Protoevangelium of James

Like the writings of Papias the Infancy Gospel of James, also known as the Protoevangelium, is a work that adds to the Catholic doctrine of Oral testimony. It presents an oral history of the birth of Mary and the birth of Christ. From this history many false concepts are supported.

The protoevangelium teaches an historical variation from the other Gospels, but is used to establish an oral tradition did exist of many of the assertions of Catholic dogma. The writing itself can be seen here.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/infancyjames-roberts.html

It deviates from scripture in many points, and provides extra-biblical history that may or may not be true. If many of its teachings can be shown to deviate from scripture then any of its points could be false. It does show that the person writing the story had a good knowledge of the Gospel timeline, yet its embellishments are actually contradictory, such as Jesus being born in a cave. Plus the wise men visited at the cave, instead of at a house as depicted by Matthew.

"And the Magi went out. And, behold, the star which they had seen in the east went before them until they came to the cave, and it stood over the top of the cave. And the Magi saw the infant with His mother Mary; and they brought forth from their bag gold, and frankincense, and myrrh."

Mat 2:11  And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh.

This could be why many nativity scenes have the wise men visiting at his birth, vs days or weeks later. Many Catholic traditions came from Oral traditions vs scripture. 

One of the clear doctrines is that Mary was still a virgin physically after the birth of Christ. Meaning Mary had a miraculous delivery, not just a miraculous conception.

And she said to her: Salome, Salome, I have a strange sight to relate to thee: a virgin has brought forth -- a thing which her nature admits not of. Then said Salome: As the Lord my God liveth, unless I thrust in my finger, and search the parts, I will not believe that a virgin has brought forth.

20. And the midwife went in, and said to Mary: Show thyself; for no small controversy has arisen about thee. And Salome put in her finger, and cried out, and said: Woe is me for mine iniquity and mine unbelief, because I have tempted the living God; and, behold, my hand is dropping off as if burned with fire. And she bent her knees before the Lord, saying: O God of my fathers, remember that I am the seed of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; do not make a show of me to the sons of Israel, but restore me to the poor; for Thou knowest, O Lord, that in Thy name I have performed my services, and that I have received my reward at Thy hand. And, behold, an angel of the Lord stood by her, saying to her: Salome, Salome, the Lord hath heard thee.

This would violate the Luke passage that he broke or tore the Matrix upon delivery, thus requiring an offering.

Exo 13:15  And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the LORD slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of beast: therefore I sacrifice to the LORD all that openeth the matrix, being males; but all the firstborn of my children I redeem.

All male children had to be redeemed or sacrificed. The firstborn could be redeemed.

This would perhaps prove Joseph did not have other children before Jesus. Otherwise he was redeemed as the firstborn of Mary.

Luk 2:22  And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; .

Luk 2:23  (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;)

The real point is that Jesus tore the Matrix during his birth. It was a natural birth. The protoevangelium was incorrect on many points.

Oral tradition often contradicted scripture.