Replies

The other important part to consider is this: this story is either documentation of 'oral history' or is, to one degree or another, fiction.

I understand your desire to to put this forgery in a good light, but even in it's day it was discredited.

Origen was quick to point out it's recent dubious appearance "like that of a gospel of Peter". What's really interesting though is the timing of this forgery. It followed by about 30 years the "Acts of Paul and Thecla" in this case Tertullian was able to point out who the forger was. Tertullian complained some Christians were using the example of Thecla to legitimate women's roles of teaching and baptizing in the church. How convenient, 30 years later "James the Just" (who by the way was dead) writes the protoevangelium and now we have a more submissive role for women. They no longer evangelize or confront pagans, as Thecla had. Now they remain silent and suffer quietly.