Why do only Matthew and Luke know of the virgin birth?

Question

Of all the writers of the New Testament, only Matthew and Luke mention the virgin birth. Had something as miraculous as the virgin birth actually occurred, one would expect that Mark and John would have at least mentioned it in their efforts to convince the world that Jesus was who they were claiming him to be.

The apostle Paul never mentions the virgin birth, even though it would have strengthened his arguments in several places. Instead, where Paul does refer to Jesus' birth, he says that Jesus "was born of the seed of David" (Romans 1:3) and was "born of a woman," not a virgin (Galatians 4:4).


What gives? Didnt the story get through to all of the apostles? Was it only a miracle to Matt and Lucky Luke?

Answer 1

Because like many fiction writers, one thought it up and the other plagarized it. The other two probably never read it.... It's not like they were written at the same time...

And, BTW-- many scholars believe that the writers of the gospels were not the actual apostles, but instead they used the names of the apostles to give credit to their stories...

Sorry if I burst a Christian bubble...

Answer 2

Matthew's Gospel is considered to be the earliest, related orally as per tradition but first written around the fall of Jerusalem in approx. 60 AD. Peter (who dictated the Gospel to Mark) didn't see any need to add to an existing Gospel. Paul dictated the Gospel to Luke, so Paul apparently did think the virgin birth was worth recognizing. And John started his Gospel just prior to the beginning of Jesus' ministry, so the early years weren't necessarily germane.

Answer 3

The Gospels were written to provide different perspectives of Christ and to different readers. Matthew wrote as an eyewitness account, and some believe he wrote as the events happened (except for the virgin birth which he mostly got from Mary herself). His gospel was written for the Jewish readers and emphasized His Jewish roots and His lineage back to Adam. Luke presented the historical Jesus for a Gentile reader. He was a very thorough historian and wanted to make sure he got all the facts in. Luke was written by Luke after interviewing or talking to eyewitnesses to the events. Mark and John were written for different purposes. Mark set out to show the servant, the Son of Man. It is believed he received his information from Peter. Johns purpose was to show Jesus as God, he was an eyewitness to the events he writes about.

Answer 4

I would say to answer that question one would need to understand that two people are a witness. There need not be more than that. Secondly, a quick look at the Greek translation of Galatians 4:4 reveals to me that the passage reads a lot differently than the version you posted. The Greek is more accurate than English. In the Greek it talks of God sending forth his son (the son of God) through a woman.

Answer 5

There's been different thories to this, but the academic theory is that the original translation for young maiden (written in Matthew and Luke) was mistranslated into virgin. And after this discovery was made, the image and idea of Mary as the virgin was already established.

Answer 6

It was a virgin birth in Luke and Luke would know best because he never met Jesus. Matthew knew about it because the person who wrote the Gospel according to Matthew copied the Gospel according to Luke.

Everyone knows that.

Answer 7

Good question I had the same question. I found my answer.

Luke and Matthew have two different geneologies. It is very clear that the Geneology in Matthew is of the lineage of Joseph. and Luke is not Joseph's Geneology so we are led to believe it is Mary's. Back then, you never tracked someone's line by a woman, only men. Thus the Seed of David scriptures. Heli, in Luke, is not a relative of Joseph. Heli is Mary's Father, thus the Seed of David scriptures are correct. Mary is of Heli who was of the seed of David. Mary is Heli's seed. By the miracle of God, all things are possible.

Another FACT: Jeremiah 22:17-30, speaks about the curse of Jehoiakim (his name meaning God will rise a Jewish King), also know as Jechonias (meaning God will establish a Jewish King). 1 Chron. 3:9-19 for more information. Since Joseph's forefather was Jehoiakim, he could not be the father of Jesus because of the curse. Also, the bible never said of the seed of Joseph, but of David. Because Joseph was married to Mary, it did give Jesus the right to be called Joseph's son and to inherit the thorne by his line. The promise of David's seed inheriting the throne is not made void because of Mary!

Genesis 3:15 - And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

It prophesis that by the seed of a woman it will bruise. Also Isaiah prophesis this. Isaiah 7:14 - Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

A woman typically doesn't produce seed, only by the power of God.Luke 1:34 - Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

Romans 16:20 - And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.

Jesus shall bruise Satan's under your feet. Jesus is of the seed of a woman.

So, because of the curse of Jehoiakim, and that two different Geneology's and the seed of woman scriptures. It seems without a doubt that Jesus was born of a woman and is still the seed of David. Why would they put two different geneologies if Joseph was his 'real' father?

Answer 8

actually the prophet Isaiah in chapter 9 verse 6-7 prophesies of the virgin birth. The wonderfull news is that Christ left his heavenly dwelling place, to come and redeem mankind of their sins. that all who believe in Him shall not perish but inherit eternal life. This was God's plan for some of the Jewish people to reject Him, so that salvation could also come to the gentiles.

Answer 9

Different Gospels were written for different audiences. There are plenty of details that do not match. Heck they do not even agree on dates. John's story of the arrest and execution of Jesus takes place one day before the other three gospel accounts. So why should this surprise you?

Answer 10

I don't think so. I think it has to do with what the purpose of the writings were. If you and I were to have been witness to something we might have a difference in what is important when we are telling the story. As John said it would take books and books to tell everything that Jesus did while He was on Earth.