The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 68 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Celsus, Toledot Yeshu and Early Traces of Apology for Virginal Birth of Jesus
Open accessAbstract
In this article New Testament passages referring to the birth of Jesus are related to Celsus’ anti-Christian arguments and the Jewish Toledot Yeshu tradition with a new question: Why it was so difficult to speak about the virgin birth of Jesus? It is argued that the concept of the virgin birth of Jesus was seen to be problematic for two reasons: 1) The concept was liable to result in scurrilous rumours, even scoffing and parodic episodes revolving on its sexual aspects. 2) Every attempt to explain that God was in some way the agent when a young girl conceived came too close to Gen. 6:1–4 – the text which explained in ancient Judaism the origin of the demonic world. Therefore, some New Testament authors (for example, the writer of the Gospel of John) deliberately avoided speaking about the virgin birth and instead presented the birth of Jesus in terms of the idea of an incarnated, personified, divine Wisdom. In order to avoid erroneous connotations relating to Gen. 6:1–4, Matthew and Luke followed a tradition where the Holy Spirit (a feminine word in Hebrew and Aramaic) played an active role in the pregnancy.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Laato argues that the virgin birth of Jesus was difficult for early Christians to speak about because it invited sexual parody and because any claim that God directly caused Mary’s pregnancy came dangerously close to Gen. 6:1-4, the origin of the demonic world in ancient Judaism. He reads Celsus’ Jewish source and the Toledot Yeshu tradition as later parallels to those polemics, while Matthew and Luke use the feminine Holy Spirit and Paul/John prefer incarnate Wisdom.
Key findings
- The paper identifies two reasons the virgin birth was problematic: (1) it was liable to scurrilous rumours, scoffing, and parodic episodes about its sexual aspects; (2) every attempt to explain God as the agent in a young girl’s conception came too close to Gen. 6:1-4, which ancient Judaism used to explain the demonic world (1 Enoch, Jubilees).
- Celsus’ Jewish source in Origen’s *Contra Celsum* (I.28, 32, 33, 39, 69) presents Jesus as illegitimate (*skotios*), the son of Mary and the soldier Panthera, with Mary convicted of adultery and turned out by the carpenter. Early Toledot Yeshu versions similarly depict Miriam as a prostitute or adulteress; all five Group I versions call Jesus son of Pandera; the Early Oriental B version calls Miriam a prostitute and Jesus a *mamzer*; the Yemenite version uses *zimmâ ûbar niddâ*; the Byzantine version includes rape and later harlotry in Egypt.
- Matthew’s genealogy (Matt. 1) lists four suspicious women—Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba—as an apology for Mary; Matt. 1:18-19 indicates negative rumours about her pregnancy. Matthew and Luke use the Holy Spirit (a feminine word in Hebrew and Aramaic) rather than God the Father as active in the pregnancy, avoiding Gen. 6:1-4 blasphemy.
- Following Thurén, 1 Tim. 3:16 is read as a counterargument to the charge that Jesus’ birth was demonic according to the Gen. 6:1-4 model. Paul and John instead present Jesus as incarnate divine Wisdom (Prov. 8; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1; John 1; Heb. 1), and John deliberately avoids the virgin birth.
Methods
- Historical-exegetical article; no empirical sample or statistical analysis.
- Compares New Testament birth references (Matthew, Luke, John, Paul, 1 Tim.) with Celsus as quoted/reconstructed in Origen’s *Contra Celsum* and with Toledot Yeshu versions in Meerson and Schäfer’s 2014 edition, plus rabbinic writings.
- Main analysis is textual and argumentative: identifying polemical motifs, typology, and Christological alternatives.
Limitations
- Stated: Celsus’ text is not extant and must be reconstructed; Origen may have shortened or imprecisely represented Celsus. The written Toledot Yeshu tradition is Byzantine onward, with Agobard (c.769–840 CE) as the earliest clear written example; Meerson and Schäfer argue the earliest versions do not develop Celsus’ story, though Laato disputes this. Early Oriental A and C are fragmentary at the beginning, so it is unknown whether they contained a birth narrative; dating the Panthera tradition earlier than Celsus gives no firm results; Acts of Pilate cannot be firmly traced earlier than the beginning of the fourth century.
