• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Fatherhood at an advanced age?

It’s more practical to have children younger. I have a 30, 24, and 23 year old. I’m 51. I recognize that my energy level has gone down some since I was in my 20s. I was able to go out and play hardcore football with my son as a bonding activity at age 40 when my son was 12 or 13. There’s nothing wrong with an older father as long as practical things are considered. Things like sports aren’t everything but it’s helpful for father and son to have some type of bonding activity. Can a 70 year old realistically do that?
 
My father is currently in his late 60s and we are still able to spar and practice martial arts together. I think it has less to do with age and more to do with health. A wise and physically fit 40 year old will probably be a better father than a foolish and lazy 20 year old. I don't really see an issue with having children at a late age as long as you commit yourself to still teaching them and have means to protect them.
 
StudentofHim said:
My father is currently in his late 60s and we are still able to spar and practice martial arts together. I think it has less to do with age and more to do with health. A wise and physically fit 40 year old will probably be a better father than a foolish and lazy 20 year old. I don't really see an issue with having children at a late age as long as you commit yourself to still teaching them and have means to protect them.
Click to expand...
Good point. There’s some really unfit 40 year old fathers.
 
julieb said:
think it is best that a father is young enough to be around for his child's formative years, till at least 18. And hopefully, be in good health to do things with his children.
Click to expand...

I like this sentiment. But I might feel different when I'm that old.

And there is a difference between starting a family when you are old and starting young and continuing to have children into a more advanced age. The death of the former leaves a kid rudderless whereas the latter will have numerous brothers to shepherd him.
 
I had my first child when I was 45 and have been blessed with 3 more beautiful children since. Our youngest I had when i was 50. My wife is in her early 30s. We eat healthy and stay active, obviously lol, and pray God blesses us with good health. You aren't guaranteed anything in this world so worrying about things outside your control is foolish and against Jesus's teachings. We know people in their 80s that are active and have been blessed with good health, more active than many 20 or 30 year olds. There's always odds and chances that would always keep you in the "safe" zone of life. That's not the life I want. Shalom.
 
I had my last two at 35, 40. There was a lot of things I wanted to do with them, it had nothing to do with age, but economics. I was busy putting food on the table. But I always had them with me when ever I wasn’t working for coin, but working on the house had them lock step.
Now they are grown and have the knowledge to be able to repair instead of a repair man.
Now on to the real issue here. The grandchildren first you wonder if you will live to see them. Then they arrive and you wonder will you see them grow. That is the issue with fathering at an advanced age. Grandfathers have a huge impact on the forming of grandchildren. Things that they didn’t tell you in your youth.
I am not saying that there aren’t exception the super health white-color man comes to mind.
 
steve said:
To what does your ’that’ refer?
Click to expand...
That was really badly worded, as I wrote a long post and then deleted most of it as irrelevant, the "that" was referring to something I had deleted...

It's ideal to have children when you are young enough to be reasonably confident you'll be alive and fit enough to take an active part in raising them until they're adults. For many obvious practical and spiritual reasons.
But still better to have children late than not at all.
 
rockfox said:
And there is a difference between starting a family when you are old and starting young and continuing to have children into a more advanced age. The death of the former leaves a kid rudderless whereas the latter will have numerous brothers to shepherd him.
Click to expand...
This is a very important point, in my opinion.

But what about the child/children?
Is it better for a child to not be given the chance at life because of the fact that the father would not be able to play baseball with him?

We don’t know how Yah creates souls.
Are they created for the occasion? Custom made for each situation, and if that situation hadn’t arisen that soul simply would never exist?

Or, as has been suggested, do they exist in a giant dispenser in the sky and the next impregnation automatically receives the next soul in the lineup? In that case, the soul that goes to an older father instead of a young father would miss out on some things.
But by the same token, if that man avoids the pregnancy and the soul goes into a truly bad situation instead?
 
Children of God said:
I had my first child when I was 45 and have been blessed with 3 more beautiful children since. Our youngest I had when i was 50. My wife is in her early 30s. We eat healthy and stay active, obviously lol, and pray God blesses us with good health. You aren't guaranteed anything in this world so worrying about things outside your control is foolish and against Jesus's teachings. We know people in their 80s that are active and have been blessed with good health, more active than many 20 or 30 year olds. There's always odds and chances that would always keep you in the "safe" zone of life. That's not the life I want. Shalom.
Click to expand...
I should also clarify we are looking forward to any more kids God provides us and even seeking another wife to add to our tribe. So we are not letting age decide God's blessings. I would not have been able to provide for my family when I was younger like I can now, financially, patience and emotionally.
 
steve said:
This is a very important point, in my opinion.

