On December 14 I will be giving a one-off remote lecture, with Q&A, called “The Other Virgin Births in Antiquity.” This will not be connected with the blog per se, but with my other venture in which I produce online courses and lectures (BEPS: Bart Ehrman Professional Services). You can learn about the lecture here: https://www.bartehrman.com/other-virgin-births-in-antiquity/
Jesus is decidedly conceived by a virgin in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. This is better called a “virginal conception” — and in my course I’ll explain the difference between the ideas of virginal conception; virgin birth; perpetual virginity; and immaculate conception. All very different ideas!
BUT, for the sake of convenience, I’ll simply refer to Jesus’ conception and birth as “the virgin birth.”
Since, oh, I don’t know, the 19th century I guess, there have been people who have claimed that virgin births were common in the ancient world. You find that claim widely today still among those who call themselves “mythicists” — those who think Jesus didn’t exist but was just a myth. One of the most common claims of the mythicists is that there were numerous other divine men in Jesus’ day who were very similar – in fact, in almost every respect – to Jesus.
I deal with all this material in my book Did Jesus Exist (HarperOne, 2012). Here I reproduce in edited form some of what I say there.
A terrific example of mythicist claims comes in a classic in the field, the 1875 book of Kersey Graves, The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors: Christianity Before Christ, which has been reprinted for wide circulation here in recent years. A number of mythicists simply take Graves’ word for it when he claims that Jesus was just like all the other invented figures of his day; they sometimes simply restate what he says as “fact” (hey, it’s in print!).
Early on his “study” Graves states his overarching thesis:
Researches into oriental history reveal the remarkable fact that stories of incarnate Gods answering to and resembling the miraculous character of Jesus Christ have been prevalent in most if not all principal religious heathen nations of antiquity; and the accounts and narrations of some of these deific incarnations bear such a striking resemblance to that of the Christian Savior – not only in their general features but in some cases in the most minute details, from the legend of the immaculate conception to that of the crucifixion, and subsequent ascension into heaven – that one might almost be mistaken for the other. (p. 29)
Graves goes on to list thirty five such divine figures, naming them as Chrisna of Hindostan, Budha Sakia of India; Baal of Phenicia; Thammuz of Syria; Mithra of Persia, Cadmus of Greece; Mohamud of Arabia; and so on. Already the modern, informed reader sees that there are going to be problems. Buddha, Cadmus, and Mohammed? These had lives that were remarkably like Jesus’, down to the details? But as Graves goes on to contend:
These have all received divine honors, have nearly all been worshiped as Gods, or sons of Gods; were mostly incarnated as Christs, Saviors, Messiahs, or Mediators; not a few of them were reputedly born of virgins; some of them filling a character almost identical with that ascribed by the Christian’s Bible to Jesus Christ; many of them, like him, are reported to have been crucified; and all of them, taken together, furnish a prototype and parallel for nearly every important incident and wonder-inciting miracle, doctrine, and precept recorded in the New Testament, of the Christian’s savior.” (pp. 30-31)
Virtually everything Graves says is wrong. In my lecture I won’t be addressing Graves or any of the mythicists directly, or be dealing with each of these claims — just the bit about there being lots of virgin births in the ancient world. You find claims like that far more recently.
As a more recent example, appearing in 1999 was the (intended) blockbuster work by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, The Jesus Mysteries: Was the ‘Original Jesus’ a Pagan God?. Freke and Gandy have collaborated on a number of books in recent years, most of them uncovering the conspiratorial secrets of our shared past. In their book they argue that Jesus was invented by a group of Jews who resembled the Therapeutae in Alexandria Egypt, leading to the invention of a new mystery religion (the Jesus Mysteries) that flourished at the beginning of the third century CE. In their view, however, Jesus was not a sun-God. He was a creation based on the widespread mythologies of dying and rising gods known throughout the pagan world. And so their main thesis:
The story of Jesus is not the biography of a historical Messiah, but a myth based on perennial Pagan stories. Christianity was not a new and unique revelation but actually a Jewish adaptation of the ancient Pagan Mystery religion. (Jesus Mysteries, p. 2)
At the heart of all the various pagan mysteries, Freke and Gandy aver, was a myth of a godman who died and rose from the dead. This divine figure was called by various names in the sundry pagan mysteries: Osiris, Dionysus, Attis, Adonis, Baccus, Mithras. But “fundamentally all these godmen are the same mythical being” (p. 4).
