Talk:Ebionites/Archive 6

message: The article passed Wikipedia GA. Merely 1 in 1300 articles are that sufficient. I told you guys this article was a superb expose on the Ebionites, which gives the author even more credit considering the near completely insufficiant sources and knowledge of the topic, the Ebionites. 66.161.185.110 12:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, Joshua. --Loremaster 00:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Congratulations Ovadyah! If you hadn't convinced me to come back and contribute to the article, none of this good work would ever have happened. :) --Loremaster 21:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations to you folks. Well done. Metamagician3000 13:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Passed [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|Featured Article]]

message: According to a Wikipedia rule of thumb: 1) if something is in See also, try to incorporate it into main body 2) if something is in main body, it should not be in See also and therefore 3) good articles have no See also sections. --Loremaster 01:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shalom Loremaster, Articals explaining offical Wikipedia policy have "see also" sections. NazireneMystic 00:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know but official Wikipedia policy pages and encyclopedic articles are not held to the same standard. Futhermore, I have spoken to Wikipedia administrators about this issue and I've confirmed that this rule of thumb is an unofficial policy that is highly recommended. --Loremaster 02:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

text: "See also" are a list, lists are worse then text. Wiki is not paper, we should have room to discuss all related issues, and "see also", which rarely discuss the linked items, give little indication why they are relevant. --Loremaster 19:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: About See also

message: Connected Klijn and Reinink reference back to article using ref tags. Ovadyah 01:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good. --Loremaster 02:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference audit