- Evident: the link from later Celsus/Toledot Yeshu polemics to pre-Gospel rumours is inferential; the claim that John deliberately avoided the virgin birth is argued from silence; no direct pre-Matthean source for the alleged rumours is presented.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
47 Sources not found · 38 Own interpretation · 5 No basis given · 4 Own result · 3 Not checked yet
In the paper
“In later texts (Group II and III) there were more sophisticated variations.20”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“All five versions in Group I available now in Meerson and Schäfer TY refer to Jesus as the son of Pandera.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Meerson and Schäfer
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Nevertheless, the date of Acts of Pilate cannot be firmly traced back to earlier than the beginning of the fourth century.21”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [21]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the former never refers to the alleged 'Jewish' story concerning Panthera as the father of Jesus.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in order to avoid erroneous connotations relating to Gen. 6:1-4, Matthew and Luke followed a tradition where the Holy Spirit (a feminine word in Hebrew and Aramaic) played an active role in the pregnancy.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“The relevance of this problem becomes apparent in the formulations of the virgin birth in Matthew and Luke where no reference is made to the agency of God the Father in the pregnancy of Mary; rather to that of the Holy Spirit (a feminine word in Hebrew and Aramaic).”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
In the paper
“Precisely this detail in TY has been the topic of earlier counter-exegetical arguments against Christianity, especially in Celsus' Jewish source where reference is also made to Jesus as the son of Panthera (Contra Celsum I.28, 32, 33, 69).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Contra Celsum I.28, 32, 33, 69
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“It is a well known fact that in its literary form the TY tradition was produced only from the Byzantine period onwards -something which was emphasized in Samuel Krauss's monograph of 1902 and has recently been confirmed in several articles edited by Peter Schäfer, Michael Meerson and Yaacov Deutsch (2011; see also Schreckenberg 1999: 483-4).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Krauss 1902
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schäfer, Meerson and Deutsch (2011)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schreckenberg 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it is argued that the concept of the virgin birth of Jesus was seen to be problematic for two reasons: 1) the concept was liable to result in scurrilous rumours, even scoffing and parodic episodes revolving on its sexual aspects.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Firstly, common sense indicates that a young girl cannot conceive without the help of a man.Every attempt to argue in that direction laid the story open to scurrilous rumours, even scoffing and parodic episodes revolving on the sexual aspects of the situation.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: A young girl cannot conceive without the help of a man.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“2) Every attempt to explain that God was in some way the agent when a young girl conceived came too close to Gen. 6:1-4 -the text which explained in ancient Judaism the origin of the demonic world.”
What the sources say
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For example, Celsus' Jewish source on Jesus was not a TY version.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Meerson and Schäfer 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“therefore, some new testament authors (for example, the writer of the Gospel of John) deliberately avoided speaking about the virgin birth and instead presented the birth of Jesus in terms of the idea of an incarnated, personified, divine Wisdom.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“It consists of Jewish counter-narratives to the Christian Gospels where the case of Jesus is revealed to Jewish readers in a parodic way.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Meerson and Schäfer 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Two of the earliest versions of the Toledot Yeshu tradition, the so-called early Yemenite and the Byzantine version, contain the birth story of Jesus (Meerson and Schäfer 2014, I: 147-66; II: 65-78).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Meerson and Schäfer 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This being the case, we have a coherent interpretive tradition from the Jewish points of view which depicts the pregnancy of Mary as an adulterous act, presumably with the Jewish villain Pandira or the Roman soldier Panthera.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this way the early Christians expressed the birth of Jesus in terms which distanced it from the idea of a sexual act between Mary and the divine masculine power.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“So it is difficult to see why the situation would have been different in the TY tradition where this concept has been used from earlier versions onwards.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the counter-narratives such as TY the main point was to show the falsehood of the Christian concept of the virgin birth of Jesus.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“That the concept of 'the son of Pandera' is related to the adulterous origin of Jesus in the Talmud is noted by Schäfer (2007: 19).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schäfer (2007: 19)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Every explanation which suggests that God was in some way an active agent in the birth of Jesus would have immediately evoked Gen. 6:1-4, which was interpreted in Jewish writings (the Book of Jubilees and the First Book of Henoch) as an explanation of the origin of the demonic world.24”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [24]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Gen.6:1-4 was interpreted in Jewish writings (the Book of Jubilees and the First Book of Henoch) as an explanation of the origin of the demonic world.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, we have good reason to argue that something similar was stated at the beginning of the Early Oriental A and C.”
boostedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This explanation was based on Proverbs 8:22-31, according to which a personification of Wisdom assisted God in the creation.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Proverbs 8:22-31
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Acts of Pilate II.3. is another early text which contains reference to the illegitimate birth of Jesus as expressed by his Jewish opponents: 'you were born of fornication'.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Acts of Pilate II.3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“However, 1 Tim.3:16 indicates that the Christians even had to encounter the criticism that Jesus' (virgin) birth was demonic event.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 1 Tim.3:16
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I am inclined to interpret 1 Tim.3:16 in such a way that it provides a counterargument for those who have understood the birth of Jesus to be an example of the scenario outlined in Gen. 6:1-4; that is, the way in which the son of God sinned with Mary and gave birth to a demonic Jesus.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Miriam's pregnancy is recounted in the early TY versions in quite a similar way as is found in Celsus' counter-exegetical themes of the life of Jesus.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In order to argue that the virgin birth was indeed part of an essential plan of salvation Matthew uses Isa.7:14 which in the Septuagint translation refers to the virgin (parthenos) who will give birth to the son whose name is Immanuel (meaning 'God is with us').”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Isa.7:14
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“It is worth quoting Origen, Contra Celsum I.33 who argues that the birth of Jesus must be supernatural:”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Origen, Contra Celsum I.33
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Such an idea was associated with the activity of the sons of God in Gen. 6:1-4.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen. 6:1-4
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An attempt to date the history of the Panthera tradition earlier than Celsus gives us no firm results.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In that way also the blasphemy (with an association to Gen. 6:1-4) was avoided.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, the first Christians resorted to other ways of speaking about the incarnation of the Son of God.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I have argued above that the tradition of Celsus accords well with the evidence of rabbinical writings and TY tradition.”
boostedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is significant that such a trad ition was not adopted in the Gospel of John (written later than Matthew and Luke's gospels) and a good explanation for this is that the writer deliberately avoided referring to the virgin birth of Jesus.He estimated that such a concept would come dangerously close to Genesis 6.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Gospel of John was written later than Matthew and Luke.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is reason to believe that this way of speaking about the virgin birth is based on the traditions formulated in Hebrew or in Aramaic where the Spirit is grammatically feminine.”
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Hebrew or Aramaic word for Spirit is grammatically feminine.
In the paper
“It is precisely this verse which has been used in the Byzantine version of TY to argue the case that Jesus cannot be accepted in the congregation.23”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [23]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Origen thought along similar lines when he argues that Mary and close family members of Jesus had to hide Mary's pregnancy in order to avoid scandal.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Origen
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The first of these was related to negative rumours or even parodies of how Mary became pregnant.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this criticism Mary's pregnancy is seen as being the work of a demonic angel or similar monster.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The parodies in the Toledot Yeshu literature and Celsus' Panthera episode were post-New Testament traditions, but I have suggested that in the genealogy of the Gospel of Matthew there are negative rumours concerning the pregnancy of Mary, as indicated in Matt.1:18-19.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this article I have argued that the virgin birth of Jesus was the target of two sorts of criticism.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It was precisely this problem which led to the alternative way of speaking about the birth of Jesus.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“According to this model Jesus was God's Wisdom (the Son of God) who was incarnated and became human.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“I have suggested that in the genealogy of the Gospel of Matthew there are negative rumours concerning the pregnancy of Mary, as indicated in Matt.1:18-19.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Matt.1:18-19
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Other references in the Gospels indicate that similar rumours may have alluded to Jesus who is referred to only as the son of Mary (Mark 6:3; Matt.13:55-6; John 1:45, 6:42).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Mark 6:3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Matt.13:55-6
