Did Mary outlive Jesus?

Did Mary outlive Jesus?

Spirituality

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

PH

Joined
15 Jul 12
Moves
635
18 Aug 12

Originally posted by Suzianne
No, sorry, I decline, I wouldn't want to be myth-understood.

And certainly, if he insists on acting like a horse's ass, I don't have to talk to him.
Not a problem. It is Atheism that is myth understood.

Misfit Queen

Isle of Misfit Toys

Joined
08 Aug 03
Moves
36681
20 Aug 12

Originally posted by SwissGambit
But you're also saying she gave birth at age 12 or 13. The average age of fertility was higher a century or two ago; who knows what it was at ~0 BCE. How can you be so sure Mary was able to conceive at such a young age? What if her age of fertility was higher than average?
Well, whether or not she could conceive normally at that age, the fact remains that she did become "with child" and did in fact give birth.

I would guess that the age of fertility was actually less then than it is now. When a species' lifespan is shorter, it makes sense to become fertile sooner so that children can be produced as soon as possible within a shorter lifespan. I think the only reason why our fertility has not come later with increasing lifespan is because socially (through exposure to media sources, as well as cultural pressures), humans are encouraged to be sexually precocious, especially females.

PH

Joined
15 Jul 12
Moves
635
20 Aug 12

Originally posted by Suzianne
the fact remains that she did become "with child" and did in fact give birth.
You do realize that you have an extremely warped definition of fact.

PH

Joined
15 Jul 12
Moves
635
20 Aug 12

I wonder if there is a Christian in the world who understands that there is no evidence for Jesus or any of his merry band of hooligans nor can there be otherwise faith is useless. Faith is how the bible tells them to believe. So....any Christians want to provide evidence of Jesus?

The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined
24 Jan 11
Moves
13644
20 Aug 12

Originally posted by Phil Hill
I wonder if there is a Christian in the world who understands that there is no evidence for Jesus or any of his merry band of hooligans nor can there be otherwise faith is useless. Faith is how the bible tells them to believe. So....any Christians want to provide evidence of Jesus?
Don't be lazy. Do your own research. We did ours. 😏

S
Caninus Interruptus

2014.05.01

Joined
11 Apr 07
Moves
92274
20 Aug 12

Originally posted by Suzianne
Well, whether or not she could conceive normally at that age, the fact remains that she did become "with child" and did in fact give birth.

I would guess that the age of fertility was actually less then than it is now. When a species' lifespan is shorter, it makes sense to become fertile sooner so that children can be produced as soon as possible within ...[text shortened]... as cultural pressures), humans are encouraged to be sexually precocious, especially females.
Sure, she gave birth, but you don't have any real justification for assuming that she was 12 or 13 when she did it. She may have been a late bloomer for all we know.

And if marrying off your daughter at age 12 isn't encouraging her to be sexually precocious, I don't know what is.

PH

Joined
15 Jul 12
Moves
635
20 Aug 12

Originally posted by RJHinds
Don't be lazy. Do your own research. We did ours. 😏
There we have it, a Christian of no faith and no evidence either.

Misfit Queen

Isle of Misfit Toys

Joined
08 Aug 03
Moves
36681
24 Aug 12

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Sure, she gave birth, but you don't have any real justification for assuming that she was 12 or 13 when she did it. She may have been a late bloomer for all we know.

And if marrying off your daughter at age 12 isn't encouraging her to be sexually precocious, I don't know what is.
It was merely "the way it was" back then. Low life span means if you're gonna reproduce, you better be on about it, no wasting any time.

S
Caninus Interruptus

2014.05.01

Joined
11 Apr 07
Moves
92274
24 Aug 12

Originally posted by Suzianne
It was merely "the way it was" back then. Low life span means if you're gonna reproduce, you better be on about it, no wasting any time.
That's fine once you have fertility. Really, you just have to take advantage of those years, wherever they may fall. Get in your birthing before you die.

I just don't see any indication that they had fertility as young as age 12 at that time. Has anyone researched it?

Insanity at Masada

tinyurl.com/mw7txe34

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26660
25 Aug 12

Originally posted by Suzianne
Well, whether or not she could conceive normally at that age, the fact remains that she did become "with child" and did in fact give birth.

I would guess that the age of fertility was actually less then than it is now. When a species' lifespan is shorter, it makes sense to become fertile sooner so that children can be produced as soon as possible within ...[text shortened]... as cultural pressures), humans are encouraged to be sexually precocious, especially females.
Our fertility does come later. The people who are getting pregnant at 13 tend to be members of populations that often die young.

Insanity at Masada

tinyurl.com/mw7txe34

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26660
25 Aug 12

Originally posted by SwissGambit
That's fine once you have fertility. Really, you just have to take advantage of those years, wherever they may fall. Get in your birthing before you die.

I just don't see any indication that they had fertility as young as age 12 at that time. Has anyone researched it?
I don't see any reason to doubt Mary was pregnant by 12 or 13.

PH

Joined
15 Jul 12
Moves
635
25 Aug 12

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I don't see any reason to doubt Mary was pregnant by 12 or 13.
There is no reason to doubt she was pregnant when she didn't sleep with a man? Can you provide another incidence of any woman actually giving birth to a child without being touched by a man? If not, you have plenty of reason to doubt.

S
Caninus Interruptus

2014.05.01

Joined
11 Apr 07
Moves
92274
25 Aug 12
1 edit

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I don't see any reason to doubt Mary was pregnant by 12 or 13.
And I suppose they let 12-year-old couples take cross-country trips alone to register in a census?

Yeah, you have no reason to doubt. 🙄

PH

Joined
15 Jul 12
Moves
635
25 Aug 12

Originally posted by SwissGambit
And I suppose they let 12-year-old couples take cross-country trips alone to register in a census?

Yeah, you have no reason to doubt. 🙄
That was because the author of the gospel that first mentioned Nazareth misread Isaiah 11:1 (proving he , she or it didn't know Hebrew worth anything) and thought NETZER (branch) was a town that wasn't settled between 700 BCE and 135 CE.

The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined
24 Jan 11
Moves
13644
25 Aug 12

Originally posted by Phil Hill
That was because the author of the gospel that first mentioned Nazareth misread Isaiah 11:1 (proving he , she or it didn't know Hebrew worth anything) and thought NETZER (branch) was a town that wasn't settled between 700 BCE and 135 CE.
Keep working on your research. You will probably get it right eventually. 😏