message: ===Ebionites===
The first is in English  and can be found here: http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/ebionites.php 
:EBIONITES. This designation was at first, like "Nazarenes," a common name for all Christians, as Epiphanius (d. 403) testifies (Adv. Haer., xxix. 1). It is derived from the Hebrew [Hebrew text omitted] "poor," and was not given, as Origen supposes, in reference to their low views of Christ, but to their own poverty. This poverty, especially characteristic of the Christians of Jerusalem, evoked from the Pagan and Jewish world the contemptuous appellation of "the poor." Minutius Felix says, "That we are called the poor is not our disgrace, but our glory" (Octav., 36). Subsequently its application was limited to Jewish Christians. "The Jews who accept Christ are called Ebionites," writes Origen (c. Cels., II. 1). Then, when a portion of the Jewish Church became separate and heretical, the designation was used exclusively of it. Later in the fourth century Epiphanius, Jerome, and others use it of a separate party within the Jewish Church distinct from the Nazarenes. This outline of history proves that Tertullian was wrong when he derived the term from a pretended founder of the sect called Ebion.
:The notices in the early fathers are fragmentary, and at times seem to be contradictory on account of the double application of the term, now to Jewish Christianity as a whole, now only to a party within it. The New Testament knows of no sects in the Jewish Church, but indicates the existence of different tendencies. At the Council of Jerusalem a legalistic and Judaizing spirit manifested itself, which was in antagonism to the spirit of Paul, and was shown in the Judaiziug teachings which did so much mischief in the Galatian churches. But it was not until after the destruction of Jerusalem, and the founding of Aelia Capitolina by Hadrian, in 134, that Jewish Christianity became a distinct school, gradually becoming more and more heretical till it separated into the two sects of Ebionites proper and Nazarenes. The latter still held to Paul as an apostle, and, while they kept the law themselves, did not demand its observance of the Gentile Christians. The former held the observance of the law to be obligatory upon all Christians alike, and rejected Paul as an apostate. This was the state of affairs at the time of Justin Martyr (Dial. c. Tryph., 47). Irenaeus, who does not mention this party division, describes the Ebionites as stubbornly clinging to the law, as rejecting the apostle Paul as an apostate, and all the Gospels except Matthew. He further notices a christological heresy. Denying Christ's birth from the Virgin, they regarded him as a mere man. Origen (c. Cels., V. 61) distinguishes between two branches of Ebionites, - those who denied and those who accepted the miraculous birth. Here he distinction between Nazarenes and the Ebionites proper becomes apparent. In the later fathers, as Jerome, Epiphanius, etc., the notices are more frequent; but nothing is added to our knowledge except that the [p.685] Ebionites were chiliasts (Jerome ad. Esdr., 35, 1). In Epiphanius' day (d. 403) they dwelt principally in the regions along the Dead Sea, but also in Rome and Cyprus. The disintegration of Jewish Christianity was consummated by the introduction of Gnostic philosophy, of Greek culture, as also, perhaps, of Oriental theosophy. See the art. ELKESAITES.
:G. Uhlhorn, "EBIONITES," Philip Schaff, ed., A Religious Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology, 3rd edn., Vol. 2. Toronto, New York & London: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1894. pp.684-685.
The second is in German and can unfortunately not be linked through the worldwideweb, but I have copied it unto my talk page and will give a (rough) translation here:
:Ebionites,  a term used in Christian heresiologies since Irenause (adv. haer. 1, 26, 2) denoting the Jewish Christianity grown from the Jerusalem Urgemeinde, which after the exodus of 66/67 AD degenerated (the German term "Rückbildung" is less derogatory) into a sect. The derivation of the name from a heresiarch Ebion (Tertullian, Epiphanius) is based on fiction; it propably goes back to a honarary title of the Jerusalem congregation (the poor = ptôchoi, 'æbjônîm; see Rom 15, 26; Gal 2, 10), who then could draw links to the self-given term of pious Jewish circles (aside from Ps 25, 9; 68, 11 especially PsSal 10, 6; 15, 1; 1 QpHab XII, 3.6.10) and the Macarisms of Jesus (Mt 5, 3; Lk 6, 20) (see poverty: I,2).
:The actual scope of the term E. of course remains unclear, since the contradictory accounts of the Church Fathers (primarily Epihanius, Panarion 30) allow no clear distinction to other heresy-names (e.g. Nazorenas, Elchesaites). Also in other respects does the history of the E. remain obscure in many regards. Their theology had no more influence on the development of Christianity, but very well on Islam. Ebionitic literature encompasses apart from fragments of the Gospel of the Ebionits primarily certain passages of the Pseudo-Clementines (Kerygma of Peter), as well as the work of Symmachus (Schoeps). The Church Fathers accuse the E. of christological heresy (rejection of the virgin birht; Christology II, 1b) and heretical legalism. Other attributes are: rejection of the whole sacricifical and sacerdotial institutions, polemics against the Samaritans, against John the Baptist and especially against Paul, furthermore a tendentious textual criticism: the E. used a Pentateuch cleansed from "false pericopes" as well as a reworked Gospel of Matthew (Gospel of the Ebionites). They knoew ritual bathings (baptism: II), communual meals (with bread and salt - maybe a old custom of the Urgemeinde) and a strict arcane disciple. The process of degeneration (the German term "Rückbildung" is less derogatory) into a heretical sect is linked with the fact, that the transjordan Jewish Christianity opened itself to all kinds of gnostic-syncretist and Jewish influences. One will have to link the E. with widespread gnostic baptism movement in Syria and Palestine; the strong connections of their thoughts with those of the Essene sect of Qumran is obvious. Possibly remnants of the sect of Qumran have merged into ebionitic groups east of the Jordan after the desaster of 70 AD.
:H. J. SCHOEPS, Theol. u. Gesch. des Judenchristentums, 1949 (Lit.) – S. G. F. BRANDON, The [Ebioniten. Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, S. 7435 (vgl. RGG Bd. 2, S. 297-298) (c) J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) http://www.digitale-bibliothek.de/band12.htm ]
::Thank you for the translation.  The German encyclopedic source raises the issue of the role of the Ebionites in the origin of Islam.  This should be expanded in the Legacy section.  I think we had a brief sentence that was removed with the Schoeps reference. Ovadyah 02:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. --Michael C. Price talk 05:42, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've restored the mention of the role of the Ebionites in the origin of Islam but a new citation is needed since no one has read Schoeps to confirm that he explored the issue. --Loremaster 21:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More external sources