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites John 1:45, 6:42
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
- Not matched
- Probably not a substantial claim. 30
- It may state two separate claims as one. 35
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The relevance of this question becomes apparent when one notices that the virgin birth is not mentioned in the Gospel of John even though it was certainly written after Matthew and Luke, and the concept itself would have fitted well into the framework of the high Christology of that gospel.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The Gospel of John was written after Matthew and Luke.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The writer never refers to the 'Father', but rather the Holy Spirit (so also in the Gospel of Luke).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The Early Oriental A and C versions are fragmentary at the beginning (as presented in Meerson's and Schäfer's edition) and it is impossible to know whether or not they contained the birth narrative.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Meerson and Schäfer
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, both writers have the same theological emphasis: Jesus was born to the Virgin Mary whose pregnancy was due to creative action on the part of the Holy Spirit.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, the Early Oriental B version indicates clearly that Miriam was regarded as a prostitute and Jesus as a bastard.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In his work Contra Celsum Origen explains that Celsus would have used an early (Alexandrian) Jewish source in which Jesus was presented as the son of Mary and the Roman soldier Panthera.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Contra Celsum I.28
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: Origen's quotations of Celsus are reliable enough to reconstruct Celsus' Jewish source.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The Gospel of John emphasizes three important elements in Christology.1) Jesus is the Son of God who had pre-existence before his advent.The world is created through him ( John 1:1-14).2) God sent his Son to the world in order to save it from sin ( John 3:16-17).3) After his resurrection Jesus took up his glorious position beside God in heaven (cf., Ps. 110:1) where he reigns over the world.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites John 1:1-14
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites John 3:16-17
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Ps. 110:1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“But one day he quarrelled with a Jew who decided to destroy Yosef by committing adultery with his wife.One Sabbath eve this wicked man 'climbed into his [Yosef 's] bed and lay with Miriam, who thought that he was her husband Yosef '.She became pregnant and Yosef later noticed this.It became clear for him and then also Miriam what had taken place but 'from his great love for Miriam, for she was”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For he [i.e.Celsus's Jewish informant] represents him disputing with Jesus, and confuting Him, as he thinks, on many points; and in the first place, he accuses Him of having invented his birth from a virgin, and upbraids Him with being born in a certain Jewish village, of a poor woman of the country, who gained her subsistence by spinning, and who was turned out of doors by her husband, a carp”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Contra Celsum I.28
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Origen's quotations of Celsus are reliable enough to reconstruct Celsus' Jewish source.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The name of Panthera is significant because in rabbinical writings (e.g.Tosefta Hullin II.24; bShabb 104b),foot_1 as well as in the Toledot Yeshu tradition, the name Pandira or Pantira has been used.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tosefta Hullin II.24
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites bShabb 104b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The early Yemenite version does not mention anything about the father of Yeshu, but implies his name in the introductory words of the text: 'The story of Yeshu ben Pandera ha-Notsri (may his name and memory be blotted out), who was an abomination and the son of a menstruating woman.'”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The central topic in the TY tradition was the means by which Mary became pregnant.It was presented in a parodic way.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The only real parallels to the TY tradition are provided in the Talmud which calls Jesus the son of Panthera, and contains stories about the trial of five disciples of Jesus (bSanh 43a), Jesus' atrocious behaviour in an Alexandrian hostel (bSanh 107b) and Miriam's confession to Rabbi Aqiba concerning Yeshu's parentage (Kallah 18b).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schäfer 2007: 34-40, 75-81
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“But let us now return to where the Jew is introduced, speaking of the mother of Jesus, and saying that when she was pregnant she was turned out of doors by the carpenter to whom she had been betrothed, as having been guilty of adultery, and that she bore a child to a certain soldier named Panthera;”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Contra Celsum I.32
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Origen's quotations of Celsus are reliable enough to reconstruct Celsus' Jewish source.
