Is it possible that Luke’s Gospel originally lacked the story of the Virgin Birth, but that it was added later in order to make the book more “orthodox”?  That’s the question I’m pursing in this thread, based on a paper I delivered to a group of NT scholars 20 years ago.


It appears that in the earliest form of Luke’s Gospel, what we have is an account that locates Jesus’ adoption/appointment to sonship, and its accompanying empowerment, at the baptism, when God declared “Today I have begotten you.”   It is true that throughout the work of Luke – Acts there are other kinds of christological traditions preserved as well – especially in the speeches of Acts.  But many of these are also adoptionistic, even though they appear to embody an even earlier adoptionistic notion that it was at the resurrection, not the baptism, that God conferred a special status upon Jesus and invested him with a special power.

Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!

Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!

Learn More!