Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
So tell me, did Mary get a say in being impregnated? Because sometimes that part of the story just reads like get gets told that she'll be getting pregnant now, and, well, sure, she does say later on, "Okay, let it be so," that part of her response seems pretty inconsequential given the fact that she's already been told that it's going to happen regardless.
Did Mary consent to being impregnated? Of course she did. The Bible writing often doesn't do a very good job of expressing the inner life of those it mentions. I think it's because the stories are so brief. It's up to us to figure out what must be going on in people's minds. I think she could have refused to become the mother of the Messiah, and that the angel was aware of this. The text confuses such issues, as you note.
 
Upvote 0

amariselle

Jesus Never Fails
Sep 28, 2004
6,648
4,194
The Great Northern Wilderness
✟60,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
So tell me, did Mary get a say in being impregnated?

Of course. God doesn't force anyone to do anything. We are not puppets or robots.

Because sometimes that part of the story just reads like get gets told that she'll be getting pregnant now, and, well, sure, she does say later on, "Okay, let it be so," that part of her response seems pretty inconsequential given the fact that she's already been told that it's going to happen regardless.

That part of her response was far from "inconsequential." It was necessary. God was not going to force her to become pregnant. She was a humble and obedient servant of the Lord, which is precisely why she found favour with God. Her faith in God was well known to Him.

Believe me, I have a burning desire to want Mary to have agency. She did say, "Let it be according to your word." I want to let her yes be yes! What an empowering story that one would be, and what a deep and meaningful testament to the trust Mary had in God!

And indeed, that's exactly what it is. A beautiful, deep and meaningful testament of Mary's trust and faith in God.

Being pregnant was even more dangerous then than it is today. To top it off, being unwed and pregnant? And all that traveling. God didn't put her in an easy position, that's for sure. But she trusted God. And goodness knows the good book needs a woman or two with agency!

Absolutely. All of that is true. God has often asked for extreme sacrifice and obedience. He doesn't force anyone, however.

Her "Let it be according to your word," doesn't feel like consent. It feels like the child who pretends to be asleep when her dad comes into her room at night because she knows there's nothing she can do to stop what he is about to do anyway... and even if she wanted to try, how would she even begin to say "no" when they are on such unequal playing fields; she doesn't have the language yet to describe what he is doing.

While it's true that God is far above Mary (as her God and Creator) that does not mean He took advantage of her. I find it heartbreaking that you would equate the miracle of our Saviour's conception with the incestuous rape of a child by their father.

How much did Mary know of the OT God?

We know she was a devout and faithful young Jewish woman. As such, she would have known of God very well and of all the Jewish customs and traditions and the reasons for them.

I'm not sure I know a lot about her regarding what education she would have had?

Her education would likely have been typical of any other Jewish woman at that time. She would have known all of the OT accounts, the reasons for the traditions and customs.

Did she know enough to know how the OT women got treated?

Because human beings have free will, there are indeed cases of that free will being abused. That does not mean God condones such things.

Look at Hagar. She was raped, repeatedly, and later mistreated by the wife of the man who raped her.

Nowhere does it say that God approved of how Hagar was treated. In fact, He made provision for her and Ishmael.

She ran away and what did God do? God said, "Go back to the place where you get hurt."

Well, I think there was more to it than that. God doesn't celebrate or condone people getting abused.

Where women do come up in the OT, it's no secret that they are generally either "vessels" or they meet unpleasant ends (or maybe both!)

There are actually many OT accounts of women who were very powerful and blessed by the Lord and anything but mere "vessels".

Would Mary have felt like she had any power to say "no" to a God who the OT credits with some pretty... strong... punishments?

No doubt she would have "feared" the Lord (which, as Scripture says is the beginning of wisdom). However, she would also have trusted Him, and her humble obedience is absolutely a beautiful and lasting testament to her strong faith in God and all of His promises.

So what is there to take away from that passage that just seems to be Mary being taken advantage of/being reduced to a vessel. I get the whole theme of obedience and all but the annunciation bit itself really still eats at me.