The reason that Freke and Gandy think so is that all these figures share the same mythology: their father was God; their mother was a mortal virgin; they were each born in a cave on December 25 before three shepherds and wisemen; among their miracles they turned water to wine; they all rode into town on a donkey; they all were crucified at Eastertime as a sacrifice for the sins of the world; they descended to hell; and on the third day they rose again. Since these same things are said of Jesus as well, it is obvious that the stories believed by the Christians are all simply invented as imitations of the pagan religions.
Historians of antiquity as a rule have trouble believing that anyone takes these kinds of claims seriously. It takes very little research in the ancient texts themselves to see how odd they are. The authors provide no evidence for them: they don’t even cite any sources from the ancient world that can be checked. And so it is not that they have provided an alternative interpretation of the available evidence. They have not even cited the available evidence. And for good reason. No such evidence exists.
What, for example, is the proof that Osiris was born on December 25 before three shepherds? Or that he was crucified? And that his death brought an atonement for sin? Or that he returned to life on earth by being raised from the dead? In point of fact, no ancient source says any such thing about Osiris (or about the other gods). But Freke and Gandy claim that this is common knowledge. And they “prove” it by quoting other writers from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries who have said so. But these writers too do not cite any historical evidence. This is all based on assertion, believed by Freke and Gandy simply because they read it somewhere. This is not serious historical scholarship. It is sensationalist writing driven by a desire to sell books.
Well, there’s a lot of that about. In my course I’ll be talking specifically about ancient virgin births. Were there a lot of them? Were there any? Were there *other* kinds of weird birth stories? That’s actually the most interesting question. The answer: Oh boy were there.
What about Paul and John’s views? How does a pre-existent divine being become incarnated as a human? Paul mentions Jesus having a mother and John names Joseph so it’s not like Jesus just popped into existence one day fully mature. How would that work? Functionally I mean. Any clues from pagan sources perhaps?
Thanks
Certainly in pagan sources gods become human, yes. But I’m not sure what you’re asking? The Gospels of Matthew and Luke have a virgin birth but not pre-existent divine being; John has a pre-existent divine being but no birth; Mark doesn’t have either.
Yes, both Paul and John believe Jesus was a pre-existent divine being who incarnated as a human being. But Paul does say that Jesus was born of a woman. John tells stories about Jesus’ mother and has a character identify Joseph as Jesus’ father. Neither tells us stories about Jesus’ birth. So my question. How do you suppose Paul and John imagined a pre-existent divine being incarnating as a human who had human parents? Matthew and Luke’s virgin births have a logic to them since they remove joseph from the equation. But as you say there is no hint of Jesus’ pre-existence. But Paul and John have both a pre-existent Jesus and human parents. I just wonder how that might have worked.
Thanks
I don’t know how they imagined it, but I sure do wish I did.
Are there examples of Greco-Roman gods or supernatural beings who are pre-existent beings who become human by being born of a woman?
It seems to me that all the pre-existent divine beings who become human just transform into one without having to be conceived and born. On the other hand, those Greco-Roman gods who are born of women aren’t pre-existent beings but are humans glorified as gods at some point after they are born.
So, are Paul and John unique in claiming that a heavenly being became human through being born of a woman?
No, I dno’t believe there are. Paul of course does in one place speak of Jesus being a pre-incarnate human who became human and in a different letter (written at a different time) does speak of him being born of a woman. If you do put those two together, which makes sense but I suppose a counter-argument could be made, then yes, that would be unlike anything we know of, at least that I know of. John doesn’t say anything about Jesus’ birth, so it’s hard to say. He does mention Jesus’ mother – but elsewhere in the Bible Joseph is called his father, even though he, for those texts, actaully wasn’t. (So possibly John doesn’t imagine she actually gave birth? It’s a possibility at lesat.
In neither case do you have an explicit statement let alone a narrative. Alas. I wish they had both left both!
Of course there was later Gnostic speculation that the pre-existent divine “Christ” inhabited (possessed?) the human Jesus and at his crucifixion departed from him. Based on your comments over the years I don’t think you think either Paul or John held that view, but I can see the logic of it.
The link’s not working.
https://www.bartehrman.com/other-virgin-births-in-antiquity/
I just clicked on it (in your comment) and it worked for me!