But what about the child/children?
Is it better for a child to not be given the chance at life because of the fact that the father would not be able to play baseball with him?

We don’t know how Yah creates souls.
Are they created for the occasion? Custom made for each situation, and if that situation hadn’t arisen that soul simply would never exist?

Or, as has been suggested, do they exist in a giant dispenser in the sky and the next impregnation automatically receives the next soul in the lineup? In that case, the soul that goes to an older father instead of a young father would miss out on some things.
But by the same token, if that man avoids the pregnancy and the soul goes into a truly bad situation instead?
Click to expand...
The souls of children seem very much related to the souls of their parents, so I think the random "soul dispenser" theory unlikely, and the "custom made" theory most probable. Therefore, if "old dad, and/or old mom" didn't have the child, then he or she would never exist.

I feel it is much better to exist in God's good creation, than to never exist at all. The soul that never exists cannot know the Living God.

We should also remember that the one who has God as his Father is never truly fatherless.

Still, I agree younger is generally preferable to older as far as fathers go.
 
What exactly do we mean by "older fathers"?

I'll define it by the age of the father at the birth of the child. I would suggest that the optimal age of the father at the birth of the child would probably be between the ages of say 22-35. Twenty-one and under is pretty young. Over 40 would be older. Over 50 is really getting older. Over 60 is extreme on the older. Over 70, crazy, but praise God if He wills it and brings it to pass.

On the mom side 20-29 is probably ideal. Nineteen and under is a little young (in our current society, not historically or biologically). Thirty to thirty-four is a little older. Over 35 is clearly older. Over 40 is really older. Over 50, praise God for His miraculous gift!
 
I
Bartato said:
What exactly do we mean by "older fathers"?

I'll define it by the age of the father at the birth of the child. I would suggest that the optimal age of the father at the birth of the child would probably be between the ages of say 22-35. Twenty-one and under is pretty young. Over 40 would be older. Over 50 is really getting older. Over 60 is extreme on the older. Over 70, crazy, but praise God if He wills it and brings it to pass.

On the mom side 20-29 is probably ideal. Nineteen and under is a little young (in our current society, not historically or biologically). Thirty to thirty-four is a little older. Over 35 is clearly older. Over 40 is really older. Over 50, praise God for His miraculous gift!
Click to expand...
I had my 3 children when I was between ages 21-28. They’re now aged 23-30. I was perfectly capable of being a good father in my 20s. I am exactly 50 years and 7 days older than my grandson!
 
My son and daughter are in their later 40’s and are committed to saving the planet by not reproducing.
At what point must I accept that they are the last branches in my personal family tree?
 
NBTX11 said:
I

I had my 3 children when I was between ages 21-28. They’re now aged 23-30. I was perfectly capable of being a good father in my 20s. I am exactly 50 years and 7 days older than my grandson!
Click to expand...
At age 50, you should still have plenty of energy to spend with the grandkids.
👍
Also, with the three kids being 23-30, but you only having one grandson, the kids need to get going and give you some more grandkids. ☺️
 
steve said:
My son and daughter are in their later 40’s and are committed to saving the planet by not reproducing.
At what point must I accept that they are the last branches in my personal family tree?
Click to expand...
Sadly, that story is being repeated all across our society. The result is the end of individual branches, and the downfall of our society.

I'm so sorry to hear about your son and daughter. That is truly heartbreaking.

I hear that foolish line about saving the planet by not reproducing from many young friends and coworkers, and sadly a few relatives as well.

The irony of it is that the environment will still get wrecked by the satanic globalists anyway.

Apart from the Lord blessing me in a surprising way, having not so far reproduced I myself will be the end of my line. At least it wasn't intentional. We tried.
 
NBTX11 said:
I

I had my 3 children when I was between ages 21-28. They’re now aged 23-30. I was perfectly capable of being a good father in my 20s. I am exactly 50 years and 7 days older than my grandson!
Click to expand...
They will keep you in physical form.
 
Bartato said:
At age 50, you should still have plenty of energy to spend with the grandkids.
👍
Also, with the three kids being 23-30, but you only having one grandson, the kids need to get going and give you some more grandkids. ☺️
Click to expand...
Well I’m 51 and my grandson is now 1, but yeah I plan on running out there and playing ball with him. I can still move. I actively run 2-3 miles at a time.

Correct two of my kids are married and so far have only produced one grandchild
 
NBTX11 said:
Well I’m 51 and my grandson is now 1, but yeah I plan on running out there and playing ball with him. I can still move. I actively run 2-3 miles at a time.

Correct two of my kids are married and so far have only produced one grandchild
Click to expand...
I hope you enjoy your grandson, and that the Lord blesses you with many more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top