I'm sorry that this account troubles you so deeply. I truly wish it did not. It really is a beautiful example of faith, one we should still rejoice and thank God for today.

And God knew Mary would say "yes" (as He is all knowing). He did not "take advantage" of her or use her as nothing more than a "vessel." He loves her and she had found favour with Him. This plan that was being fulfilled was for her salvation also. So, we can and should praise God and give Him all glory in this.

God bless.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Doug Melven
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So tell me, did Mary get a say in being impregnated? Because sometimes that part of the story just reads like get gets told that she'll be getting pregnant now, and, well, sure, she does say later on, "Okay, let it be so," that part of her response seems pretty inconsequential given the fact that she's already been told that it's going to happen regardless.

Believe me, I have a burning desire to want Mary to have agency. She did say, "Let it be according to your word." I want to let her yes be yes! What an empowering story that one would be, and what a deep and meaningful testament to the trust Mary had in God! Being pregnant was even more dangerous then than it is today. To top it off, being unwed and pregnant? And all that traveling. God didn't put her in an easy position, that's for sure. But she trusted God. And goodness knows the good book needs a woman or two with agency!

Her "Let it be according to your word," doesn't feel like consent. It feels like the child who pretends to be asleep when her dad comes into her room at night because she knows there's nothing she can do to stop what he is about to do anyway... and even if she wanted to try, how would she even begin to say "no" when they are on such unequal playing fields; she doesn't have the language yet to describe what he is doing.

How much did Mary know of the OT God? I'm not sure I know a lot about her regarding what education she would have had? Did she know enough to know how the OT women got treated? Look at Hagar. She was raped, repeatedly, and later mistreated by the wife of the man who raped her. She ran away and what did God do? God said, "Go back to the place where you get hurt." Where women do come up in the OT, it's no secret that they are generally either "vessels" or they meet unpleasant ends (or maybe both!) Would Mary have felt like she had any power to say "no" to a God who the OT credits with some pretty... strong... punishments?

So what is there to take away from that passage that just seems to be Mary being taken advantage of/being reduced to a vessel. I get the whole theme of obedience and all but the annunciation bit itself really still eats at me.

Hello Cirrutopia,

From the full Jewish context of Mary's story presented by both Matthew and Luke, we can understand that Mary gave her implicit, Covenantal consent to God as a chosen vessel. However, it's obvious that her consent wasn't the kind that would be typical or representative of today's liberally charged civil and human rights regimes.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: DavidFirth
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hello Cirrutopia,

From the full Jewish context of the story presented for her by both Matthew and Luke, we can understand that Mary gave her implicit, Covenantal consent to God as a chosen vessel. However, it's obvious that her consent wasn't the kind that would be typical or representative of today's liberally charged civil and human rights regimes.


In what way is that obvious? It’s important to bear in mind when reading the gospels that they are very short accounts of a period covering 3 years or more, involving a lot of people and events. There’s no exploration of the ins and outs of every scene in terms of what the people involved felt, thought and said, most of it is summarised for the sake of brevity, because the important thing was getting the message across. That doesn’t mean Mary, or anyone else, didn’t think anything through or have a choice.
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So tell me, did Mary get a say in being impregnated? Because sometimes that part of the story just reads like get gets told that she'll be getting pregnant now, and, well, sure, she does say later on, "Okay, let it be so," that part of her response seems pretty inconsequential given the fact that she's already been told that it's going to happen regardless.

Believe me, I have a burning desire to want Mary to have agency. She did say, "Let it be according to your word." I want to let her yes be yes! What an empowering story that one would be, and what a deep and meaningful testament to the trust Mary had in God! Being pregnant was even more dangerous then than it is today. To top it off, being unwed and pregnant? And all that traveling. God didn't put her in an easy position, that's for sure. But she trusted God. And goodness knows the good book needs a woman or two with agency!

Her "Let it be according to your word," doesn't feel like consent. It feels like the child who pretends to be asleep when her dad comes into her room at night because she knows there's nothing she can do to stop what he is about to do anyway... and even if she wanted to try, how would she even begin to say "no" when they are on such unequal playing fields; she doesn't have the language yet to describe what he is doing.

