There is a decent argument against the virgin birth using biblical texts, but I don't think using a 17th century translation of "pneuma" as ghost is giving an accurate picture of what Matthew was writing. To my knowledge, at the time of the KJB translation, "ghost" had a different connotation to how we would use the word today, which is why modern translations use the word "spirit". Literally pneuma means "breath".
It's irrelevant to my point exactly how the supernatural entity is described, Jesus according to the Bible was conceived via the "same" mechanism many other "children of the gods" were in many other mythologies - i.e. a supernatural entity did the deed.
Last edited: