• Flax
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Wikipedia is using the pseudepigraphal gospel attributed to James as a source. This had been identified by Origen as a forgery and it doesn’t constitute Christian doctrine. Although it does influence Christian tradition a lot. It also cites Jewish custom, where girls are eligible to marry at age 13 (which actually contradicts the infancy gospel of James, which states she was 12)

          It’s not really reliable and definitely not Christian doctrine.

            • Flax
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 month ago

              To use it as ammo against Christianity is just silly. “Oh, the mother of Jesus might have been a young teenager instead of an older teenager because people married earlier back then, and a document known for being a forgery says she is”

              • @idiomaddict@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 month ago

                I don’t need that for ammo against Christianity, lol, I went to catholic school, I’ve got plenty of material. I was using it to make a flip joke.

                But do you have any source for her age? If that’s as unreliable as you say, you should probably put an edit through on Wikipedia.

                • Flax
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 month ago

                  I’ve tried before. Wikipedia is governed by reddit atheists tbh. I have tried adjusting certain things before by citing Qualified Christian Scholars (this was on the topic of Gospel Authorship) and I was told I am not allowed to cite “Christian Apologists”. The problem with that is, any scholar regardless of qualification who makes an argument in favour of a Christian narrative is by definition an apologist, or at least making apologetic material.