I consider it some slight evidence in favor of a historical Jesus that the circumstances of his birth needed justification. The messiah wasn't supposed to be born of a virgin, he was supposed to be of the male line of David.
There was no virgin birth prophecy, Isaiah refers to a young woman having a son she will name Immanuel. It's wishful thinking to tie this to Jesus. The Greek translation of Isaiah uses a word for maiden that means 'virgin' which made it into the Latin and English translations, but the Hebrew word does not mean 'virgin'. Also this Immanuel was supposed to be someone during whose childhood the enemies of Ahaz would be destroyed, Ahaz being the king the prophet is predicting for.
There was no virgin birth prophecy, Isaiah refers to a young woman having a son she will name Immanuel. It's wishful thinking to tie this to Jesus. The Greek translation of Isaiah uses a word for maiden that means 'virgin' which made it into the Latin and English translations, but the Hebrew word does not mean 'virgin'. Also this Immanuel was supposed to be someone during whose childhood the enemies of Ahaz would be destroyed, Ahaz being the king the prophet is predicting for.
