S0 if Mary’s death was not documented, she never died. Likewise,Peter.Paul, John etc. My point being that Scriptures are not a complete record, but a collection of writings by the Apostles and those close to them. They tell us nothing about the careers of anyone beyond the year 60 A.D. But we have made stories that have also been passed down, such as about the deaths of Peter and Paul in Rome. The Scriptures are silent about these events, but that proves nothing one way or another. Now Mary is not mentioned after The opening of Acts. Yet by the end of the century is already “the Virgin.” central to the disputes about the divinity of Jesus. By the end of the second century, she is central to orthodox Christian theology. How can you ever talk about the idea of the incarnation without bringing her into the matter. Furthermore, already in the early second century, Rome claimed Peter and Paul for itself. Yet no one, no place claimed Mary. The fact needs to be dealt with. Why not? Of all the places Mary was said to live: Jerusalem, Ephesus, no place claimed to be the resting place of the mother of Jesus.
The right way to deal with it is the way all others who were taken into heaven alive were dealt with; by a Scriptural reference. Not make up some story where Scripture is silent.
How can you ever talk about the idea of the incarnation without bringing her into the matter.
Because while Mary was the vessel, the Incarnation was a mighty act of God, not God and Mary. And the significance of that act of God goes beyond a virgin birth and thunders through history since God made Himself man to die for our sins as the only acceptable sacrifice of atonement. God and man are reconciled, by God's hand alone, not God with man's help. That's how.
Or it was insignificant to the message of scripture.