How much did Mary know of the OT God? I'm not sure I know a lot about her regarding what education she would have had? Did she know enough to know how the OT women got treated? Look at Hagar. She was raped, repeatedly, and later mistreated by the wife of the man who raped her. She ran away and what did God do? God said, "Go back to the place where you get hurt." Where women do come up in the OT, it's no secret that they are generally either "vessels" or they meet unpleasant ends (or maybe both!) Would Mary have felt like she had any power to say "no" to a God who the OT credits with some pretty... strong... punishments?

So what is there to take away from that passage that just seems to be Mary being taken advantage of/being reduced to a vessel. I get the whole theme of obedience and all but the annunciation bit itself really still eats at me.
There is a book written about Joseph and Mary. They wanted to marry her off when she was 12 years old and she told them that she had dedicated her life to serving God. So whatever God asked her to do she would do. The book is approved by the catholic church.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
In what way is that obvious? It’s important to bear in mind when reading the gospels that they are very short accounts of a period covering 3 years or more, involving a lot of people and events. There’s no exploration of the ins and outs of every scene in terms of what the people involved felt, thought and said, most of it is summarised for the sake of brevity, because the important thing was getting the message across. That doesn’t mean Mary, or anyone else, didn’t think anything through or have a choice.

I didn't say that Mary didn't think things through or have a choice; hence, this is why I said she gave her implicit, Covenantal consent. It is consent, it's just not of the highly liberated conceptual type that is expected in today's democratic legal thinking.

However, with that said, we do not see Gabriel coming to Mary and saying, "Hey daughter of God, I've got a proposition for you. Would you like to do the honors of carrying the Christ-child?" To which she then responds with liberal fervor, "What's in it for me? I need more info than this, Gabriel, and even if it turns out that it's all on the up and up and there are some grand social benefits to it, I'm going to need...some time... to consider the pro and cons before I sign my name on the dotted line. I might even want a legal contract drawn up for me to review and on which I'll strike out all those points in the agreement to which I feel are unfair, ask too much, or are otherwise deemed irrelevant by ... me!" :rolleyes:
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So tell me, did Mary get a say in being impregnated? Because sometimes that part of the story just reads like get gets told that she'll be getting pregnant now, and, well, sure, she does say later on, "Okay, let it be so," that part of her response seems pretty inconsequential given the fact that she's already been told that it's going to happen regardless.

Believe me, I have a burning desire to want Mary to have agency. She did say, "Let it be according to your word." I want to let her yes be yes! What an empowering story that one would be, and what a deep and meaningful testament to the trust Mary had in God! Being pregnant was even more dangerous then than it is today. To top it off, being unwed and pregnant? And all that traveling. God didn't put her in an easy position, that's for sure. But she trusted God. And goodness knows the good book needs a woman or two with agency!

Her "Let it be according to your word," doesn't feel like consent. It feels like the child who pretends to be asleep when her dad comes into her room at night because she knows there's nothing she can do to stop what he is about to do anyway... and even if she wanted to try, how would she even begin to say "no" when they are on such unequal playing fields; she doesn't have the language yet to describe what he is doing.

How much did Mary know of the OT God? I'm not sure I know a lot about her regarding what education she would have had? Did she know enough to know how the OT women got treated? Look at Hagar. She was raped, repeatedly, and later mistreated by the wife of the man who raped her. She ran away and what did God do? God said, "Go back to the place where you get hurt." Where women do come up in the OT, it's no secret that they are generally either "vessels" or they meet unpleasant ends (or maybe both!) Would Mary have felt like she had any power to say "no" to a God who the OT credits with some pretty... strong... punishments?

So what is there to take away from that passage that just seems to be Mary being taken advantage of/being reduced to a vessel. I get the whole theme of obedience and all but the annunciation bit itself really still eats at me.

Are you suggesting that God raped Mary?
 
  • Prayers
Reactions: RaymondG
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think if this post demonstrates anything it’s the difficulties of trying to impose elements of 21st C thinking on times, places and people we know very little about
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I agree, Anastasia. What are we saying about women's bodies in general when we think of the mother of our Lord's body as just being an object in a cosmic plan, like a chess piece being moved on a board or a switch being flipped? It is indeed offensive, and I think it shows more our attitudes towards women in general that we even contemplate this as real theology.