- Not matched
In the paper
“and let us see whether those who have blindly concocted these fables about the adultery of the Virgin with Panthera, and her rejection by the carpenter, did not invent these stories to overturn His miraculous conception by the Holy Ghost: for they could have falsified the history in a different manner, on account of its extremely miraculous character, and not have admitted, as it were against”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Contra Celsum I.32
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Origen's quotations of Celsus are reliable enough to reconstruct Celsus' Jewish source.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Against the background of such high Christology it would be curious if the writer of the Gospel of John thought that Jesus' birth was an ordinary event.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: The Gospel of John was written after Matthew and Luke.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The early Yemenite text calls Jesus Yeshu ben Pandera ha-Notsri and adds the attribute zimmâ ûbar niddâ, 'abomination (bastard) and the son of menstruating woman'.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The story is certainly ironical in assuming that Miriam made love without recognizing who the man was, and Yosef who feared God after all did not reject adulterous Miriam.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“She tells the following story which explains the expression zimmâ ûbar niddâ: 'Once I went out at night to launder my shawls after menstruation and I still was impure.Then, someone approached me, and I did not recognize him, and he raped me, and so I conceived this boy.'This being the case the story connects the name of the father of Jesus with the rapist who violated the mother of Jesus during”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the Toledot Yeshu tradition argues, as it were, parodically, that Jesus was indeed wise, but this was due to his being a bastard and having escaped to Egypt with his mother (who continued her harlotry there); there he learned magic and sorcery.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Felix Scheidweiler has suggested that the genealogy of Matthew may indicate that scurrilous rumours about the birth of Jesus prevailed (among the Jews).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Scheidweiler
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a possible causeSingle case- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Finally, it should be noted that the Early Oriental B version characterizes Miriam by means of an expression which indicates that she was a prostitute: 'Her name is Miriam, and she grows the (long) hair of women'.16 In addition, the story accounts the words of Yeshu: 'I am a Jew, and also a bastard (mamzer)', as well as 'the name of my father was Pandera, and he was a foreigner in Israel',”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Contra Celsum I.32
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Meerson and Schäfer 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“just before these verses there is a statement (Deut.23:3) that no bastard (mamzer) can be taken into the congregation of God.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Deut.23:3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The genealogy in Matt. 1 mentions four women each of whom were -in some ways -suspicious cases in the Hebrew Bible: Tamar (gave birth as a consequence of harlotry, Gen. 38), Rahab (was a harlot, Josh. 2 and 6), Ruth (was a Moabite woman, see Deut.23:4-5) and Batsheba (committed adultery with David, 2 Sam.11-12).22”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen. 38
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Josh. 2 and 6
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites 2 Sam.11-12
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“We can hardly use Agobard's references as an argument that Jesus' adulterous birth was unknown in early TY versions.After all, Agobard only recounts Jewish stories as he heard them from those who knew Hebrew (as noted in Schäfer 2011: 27-48, esp.p. 38).In addition, Agobard's successor Amulo (as noted by Schäfer) referred to Jewish ideas about the origin of Jesus: 'he is im pious and the son of an”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schäfer 2011: 27-48
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Interestingly these paraphrases from Celsus' Jewish source (I.28, 32, 39) reveal two important points about Jesus and his parents which were later developed in the Toledot Yeshu tradition.Mary was beautiful and she was actually rejected by Joseph.14 This rejection implies that the birth of Jesus was an argument for his not having anything to do with the kingdom of heaven (I.39).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Contra Celsum I.28, 32, 39
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Origen's quotations of Celsus are reliable enough to reconstruct Celsus' Jewish source.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This being the case the only relevant conclusion is that Miriam was regarded more or less as a prostitute or an adulterous woman in the early versions of TY.No sympathetic view of Miriam can be detected.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Jukka Thurén (2008: 512-15) argues that 1 Tim.3:16 speaks about the incarnation of Jesus in a way which contrasts it with the interpretation of Gen. 6:1-4 in the First Book of Henoch.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Thurén 2008: 512-15
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Once some Christians had found a way of expressing the virgin birth of Jesus with reference to the Holy Spirit (a feminine word in the Hebrew language) it was easier to begin to speak about the pregnancy of Mary.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“1 Tim.3:16 explains why it was difficult to speak about the miraculous pregnancy of Mary, performed by the divine power.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 1 Tim.3:16
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Deut.23:4-5 excludes Moabites from the community of Israel.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Deut.23:4-5
