How Old Were Mary and Joseph?

[BaneSidhe]

@Gary_T

My understanding is that the important issue is that Jesus is descended from David (legally if not biologically), as prophesied in scripture, hence the attention to his lineage. While you consider details of his nuclear family beyond his parents to be important, they were immaterial to the message of the Gospel writers.

I was under the impression that because society back then was patriarchal, there would be more more importance placed on the paternal lines than the maternal lines.

Polycarp, excellent summary. I learned a lot—a lot more than I ever did in church.

[Uncertain]

@Polycarp

1. Joseph plays a major role in the Infancy Narratives, the Flight into Egypt, and then, save for Luke’s brief note of the visit to the Temple when Jesus was 12, vanishes utterly from the story.

The infancy narratives are tacked on from separate sources, so this contrast is not very informative.

[TriPolar]

@Blake

As Polycarp notes above, we can discern some things because they are *not *mentioned as being unusual. A girl’s parents marrying her to man who was physically incapable of of fathering children would have been highly unusual, not to mention cruel. Yet no such statement was made about Mary’s engagement. It seemed perfectly normal and mundane.

Ok, so anything not identified as unusual would be usual.

I don’t know much about this subject, but the latter part of the gospels relate first hand accounts, while these parts are relating the accounts of others. I would assume what is included would be everything known (or accepted to be true), and the age of Mary and Joseph aren’t known, nor are any of the circumstances that weren’t mentioned. Otherwise, if its not everything known, then these would be the parts considered unimportant for others to know for some reason. In that case, the age of Mary and Joseph weren’t considered important, even had they been known.

So yeah, if anything related was unusual, an explanation would probably be included. But the unusual might just be excluded. That doesn’t move any closer to answering the question, unless you accept a subset of (unknown, omitted, irrelevant) as the answer.

It is interesting to see the ways that every nuance is examined to find a clue though.

[Chronos]

Quoth BigT:

Heck, I still don’t understand the need for the Immaculate Conception theologically: if God can make a woman sinless who was born from human parents, why can’t he make himself sinless being born from only one human parent? Why do the two miracles need to be separated by a generation?

IIRC, the official Church answer to this one is “It’s a mystery”. Which I agree isn’t very satisfying.

[Scathach]

nm: misread

[TriPolar]

@TriPolar

Ok, so anything not identified as unusual would be usual.

I don’t know much about this subject, but the latter part of the gospels relate first hand accounts, while these parts are relating the accounts of others. I would assume what is included would be everything known (or accepted to be true), and the age of Mary and Joseph aren’t known, nor are any of the circumstances that weren’t mentioned. Otherwise, if its not everything known, then these would be the parts considered unimportant for others to know for some reason. In that case, the age of Mary and Joseph weren’t considered important, even had they been known.

So yeah, if anything related was unusual, an explanation would probably be included. But the unusual might just be excluded. That doesn’t move any closer to answering the question, unless you accept a subset of (unknown, omitted, irrelevant) as the answer.

It is interesting to see the ways that every nuance is examined to find a clue though.

Ugh, this should read ‘…these would be the parts considered IMPORTANT…’