accompanied him to Bethlehem. It is very unlikely that a Hebrew man with no children would marry a woman
who was past childbearing age. (Talmud Mas. Yevamoth 61b)
Y‘shua was Miriam's firstborn son (Luke 2:7) and she had other children, both sons and daughters. (Matt
12:46, Matt 13:55-56)
Yoseph and Miriam went to Jerusalem every year at Passover and continued to do so until Y‘shua was at
least twelve years old. (Luke 2:41-42) If Miriam was old, she would not have undertaken the arduous journey
from Nazareth to Jerusalem (probably having to travel on a donkey).
Miriam is mentioned in the writings of Ignatius, who was Bishop of Antioch from A.D. 69 until he was taken to
Rome and fed to the lions in 115. At some time during his ministry, he wrote to John the Apostle: "There are
also many of our women here, who are desirous to see Mary [the mother] of Jesus, and wish day by day to
run off from us to you, that they may meet with her..." (Epistle of Ignatius to St. John the Apostle). If Miriam
was still alive in A.D. 69 or afterwards, she must have been very young when she gave birth to Y‘shua. The
writings of Ignatius and other early church leaders are available at the Wheaton College web site
Conclusions on ―How could Y‘shua be Son of Yoseph and Son of God?‖
Y‘shua was born into the household of Yoseph, a descendant of David, of the tribe of Judah. This was more
than enough to make him the ―seed of David according to the flesh", regardless of the tribe to which Miriam
belonged.
The differing genealogies of Matthew and Luke are most likely the consequence of adoption. In the Bible,
there is no distinction between children who are genetically born into a household and those who are
adopted.
The suggestion that Mary was old has no substance, and all the evidence is to the contrary.
Childbearing in the Days of the Bible
The Jewish community was family-oriented, so most births were cause for celebration. In an era when
delivery complications were usually fatal, a new birth was looked upon with hope, anticipation, and
happiness. Children were considered a blessing (Psalm 127:3-5).
They were an opportunity for parents to "train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not
turn from it" (Prov 22:6). This was done as parents handed down their religious faith, which was the guiding
force in their lives.
Motivation for Bearing Children:
There were high motivations to have children in the ancient world, the most prominent being economic and
for posterity. A large family, particularly filled with boys, insured your well-being when you were older and in
need of care due to your age, injury or inability to work. There was no retirement or nursing homes or state
welfare agencies; so without the support of a family, your future could be bleak. Also, to die without children
meant the annihilation of the family name and property. For this reason, the levirate practice of a widow
marrying her husband's next of kin to pass on the family name became prevalent among the Israelites
(Deut 25:5-6; Ruth 3:12).
However, with the Children of Israel, the overriding reason for having lots of children was religious, stemming
from the oft-repeated commandment in the Book of Genesis to "be fruitful and multiply" (Gen 1:22, 1:28, 9:1,
etc.). Children were clear evidence that YHWH had given favour (Psalm 127:3-5) and were symbols of a full
and happy life. Therefore, since childbirth was considered normal, then childlessness was abnormal and
seen as a curse or judgment from YHWH. Barren women were seen as deficient and open to ridicule (1
Sam. 1:1-8). A husband who did not become a father was looked on with pity. Many assumed that he had a
physical problem or an inferior wife. This public scorn could greatly strain a marriage. In fact, it was so
devastating that many prayed for a child (1 Sam 1:11; Luke 1:13). Also, YHWH's judgments for certain acts
of unlawful sexual relations was to render the person childless (Lev 20:20-21), and therefore a barren couple
was suspect.
The Birthright:
As in many societies in the Middle East today, couples longed for a male child. Girls were accepted and
loved, but the family was considered incomplete without at least one male offspring. It was the male who
carried forward the family name and received the birthright, so he was important. Also, since the man was
the breadwinner, sons were helpful to sustain the family if the father should die or when parents became too
old to work and needed protection and support. Sons remained in the household, but daughters were given
away in marriage. It is easy to see how a girl might feel a little less special than her brothers might.