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The Yemenite version blames Miriam because she 'used to go out alone' (the point is that there were no witnesses to the rape and Miriam could have fabricated a convenient story about her pregnancy) and the Byzantine version states that Miriam made love with a man without recognizing who he really was -a detail which must be a parodic element.In addition, the Byzantine version notes that Miriam”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Meerson and Schäfer (2014, I: 138n9)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“As does Justin Martyr (Dial 43, 50, 63, 67) so does also Origen (I.34) discuss Isa.7:14 and the meaning of the Hebrew word c almâ (translated parthenos in LXX).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dial 43, 50, 63, 67
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites I.34
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The Christological formulation in Rom.1:3-4 should not be interpreted to mean that the title of 'Son of God' would be given to Jesus only after the resurrection.Its aim was to emphasize that after his resurrection Jesus was made Son of God in power -an idea which was based on Ps. 2:7.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rom.1:3-4
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Ps. 2:7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Her pregnancy was not due to harlotry.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“It was argued that this personified Wisdom was the Son of God (1 Cor.8:6; Col. 1:14-18; John 1:1-3; Heb.1:1-3) and this Son of God became a human being (Gal 4:4; Phil.2:7).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 1 Cor.8:6
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Col. 1:14-18
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites John 1:1-3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Both expressions 'born of a woman' in Gal.4:4 and 'taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness' in Phil.2:7 are Semitic ways of saying that the Son of God became a human being.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gal.4:4
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Phil.2:7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“According to Thurén, an attractive possibility is that the writer wants to contrast the incarnation of Jesus with 1 Henoch 8, according to which the fallen angels came from Heaven and revealed all kinds of ungodliness (asebeia) to human beings.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Thurén
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The rumours concerning Mary and her pregnancy almost led to her rejection by Joseph, but this proof based on prophecy confirmed to him that the pregnancy of Mary was part of the divine plan.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Matthew 1 is clearly an attempt at an apology for the Virgin Mary.”
boostedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This apparently took place quite early because two strikingly different traditions of the infancy stories were recounted in Matthew 1-2 and Luke 1-2.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The early versions of TY indicate how they have related the birth story of Jesus to the name Pandera.It is clear that the 'ben Pandera' tradition is something which has been transmitted in rabbinical circles.It denoted the suspicious origin of Jesus in a similar way to Celsus' counter-exegesis.But the historical details of this suspicious origin were not clearly indicated in rabbinical traditions”
boostedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There are many other women in the lineage from Abraham to the Messiah whose bad reputation has not obsructed the historical salvation plans of God.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, scurrilous rumours against her can be explained typologically.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The earlier Byzantine story noted that Jesus learned 'Egyptian wisdom, in illusions and sorcery' and this explains why he was so wise.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“At the end of the Gospel the reference is made anew to the Immanuel prophecy (Matt.28:18-20).Jesus promised to be among his disciples.He really is Immanuel; 'God is with us'.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Matt.28:18-20
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“As the Davidic prince (the potential king) had once, during his enthronement ceremony, acquired a powerful position next to God and became an actual king, so also in Rom.1:3-4 Jesus is depicted as the son of David who through resurrection becomes a powerful king next to God, a Son of God in power (Ps.2:7 and 110:1).25”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ps.2:7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites 110:1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“And as far as I can see, the birth of Jesus was in some way regarded as miraculous in this Christological model, too.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both Matthew and Luke were courageous enough to formulate the idea of the virgin birth by using an older Hebrew or Aramaic tradition according to which it was the (feminine) Holy Spirit not God the Father which was active in the pregnancy of Mary.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This model is followed in the earliest documents of the New Testament, that is, in the letters of Paul as well as in one of the latest New Testament documents -the Gospel of John.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“After all, the concept that Jesus was the Son of God and Wisdom incarnate (Prov.8; 1 Cor.8:6; Col. 1:15-20; John 1:1-3; Heb.1:1-3) must have contained some sorts of ideas concerning how Jesus was born.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Prov.8
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites 1 Cor.8:6
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Col. 1:15-20
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Scholars often explain the birth stories of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke as later attempts to explain the origin of Jesus in terms of the concept of the virgin birth.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“It is obvious that early Christians (such as Paul) believed that the birth of Jesus was in some way extraordinary, particularly if Jesus was regarded as a personification of the Wisdom of God through whom the world was created (earliest evidence is 1 Cor.8:6).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 1 Cor.8:6
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
The Gospel of John was written after Matthew and Luke.
