Thomas Boslooper, considering the assertion of many Christian critics that other religions had precedents for the miraculous birth of gods and demi- gods, is quoted by Ashe as saying:

It is difficult to find a statement in all the literature of biblical criticism which is more misleading.

There is no example so clear of the Christian technique of argument. Come out with the devastating criticism whether it is true or not, and every Christian will automatically believe you. It is the Christian big-lie technique. This “devastating” assertion is true only in the sense that no other miraculous birth precisely matches that of Christ. Few of them are known in more detail than a sentence or two, or a short account at best, so it is easy to claim—with Boslooper—that there are actually no precedents at all. It is a popular Christian apologetic ploy. What does not match in every detail does not match at all! What does match does not match in meaning or interpretation!

The central point is that conception in classical mythology was often unusual. The details are irrelevant so long as the character has an unusual introduction to the world that marks him out as special. The degree of restraint or flamboyance in the telling is a cultural matter with no bearing on the peculiarity of the conception. Christianity began opposing sexuality as sinful, so no sexually prurient detail entered into the story, whereas the classical religions were more sexually honest. Christians now, after two millennia of indoctrination over sexuality, think the “tastefulness” of the Christian stories proves them. No justification could be more circular!

A man, even if he were thought of as a god, had to be born of a woman, and this could not be concealed, but paternal parentage is never so obvious, being known only to the mother, if anyone. The ancients felt that an offspring of a god, a son of god, should have a purer maternal origin than mortals, and this was evidence of his supernatural or divine origin. So, the purity of his maternal parentage required the saviour to be born of a pure woman—a maiden. Hence, saviours often were born of virgins. Pure, holy and chaste virgins, just like Mary, mother of Jesus, gave birth to gods, sons of god and saviours, but often long before her.

The Christ had to be a man, so had to be born like a man, but with a father who was God. The age old magical conception was the best that could be invented given the constraints, but Luke is suggestive:

The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee.

Luke 2:35

Today people would rightly not believe a woman, however virtuous, giving birth to a child and saying she had not had sexual intercourse. In an age of miracles and ignorance of natural law, she was believed with credulity and many maidens claimed that gods fathered their sons. At one time it became so common in Greece that a decree made death the punishment of any woman insulting a god by charging him with fathering her child.

The idea of miraculous birth goes back to ancient myths that preceded any direct knowledge of how people were conceived. Birth seemed arbitrary, and primitive ideas of why conception happened involved natural phenomena like wind, sunlight, eating things, and seeing things, and it could be by touch, through the ear, the navel and the eyes. Moreover, in societies of extended families, the identity of the father was not known until taboos, even in primitive societies meant that people sought partners outside the extended family.

Another source of the myth was the practice of priests of deflowering virgins, or curing the barrenness of infertile matrons (often the impotence of their husbands) by allowing the woman to sleep in a temple when a god might impregnate her. Details came from the woman’s dreams, because when the ploy was successful, the clues were in dreams, just as they were in the biblical stories. Like Freudian psychoanalysis, to dream of a snake or a swan was to dream of phallic symbols, and the child would be that of any god symbolised in the dream. Olympia, the wife of Philip of Macedon, conceived Alexander while she was sleeping in the temple of Apollo, where she was impregnated by Zeus in the form of a snake. How can a woman be impregnated by a snake or a swan, unless she too is in that form? Ultimately, these are psychological matters, but careless young girls found them useful excuses for the consequences of their adolescent adventures. Christians might smile, but how is Mary different? A man, according to Luke, pretended to be an angel called Gabriel. He was charming and persuasive, and the young girl was naïve and innocent because she was only twelve. What is so impossible about this that Christians deny it, substituting something utterly unbelievable, that they then say is proof it is divine?

In remote time, the virgin mother of Osiris claimed her son was begotten by the father of all gods. The likeness of this virgin mother, with the divine child in her arms, is commonly shown in old temples in Egypt. Scholars have said that the worship of this virgin mother, with her God-begotten child, prevailed everywhere. Her son of God was shown in effigy, lying in a manger, just as the infant Jesus was afterward at Bethlehem. The worship of this virgin mother and her god is of ancient date as is proved by ancient sculptured figures.

