In my previous post I mentioned one of the most significant passages of the Proto-Gospel, where the midwife Salome doubts that a virgin had given birth (note: she does not doubt whether a virgin could have *conceived* [although no doubt she *would* have doubted it!]; what she doubts is that a woman could give *birth* and still have her hymen intact. That, obviously, would be impossible), and gives Mary a postpartum examination only to find that in fact she really is still a virgin (i.e., “intact”).
Immediately before that amazing scene is another that I find at least as entrancing. In it, Joseph himself describes – in the first person – what happened when the Son of God came into the world. This was such a cosmic event, that time stopped. And Joseph describes how, by explaining what he saw at that moment.
Every time I read this passage I think of a Twilight Zone episode that I saw once where everything slowed down to a virtual standstill except the main character, who observes everyone and everything moving slower than a slug but among other things sees a little girl on a tricycle moving ever so slowing (an inch an hour?) behind a car carelessly backing out of a driveway. The plot: how can he stop it?
Amazing. Why do you think the Proto-Gospel was excluded from the New Testament canon, especially considering that it offers additional details and perspectives about the birth of Jesus that could deepen theological understanding?
Almost everyone knew it wasn’t a book from the time of the apostles, and it didn’t have wide enough distribution early on. By the late fourth century its view that Joseph had children from a previous marriage became a problem — Joseph was life-time celibate, right? He was a saint! (This was Jerome’s view, and it led to the virtual disappearance of the Proto=Gospel in the west, to be replaced by the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew)
I recently read this in your book Lost Scriptures, and I wondered if this was created before the virgin birth stories that are now in the Bible, or if this was in addition to the stories already in Matthew and Luke. Which do you think came first? Obviously, the gospels were written first, but I wondered if the virgin birth stories were added later based on this Proto gospel of James, as you have been writing about already.
The birth stories of Matthew and Luke definitely came first — the proto-Gospel is heavily dependent on them and provides a kind of expansion of their narratives.
Not so miraculous. For anything traveling at the speed of light, time stands still. Light travels at the speed of light. So, the quantum particle of light, the photon, does not experience the passage of time. That’s why the range of a photon traveling at light speed is infinite, until it interacts with something material, like the lens of your eye, and the photon is absorbed by the electrons there. And that’s why we can detect the microwave background radiation from the Big Bang that was emitted13.8 billion years ago.
So the divine Christ descended from heaven into the womb of Mary at the speed of light, and it wasn’t a miracle?
One important technical point: it was the Outer Limits, not the Twilight Zone. “The Premonition”, Season 2,
Episode 16. (It’s that flawed memory thing again!) As for the proto-gospel, I think that’s a clever literary gimmick, having time stop when Jesus was born. Many stories in the Bible make God seem rather human. Did many of the early Christians think of God as more transcendent, beyond our space and time? Does that go along with Marcion’s view of the old creator god being more crude but Jesus’ god being transcendent?
Whoa. Got the gist, missed the detail. Memory!
Early Christians, like all other ancient folk we know about, didn’t ahve a conception of the “supernatural.” There wasn’t some other kind of dimension — God/the gods were way up there, but you could get there within what we today would think of as the time-space continuum.
You get the same kind of picture from the rapture idea, being “snatched up” and rising into the air, up into space, although Paul hadn’t a clue as to how things are actually arranged. If he did, he’d have had to include some kind of dimensional portal, from the earthly realm to the heavenly realm. Such ideas should have died out as soon as astronomy became a real science and we had clear ideas about space and the solar system. Rapture enthusiasts are in a weird time warp. The ones I’ve met I would simply describe as weird, period.
I think it’s interesting that this gospel goes out of its way to solve the riddle of Joseph. He has grown sons and claims to be an old man, neither of which is the case in the canonical versions, although the ‘understanding’ that Joseph must have been an old man, Mary was perpetually virginal, and Jesus had brothers and sisters survived in later orthodox teaching. When would you say that these assertions about Mary’s and Joseph’s intimate status began? And why? Where was this written?
You mean their *non*-intimate status? This Gospel is the first indication of it. After that others ran with it….
Do you have an opinion about why this perpetual virginal status with all the associated trappings became important? I mean, it seems like so much work to cook up these ‘explanations’ to support the notion, especially since gospel accounts and Paul’s statements about knowing ‘the Lord’s brother’ are right there. Was this some holdover from pagan culture that the gentile Christians brought with them?
It coincides with the view that sex is not for pleasure but only for procreation and that it is connected with sin — a view developing at jut the time the perpetual virginity of Mary was being thought of. She’s holy to God and so would have lived a highly ascetic life.
Great article, but it’s actually Outer Limits, not Twilight Zone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Premonition_(The_Outer_Limits)
So I’m hearing. I need y’all to fact check my books!!
