing’ the Incarnation inside the Christian community. Worship establishes this contact between the believers and the persons of the Trinity – worship is directed towards ‘God the Father’ through ‘Christ the Son’ and ‘in the Holy Spirit’. The importance of, and the inspiration from, members of the Trinity are ‘incarnated’, or existentially demonstrated, in the liturgy and worship services, directed by the clergypersons whose role is also guided by the Holy Spirit because of their ordination. Thus, the Church. its members, its Holy Communion, its administrators, and its worship are all products of the Incarnation as this is reflected in, and echoed among, the believers.
But there is a still further implication of the Incarnation as used in theology, as described in St. John’s gospel chapter I. ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God and All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life and the light was the light of men, and the light shineth in darkness and the darkness comprehendeth it not.
This was followed by a discussion about John the Baptist and the coming of Jesus as ‘a light into the world’. The expression ‘Word’ in these sentences actually does not mean spoken words but rather means a ‘logic’ after whose model ‘the world was made’. It was a Greek way (English translation of the word logos) of including the structure of the universe within the confines of the Divinity, and also of linking Jesus as the Christ to the origins of the universe. This mysticism of St. John reveals still another aspect of the Incarnation: the ‘Big Bang’ (origin of the universe according to scientists) and Jesus Christ are linked, the implication being that the very existence of, the existential history of, and the eventual demise of, the universe are related to Jesus Christ. When we speak about ‘the Word becoming flesh’ we are discussing the history of the universe as well as the history of Jesus the man. The ‘flesh’ of the universe, also, within the perspective of St. John, has its own inner spiritual life just as Jesus is an illustration of an ‘incarnated’ life.
In other words, the Incarnation not only relates to Jesus’ life, the Church, the sacraments (baptism and Holy Communion), the clergy and the liturgy, but also to the created world, i.e. everything that God created. This is how the Greeks
understood the term translated here (i.e. logos) into English as ‘Word’.
The biblical Book of Revelation, also probably written by or derived from the same St. John, gives some idea of the dénoument of the created world at its end in a picturesque fashion and it reminds us that the Incarnation is all-encompassing as far as theology is concerned. The divine universe of which Jesus is a part, is a ‘groaning’, through tribulation passing, giant incarnated Being with its own beginning and End, and (according to St, John) such incarnation is also a subject for theologians and believers to discuss.
The Greek concept of the Word (logos) as a description of the Divine nature is summed up to some extent in the Eastern Orthodox church’s concept of Divine Sophia (Divine wisdom). No one has expressed it as well as the Russian theologian Sergius Bulgakov, the Dean of St. Sergius Theological Seminary in Paris (died 1944). (1)
Bulgakov’s many writings on Holy Sophia challenged the Russian Orthodox Church and other Christians to understand how the ‘Divine Sophia’ (Bozhestvennaya Sophia) and the worldly Sophia (Tvarnaya Sophia) are related and how they interact with each other all through the history of the universe and how they would ‘come together again’ at the End of time.
Bulgakov, who had been a Marxist teacher in his early professional life, had a keen sense of history and preserved such an historical approach in his theology when he returned to the faith of his ancestors (his father was an Orthodox priest). Although criticized for a certain un-orthodoxy in his Sophia concept, he was always supported by the Patriarch of Constantinople in his teaching career.
For Bugakov, history was an immense drama, characterized by the effort of Divine and Earthly Sophia, separated at the ’Big Bang’, to be re-united at the End of history and that theology should not forget this aspect of Incarnation, mediated by St. Sophia (2)
In conclusion, we have tried in this article, to summarize the various aspects of Incarnation as presented in Christian theology.
- For more on sophia in theology see Charles Graves, The Holy Spirit in the Theology of Sergius Bulgakov. D. Theol. thesis University of Basel 1972 (summary and discussion of over 20 publications of Bulgakov on Divine Sophia in Christian theology).
- The main church of the Byzantine Empire was the Church of Holy Sophia in Constantinople (Istanbul)
Charles Graves
Photograph: ‘rock painting’ in Australia photographed by Graeme Churchard, Bristol (UK)