In their myths, virgin births were familiar to every Greek. Christians will complain that these virgin births were utterly unnatural, forgetting that all virgin births are! Herakles had a virgin birth. His mother Alcmene (Alcmena) was married, but had vowed to remain chaste until the death of her brothers had been avenged. Zeus had selected her as the mother of a mortal hero he needed to help him win a battle against the giants. Alcmene was still a virgin when Zeus impregnated her. Zeus’s heavenly spouse, Hera, was against the child and opposed him in every way she could. Eventually she promised Zeus that she would desist if the young demi-god would achieve twelve great works. In the end, the wife of Herakles poisoned him, and he made a funeral pyre and got a shepherd to ignite it. A cloud came down from heaven, and the disciples of Herakles saw him rise from the summit of the pyre physically in the cloud to heaven. Hundreds of years later, the virgin-born Saviour from Nazareth was “taken up, and a cloud received him out of their sight” from the summit of a hill (Acts 1:9).

According to Chinese mythology there were two beings—Tien-Chu and Shang-Ti—worshipped in that country as gods (Lords of Heaven) in the Chou dynasty more than twenty five hundred years ago, born of virgins who knew no man. Shang-Ti also was the father of the first emperor of the Chou dynasty, impreganting the mortal woman when she stepped on his footprint. Maia, mother of Buddha, Semele, mother of Dionysos, and Persephone, mother of Zagreus, Shing-Moo, mother of Fu-Hsi all had miraculous confinements and births, as did Io, called in Æschylus, the chaste virgin, whose son was the son of god.

The Latin inscription “Partura Virginis”, “the virgin about to bring forth”, has been found on Pagan temples in Celtic countries. Mayence was, it is said, the virgin-mother of the god-sired Esus of the Druids. In images more than two thousand years old, she is depicted enveloped in light, with a crown of twelve stars upon her head, exactly the same as the apocalyptic figure of the Christian Book of Revelation. She is also shown with her foot on the head of a serpent.

Apologists say that the classical stories are not virgin births like Mary’s. Ashe declaims that “male sexuality is always present” in Pagan birth narratives. He knows it was not in the Christian case. Why? Because he believes it was not! That’s faith for you!

The Virgin Birth of Christ was without sex, without physical agony.

But why is he so certain Mary’s was? The original Pagan idea was that the mortal girl should have been a virgin before she conceived, like Alcmene, not that she remained a virgin after she had given birth! Besides normal conception ordinary birth was also too ignominious for a god. It had to be spotless, or immaculate. Jesus Christ in an apocryphal gospel, like Krishna was born through his mother’s side, rather than the impure route. Though not in the canonical works, some of the Christian fathers endorsed this story. And, in some cases, the mother, like the mother of Krishna, was still held to be a virgin, even after she had given birth to other children—a greater miracle than the biblical version, though deprecated by Christians. Yet even this parallels Mary, who remained a virgin even though she had given birth to Jesus and his brothers and sisters.

Christians, for no good reason, believe that Mary was perpetually a virgin, but again this is just like important Pagan goddesses. However, what goddesses can do, human women cannot. No woman can physically give birth while remaining a virgin—her hymen remaining intact—even if she had managed to conceive somehow while remaining one. Even if a fatherless conception is possible, a birth in which the woman remains a virgin is not, unless we are to admit Caesarian sections, like Krishna’s, into the reckoning. If they are admitted, then it is another miracle that Mary survived what was possible but dangerous until recently, but such a birth was not miraculous. Because of the danger to the mother, the Romans usually permitted it only on dead women, to save the foetus in the last four weeks of a pregnancy.