No it is not offensive. Jesus Himself contemplated his mission and was concerned that He was going to be going through with his crucifixion. And He was far better informed of his future than Mary was. It's amazing that she did not contemplate her role with reservations, in scripture.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,477
18,456
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,462.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
And? What does any of this have to do with Mysticism? That's a whole other issue.

It's ironic a charismatic Christian would be against mysticism. So much of charismatic spirituality is nothing but mysticism.

I've read Julian's Revelation of Divine Love. It is thoroughly orthodox, insightful, and powerful. The reason Julian was denounced was because she was a woman and her works threatened a male hierarchy that had taken over the English church for their own political interests. Interests that did not include empowering women to speak on much of anything, let alone God. So while before the Reformation, women at least had some access to spiritual empowerment, in post-Reformation England they were not even allowed that.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

thesunisout

growing in grace
Supporter
Mar 24, 2011
4,761
1,399
He lifts me up
✟159,601.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How much did Mary know of the OT God? I'm not sure I know a lot about her regarding what education she would have had? Did she know enough to know how the OT women got treated? Look at Hagar. She was raped, repeatedly, and later mistreated by the wife of the man who raped her. She ran away and what did God do? God said, "Go back to the place where you get hurt." Where women do come up in the OT, it's no secret that they are generally either "vessels" or they meet unpleasant ends (or maybe both!) Would Mary have felt like she had any power to say "no" to a God who the OT credits with some pretty... strong... punishments?

So what is there to take away from that passage that just seems to be Mary being taken advantage of/being reduced to a vessel. I get the whole theme of obedience and all but the annunciation bit itself really still eats at me.

I can't believe that you called Abraham a rapist and no one else in the thread picked up on it.

The bible isn't subservient to mans "isms", whether it be feminism or socialism or what have you. If you don't begin with the notion that God is morally perfect then you won't understand the bible at all. Isaiah 45:9-10 sums all of that up, along with your question:

9"Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker-- An earthenware vessel among the vessels of earth! Will the clay say to the potter, 'What are you doing?' Or the thing you are making say, 'He has no hands'? 10"Woe to him who says to a father, 'What are you begetting?' Or to a woman, 'To what are you giving birth?'

It's not okay to hate the God of the Old Testament and love the God of the New Testament, because they're the same God. Jesus called the God of the Old Testament His Father. There is no schism there.

God didn't ask man whether he wanted to be created, and He didn't ask men whether He should send Jesus to save them, and neither did He ask man whether he wanted to be judged. God is sovereign and man is accountable, and that is the end of the story. We can accept or reject it, but those are the basic facts and our actions won't ever change those basic facts.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Thir7ySev3n
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think there are some assumptions underlying this post, assumptions about Mary as a relatively uneducated (by modern, Western standards), young, probably teenage girl, living in a rural community. I grew up in a rural farming community, went off and got a liberal education, had a good job, travelled a lot, now back living in a rural community, albeit in a different country. I can say with some confidence that your average teenage girl in a tough rural community, tough in the sense of having to drag your own living out of the dirt, the kind of lifestyle that brings out the character of anyone living it, is a lot more savvy than your average teenager or young person in college.
 
Upvote 0

GirdYourLoins

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2016
1,220
929
Brighton, UK
✟122,682.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I get the impression this question is more about left wing liberalism being applied to the bible than anything else. Maybe if it happened today she would have had Jesus aborted.

P.S. apologies if anyone finds this offensive, I wont delete it but think it is quite hard hitting.
 
Upvote 0

devin553344

I believe in the Resurrection
Nov 10, 2015
3,607
2,249
Unkown
✟93,810.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
So tell me, did Mary get a say in being impregnated? Because sometimes that part of the story just reads like get gets told that she'll be getting pregnant now, and, well, sure, she does say later on, "Okay, let it be so," that part of her response seems pretty inconsequential given the fact that she's already been told that it's going to happen regardless.

