If Yahshua Messiah was not the physical child of Joseph, then, according to all the prophecies concerning Messiah, he was not qualified to be "Messiah." Many think that being of virgin birth disqualifies him for this reason. They conclude he was not the "seed" of Joseph if he was purely "of the Holy Spirit," and that means he was not of Joseph's line, and was not "of the line of David." Here, then are the arguments, pro and con.

Luke 3: 4
"And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)

Joseph was of the "line" of David, yet the virgin birth suggests Yahshua possessed none of Joseph's blood line. In fact, most who argue the virgin birth maintain vehemently that Yahshua did not have Joseph's blood in his veins, and thus escaped the "curse of Adam," they do this to explain how Yahshua could live his entire life "without sin." Therefore, the proponents of virgin birth most definately agree that the blood of Joseph was not running through Messiah's veins!

It's impossible to ignore Joseph's lineage in the New Testament because it consistently points to Joseph's lineage as evidence that Messiah was who he said he was, "heir to the throne of David," the Messiah! Some virgin birth advocates argue that Messiah, as Joseph's adopted son still shared Joseph's bloodline. How is this possible? How can an adopted son have the "bloodline" of his adoptive father? It's just not possible, and such an argument defies logic.

There are also those virgin birth opponents who argue that Messiah's bloodline can be traced back to David, by following Mary's family tree, Mary's lineage. I'm very surprised and baffled by such an approach for many reasons. First, a son's lineage is always traced from his father, (unless you are talking about the American Kennel Association, but Messiah is not a cocker spaniel). The lineage of blood never comes from the mother. Thus, secondly, you'd be hard pressed to prove Messiah's lineage goes back to David from Mary, because lineages were not tracked in this way for women.

The key phrase, "David's seed," is imperative. Basic sex education in any American School will teach you why a child is always called "the seed" of their father. Women possess no "seed." the female of the species provides the "egg" which is then "seeded" by the male. Common sense and basic biology prove the error of such an argument. The entire scriptural record of Messiah, from beginning to ending, teaches us that Yahshua was of Joseph's lineage! How do those who teach Messiah was of "virgin birth," and possessed none of Joseph's blood (or the Adamic curse for that matter) justify this contradiction? They don't, they simply ignore the scriptures that say Messiah was "David's offspring" and say, "it's a mystery!"

Am I saying Yahshua Messiah was not the "only begotten Son of God?" Absolutely not. I'm saying he could not have been "born" the Son of God, for he was clearly "Joseph's son" at birth, and had Joseph's blood running through his veins. Messiah became the Son of God after baptism and when the Holy Spirit descended on him in the shape of a dove, and a voice came out of Heaven saying, "this is my beloved Son, this day have I begotten him." He became the Son of God, (then the only one, or only begotten) in the same way that we become "the sons of God," through faith and obedience.

If Yahshua was born the Son of God, he's of God's lineage, not David's. Some might argue, wasn't David of Adam's lineage, and wasn't Adam the son of God, and if so, doesn't that make Messiah of David's lineage, since David was of Adam's lineage? If that were true, then by that same reasoning we are all of David's lineage, for we are all of Adam's lineage! In which case, why would all the prophecies emphasize David's lineage at all when speaking of Messiah? The answer is, they wouldn't emphasize David, but they did!

Those who hold to the virgin birth, usually do so because of one text found in Matthew, and this is a reference that the entire scriptural record appears to contradict. All of the other scriptures concerning the birth of Messiah say that Yahshua was of Joseph's lineage. This is odd in the extreme.

Hebrews 7: 14
"For it is evident that our Master sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood."

This verse says that Messiah "sprang" out of Judah. Judah was Joseph's lineage. Another thing we see from the verse is the importance of lineage. Hebrews 7 makes the point that Yahshua was not "qualified" to be the High Priest, because that distinction was reserved for a member of the tribe of Levi. You can rest assured, if Messiah must be of the tribe of Levi to qualify as an high priest (in the Levitical Priesthood), he equally must be of the tribe of Judah, and specifically of David, in order to qualify as Messiah, since all the scriptures say Messiah is "of the house of David." If Messiah was not Joseph's blood son, he wasn't even of the tribe of Judah, in which case, Hebrews 7: 14 is mistaken!

Revelation 5: 5
"And one of the elders said to me, weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has prevailed to open the book and to loose the seven seals thereof."

The angels in Heaven call Yahshua "the Lion of the tribe of Judah," who would know better than they? It is evident Yahshua is of the tribe of Judah, through Joseph.

Isaiah 9: 7
"Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this."

If Yahshua is not a blood relative of David, he cannot sit on the throne of David! Whoever heard of an adopted son assuming the throne? It's not done.

Isaiah 22: 22
"And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open."

If Yahshua is not of David's lineage, he's not of the "house" of David, when it comes to being "of the royal house." Other scriptures that say clearly that Messiah was of the lineage of David are as follows:

Revelation 22: 16
"I, Yahshua, have sent mine angel to testify to you these things in the congregations. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright and morning star."

Yahshua says here, "I am the offspring of David." How many times do the scriptures have to say Messiah was an offspring (descendant) of David, through Joseph, before we believe it?

Matthew 1: 18
"Now the birth of Yahshua Messiah was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit."

Virgin birth teachers seem to have at least one verse that supports their beliefs, assuming the verses haven't been tampered with over time. Let's assume they haven't for now and try to make sense of these contradictions. It says, "before they (Joseph and Mary) came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit." There seems to be no way around it, the text seems to say that Mary was a pure virgin, and hadn't been joined with her husband, Joseph, yet. It also appears to say that her child was the offspring of the Holy Spirit. Yet, Yahshua says he's the "offspring of David" (through Joseph). How do we reconcile this?

