• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Protoevangelium of James

Status
Not open for further replies.

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
58
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Using "Virgin" as an appellation, when it postdates her sojourn on earth, is a statement of ever-viriginity. (Else, it would be for example, Mary then a virgin, Mary while she was yet virgin, etc.)

Exactly. It doesn't say "The Once Virgin Mary"
 
Upvote 0

Kepha

Veteran
Feb 3, 2005
1,946
113
Canada
✟25,219.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Once you start meeting the same criteria for your faith that you expect of mine we can talk.
So as I asked you in the other thread, would love to see you use Scripture and sub-Apostolic writings (those which you want from us) to prove they agreed with your 66 Book Canon idea. After all, your entire faith is built on that yes? So the importance of this is crucial.

It is a work of fiction, contradicts Scripture, and contradicts the human nature of Jesus.
The Ever Virgin Mary contradicts the human nature of Jesus?

False unsubstantiated Dogma outside of all Scripture and apostolic tradition. The only documented support comes indirectly from PofJ and similar pseudoepigraphic writings.
Mm-hmm. I've said that a few times already somewhere on here.
 
Upvote 0

Uphill Battle

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2005
18,279
1,221
48
✟23,416.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Exactly. It doesn't say "The Once Virgin Mary"
I don't know about that.

Using an appelation doesn't mean it's a constant state. It typically points to, and identifies the pinnacle, or attribute for which the individual is famous... as in this case, the virgin birth of Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Kristos

Servant
Aug 30, 2006
7,379
1,068
Minnesota
✟45,052.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I don't know about that.

Using an appelation doesn't mean it's a constant state. It typically points to, and identifies the pinnacle, or attribute for which the individual is famous... as in this case, the virgin birth of Christ.

Yeah, I kind of agree. I don't think this is a very strong argument on it's own, but when taken along with other traditions it does seem to testify to the mind of the writer in that she was seen as "the Virgin" as a defining attribute of her entire life, not just a brief period before the birth of Jesus. At some point "Ever" was added in many hymns (Justinian's hymn for example) to make the point more clear, and no one complained because it described better what they already believed.
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
I can't find any mention of Mary being "in pain" in the text; what is said is that Joseph thinks she is - ie the mention of what Joseph surmises locates his point of view somewhat in the typical expectation of childbirth. It is Joseph also who seeks a midwife, according to the text. Nor does the text give any description of the birth itself; the "light" per the description seems so strong as to conceal the events of the birth. As the light recedes, the child becomes visible. Ie the description does not indicate the child somehow is mystically manifested, but that the presence of the light obscures any view of the actual birth. As the presence of an intense light is mentioned numerous times in the Scriptures (here as a 'cloud', so it seems an overshadowing of sorts), this detail does not seem inconsistent with other accounts of the presence of God.

There is no description of the child's initial dressing - the swaddling by Mary is described at a later point in the text, at the time of the slaughter of the innocents.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
Actually, here are the passages from the Protoevangelion of James, describing the events before, during, and after the birth:

 
Upvote 0

CaliforniaJosiah

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 6, 2005
17,496
1,568
✟229,195.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Using an appelation doesn't mean it's a constant state. It typically points to, and identifies the pinnacle, or attribute for which the individual is famous... as in this case, the virgin birth of Christ.

Exactly....

Mitt Romney is consistently referred to as "GOVERNOR Romney." That title does not mean that he is the PERPETUAL governor of Mass. Obama is called "PRESIDENT Obama" it does not prove that he is the PERPETUAL president of the USA.


All this, however, seems irrelevant to THIS discussion since this FALSE book doesn't say that Mary had no sex ever or Jesus had no siblings at all.



Thank you.


Pax


- Josiah



.
 
Upvote 0

CaliforniaJosiah

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 6, 2005
17,496
1,568
✟229,195.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Using "Virgin" as an appellation, when it postdates her sojourn on earth, is a statement of ever-viriginity. (Else, it would be for example, Mary then a virgin, Mary while she was yet virgin, etc.)

I'm a virgin. Does that prove that I'm a PERPETUAL virgin, that at the second of my death (or undeath), I WILL be a virgin? While 100% of human beings are a virgin at some point, the percentage of PERPETUAL virgins is considerably smaller, it is a situation that typically changes.





.
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest

Actually every "former" president is still a president, just not an acting president.

Should Mary have been e-v, though options for the biological identity of the adelphos would narrow, lending some credibility to such accounts which suggest a biological identity of the adelphos which preclude a direct genetic link to Mary. Ie, though not central, the discussion of the e-v is still pertinent.
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest

I'm not sure how this might be relevant ...
 
Upvote 0

SolomonVII

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2003
23,138
4,919
Vancouver
✟162,516.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Greens
Once you start meeting the same criteria for your faith that you expect of mine we can talk.
I do set that criteria for myself.
It is only the dark filter that you view me with that makes it appear that I don't.
Uncharitable to the core that you make this about me, instead of the ideas we are disagreeing with.


I read and respect the Deuterocanons, even though they were disputed, even by Jerome.
Maybe you are confusing me with someone else.
Maybe it yet another example of that dark lens in action.

The Ever Virgin Mary contradicts the human nature of Jesus?
I was trying to stay on topic. I wasn't talking about the Ever-Virgin myth, but the related PofJ, which is fairly Gnostic in its description of a birth of the divine spark.
The Divine nature of Christ overwhelms any idea that this is an actual human birth, which would defeat the whole purpose of the Incarnation, which stresses fully human fully equally with fully divine.
Son of Man.


Mm-hmm. I've said that a few times already somewhere on here.
PofJ has always been considered false and contradictory to Scripture by the catholic church or apostolic orthodoxy. In usual parlance, rejecting a book means rejecting the ideas within, and not so much the papyrus or sheep skin that it was written on.

There were a vast array of heterodox responses that arose out of the Resurrection, that rocked the world at that time. Everybody interpreted it according to their understanding of the world, and few were in the position of the twelve where they actually had intimate knowledge of Jesus from the beginning of his ministry to his ascension.
False teaching abounded, and many teaching that were not apostolic had to be rejected. That was why deciding which books were a part of Scripture, and which were not, was so crucial.
Confirmed apostolic teaching alone were fit for Scripture. Unfortunately, so called Sacred Tradition circumvents the process, by making the assumption that some among us have a special knowledge and a special relationship with God where they can understand things that lie beyond Scripture and the confirmed apostolic teaching.

The ideas of rejected works and ahistoric theories thereby corrupt the process with a myriad of non-apostolic works that derive from non-apostolic traditions.

PofJ is the case in point. The ideas are non-apostolic, and cannot be demonstrated to be otherwise, except by a blind faith in the special charism of people with special knowledge who have infallibly decided that they know better.

Show me different.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

CaliforniaJosiah

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 6, 2005
17,496
1,568
✟229,195.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Actually every "former" president is still a president, just not an acting president.

News to me....


I'm a virgin. Does that prove that I'm a PERPETUAL virgin, that at the second of my death (or undeath), I WILL be a virgin? While 100% of human beings are a virgin at some point, the percentage of PERPETUAL virgins is considerably smaller, it is a situation that typically. Is a former virgin still a virgin in your opinion - just not an active one? Are ALL people perpetual virgins since all are at least former ones?





.
 
Upvote 0

Kepha

Veteran
Feb 3, 2005
1,946
113
Canada
✟25,219.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
However if you lost your virginity and after your death, I continued to salute you in the present tense as Josh the virgin, it would be quite misleading don't you think?
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest


Where there is a change in status, an appellation indicating a former condition would be inaccurate. For example, I am not known as "the Infant Thekla", as I am now 50 years old. Infancy is a stage of physical development, a "temporary" condition if you will. Child is another matter - one is always the child of someone - in that sense it can, I suppose, be used as an appellation, but not in the sense of a physical condition of being a child (unless one has died in childhood).

I'm not certain how your specific comments relate to the discussion; virginity may or may not be a permanent condition.
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
However if you lost your virginity and after your death, I continued to salute you in the present tense as Josh the virgin, it would be quite misleading don't you think?

That would be a shame, as there is no marriage in heaven. (In Matthew 22, when Christ states this, he uses the specific term for marriage, gamew", which sort of indicates "exchanging gametes".)
 
Upvote 0

Uphill Battle

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2005
18,279
1,221
48
✟23,416.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives


there is a major distinction though. When addressing the issue of Mary, it is always in relation to her giving birth to the Christ child.

to call her "Mary the Virgin" in regards to that, would be accurate, even 40 years later, and after a possible birth of many other children, because it is in relation to what she was for the incarnation, that is being addressed.

the rest, is mundane and unnoteworthy, by comparison.
 
Upvote 0

Standing Up

On and on
Sep 3, 2008
25,360
2,757
Around about
✟73,735.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Why are you so concerned about another tradition?

Believe it or not, I'm trying to help you out. There's only 2 traditions I know of in the first 200 years. One is totally debunked. That leaves the other.

PoJ---totally debunked that brothers were from Joseph/previous marriage.

Scripture/tradition---brothers were sons of Joseph/Mary.

So, unless you can come up with something like Jerome did c400, then we're left with the way it is, as Origen, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Cyril of Jerusalem said.
 
Upvote 0

CaliforniaJosiah

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 6, 2005
17,496
1,568
✟229,195.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Where there is a change in status, an appellation indicating a former condition would be inaccurate.

I agree.

ALL human beings begin as virgins.... for some time in their life, they are VIRGINS. Does this mean that ergo all human being are PERPETUAL virgins? . In most cases, they cease to be virgins at some point in their life, so that the appellation of "virgin" is normally not permanent.

Your point that it is pointed out that the teenage Mary is a virgin and ERGO it is a dogmatic fact of highest certainty of Fact and Truth that she was a PERPETUAL virgin is a point I disagree with (in fact, I find it remarkably baseless). I'm 24 - probably much older than Mary in Luke 1 and 2 - and I'm still a virgin. The appellation applies to me. I disagree with you that ERGO at the moment of my death (or undeath), I WILL BE a virgin since once a virgin ALWAYS a virgin. I respectfully disagree with you.






Again, we disagree. I don't agree with you that since 100% of human beings begin as virgins, ergo it is a dogmatic fact of greatest certainty of Truth and Fact that 100% of human beings are PERPETUAL virgins and will die having never had sex. I just disagree with you. NORMALLY, virginity is a temporary thing, IMO.


Yes, both Matthew and Luke describe Her as a virgin AT THE ANNUNCIATION AND AT THE NATIVITY when many think She was perhaps 15 or so. So does this book your denomination rejects. Many 15 year olds are virgins. I was a virgin at 15. I still am at 24. I do NOT agree that this is confirmation that She was ergo a PERPETUAL virgin, that if one is EVER a virgin, ergo they are PERPETUAL virgins. I don't agree.






.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.