None of this is available for discussion among Christians. They know Mary was a perpetual virgin, and Pallas Athene was not, despite her myth. Many ancient goddesses were perpetual virgins such as Athene, Isis and Cybele. Apologists claim these are only myths or metaphors! When Philo speaks of “God-begotten children” and “virgin mothers”, apologists dismiss it too as metaphor. Could the whole of the Christian gospels be just metaphor? Askance looks of hatred and incomprehension! Ashe concedes that the ancient goddesses were indeed virgins and mothers, but that is to “leave humanity behind”, meaning they are myths about supernatural beings! There is some subtle difference between a Catholic praying to Mary and a Canaanite praying to Anath, so at least Christians think, though what it is is impossible for the outside observer to see. In fact, it is different for no other reason than that they believe it is.

The doctrine of immaculate conception is ancient but the manner of the holy conception was different in different countries. Fu-Hsi (Fo-hi), the legendary founder of China, was conceived when his mother ate a flower she found while bathing. His gestation period was twelve years. His successor was also miraculously conceived. Christians will bleat that being conceived by eating a flower is not the same as being overshadowed by the Holy Ghost. Quite so! It is utterly different in the detail, but the detail is not what is important in these stories. It is the theme of a miraculous—particularly fatherless—conception that is the same. It is without sex and without physical agony despite the enormous brain Fu-Hsi must have developed while twelve years in the womb.

No Christian can admit it as equivalent, though, to the Christian birth stories. It is actually too miraculous. When Luke says “the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee”, there is a broad hint of sexuality. Something “kind of” sexual happened! But a flower? Don’t be silly! When pushed on this “overshadowing”, the Christian apologist can retreat again. Whatever it implies, a spirit cannot enjoy normal sex with a material woman. But then neither can a flower. If these stories were meant to be true in any sense, it could only have been that the desperate mother made some such excuse for her condition. Mary was penetrated in her excuse by the Holy Spirit or the archangel Gabriel, if he is different. Perhaps, like saintly Christian nuns, she had fantasised it in her adolescent dreams. S Theresa of Avila dreamed she was penetrated by Christ. The mother of Fu-Hsi dreamed she had eaten a water lily. In reality, such stories meant she had dallied with a human seducer but was too young to understand what he was up to, what she had done, or what the risks were.

Zoroaster was immaculately conceived by a ray from the Divine Reason or Word. Herodotus also explained that such conceptions occurred by way of a ray of light and according to Plutarch’s book on Isis and Osiris it entered through the ear. Tertullian confirms it was a ray of light. Thus medieval pictures of Mary at the moment of conception show a ray of light entering her ear. But the idea of being “overshadowed by the Holy Ghost” seems to have been most current. God, the father of a god was believed to “overshadow” the mother of a god, to impregnate her. In 550 BC, Pythias, the mother of Pythagoras, conceived by a spectre or ghost of the god Apollo, the sun god. Does the ghost of the sun god differ in principle from the Christian Holy Ghost?

A Chinese sect worshiped a saviour known as Xaca, who was conceived of his mother, Maia, by a white elephant, which she saw in her sleep, and for greater purity, she brought him forth from one of her sides. Tamerlane’s mother conceived having had sexual intercourse with the god of Day. The mother of Ghengis Khan, being too modest to claim that she was the mother of the son of God, said only that he was the son of the sun.

Juno of Rome also grew pregnant at the touch of a flower to give birth to Mars. No impregnation could have been purer. So the most immaculate conception of all was that of the god of War! If it sounds absurd, how is it more senseless than conception by a ghost? Botany has shown that, at least, a flower can fertilise other flowers but no science has yet investigated the virility of ghosts.

The Greek Juno, Hera, was immaculately impregnated by the wind to give birth to Vulcan. Here is a close parallel indeed for the word habitually translated as spirit or ghost in the scriptures and continued into the Greek of the New Testament really means breath or wind! So literally the virgin Mary was impregnated by the wind just like Hera. Regarding the observations of G Higgins (Anacalypsis) on Juno, Andreas Ardus writes by email to correct a citation, and offer the suggestions which follow:

The Goddess Februa, or Februata Juno, became the Purificata Virgo Maria. The old Romans celebrated this festival in precisely the same way as the moderns—by processions with wax lights, and so on, and on the same day, 2 February. The author of the Perennial Calendar observes, that it is a remarkable coincidence that the festival of the miraculous conception of Juno Jugalis, the blessed Virgin, the Queen of Heaven, should fall on the very same day the modern Romans have fixed the festival of the conception of the blessed Virgin Mary. Being merely a continuation of an ancient festival, there is nothing remarkable in it.

