There is no clear parallel to the notion of a virgin birth in pagan literature, only of births resulting from intercourse between God and a woman (of which there is no suggestion in Matthew and Luke), resulting in a being half-divine, half-human (which is far different from biblical Christology).
— John Frame, quoted in Jesus in An Age of Controversy by Douglas Groothuis, p. 218
In a recent book called The Original Jesus (1995), Elmar Gruber and Holger Kersten argue that the virgin birth story was borrowed from a Buddhist source, which claims the same kind of origin for Buddha. This view overlooks the significant differences between the Buddhist story and the Gospel accounts. The preincarnate Buddha comes in the form of a white elephant who enters the side of his mother. Parrinder notes that it “was not a virgin birth, since she was married, and in this story … it is celestial influence rather than a divine seed that enters her.” Continue reading
To some the virgin birth seems to be an anti-natural way to be born. To be sure, it is unnatural, but it is not thereby against nature. After all, the virgin conception resulted in a normal nine-month pregnancy and a natural birth…. Something about the event had to be highly unusual. Otherwise it would not qualify as a miracle. And having no male fertilization is highly unusual. This does not make the virgin birth of Christ anti-natural, however, for two reasons. Continue reading
If God creates a miraculous spermatozoan in the body of a virgin, it does not proceed to break any laws. The laws at once take over. Nature is ready. Pregnancy follows, according to all the normal laws, and nine months later a child is born.
— C. S. Lewis, quoted in Jesus in An Age of Controversy by Douglas Groothuis, p. 217