Yesterday (12/7) the link took me to a proper website. The website provided two boxes to enter your “First Name” and email address. I then clicked the button “sign up”, but then nothing happened. I was expecting some sort of message of confirmation. Kvogt – is that what you are referring to? It made me wonder if the process worked properly too.
Thanks,
Oh dear. I’ll look into it.
Unrelated to the blog, but I have to say that I thought your recent podcast Must Women Keep Silent? was excellent. I shared a link with my sister, who’s a believer, and she also found it very interesting, particularly as she’d always experienced Paul’s letters as inconsistent on the subject.
Great! Thanks.
I’m currently listening to Megan’s discussion with James Tabor.
The scriptures says “Again the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, “Go, number Israel and Judah.” (2 Samuel 24:1)”
However, it also says,
“Now Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel. (1 Chronicles 21:1)”
Are these genuine contradictions? Do these make God the author of evil?
Well, I wouldn’t say they are *necessarily* contradictions, since one could say that the Lord moved David through Satan. But yes, it’s a clear change in order to remove teh blame from God himself.
Is there any mention anywhere in the Old Testament that Yahweh has a son, or that he will have one ??
Since Yahweh is the only God of his chosen people, the Jews, only an Israeli woman can give him a son!
Is there any indication of such a possibility in the Old Testament?? If it exists where is it?
Thank you.
No, Yahweh is not said to have (literal) children in the OT.
And here I thought Jesus was a psychotropic fungus…
I tried using the help section but it would never submit my question. I just signed up and am looking for the audio of each post. Where am I able to access the audio of each post? Thanks.
In the help post theirs an instruction about sending an email (the Support form is experiencing technical difficulties). The audio is available to gold and platinum level members. If you’re at that level, go ahead and send a query to [email protected] If that still doesn’t work, zap me an email.
I’ve now logged into a desktop and found instructions for audio. You can delete both posts. I could not find how to access while only using mobile to browse.
AH! Thanks.
Bart, your book, Misquoting Jesus, was highly influential in my leaving Fundamentalist Christianity and the full-time ministry in 2008. I am a fairly public (locally) atheist and Secular Humanist today. I was thinking recently it would be great to have all your blog posts in book form one day. Do you have plans for this?
No plans — but some have suggested it. Thanks,
Dear Bart,
Have you studied 2 Enoch closely? I ask, as I’ve only just come across it and was amazed to discover the final chapters concerning Melchizedek’s conception seem to have a strong parallel with Jesus’. There are some important differences, but it seems to be a rare example of a woman being impregnated by the Jewish God.
I was asked that on a podcast yesterday! The problem, of course, is the dating; there’s very little reason to think that it’s pre-Christian, and many scholars date it centuries later (though first century CE seems plausible to many) (I don’t understand teh arguments that claim that the text presupposes that the temple was still standing. The same argument could be made for lots of later rabbinic texts as well. Maybe I’m just not understanding it)
I’m diving into this text soon, but from what little I’ve found out it seems there could have been an early 1st C Jewish base text (R H Charles) which has been edited throughout the centuries. I can’t make out if the Melchizedek episode is early or a later addition. Do you have a strong opinion one way or the other? What did you say on the podcast?
Also – what a coincidence you get asked it twice on the same day through entirely different mediums!! Perhaps this is God’s way of prompting you to look at this closer! 😀
I’n not sure. But there’s been a lot of debate since Charles’s day. I assume you’re using the Charlesworth volumes as teh place to start. They too, alas, are getting dated (though not as much as Charles. A lot has changed.) And yes, I do think this is proof that God exists…
Thanks for this – I’ve yet to get hold of Charlesworth’s first volume where I suspect 2 Enoch is. I’ll try to get hold of it later. Out of curiosity, have you met Charlesworth before? I’m impressed with his scholarship, especially on Odes of Solomon. What’s your opinion of the man?
Oh yes, I’ve known him for years. He replaced Metzger at Princeton Theological Seminary while I was still doing my dissertation. The two-volume work on OT Pseudepigrapha is a vade mecum.
Somewhat off topic but related — why is the story of Herod the Great seeking to kill infant boys when Jesus was born only in Matthew? Where do you think Matthew got it from? If I’m not mistaken, it is not in Mark and likely not in Q. If it came from Q, why would it not also be in Luke? Is there any evidence that Herod actually tried to do something like this?
