FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53  
54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   >>   >|  
ery--and many feel that it is much easier to accept the theory of the later interpolation of the story into Luke's Gospel, particularly in view of the corroborative indications. Summing up the views of the Higher Criticism, we may say that the general position taken by the opponents and deniers of the Virgin Birth of Jesus is about as follows: 1. The story of the Virgin Birth is found only in the introductory portion of two of the four Gospels--Matthew and Luke--and even in these the story bears the appearance of having been "fitted in" by later writers. 2. Even Matthew and Luke are silent about the matter after the statements in the introductory part of their Gospels, which could scarcely occur had the story been written by and believed in by the writers, such action on their part being contrary to human custom and probability. 3. The Gospels of Mark and John are absolutely silent on the subject; the oldest of the Gospels--that of Mark--bears no trace of the legend; and the latest Gospel--that of John--being equally free from its mention. 4. The rest of the New Testament breathes not a word of the story or doctrine. _The Book of Acts, generally accepted as having also been written by Luke, ignores the subject completely_. Paul, the teacher of Luke, and the great writer of the Early Church, seems to know nothing whatever about the Virgin Birth, or else purposely ignores it entirely, the latter being unbelievable in such a man. Peter, the First Apostle, makes no mention of the story or doctrine in his great Epistles, which fact is inconceivable if he knew of and believed in the legend. The Book of Revelation is likewise silent upon this doctrine which played so important a part in the later history of the Church. The great writings of the New Testament contain no mention of the story, outside of the brief mention in Matthew and Luke, alluded to above. 5. There are many verses in the Gospels and Epistles which go to prove, either that the story was unknown to the writers, or else not accepted by them. _The genealogies of Joseph are cited to prove the descent of Jesus from David, which depends entirely upon the fact of Joseph's actual parentage. Jesus is repeatedly and freely mentioned as the son of Joseph._ Paul and the other Apostles
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53  
54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Gospels

 
mention
 

Virgin

 
doctrine
 

Matthew

 

Joseph

 
silent
 

writers

 

written

 

believed


Testament

 
Church
 

Epistles

 

ignores

 

accepted

 

legend

 

subject

 
introductory
 

Gospel

 

inconceivable


played

 

likewise

 

Apostle

 

Revelation

 

theory

 
accept
 
purposely
 

unbelievable

 
easier
 

history


depends
 

descent

 

genealogies

 

actual

 
parentage
 

Apostles

 

mentioned

 

repeatedly

 
freely
 

unknown


alluded

 
writer
 

writings

 

verses

 

important

 
deniers
 

opponents

 
scarcely
 

action

 

probability