Believe me, I have a burning desire to want Mary to have agency. She did say, "Let it be according to your word." I want to let her yes be yes! What an empowering story that one would be, and what a deep and meaningful testament to the trust Mary had in God! Being pregnant was even more dangerous then than it is today. To top it off, being unwed and pregnant? And all that traveling. God didn't put her in an easy position, that's for sure. But she trusted God. And goodness knows the good book needs a woman or two with agency!

Her "Let it be according to your word," doesn't feel like consent. It feels like the child who pretends to be asleep when her dad comes into her room at night because she knows there's nothing she can do to stop what he is about to do anyway... and even if she wanted to try, how would she even begin to say "no" when they are on such unequal playing fields; she doesn't have the language yet to describe what he is doing.

How much did Mary know of the OT God? I'm not sure I know a lot about her regarding what education she would have had? Did she know enough to know how the OT women got treated? Look at Hagar. She was raped, repeatedly, and later mistreated by the wife of the man who raped her. She ran away and what did God do? God said, "Go back to the place where you get hurt." Where women do come up in the OT, it's no secret that they are generally either "vessels" or they meet unpleasant ends (or maybe both!) Would Mary have felt like she had any power to say "no" to a God who the OT credits with some pretty... strong... punishments?

So what is there to take away from that passage that just seems to be Mary being taken advantage of/being reduced to a vessel. I get the whole theme of obedience and all but the annunciation bit itself really still eats at me.

God is not a rapist in any sense of the word. Therefore one must assume from that that there was some discussion between God and Mary that was not put in the bible. :) Therefore you must believe that Mary agreed to being with child from God.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It's ironic a charismatic Christian would be against mysticism. So much of charismatic spirituality is nothing but mysticism.

Perhaps somebody said something somewhere. But, that's not a quote from me.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,413
6,797
✟915,691.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
So tell me, did Mary get a say in being impregnated?

No.

Luk 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Luk 1:29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
Luk 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
Luk 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
Luk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Luk 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.


She wasn't given a choice in the matter. She was chosen by God and became pregnant via the Holy Spirit.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Thir7ySev3n
Upvote 0

amariselle

Jesus Never Fails
Sep 28, 2004
6,648
4,194
The Great Northern Wilderness
✟60,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Perhaps somebody said something somewhere. But, that's not a quote from me.

Agreed. I believe it was a quote from me. I have no idea why it was attributed to you.
 
Upvote 0

amariselle

Jesus Never Fails
Sep 28, 2004
6,648
4,194
The Great Northern Wilderness
✟60,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
No.

Luk 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Luk 1:29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
Luk 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
Luk 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
Luk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Luk 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.


She wasn't given a choice in the matter. She was chosen by God and became pregnant via the Holy Spirit.

You left out this part:

And Mary said, "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word." And the angel departed from her. -Luke 1:38
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Tigger45
Upvote 0

amariselle

Jesus Never Fails
Sep 28, 2004
6,648
4,194
The Great Northern Wilderness
✟60,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
It's ironic a charismatic Christian would be against mysticism. So much of charismatic spirituality is nothing but mysticism.

I've read Julian's Revelation of Divine Love. It is thoroughly orthodox, insightful, and powerful. The reason Julian was denounced was because she was a woman and her works threatened a male hierarchy that had taken over the English church for their own political interests. Interests that did not include empowering women to speak on much of anything, let alone God. So while before the Reformation, women at least had some access to spiritual empowerment, in post-Reformation England they were not even allowed that.

The "Mysticism" comment was mine. As I am not a Mystic, I stand by it.

God bless.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LovebirdsFlying

My husband drew this cartoon of me.
Christian Forums Staff
Red Team - Moderator
Supporter
Aug 13, 2007
28,726
4,216
59
Washington (the state)
✟832,883.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Not only did she consent, but in that society, if she was old enough to become a mother, she wasn't considered a child. I'm not sure how old she was, whether she was a teenager or a more mature woman. Maybe a more well informed Biblical scholar would know. Either way, thirteen or thirty, she had the rights and responsibilities of an adult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FireDragon76
Upvote 0