Talk:Mary, mother of Jesus

Semi-protected edit request on 23 May 2024
"Per the Jewish customs surrounding marriage at the time, and the apocryphal Gospel of James, Mary was approximately 13–14 years old when giving birth to Jesus.[1] Her year of birth is therefore contingent on that of Jesus, and though some posit slightly different dates (such as Meier's dating of c. 7 or 6 BC)[2] general consensus places Jesus' birth in c. 4 BC,[3] thus placing Mary's birth in c. 18 BC."

Mary being this young is probably false, it would be more appropriate to say she was more around her late teens to early twenties (18-20). It would be more appropriate to add this or replace the original lines all together.

Here are my sources if your curious to read them.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233495632_Children_and_Childhood_in_Light_of_the_Demographics_of_the_Jewish_Family_in_Late_Antiquity

"On the basis of rabbinic sources (and ancient documents) scholars suggest that the average age of the first marriage in Palestine and the Western Diaspora was in the late teens or early twenties for women and around thirty for men" Page 330-331

https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691002552/jewish-marriage-in-antiquity

"A twenty-year-old Jewish woman from Egypt who died while, apparently, betrothed us described as 'ripe for marriage like a rose in a garden nurtured by fresh rain....these sources suggest that in the Palestine and the Western Diaspora, Jewish (elite?) men might have typically married around thirty to women who were in their (mid or late?) teens" (107-108)

Also the Catholic Document you attached does not affirm it.

"It will not be without interest to recall here, unreliable though they are, the lengthy stories concerning St. Jospeh's marriage contained in the apocryphal writings."

This is my first time doing anything with Wikipedia so please let me know how i screwed up. Thank you.

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm Tylerlikesbees (talk) 05:50, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


 * This is your original research; Wikipedia does not publish original research. Remsense  诉  05:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Im Confused what you mean. I have attached sources and pages numbers. These are all from scholars. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 05:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Sure, and none of them say "Mary was likely this age". That is a conclusion you've synthesized from various things you've read, which is considered original research. You need to (a) cite a source that directly comes to the conclusion itself, and (b) weigh it against the other reliable sources on the subject to determine how much weight it should be due in the article. I recommend reading the Wikipedia policy and guideline pages I've linked above. Remsense  诉  06:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.
 * As already mentioned, this is original research as none of the sources directly support this claim. Extrapolating from an average age for the region to a specific person is quite a leap. ResearchGate is also not considered a reliable source here. Jamedeus (talk) 06:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok, I understand what you mean however I still believe it would be appropriate to give a more generalized approach instead of stating a approximate age. Since all the sources do not mention a specific age for Mary also unless if i somehow missed something. Theirs also scholarly discourse on the matters of Mary's actual age and the Apocrypha. I would replace "Mary was approximately 13–14 years" to "Mary was a teen." Also the researchgate article is available on other websites. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 06:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The Sources i am referring to is Sources 1-3. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 06:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That would be based on original research. If you think a claim is not supported by its sources, I recommend putting a tag on it.  Remsense  诉  06:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok That works, however i still do not believe using the Apocrypha as part of the evidence is not a good idea unless scholars mostly agree which i believe in the context of the Gospel of James is not. Most churches deny the Apocrypha and so do scholars.
 * The source that is cited states fully also,
 * "It will not be without interest to recall here, unreliable though they are, the lengthy stories concerning St. Joseph's marriage contained in the apocryphal writings. When forty years of age, Joseph married a woman called Melcha or Escha by some, Salome by others; they lived forty-nine years together and had six children, two daughters and four sons, the youngest of whom was James (the Less, "the Lord's brother"). A year after his wife's death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age..."
 * Thus the generalization to provide a unbiased claim. Scholarly and church opinion is debated. you can look up "Gospel of James is it reliable" and get a bunch of different opinions. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 07:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I Am sorry i forgot the Catholic Doctrine on source 1 states " A year after his wife's death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age" However my point still stand the Acrophya is still debated. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 06:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Every opinion is debated. We need sources that attest the extent of this debate explicitly. Remsense  诉  07:03, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The first source already claims their unreliable. Do you need any additional sources? Im sorry i am brand new to Wikipedia. Please be patient with me lol
 * Also can you add the "citation needed" i do not believe i can add them.
 * For Source 1:
 * Tylerlikesbees (talk) 07:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the claim is presently adequately supported by its sources. It attributes where the estimate is from, and it provides an inline citation accordingly. If this didn't say Per the Jewish customs surrounding marriage at the time, and the apocryphal Gospel of James, then there might be a problem, but it does. If there are alternate claims about Mary specifically, they may be worth noting also. Remsense  诉  07:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I do not know about Jewish customs surrounding marriage to comment on it, however i would reword the apocrypha part slightly differently.
 * Per the Jewish customs surrounding marriage at the time, and the apocryphal Gospel of James (which is debated for its legitimacy use this source)
 * Theirs also no need to add other sources since the source already claims its a gray area for the apocrypha's. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 07:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The source i provide its just a generalization of disputes of the apocrypha in general if you would like specifically for the Gospel of John let me know. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 07:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * This gives the best general take. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 08:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Also I would add "Scholars suggest" to so it would look like this
 * "Scholars suggest, Per the Jewish customs surrounding marriage at the time, and the apocryphal Gospel of James (which is debated for its legitimacy use this source)
 * I'm hoping I'm not spamming anything however I believe this adequately shows a good adequate approach to it. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 08:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * How else would we know? It is often difficult to balance attributing viewpoints to inadvertently casting undue doubt on them, but I think this particular passage threads the needle fine as is. Others may disagree though. Remsense  诉  10:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think adding "(which is debated for its legitimacy)" would add more context for the reader. Also the reason why I would add "Scholars suggest" is that I have never seen this approximate age represented, except outside a small handful of articles. I feel like it would be appropriate to add more sources or either add that specific sentence to the start of the article. Since the source itself listed for it is weary on its legitimacy. To avoid confusion like I have experienced. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 15:50, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think adding "(which is debated for its legitimacy)" would add more context for the reader. Also the reason why I would add "Scholars suggest" is that I have never seen this approximate age represented, except outside a small handful of articles. I feel like it would be appropriate to add more sources or either add that specific sentence to the start of the article. Since the source itself listed for it is weary on its legitimacy. To avoid confusion like I have experienced. Tylerlikesbees (talk) 15:50, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Madonna which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Dawid2009 (talk) 21:35, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Grammar error that need fixing
The sentence:

“For Helvidius, would be full siblings of Jesus, born to Mary and Joseph after the firstborn Jesus.”

is missing the word “those” after the first comma. 98.144.128.56 (talk) 17:46, 15 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Fixed it. You're right. Thanks! Rafaelosornio (talk) 10:33, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 June 2024
Typo in "Names and Titles" section. Please change "BMV" to "BVM" ((Blessed Virgin Mary)) Gleitzeit (talk) 23:03, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 23:17, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2024
Sentence "She is a central figure of Christianity" should be changed to "She is an important figure of Christianity". While not entirely wrong, the current version may be misleading – central figure of Christianity is Jesus, obviously. Arateniz (talk) 07:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)