I recently saw Bill Maher's documentary and he mentions that the virgin birth is only mentioned in two of the gospels. He goes on to bug Christian people several times by asking questions such as "How can you believe in the virgin birth if it's only mentioned in two of the gospels?". I know for a fact that the virgin birth is mentioned in the gospels of Matthew (1:18) and Luke (1:26-35), however, it is mentioned in neither Mark nor John. In spite of that, millions of Christians world-wide take the virgin birth for granted. My question is, as stated above, why isn't the virgin birth of Jesus mentioned in all four gospels?
4My guess also is that if it had appeared in each gospel that Maher would be contending that this is evidence of excessive corroboration between the gospel writers. I haven't seen the documentary? What's his point, that it must have been added after the fact since it is in neither Mark nor John?– San JacintoMar 29, 2012 at 20:53
6It's a popular red herring to say that something "isn't mentioned in all the gospels", and doesn't have much weight as a criticism. For example I've seen several of Bill Maher's shows, and he doesn't say that he thinks Christians are wrong in all of them. Does this mean he doesn't really believe it?– DJClayworthMay 24, 2012 at 20:03
2So, Bill of Maher makes an argument from silence...and we need to refute that for some reason? The OT was clear that two witnesses are all that is necessary to confirm a matter. In any case, an argument from silence is no argument at all.– user900Mar 30, 2013 at 21:06
I disagree that it's a "red herring". If someone were verified to be born of a virgin birth, would that not be an exceptionally noteworthy event? The omission is a serious problem.– PeteNov 6, 2015 at 16:44
The birth of Jesus is also only mentioned at all in Matthew and Luke. Following the logic, since only half of the Gospels mention that means we should discard the theory that he was ever born at all.
In 100% of the cases where a birth narrative is present, the miracle of God becoming man is mentioned. Indeed, in John, even where the birth narrative isn't present, the incarnation - that God became man - is explicit.
Neither John nor Mark say anything about the birth of Jesus at all, so it is not surprising at all that there is nothing about the virgin birth.
2Great! Some people can think and write about complex issues but sometime fail to understand a simple logic. Mar 31, 2013 at 13:15
The underlying assumption is that if something is true, it has to appear in all four Gospels. However, if it appeared in all four gospels, some would ask why doesn't it appear in every epistle as well.
It's interesting that people attack the Bible for having four versions of the same story in the Gospels and other people attack the Bible for not having four exact copies of the same story in the Gospels. Some people will find fault no matter what the Bible teaches.
A good answer to bill maher's question would be to ask him if he believes that Jesus died and rose again from the dead, since that is, in fact, recorded in all four gospels. Of course he would say he does not, because he doesn't believe the Bible. By the same token, those who believe that Jesus did die and rise again are well prepared to believe that Jesus is also virgin born, even though only two gospel accounts record that. One witness would have been sufficient--two is more than enough.
Mark and John, as Affable Geek noted, do not even record Jesus' birth. The books were written to concentrate on different aspects of Jesus life.
So, maher's question was nonsensical at its very root.
2In fact, people already do ask why everything in the Gospels doesn't appear in the epistles as well: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Who_Wasn%27t_There– user971Mar 29, 2012 at 23:27
4I guess everything should be in every book in order to please everyone. Jude would have to be a bit bigger, I guess.– NarnianMar 30, 2012 at 12:12
Great answer. I particularly like your note that "the books were written to concentrate on different aspects of Jesus' life."– Jas 3.1Mar 30, 2013 at 19:44
This too is an equally good answer. Mar 31, 2013 at 13:20
why isn't the virgin birth of Jesus mentioned in all four gospels?
Because mentioning it wasn't important to Mark or John.
It's really that simple. The writers of the Gospel accounts & the epistles weren't trying to mention everything that's true. They weren't even trying to mention everything that matters.
Maher's attempt to turn this into any kind of argument is pretty silly. (Affable Geek and Narnian say more about that.) I'm afraid I can't understand how anyone can see his question "How can you believe in the virgin birth if it's only mentioned in two of the gospels?" as anything but an obvious non sequitur. It's reaching & empty rhetoric, not rational skepticism.
2"The writers ... weren't trying to mention everything that's true." Indeed. John's Gospel even includes as its last verse an explicit disclaimer to this effect. May 25, 2012 at 16:49