message: The first is in English  and can be found here: http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/ebionites.php 
:EBIONITES. This designation was at first, like "Nazarenes," a common name for all Christians, as Epiphanius (d. 403) testifies (Adv. Haer., xxix. 1). It is derived from the Hebrew [Hebrew text omitted] "poor," and was not given, as Origen supposes, in reference to their low views of Christ, but to their own poverty. This poverty, especially characteristic of the Christians of Jerusalem, evoked from the Pagan and Jewish world the contemptuous appellation of "the poor." Minutius Felix says, "That we are called the poor is not our disgrace, but our glory" (Octav., 36). Subsequently its application was limited to Jewish Christians. "The Jews who accept Christ are called Ebionites," writes Origen (c. Cels., II. 1). Then, when a portion of the Jewish Church became separate and heretical, the designation was used exclusively of it. Later in the fourth century Epiphanius, Jerome, and others use it of a separate party within the Jewish Church distinct from the Nazarenes. This outline of history proves that Tertullian was wrong when he derived the term from a pretended founder of the sect called Ebion.
:The notices in the early fathers are fragmentary, and at times seem to be contradictory on account of the double application of the term, now to Jewish Christianity as a whole, now only to a party within it. The New Testament knows of no sects in the Jewish Church, but indicates the existence of different tendencies. At the Council of Jerusalem a legalistic and Judaizing spirit manifested itself, which was in antagonism to the spirit of Paul, and was shown in the Judaiziug teachings which did so much mischief in the Galatian churches. But it was not until after the destruction of Jerusalem, and the founding of Aelia Capitolina by Hadrian, in 134, that Jewish Christianity became a distinct school, gradually becoming more and more heretical till it separated into the two sects of Ebionites proper and Nazarenes. The latter still held to Paul as an apostle, and, while they kept the law themselves, did not demand its observance of the Gentile Christians. The former held the observance of the law to be obligatory upon all Christians alike, and rejected Paul as an apostate. This was the state of affairs at the time of Justin Martyr (Dial. c. Tryph., 47). Irenaeus, who does not mention this party division, describes the Ebionites as stubbornly clinging to the law, as rejecting the apostle Paul as an apostate, and all the Gospels except Matthew. He further notices a christological heresy. Denying Christ's birth from the Virgin, they regarded him as a mere man. Origen (c. Cels., V. 61) distinguishes between two branches of Ebionites, - those who denied and those who accepted the miraculous birth. Here he distinction between Nazarenes and the Ebionites proper becomes apparent. In the later fathers, as Jerome, Epiphanius, etc., the notices are more frequent; but nothing is added to our knowledge except that the [p.685] Ebionites were chiliasts (Jerome ad. Esdr., 35, 1). In Epiphanius' day (d. 403) they dwelt principally in the regions along the Dead Sea, but also in Rome and Cyprus. The disintegration of Jewish Christianity was consummated by the introduction of Gnostic philosophy, of Greek culture, as also, perhaps, of Oriental theosophy. See the art. ELKESAITES.
:G. Uhlhorn, "EBIONITES," Philip Schaff, ed., A Religious Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology, 3rd edn., Vol. 2. Toronto, New York & London: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1894. pp.684-685.
The second is in German and can unfortunately not be linked through the worldwideweb, but I have copied it unto my talk page and will give a (rough) translation here:
:Ebionites,  a term used in Christian heresiologies since Irenause (adv. haer. 1, 26, 2) denoting the Jewish Christianity grown from the Jerusalem Urgemeinde, which after the exodus of 66/67 AD degenerated (the German term "Rückbildung" is less derogatory) into a sect. The derivation of the name from a heresiarch Ebion (Tertullian, Epiphanius) is based on fiction; it propably goes back to a honarary title of the Jerusalem congregation (the poor = ptôchoi, 'æbjônîm; see Rom 15, 26; Gal 2, 10), who then could draw links to the self-given term of pious Jewish circles (aside from Ps 25, 9; 68, 11 especially PsSal 10, 6; 15, 1; 1 QpHab XII, 3.6.10) and the Macarisms of Jesus (Mt 5, 3; Lk 6, 20) (see poverty: I,2).
:The actual scope of the term E. of course remains unclear, since the contradictory accounts of the Church Fathers (primarily Epihanius, Panarion 30) allow no clear distinction to other heresy-names (e.g. Nazorenas, Elchesaites). Also in other respects does the history of the E. remain obscure in many regards. Their theology had no more influence on the development of Christianity, but very well on Islam. Ebionitic literature encompasses apart from fragments of the Gospel of the Ebionits primarily certain passages of the Pseudo-Clementines (Kerygma of Peter), as well as the work of Symmachus (Schoeps). The Church Fathers accuse the E. of christological heresy (rejection of the virgin birht; Christology II, 1b) and heretical legalism. Other attributes are: rejection of the whole sacricifical and sacerdotial institutions, polemics against the Samaritans, against John the Baptist and especially against Paul, furthermore a tendentious textual criticism: the E. used a Pentateuch cleansed from "false pericopes" as well as a reworked Gospel of Matthew (Gospel of the Ebionites). They knoew ritual bathings (baptism: II), communual meals (with bread and salt - maybe a old custom of the Urgemeinde) and a strict arcane disciple. The process of degeneration (the German term "Rückbildung" is less derogatory) into a heretical sect is linked with the fact, that the transjordan Jewish Christianity opened itself to all kinds of gnostic-syncretist and Jewish influences. One will have to link the E. with widespread gnostic baptism movement in Syria and Palestine; the strong connections of their thoughts with those of the Essene sect of Qumran is obvious. Possibly remnants of the sect of Qumran have merged into ebionitic groups east of the Jordan after the desaster of 70 AD.
:H. J. SCHOEPS, Theol. u. Gesch. des Judenchristentums, 1949 (Lit.) – S. G. F. BRANDON, The [Ebioniten. Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, S. 7435 (vgl. RGG Bd. 2, S. 297-298) (c) J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) http://www.digitale-bibliothek.de/band12.htm ]
::Thank you for the translation.  The German encyclopedic source raises the issue of the role of the Ebionites in the origin of Islam.  This should be expanded in the Legacy section.  I think we had a brief sentence that was removed with the Schoeps reference. Ovadyah 02:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. --Michael C. Price talk 05:42, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've restored the mention of the role of the Ebionites in the origin of Islam but a new citation is needed since no one has read Schoeps to confirm that he explored the issue. --Loremaster 21:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ebionites

