The Cult of Mary

https://christs-disciples.org/rccism.php ^ | me

[zucchini bob]

(2 Peter 1:20) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (Isaiah 28:10) For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little: (Isaiah 28:13) But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

[ealgeone]

From the article:

"The heretical books that were written after the first century could be recognized as fakes because of the false doctrine they contained. However, the early orthodox books were another matter."

*****

The Protoevangelium is one of those books.

[ealgeone]

The documents of the early Church, such as the Protoevangelium of James record...

The Protoevangelium was never one of the documents of the early church as it was rejected as previously noted.

[ealgeone]

You still don't see do you?

Aiken, and Roman Catholicism, are appealing to books rejected by the early church for their marian dogmas.

I know this is upsetting as it's challenging long held beliefs.

[ealgeone]

>>Catholic Answers apologist Jimmy Akin, notes this regarding the books rejected by the early ekklesia. "The heretical books that were written after the first century could be recognized as fakes because of the false doctrine they contained."<<

Pay close attention to what I attributed to Aiken in the overall post I made. He refers to heretical books that were recognized as fakes.

He doesn't (or won't) list the PoJ in the article you reference as it deals with a different set of writings.

If he did call the PoJ, and other infancy gospels Rome relies upon, as fakes, he'd undermine the Roman Catholic position on the dogmas. IMHO he's not being honest in his evaluation of the topic.

[af_vet_1981]

It seems to me you called Jimmy Akin as a witness for the prosecution and now you are arguing with your witness. He is a very smart guy though. You were wise to call him as a witness.

[ealgeone]

You would think then that it would be Rome that keeps splintering into a thousand different denominations, on and on, each one saying they have the correct Faith belief, Disagreeing with each other... pointing a finger all along...

Check out the daily posts of articles against the pope from one of your fellow Roman Catholics.

Which is correct...Vatican I or Vatican II?

Ask various Roman Catholics if the current pope is legit...or which was the last legit pope.

There are seemingly, just on this forum alone, as many opinions on various topics from Roman Catholics as there are RC posters.

[ealgeone]

It seems to me you called Jimmy Akin as a witness for the prosecution and now you are arguing with your witness. He is a very smart guy though. You were wise to call him as a witness.

He is a good witness for my argument as he cites a known and admitted rejected book, the Protoevangelium of James, for the dogmas thus proving my point.

[af_vet_1981]

And now, it seems to me, you are impeaching your own witness. It is evident to me that Jimmy Akin gives weight to "the documents of the early Church, such as the Protoevangelium of James" while at the same time accepting that they are not included in the Canon of the Bible as determined by the Church.

What I find odd is that, it seems to me, you don't accept the Canon of the Bible as determined by the Church and yet argue about whether the books outside the Canon have any validity. I think it is a sign of the weakness of the Sola Scriptura doctrine.

[ealgeone]

And now, it seems to me, you are impeaching your own witness. It is evident to me that Jimmy Akin gives weight to "the documents of the early Church, such as the Protoevangelium of James" while at the same time accepting that they are not included in the Canon of the Bible as determined by the Church.

He's giving weight as you call it to a book rejected by the church as it contained heretical beliefs.

The book was never, repeat never, a document of the early church.

Connect the dots here, af.

What I find odd is that, it seems to me, you don't accept the Canon of the Bible as determined by the Church and yet argue about whether the books outside the Canon have any validity. I think it is a sign of the weakness of the Sola Scriptura doctrine.

Actually it is strong argument for Sola Scriptura.

I'm using Roman Catholic sources to impeach Roman Catholic dogma.

[af_vet_1981]

The book was never, repeat never, a document of the early church.

Sure it was; it was widely read, especially in the East; it was not included in the Canon.

November 21, 2013Fr. Jeremy8 Commentson The Protevangelium of James
The Protevangelium of James
The Protoevangelium of James, or The Infancy Gospel of James
The Birth of Mary the Holy Mother of God, and Very Glorious Mother of Jesus Christ

This is an ancient narrative, which mostly falls in line with the teachings and traditions of the Orthodox Church. We do not hold it on par with the four gospels, but the dramatic story that it contains of the Virgin Mary’s parents, her growing up in the temple, the scandal of her betrothal to St Joseph when it was found that she was pregnant, and even the bits of tragedy near the end are thought to originate from oral accounts preserved by the early church and finally written down around 145 AD.

[af_vet_1981]

I know this is upsetting as it's challenging long held beliefs.

It seems to me that it may be challenging your long held beliefs, which could explain the reactions. I find it to be a fascinating story, and owe you some thanks for focusing the attention on it.

[ealgeone]

>>The book was never, repeat never, a document of the early church.<<

Sure it was; it was widely read, especially in the East; it was not included in the Canon.

You're appealing to the EO church??

However, my point stands...this was never a book of the early church.

It was not known in the West...which as I noted previously means Peter nor Paul "handed down" these false narratives.

[ealgeone]

It seems to me that it may be challenging your long held beliefs, which could explain the reactions. I find it to be a fascinating story, and owe you some thanks for focusing the attention on it.

Hardly. If anything, my research on this topic, again using a lot of Rome's sources, confirms my beliefs that:

Joseph and Mary did have children on their own thus negating the "ever virgin" claims of Roman Catholicism.

Mary was a sinner in need of redemption which negates the "Immaculate Conception" which itself contradicts numerous passage of scripture.

[ealgeone]

This is an ancient narrative, which mostly falls in line with the teachings and traditions of the Orthodox Church. We do not hold it on par with the four gospels, but the dramatic story that it contains of the Virgin Mary's parents, her growing up in the temple, the scandal of her betrothal to St Joseph when it was found that she was pregnant, and even the bits of tragedy near the end are thought to originate from oral accounts preserved by the early church and finally written down around 145 AD.

In our courtroom trial we're having this is rejected as heresy evidence.

In other words, this witness is impeached.

[Elsie]

Even a fool (me) is shown to be right when...

[af_vet_1981]

You're appealing to the EO church?? However, my point stands...this was never a book of the early church. It was not known in the West...which as I noted previously means Peter nor Paul "handed down" these false narratives.

It was widely read in the East (as reasoned from number of surviving manuscripts). It was also known in the West. The East and the West were one holy catholic and apostolic Church. This was a document read widely in the early church. Pope Gelasius I, bishop of Rome from 492–496, is credited with a list of distrusted and rejected works not encouraged for church use that included it. Therefore, it is not in the Bible.

[Elsie]

As I observed at church long ago...

A woman commented on how well behaved a certain pre-teen girl was and told her so.

The girl replied, “You’d behave, too, if YOUR dad weighed 300 pounds!”

[ealgeone]

You're admitting this book was distrusted and rejected.....yet Rome built its dogmas upon it.

My position stands these teachings were not handed down by Paul nor Peter...if they had been the book would not be on the rejection list.

[Elsie]

It seems to me you called Jimmy Akin as a witness for the prosecution and now you are arguing with your witness.
He is a very smart guy though.
You were wise to call him as a witness.

It seems to me your College of Cardinals called Jorge Mario Bergoglio as a leader for the church you belong to.
He must be a very smart guy though.
Yet so many of you guys doubt the wisdom of selecting him.

[Elsie]

I think it is a sign of the weakness of the Sola Scriptura doctrine.

Naaman thought certain things as well - 2 Kings 5:11

He was wrong.