Virgin birth of Jesus

==Theology and development==
Matthew and Luke use the virgin birth (or more accurately the divine conception that precedes it) to mark the moment when Jesus becomes the [[Son of God (Christianity)|Son of God]].{{sfn|Loewe|1996|p=184}} This was a notable development over Mark, for whom the Sonship dates from [[Baptism of Jesus|Jesus's baptism]], {{bibleverse|Mark|1:9-13}} and the earlier Christianity of Paul and the pre-Pauline Christians for whom Jesus becomes the Son at the [[Resurrection of Jesus|Resurrection]] or even the [[Second Coming]].{{sfn|Loewe|1996|p=184}} The [[Ebionites]], a [[Jewish Christian]] sect, saw Jesus as fully human, rejected the virgin birth, and preferred to translate ''almah'' as "young woman".{{sfn|Paget|2010|p=351}} The 2nd century gnostic theologian [[Marcion]] likewise rejected the virgin birth, but regarded Jesus as descended fully formed from heaven and having only the appearance of humanity.{{sfn|Hayes|2017|p=152 fn.153}} By about AD 180 Jews were telling how Jesus had been illegitimately conceived by a Roman soldier named [[Panthera (Jesus's father)|Pantera]] or Pandera, whose name is likely a pun on ''parthenos'', virgin.{{sfn|Voorst|2000|p=117}} The story was still current in the [[Middle Ages]] in satirical parody of the Christian gospels called the [[Toledot Yeshu]].{{sfn|Cook|2011|p=unpaginated}}{{sfn|Evans|1998|p=450}} The Toledot Yeshu contains little historical material, and was probably created as a tool for warding off conversions to Christianity.{{sfn|Cook|2011|p=unpaginated}}

The virgin birth was subsequently accepted by Christians as the proof of the divinity of Jesus, but its rebuttal during and after the 18th century European Enlightenment led some to redefine it as mythical, while others reaffirmed it in [[dogma]]tic terms.{{sfn|Kärkkäinen|2009|p=175}} This division remains in place, although some national synods of the Catholic Church have replaced a biological understanding with the idea of "theological truth," and some [[evangelical]] theologians hold it to be marginal rather than indispensable to the Christian faith.{{sfn|Kärkkäinen|2009|p=175}}