Christ is same yesterday, today, and forever. That’s really beautiful! What a clear depiction of time standing still for the miracle of Jesus. It bothers me they would go through the trouble addressing the presence of a hymen. In a true birth, this would have been torn and it bothers me that Mary didn’t go through a true birth. My impression as a woman who is NOT a Mother is that something of the feminine was lost here, almost as though femininity is dirty and the woman’s natural body not good enough (which IS what they’re saying.). I think Mary should be changed by Christ’s birth and grow into a woman and Mother but they seem to shy away from ever saying Mother of God. They made her just a vessel that if God is all powerful seemingly isn’t needed. They denigrated all that was truly woman to get HIM here and that I don’t believe in! If we are truly in the image of God, then Motherhood and Woman are important.
I understand where you’re coming from, feeling that the doctrine of Mary’s Perpetual Virginity might suggest that femininity and motherhood are somehow ‘less than’ in the eyes of the Divine. The idea has been interpreted in various ways over time, and in some traditions, it’s viewed less as a commentary on femininity and more as a way to emphasize the miraculous nature of Jesus’ birth.
It’s also worth noting that in some Christian traditions, Mary is indeed referred to as the ‘Mother of God’ (Theotokos), underscoring her importance not merely as a vessel but as an integral part of the incarnation of Christ.
However, your feelings highlight how religious doctrines can be received differently depending on individual perspectives, particularly when it comes to the complexities of gender and the female experience
I’m wondering if you will stray from the current topic to current events?
Is this apocryphal history being made- the beginning of WWIII?
As our final (very bright) light will find us all in foxholes, it would help to better understand Revelation. As it happens to us.
Respectfully,
Ron D’Agostino D.O.
I’m not sure, but it’s getting heavily apocalyptic right now. I do deal with some of the relevant issues (including Revelation, Christian Zionism, the state of Israel, etc.) in my recent book Armageddon.
Wrathful is a better way of describing current events
Perhaps the best evidence that the Proto-Gospel of James was indeed written by a man: https://health.osu.edu/health/sexual-health/myths-and-facts-about-hymen
“Hide your shame”? What exactly is the shame being described here by Joseph? Giving birth in a lowly cave/manger? Or was simply giving birth something akin to a shameful act – especially if it was done in the open? If Joseph knew the child was holy (per Matthew), ‘shame’ seems to be an awkward word choice. But the Protoevangelium of James seems here to show Joseph fully in doubt of Mary’s pregnancy story. Which then seems to setup the slo-mo vision as a means to reset Joseph’s attitude.
I believe it’s referring to her nakedness being exposed at the birth; he doesn’t want it to be public. “Shame” (the same Greek word) is used that way in the Bible, both the Greek OT (e.g., Exodus 20:26) and NT (Rev. 15:16)
LOL! It is funny how often one can read way too much into these words. The English translations don’t always help to maintain borders around the context. Yes, ‘shame’ as a form of ‘nakedness’ makes perfect sense and reading any more into the English word just leads to distortion. This demonstrates to me why familiarity with Greek is so critical to seeking original contexts in these texts.
I also jumped at this utterance. But it’s logical. Besides the nakedness, we can think of Eve’s curse in Genesis. Being guilty , as Adam is , of losing Paradise for humankind, forcing the generations into a wild and brutish world,condemned to die, is eternally memorialised by the excruciating pain of giving birth, a form of divine torture, a ” shameful” position for a victim to be., left to scream more like an animal than a human.
I wonder if ” shame” could also refer to the paternity doubts?
Many women who gave birth out of wedlock throughout History would leave town and have their baby, their “shame”, away from the gossipy tongues.
Finally, everything to do with blood in women’s case, was taboo in Ancient Israel. Women in this case also needed to stay apart from everybody else, regularly, as the women’s “impurity” was viewed as shame as well as a danger to the purity of the collective. Needless to say, the blood of males was precious, glorious , and eventually, divine.
What would Jesus have thought of all this? He speaks for himself on this and other topics on page 19 of the October 2, 2023 issue of the New Yorker.
I assume that would be Shouts and Murmurs? Missed that one. Have to look it up. But LOVED the one this week about Thinking of Rome….
This is stunning indeed. To be able to create movement with a few common words,to make the reader really “ see” a story told as motion, or even to transform a literary language into a vision, is an artistic achievement of the highest degree. A gem.
Personally,Time standing still immediately reminded me of a favourite movie -and a favourite painting-, The Mill and the Cross, based on Pieter Bruegel’ the Elder’s “The Procession to Calvary.”
In the movie, whilst characters and stories from the painting come to life as if lifted from the masterpiece, Time also stands still at times.
In the link below, at 1:11’ of the trailer, Bruegel says “ if only one could slow Time, if Time could be stopped”, which the film then shows.
I have seen this film twice, but after this reminder,I’m ready for a third time.
Besides, I am in Brussels, where Bruegel died. Pity the painting is in Vienna!
https://www.google.com/search?q=the+mill.and+the+cross+french+trailer&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:1e6c83e7,vid:RYhq9V97mnI,st:0&vuanr=4