I don’t know where he got it from (nothing suggests it was in Q, which is almost entirely sayings of Jesus); Matthew has a number of stories taht he alone preserves; normally these are simply assigned to his “special source” that scholars call “M” — which may have been one or a bunch of oral traditions or written texts. The reason it’s in Matthew, though, is becuas Matthew has to get Jesus to Egypt as a child so that he can come out of there to fulfill prophecy “out of Egypt have I called my son” (Hosea 11:2; quoted in Matthew 2). No, there’s no evidence it ever happened an compelling reasons to think it didn’t (since, e.g. it’s not even alluded to anywhere else from antiquity and Herod would have been in very serious trouble had he done it)
Who came up with the idea that Mary was a virgin? It seems that he started a cottage industry around this idea that exists to this day. Can we trace this to one person or group of people? The idea doesn’t seem particularly relevant these days.
Well, we don’t know. The Gospel of Matthew is the first to mention it (it’s found only there and in Luke in the NT). But since they both have it independently of one another it must have been an idea floating around. I’ll be dealing with that a bit in my talk.
I would suppose the idea of virgin birth should not exist in the bible, as only Matthew’s gospel puts emphasis on it quoting Isaiah, but the hebrew word used here was ‘Alma’, which means young woman.
The greek mistranslation plays into the catholic idea of the immaculate conception.
Hello Dr. Ehrman. I listened to your talk “The Other Virgin Births in Antiquity”. Here is my question:
I am not sure I agree that Jesus birth is the only virgin/sexless conception from antiquity. For instance, I would like to know your take on the birth story of Perseus. In this mythology, Acrisius imprisoned his daughter, Danaë, in a bronze chamber, open to the sky, in the courtyard of his palace. Zeus came to her in the form of a shower of gold, and fathered her son Perseus.
It is not clear to me if the drops of gold falling from the sky/ceiling in the mythology entered into her vagina, but still no sex. This is far closer to Mary being overshadowed by the Holy Spirit (just as a magical substance, which must have went into her womb to impregnate her). So it seems to me that Danaë remained as much a virgin as Mary did.
Moreover, Justin Martyr conceded the virgin birth of Perseus but attributed the story to Satan’s work:
“And when I hear, Trypho,” said I, “that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving serpent counterfeited also this.” – St. Justin Martyr Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 70
My sense is that Greeks who promoted their myths of the births of divine men were read to be explaining extraordinary measures the gods took in order to have sexual experience of them. Otherwise there was little reason for the god being interesyed. The gods never seem to be interested in having a child per se, but in the physcial attractions of the woman. I will admit that this is much closer to what happens to Mary in Luke 1:35 than other pagan stories — she does appear to be a virgin when locked up by her father to keep her from getting pregnant) And yes, Justin is a very interesting case. In his apologetic works he wanted to stress the *similarities* of Xn claims with pagan, as a way to defend what opponents claimes was nonsense; and in doing so he sometimes exagerrated the similarities. THis one is indeed pretty close. But I’m not sure it’s the same as in the NT (where there is nothing at all tangible that comes upon Mary)
Dear Dr Ehrman,
Can we consider the story of the virgin birth a *legend*? Or a *myth*?
Technically speaking, Is it correct to call it this way?
Thanks
It depends on how we define the terms “legend” and “myth.” I usually use “legend” to refer to invented stories about human figures and “myth” to refer to invented stories that involve divine interventions (either wiht other gods or with humans). The virgin birth kind of falls twixt the cracks, but I suppose is more toward the myth side of the equatoin.
Dr. Ehrman, love your Podcast and the blog posts. I have learnt a lot. I am bit confused about the “immaculate conception” which refers to Mary’s birth. So what I have been able to understand is that because Anna (Mary’s mother) could not conceive and the “holy spirit” enabled her conceiving Mary? Would that not suggest Mary as the daughter of God e.g., holy spirit and Jesus as his grandson. How then would we explain Anna being able to conceive?
No, that’s not quite it. The Immaculate Conception is not that Anna conceived without human sexual intercourse. It is that God did a miracle at the conception and made sure she did not have the “sin nature” passed along to her. That way she could not pass it along to Jesus. She was nonethelss fully human (Just as Adam too was fully human without having a sin nature).