“even though it was certainly written after Matthew and Luke”
The paper relies on this without support.
A young girl cannot conceive without the help of a man.
“common sense indicates that a young girl cannot conceive without the help of a man”
The paper relies on this without support.
Origen's quotations of Celsus are reliable enough to reconstruct Celsus' Jewish source.
“Methodologically we must be aware of the fact that Celsus' text is not given; rather it must be reconstructed.”
“Scholars often answer this methodological case by noting that Origen, in many points, has cited his source verbatim even though he may also have shortened Celsus' text.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Gospel of John was written later than Matthew and Luke.
“It is significant that such a trad ition was not adopted in the Gospel of John (written later than Matthew and Luke's gospels)”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Hebrew or Aramaic word for Spirit is grammatically feminine.
“where the Spirit is grammatically feminine”
The paper relies on this without support.
Gen.6:1-4 was interpreted in Jewish writings (the Book of Jubilees and the First Book of Henoch) as an explanation of the origin of the demonic world.
“which was interpreted in Jewish writings (the Book of Jubilees and the First Book of Henoch) as an explanation of the origin of the demonic world.”
Citations
Cites
Funkenstein, A. (1993) · University of California Press eBooks · doi:10.1525/9780520912199 · Cited by 258
Origen and the Jews. Studies in Jewish-Christian Relations in Third-Century Palestine
van Winden, J. C. M., & LANGE, N. D. (1978) · Vigiliae Christianae · doi:10.2307/1583414 · Cited by 201
Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel, and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1 Enoch 6-11
Hanson, P. D. (1977) · Journal of Biblical Literature · doi:10.2307/3265878 · Cited by 89
Apocalyptic and Myth in 1 Enoch 6-11
Nickelsburg, G. W. E. (1977) · Journal of Biblical Literature · doi:10.2307/3266192 · Cited by 80
Rokeah (2002) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/9789004421424 · Cited by 75
Against the Christians: the rise of early anti-Christian polemic
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.38-2115 · Cited by 65
Niehoff, M. R. (2013) · Journal of early Christian studies · doi:10.1353/earl.2013.0015 · Cited by 32
(2005) · UCL Discovery (University College London) · Cited by 17
Biale, D. (1999) · Jewish Social Studies · doi:10.1353/jss.1999.0014 · Cited by 16
Against the Christians : the rise of early anti-Christian polemic
Hargis, J. W. (1999) · doi:10.2307/3184848 · Cited by 14
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- Antti Laato is a professor in old testament Exegetics and Judaic Studies at Åbo Akademi University. He is the leader of the international SRB (Studies in the Reception History of the Bible) network which examines how biblical traditions have been transmitted in the three Abrahamic monotheistic religions. His SRB-related research project Where are you, Adam? A new Understanding of Adam in Jewish-Christian-Muslim Context has received finance from the Academy of Finland (2013-17). He has recently published the monographs Who is the Servant of the Lord? Jewish and Christian interpretations on isaiah 53 from Antiquity to the Middle Ages (SRB 4, Eisenbrauns 2012) and Guide to Biblical Chronology (Sheffield Phoenix Press 2015).
