[Who Do You Say I Am? by Edward E. Stevens]
IV. Implications of the Virgin Birth
And what of the virgin birth? If Jesus is just a created being, why bother the Holy Spirit (God Himself) with impregnating Mary and making it seem like the “Holy Offspring” inside her was the actual “Son” or offspring of God when in fact he was just “son of God” in some other sense? God didn’t need to do that if all He wanted to do was get one of His creatures to come to earth and die to atone for the sin-guilt of mankind. The virgin birth is only necessary if God Himself wants to become flesh and reverse the curse personally. No one else should be allowed to reverse that curse (because they would be sharing in God’s glory), and in fact, no created being can remove that curse which was placed on mankind by God, simply because they are not holy enough, nor powerful enough. Only God can remove what He Himself imposed, and the prophecies overwhelmingly indicate that is exactly what Jesus (born of a virgin) was supposed to do (Isa. 53:10-12).
How do we explain the virgin birth if Jesus was not God in flesh? Was it just an angel or other created being taking on a fleshly form? Why go through all the trouble of conceiving in a virgin’s womb, and growing up through thirty years of preparation? If it is just some created being, why go to the bother. Angels had taken human form before. Why go through the process of a virgin birth and thirty years of preparation? If salvation can come to man without God Himself directly intervening on our behalf, then why take thirty-three years to do it? God could have simply waved His magic wand and declared salvation was given, and inspire some prophets to write it down that salvation had been freely given by God. Why did someone have to live thirty-three years in the flesh and die? Could anyone else but God save us? Every creature is fallible.
What exactly would be the result of the union of God (the Holy Spirit – Lk. 1:26-38) and Mary? Is it any wonder He was called “The Holy offspring” (Lk. 1:35) and “The Son of the Most High?” (Lk. 1:32) He was the real Son of God, and God was His real Father.
When we use the term “Holy Spirit” we need to remember that this term was used by the Hebrews as a direct reference to Yahweh Himself. No Jew would have thought this term referred to some kind of “impersonal force.” When they used the term they were referring to the very presence of Yahweh God Himself which led Israel through the wilderness and inspired their prophets. It was a very direct reference to God Himself. It is more than interesting and absolutely not accidental that Matthew 28:19 (and other passages) connect Jesus with the Father and the Holy Spirit. We know the Father and the Holy Spirit are direct references to God, so why bring Jesus into this equation and refer to Him in such a way that it implies that He is on a par with them in some way? The NT refers to the Holy Spirit quite often in distinction to the Father as if they were two separate persons. Yet most of us would agree that the Holy Spirit is still every bit as much a reference to God as the Father is. What goes here? Why is it so easy for us to personalize the Holy Spirit and conceive of Him as a separate manifestation of God’s presence and work, and then turn right around as say it is “imponderable” to do the same thing with Jesus Christ? And what is more interesting is that many of those who say they have difficulty conceiving of a “Trinity” of persons sharing the One Divine Existence, seem to have no difficulty conceiving of a “Duality” of persons (the Father and the Holy Spirit) sharing the One Divine Existence. Is it any more difficult to conceive of a Trinity than a Duality? Either these folks are going to have to allow for a Trinity, or reject the Deity of the Holy Spirit. And, to a Jew familiar with the OT revelation, rejecting the Deity of the Holy Spirit would be nothing less than Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit (an unforgivable sin). This one argument by itself is almost enough to settle the whole issue. If there are Two, why couldn’t there be Three? And if someone is going to deny the possibility of Three, they also have to deny the possibility of Two. Just take a look at the writings of those who deny the Deity of Christ. How do they deal with the Holy Spirit? Are they consistent in rejecting the Deity of both Jesus and the Holy Spirit? It is an embarrassing problem for the unitarians.