|
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, |
His supernatural conception, described in Luke’s Gospel. Luke was
a gentile Doctor, and would have gone over the
details of this with Mary before committing it to print! |
Luke
was a doctor – not trained to today’s level, but he was the closest thing to a
scientist at that time. He had met St Paul, accompanied him on several of his
travels (in Acts, which Luke wrote, there are a number of chapters where the
language changes from “he went” to “we went”) and at the start of his gospel he
claims to have diligently researched everything he wrote; he would have met and
interviewed Mary (living under John’s care), to be able to include the birth
narrative. So his account here is probably the most
objective account possible.
The
account of Gabriel’s visit to Mary is extraordinary in a
number of ways …
·
God
(despite knowing that Mary would say “yes”) asks her permission … the normal
way was to announce “this is what God will do”
·
Mary
was allowed to ask a question, without being in any way condemned for doubt
·
Despite
the enormity of what Gabriel described, Mary asked only the one question; the
rest she “took on trust”
Some
people assume that Joseph fathered Jesus, possibly
because they can’t conceive of an engagement without prior sex (taking today’s
morals as the historical norm?), or accept that God could overrule the “laws of
nature”. But if God created Adam from the dust of the ground, and Eve from
Adam’s rib, surely He can cause one of Mary’s ova to
fertilise. It may be that this is something difficult for anyone who has not
experienced something of the miraculous to accept.
Another
argument sometimes advanced against a supernatural conception, is that in the
Bible Joseph is called Jesus’ father
·
The
genealogies include Joseph
·
At
age 12 Mary tells Jesus “Your father and I have sought you …”
·
The
crowds think of Jesus as Joseph’s son
But
if Joseph was not the biological father, he was definitely an adoptive father,
and would have deserved the title “father” anyway; so
we can’t use these passages as a conclusive argument.
Luke
then goes on to recount the events of Mary’s visit to Elizabeth (unexpectedly
pregnant with John the Baptist) and her reception, and her prophetic song of
praise; all of these events would have reassured her
that God was with her, during and beyond her pregnancy.
In
Matthew’s gospel we have more information about Joseph’s reaction to Mary’s
pregnancy. The natural assumption would have been that Mary had been unfaithful
to him with someone else; this would have made Mary liable for at best community
shaming, at worst stoning. But in a dream Joseph was told that he shouldn’t
hesitate to complete his marriage to Mary, because the pregnancy was of divine
origin.
Why
is this important?
·
I’ve
put this in the “birth” section, so won’t repeat it here.
Return
to the “What we believe” page, or the “Faith” index, or the main
website index.