message: Str, you are the one who is utterly incorrect in stating Islam has no view on the Ebionites.  In fact, Islamic websites have quite a lot so say about them.  The Ebionites are used polemically to argue that Christianity is a false religion created by Paul and enforced with Roman power by Constantine.  While you may find these views to be despicable personally, they are representative of mainstream Islam. Ovadyah 15:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some Muslims have a view and some Muslims are pushing hard for it. But that doesn't constitute a view of Islam. If that "some" is incorporated the statement will at least be accurate - though other issues remain. Str1977 (smile back) 10:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Some" Muslims is a fair statement. Ovadyah 14:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've edited the Islamic views section accordingly. --Loremaster 01:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Islamic Views

message: Easy stuff first.  I'm fine with moving the Religious perspectives section to the end.  I'm still not good with the Essenism section, but that's another topic for another day.  All the other content is fine, after the fix I made above. Ovadyah 23:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Views and practices and text below

message: The statement "Their views had no influence the developing Christian theology" is inserted as a truism, but needs a verifiable secondary source.  Everything else is ok. Ovadyah 23:53, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I took that from the RGG article.  Maybe we should also downtone it. Str1977 (smile back) 08:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Either that or find an additional reference that explicitly argues why there is no influence. Ovadyah 09:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Legacy section

message: The first two paragraphs are fine, except the last sentence from the original second paragraph was removed for some reason.
Eusebius, however, mentions that a minority of Ebionites came to embrace some of these views despite keeping their name.Eusebius of Caesarea, History of the Church, III, 27
This needs a secondary source, but otherwise seems fine to me.  I'm going to put it back and use Wace as a source.  I must have missed whatever the thinking was for removing it. Ovadyah 02:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't find this in Eusebius. Str1977 (talk) 07:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are quite right.  It was based on Epiphanius according to Wace.  I have removed the Eusebius reference and fixed this mistake. Ovadyah 17:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: History section - Patristic Fathers

message: This section looks fine.  Tertullian received the Ebion nonsense from Hippolytus, and it's likely that the "poor in doctrine" polemic mentioned by Origen came from him too. Ovadyah 23:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: The caption of the main picture is ok. Ovadyah 23:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: The lead section is accurate as it stands, but it has become truncated to the point where it is far from adequate.  The Lead should function as a stand-alone summary apart from the body of the article.  It needs a major rewrite. Ovadyah 23:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead

message: Editors often post minority views to articles.  This fits within Wikipedia's mission so long as the contributions are attributable.  The burden of evidence rests with the editor who wishes the information to remain. 
From Wikipedia:Neutral point of view: 
:NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a verifiable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each. Now an important qualification: Articles that compare views need not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and may not include tiny-minority views at all. 
Taken from the Wiki page on destructive editing. Ovadyah 14:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Distinguished from productive editing