The “Virgin Birth” — how did that work, exactly? Did God use one of Mary’s ova, and add a sperm of his own? (By the way, how can he make a sperm — or any thing at all — if he’s immaterial? And when did he make it, if he’s eternal?) Or, did he implant a ready-made zygote — or an embryo — or a fetus? Which was it? And in all of these cases, did he adjust Mary’s hormone levels to prevent rejection? If so, how was the adjustment carried out? — if not, how did he prevent rejection?
Those are ridiculous questions. It was a miracle. Maybe you’re unclear on the concept.
I think you are the one who is unclear. The details of the miracle matter very much, for the following reason: if you can’t tell me how it happened, then you can’t tell me what you believe.
I believe that Jesus was born without Mary having had sex with a man. That’s called the Virgin Birth.
But how was it done? So far we have, “In December of one year she was a virgin; in December of the following year she had a baby.” Unless we know more, this is not actually a very unusual story.
In between, there was a miracle!
But what does that mean? The word is supplying no information. Is that what you believe? — god did something magical, but we don’t know what?
He made a baby!
But human couples do that every day.
But he did it in a different way.
Different, how?
There was no man! There was no sex!
Don’t tell me how it wasn’t, I want to know how it was. Let me put it this way: how was what God did more miraculous than two humans having sex? I mean, that way is pretty amazing. What did God do that was more amazing than that?
How could I know that?
I have no idea how you could know! — but if you don’t know, then how are we to understand what it is that you are saying that you believe in? You are amazed and inspired by God’s having done… what?
As far as I can tell, to say it was a miracle is the same as saying you don’t know what happened. Does it make sense to call that a belief? “I believe in something, but I don’t know what exactly” — is that what you’re telling us?
I believe I hate you. Actually, I am quite certain of it.
As far as I can tell, the idea of divine intervention does not mean anything. It is incoherent. Your “belief” in miracles does not just lack empirical support; the very idea is without meaning. Rational rebuttal is unnecessary, because you have made no specific claim. The truth is, I am rapidly losing interest in this topic.
YASHWATA 
Ad hominem. You lose.
YASHWATA, you must understand that I can remain ignorant of how the Virgin birth happened, but still believe it did; again, see the reason listed in my two previous posts.
Because I continue to refer you to my case above, I will rest it here.
Finally, feel free to take excerpts or make implications about my writing as necessary, so you can bend it to support your argument.
I agree that “The Bible is correct in its description of the birth of Jesus” is a coherent proposition about the world. Therefore, it is a belief one could have (as long as one has not checked too carefully). And this belief has a logical implication that the birth was a miracle. So, if you believe that the Bible is correct, you (sort of) believe (by implication) that the birth was a miracle. But when it comes to the event itself, you have no specific opinions about it. You have no picture in your mind of how it happened — of what took place. You don’t have a single specific belief about what took place. You have only what amounts to a verbal formula, “It was a miracle,” which doesn’t actually mean anything outside the self-referential discourse of Christian dogma.
“It was a miracle” can be regarded as a profession of ignorance. It can be regarded as a profession of affiliation — that is, a marketing slogan for the Christian religion. But it is not a profession of belief.
YASHWATA, I do understand the basis of your case, and clearly addressed it above; a belief in the Bible as historical document, which presents the Virgin birth. Likewise, the notion that a historical manuscript would satisfy an explanation in modern science is an illegitimate premise for your case.
Josh, you have missed the point the point of my article. The point is that if you don’t know how it happened, then you don’t know what happened. You don’t even have a belief as to what happened.
No one who says “I don’t know” is talking about a belief. Saying “It was a miracle” is the same as saying “I don’t know what happened.” It doesn’t refer to a belief, only to a lack of knowledge.
People say, “I believe God did it,” but this is equivalent to “I have absolutely no idea what actually took place.” To insist that this is a statement of belief is to misunderstand the word.
Belief: confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof (Dictionary.com). YASHWATA, it appears that your logic or at least definitions are inaccurate. If anyone could tell you exactly how the Virgin birth happened, then we would refer to it as a fact, not a belief. No one is claiming to know how the Virgin birth happened, rather people believe the Bible presents a historical case for the birth of Jesus through the Virgin birth.
Second, do you really think the Bible’s authors, writing nearly 2000 years ago, would understand fertilization, blastocyst implantation into the uterus, embryogensis, progesterone levels, and the rest of a preganancy? Your basis for this argument is silly.
Rob, you have missed the point the point of my article. My “disbelief” is not the issue. If you don’t know how a putative miracle happened, then you don’t know what took place. You don’t even have a *belief* about what took place. All you can say about the event is, “I don’t know how it happened.” The statement “I don’t know” is not an expression of belief.
So, not only haven’t we seen any miracles, no one even believes in them. Including you.
Do you exercise the same disbelief when it comes to the origin of life as inanimate matter? You’ve seen that just as often as you’ve seen a virgin birth.
I don’t believe in it. I see light. I can measure it. I can learn how it works. Because of all this, I know that light is real.
No one can explain to you how light can be both a wave and a particle, but you still believe in light.