Some argue that Mary and Joseph did not have to "come together," in the biblical sense for her to become pregnant by Joseph. Medical doctors will tell you that a woman can be impregnated without total "penetration." The man's seed can theoritically enter, even though he did not break the "hymen."

The woman would still, clinically, and legally, be a virgin, even though she's pregnant. This theory doesn't sit well with most Christians, because it would mean the Mary and Joseph were having "light" contact before their wedding day. There would have been some sort of sexual encounter between them, but no penetration. Young couples who are about to be married, they argue, often "fool around," a bit, but do not consumate the act all the way. Perhaps, they theorize, that Mary and Joseph came close to having intercourse, but then, before it went too far pulled away from each other. I can see this theory as plausible, but impossible to prove. Yet, the verse also says she was "with child of the Holy Spirit," which lends credence to the notion that Joseph didn't touch her at all, and that her pregnancy was an obvious miracle!

The detractors of this theory have a very good argument. It says that Joseph contemplated "putting her away privately," after hearing the news that she was pregnant. They argue, quite convincingly that Joseph would not have even considered it, if he knew they had been "fooling around" a little.

What if there is another explanation, one that shows how the virgin birth could be "of the Holy Spirit," and yet, Yahshua was still Joseph's physical descendant? We know that the Holy Spirit is "spirit" and not flesh. That which is flesh is flesh and that which is spirit is spirit. So, if the Holy Spirit is spirit and not flesh, from whence came the seed with which Mary had in her, to bring forth Messiah?

According to the Spirit, speaking through the Holy Apostles, that seed sprang forth from Joseph. So, even though Mary was with "child of the Holy Ghost," the seed was still Joseph's. How is this possible? How did Mary become pregnant with Joseph's seed, by the Holy Spirit? All things are possible with God. Yet, where is the proof? We have no proof, and for that matter, because of the contradiction in scripture, we have no proof of Mary's virginity when she was found with child, and we also, therefore, have no proof of Yahshua's lineage from David! We simply must take the scriptural record as a whole. The scriptures say that Mary was a virgin, and they also say Joseph was the blood father of Yahshua, after the manner of the flesh.

The only conclusion is that, the Holy Spirit, having no flesh and therefore no seed, impregnated Mary with Joseph's seed. Consider, however; what this theory I'm proposing does to the teaching that Messiah was perfect because he did not have "Adam's sin" in him. It destroys that teaching, because, as scriptures make clear, Yahshua was indeed of the "seed" of David, and therefore, was also of the line of Adam. Adam's blood ran through Yahshua's veins. It also eliminates the notion that Yahshua was born the Son of God, for, even though the Holy Spirit was involved, it was still Joseph's seed. Yahshua was born the son of Joseph.

This sets the entire debate on its ear!

Yet, the lingering question is, why would not Yahweh simply wait until Joseph and Mary were wed, came together, and then bless their child? Who knows the mind of Yahweh. Perhaps a miracle birth underscores the Messiah's birth for no other reason than he was an extraordinary child, born to save the world, and Yahweh thought it would be splendid to bring him into the world in an extraordinary way.

Either this is the case, or Mary was not a virgin at all, and the scriptures have been sabotaged. Either way, the virgin birth argument is now rendered moot, and a non-issue. For, even if Mary was a virgin when she conceived, it still does not mean that Messiah was not born in sinful flesh. In fact, scripture says that Messiah was born in sinful flesh.

Romans 8: 3
"for what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh."

The virgin birth has been "much ado about nothing." All of the scriptures that say Messiah was of the "seed" of David completely refute the "original sinner's" claims that Messiah was not born with the "sin" curse. They have put forth this notion in an attempt to explain why Messiah was "perfect" and "without sin."

The truth of the matter is that Messiah was perfect because he loved as God loves, and obeyed God, and became the First Begotten Son of the Father. If Messiah's perfection can be explained by saying "he didn't have Adam's sin curse, being conceived of the Holy Ghost," then what hope have we who were not conceived of the Holy Spirit from birth of ever being found perfect and sinless like Messiah? Absolutely no hope at all, for we have the "sin curse," and Messiah didn't.

Yet, if Messiah was the "offspring" of David, as he claimed, and David had the "sin curse," as they say he did, then Messiah, too had the "sin curse" from David. If Messiah had this curse, he certainly overcame it unto sinless righteousness. If Messiah overcame this curse by the love of God, we know that we have been given that same love, to the same extent that Messiah possessed it! What would stop us from overcoming the "sin curse," as well? Nothing. So we see, that saying Messiah did not have some "sin curse" and that's why he was perfect attempts to defeat the power we possess through Messiah of overcoming sin!

My final answer to those who insist that Mary was a true virgin when Messiah was conceived is this:

"Yes, ok, and that proves... what?"

The virgin birth does not prove that Messiah was "not a man." To believe that you'd have to disregard the scriptures that say he was a man, and "of the seed of David," and "made the likeness of sinful flesh," and was "tempted in all manner as we are, yet without sin," and that he "died on the cross," and that he now sits "at the right hand of the Father in Heaven."

Yahshua was most definately born a man, in the flesh. Else, why would scripture say of Messiah, "by man came the resurrection?"

1 Corinthians 15: 21
"For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead."

All of the arguments over the virgin birth are pointless debate, and are rendered quite moot by the overwhelming amount of scriptures that say Messiah was a man, of the line of Judah, of the seed of David. The virgin birth does not prove Messiah was God, come down to earth in fleshly form. The virgin birth only proves that Messiah was indeed born of a virgin! Nothing more, nothing less. If you draw the conclusion from that virgin birth that it means Messiah was God, or that he did not possess some supposed "curse" passed down from Adam, and that's why he was sinless, well, your conclusions aren't drawn from any scripture. You are merely speculating!