G Higgins, Anacalypsis

Andreas Ardus also notes:

This festival of the Purification of the Virgin corresponds with the old Roman festival of Juno Februata (purified) which was held in the last month (February) of the Roman year, and which included a candle procession of Ceres searching for Proserpine.

Edward Carpenter, Pagan and Christian Creeds: their Origin and Meaning

Oskar Seyffert says Juno was known under many names as the goddess of nuptials, and the name Iuga (Yoke) is one of them. He gives no feast day for her but he says the calends were a bad day for marriage, one reason perhaps why the festival was on 2 February, another being that the first was devoted to Juno Sospita, the national goddess. 2 February is actually the date of the “Presentation of the Lord” in the Catholic Calendar, celebrating when the infant Jesus was presented in the temple, and Mary was purified (Lk 2:22). This seems to be the real link between Juno and Mary, Godfrey Higgins was suggesting. It was not the conception but the purification of the virgin that was celebrated on this date. William Woods (A History of the Devil ) confirms that 2 February was the Roman day of purification. Since the Church adopted 25 December as the birth date of Christ, in Mosaic law, 41 days later would have been Mary’s date of purification, 4 February. It fell so close to the official Roman festival on 2 February, that was the day chosen.

The second century Stoic, Aelianus, in De Natura Animalium, describes what seems to have been a version of the virgin birth of Christ. He says in Herod’s reign a Judaean maid had made love to a serpent, become pregnant and fathered the son of a god. At the time, Asklepios of Epidauros was well known as fathering many a demi-god to matrons who made the appropriate sacrifices and slept overnight in the sanctuary. She would dream that Asklepios appeared to her as a serpent, and if she later had a child, she was sure it was the offspring of the god. Augustus was called “Divus”, it is said, because his mother conceived him in the temple of Apollo, the god appearing to her as a serpent. Julius Caesar too was immaculately conceived, being the son of the beautiful virgin Cronis Celestine and begotten by the Father of all Gods, Jupiter.

Both Buddha and Krishna, of India, were immaculately conceived. The mother of Krishna was overshadowed by the supreme God, Brahma, and the Holy Ghost was Naraan. Krishna’s mother had given birth seven times previously but remained a virgin. Philostratus, the biographer of Apollonius of Cappadocia cites his source Damis as saying the virgin mother of Apollonius—the contemporary and rival saviour of Jesus Christ—gave him birth by being overshadowed by the god, Proteus.

Several of the virgin mothers of gods and great men go ten months between conception and delivery.

The tradition of the miraculous conceptions of gods, sons of gods, saviours and messiahs was prevalent in the world from ancient times on, beginning long before the mother of Jesus was overshadowed by the ghostly representative of the Most High. The belief in immaculate conception extended to every nation in the world. The furtive pregnancy of young women by a god is a recurring theme in Greek mythology.

Dishonest Christians will insist their own fantasy is unique, but it is no more unique than any other. Both the prevalence and antiquity of the idea of divine conception among the heathen is conceded by earlier Christian writers in their arguments from precedents of the divinity of Christ. S Augustine, Origen and Lactanius tried to persuade us of the immaculate virginity of the mother of Jesus Christ by the example of similar Pagan events. They conceded that the doctrine of divine conception was long anterior to Christ and not unique in his case.

In Luke, the birth of John the Baptist is no less miraculous than that of Jesus. John’s mother is an old woman, Elizabeth, and his father is an old priest, Zachariah, who complains that he is past it! Yet John is conceived and born six months before Jesus, according to Christians. So, an impotent old man and a barren old woman have a son. Are we to assume that this was old Zachariah suddenly became a stud again, once his old dear had turned into Liz Hurley? Objectively, this is a better miracle because the factors of age and impotency preclude pregnancy utterly. Presumably Elizabeth was not a virgin, so this was not a virgin birth, but that is often not the point—it is the miraculous conception.