- Alexander, Philip, 2011. 'Jesus and his mother in the Jewish anti-Gospel (the Toledot Yeshu)' in Infancy Gospel: Stories and Identities, eds Claire Clivaz, Andreas Dettwiler, Luc Devillers, and Enrico Norelli with Benjamin Bertho, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Neuen Testament, 281 (Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck), pp. 588-616
- Bammel, Ernst, 1986. 'Der Jude des Celsus' in Judaica. Kleine Schriften, I, ed. Ernst Bammel, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Neuen Testament, 37 (Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck), pp. 265-83
- Baumgarten, Albert, 1990. 'Jews, pagans and Christians on the empty grave of Jesus' in Proceedings of the Tenth World Congress of Jewish Studies Division B, vol. 2: The History of the Jewish People ( Jerusalem, World Union of Jewish Studies), pp. 37-44
- --2006. 'Noah's library: sources for 1 Enoch 6-11', Journal for the Study of Pseudepigrapha, 15, pp. 163-77
- Chadwick, Henry, 1953. Origen: Contra Celsum (Cambridge University Press)
- Gager, John, and Mika Ahuvia, 2013. 'Some notes on Jesus and his parents: from the New Testament Gospels to the Toledot Yeshu' in Envisioning Judaism: Studies in Honor of Peter Schäfer on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, vol. 2, eds Ra'anan S. Boustan, Klaus Herrmann, Reimund Leicht, Annette Y. Reed, and Giuseppe Veltri, in collaboration of Alex Ramos (Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck), pp. 997-1019
- Gambero, Luigi, 1999. Mary and the Fathers of the Church: The Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Though (San Fransisco, Ignatius Press)
- Hengel, Martin, 1992. 'Christological titles in Early Christianity' in The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity. The First Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Christian Origins, ed.
- James H. Charlesworth (Minneapolis, Fortress), pp. 425-48
- Hoffman, Joseph, 1987. Celsus On the True Doctrine: A Discourse Against the Christians (Oxford University Press)
- Lockshin, Martin, 1993. 'Translation as polemic: the case of Toledot Yeshu' in Minhah le-Nahum: Biblical and Others Studies Presented to Nahum M. Sarna in Honor of his 70th Birthday, eds Marc Brettler and Michael Fishbane, JSOT Supplement, 154 (Sheffield Academic Press), pp. 226-41
- Schäfer, Peter, 2007. Jesus in the Talmud (Princeton University Press) --2011. ' Agobard's and Amulo's Toledot Yeshu' in Toledot Yeshu ("The Life Story of Jesus") Revisited, eds Peter Schäfer, Michael Meerson, and Yaacov Deutsch, Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism, 143 (Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck), pp. 27-48
- The Gospel of Nicodemus, Acts of Pilate and Christ's descent into Hell' in New Testament Apocrypha I: Gospels and Related Writings, ed. Wilhelm Schneemelcher (Westminster, John Knox), pp. 501-36
- Thomas, S. 2006. 'Celsus' in A-Z of Origen, ed. John Anthony McGuckin (London, The SCM Press 2006), pp. 72-3
- Triggs, Joseph, 1998. Origen (London, Routledge)
- VanderKam, James, 1999. 'The angel story in the book of Jubilees' in Pseudepigraphic Perspectives: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Proceedings of the International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 12-14 January, eds Estelle G. Chazon and Michael E. Stone, Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah, 31 (Leiden, Brill), pp. 151-70
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Una polemica cruciale: Celso e Origene in tema di corporeità
Camassa, G. (2018) · Klio · doi:10.1515/klio-2018-0105 · Cited by 1
Vopřada, D. (2025) · Studia theologica · doi:10.5507/sth.2025.006
Metadata
- Authors
- Laato, A.
- Affiliations
- Åbo Akademi University (FI)
- Corresponding author
- Laato, Antti
- ORCID
- Laato, Antti
- Venue
- Scripta Instituti Donneriani Aboensis
- Published
- 1970-01-01
- Volume
- 27
- Pages
- 61-80
- ISSN
- 0582-3226 (ISSN-L)
- 2343-4937
- OpenAlex
- W2460625655
- Semantic Scholar
- e07ce5dfe3dad59cdbf255af4f87a556afa9ee5c
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Scripta Instituti Donneriani Aboensis (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Historical and Linguistic Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
- Keywords
- Celsus, Toledot Yeshu, anti-Christian polemic, Genesis 6:1-4, divine wisdom, Gospel of John, Matthew, Gospel of Luke, Holy Spirit, Jewish apologetics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-13, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-13 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
