Talk:Gospel of the Twelve

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconReligious texts Stub‑class (defunct)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.


This article could use a major cleanup while it is still in the stub stage. An important point to decide early on is whether it is better to separate the Gospel of the Twelve (really a misnomer because Origen calls it the "Gospel of the Epigrams of the Twelve") from the Gospel of the Apostles mentioned by Jerome and the Memoirs of the Apostles by Justin. There is no assurance that any of these are the same text. Ovadyah (talk) 00:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the Jewish Christian Gospels article has a section called the Gospel of the Apostles as mentioned by Jerome. Several sections of the article seem to be written with this Gospel in mind (the Nazarene and Gospel of the Hebrews sections). There is no way this is the Gospel of the Twelve. Origen mentions the GH as a disputed text that is separate from the G12, which he considers to be heretical. This is a case of three texts with similar sounding sames in English that have very different names in Greek. So, I will put this out there as two proposals:

1. Create a new article for the Gospel of the Apostles mentioned by Jerome and move all the material relevant to that Gospel there. Focus on the Gospel of the Twelve known to Origen here, its possible relationship to the GE, and later reports of its possible use by the Quqaje (the Ququean Gospel of the Twelve).
2. Create a composite article about all three Gospels with similar sounding names (in English) with completely separate sections for each Gospel.

Which of these directions seems the most preferable? Ovadyah (talk) 01:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like we will be going with option 2. I moved Justin to the top of the main body. Logically, the order should be chronological, since the testimony of the Church Fathers might and often does depend on those that came before. I named the three sections by the gospel names (and Church Fathers) that are primarily associated with them. Ovadyah (talk) 13:10, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Original stub[edit]

I'm going to start by taking a look at the original stub to see if there was anything worth keeping. The stub was completely over-written by Ret. Prof (not saying that was a bad thing to do), so I will arbitrarily define original as everything before Ret. Prof began to make changes to the article. Ovadyah (talk) 13:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Gospel of the Twelve is a currently almost entirely lost text from the New Testament apocrypha. It has been mentioned as existing by various church fathers including Ambrose, Jerome, and Origen. The only surviving fragments that are explicitly identified as the Gospel of the Twelve have been preserved by Epiphanius in Heresies, and it appears that it began with an account of baptism.
The text's title refers to the apostles, and this, together with the context in which it appears within the works of the church fathers, has led the majority of academics to identify the text as being one of the Jewish Gospels and related to the Gospel of the Ebionites or the Gospel according to the Hebrews.

This is the August 2010 version. That's all folks - a two paragraph Lead section without any sources. The mention of the text preserved by Epiphanius clearly implies a linkage to the GE, as mentioned explicitly in the second paragraph. However, the mention of Ambrose and Jerome implies a linkage to the GH, also as mentioned in the second paragraph. I need to check further into Ambrose, so that I know exactly what he said. Anyway, there are two primary sources mentioned here that are clearly being conflated. Ovadyah (talk) 13:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Ovadyah Good idea to clean up here. Wikipedia already suffers from overpopulation of badly sourced articles on NTA, some of them on texts which don't exist, so I personally would suggest that since there is not much actual TEXT of value under this heading that just one article "Gospels of the Apostles" collecting redirects from Gospel of the Twelve, Gospel of the Apostles, Gospel of the Twelve, etc. covers all of those mentioned p374 onwards of Schneemelcher Vol.2 I'd also suggest that everyone involved in editing this page read p374 onwards before making any edits. :)

As to structure I'd guess. 1. Patristic references - quotes of Jerome, Justin, Origen, mentions of "Gospel of Apostles" in banned books lists. 2. Then subsections about every "Gospel of the Apostles" per Schneemelcher NTA2, even that of the 12thC manuscript found by James Rendel Harris etc. Whether the article needs any references at all to marginal 19thC writers like Sabine Baring Gould is questionable.In ictu oculi (talk) 19:05, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was concerned about creating a content fork that would just lead to more problems later. I suggest the text be organized in three different sections, according to the quotes from the three Church Fathers you mentioned. The situation is somewhat analogous to the three Jewish Christian Gospels that can't be separated from the Church Fathers who quote from them. Rather than create a new "Gospels of Apostles" stub we should probably just leave it as is with redirects for the other two texts. Ovadyah (talk) 20:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree that "Whether the article needs any references at all to marginal 19thC writers like Sabine Baring Gould is questionable". We have much better and more recent reliable sources on which to base the article content. Ovadyah (talk) 21:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm trying to do is prevent another opportunity to argue endlessly about the GH, and recreate an article on the Nazoraeans. That might be ok if the article was only about the Gospel of the Apostles, but it's less ok if there are two other texts that probably have nothing to do with the GH or the Nazoraeans. Ovadyah (talk) 20:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I created a general structure with three sections. There is a lot of content in the article that suggests there are three interchangeable names for the same text. All of this needs to be cleaned up. Ovadyah (talk) 20:53, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The term Nazarene was first applied to Jesus of Nazareth (Matthew 2:23). Paul was called a Nazarene by Tertullus in Acts. Thereafter the name does not appear again until the 4th Century when used of a Jewish Christian Group by Epiphanius.[1][2] The 4thC Nazarenes adhered to the Mosaic law.[3]
Sabine Baring-Gould was one of those who considered that The Gospel of the Apostles, or The Gospel of the Twelve was used by the Nazarenes sinece Jerome (Dial. adv. Pelag. III 2) appears to say that "the Gospel used by the Nazarenes is called the Gospel of the Apostles". That the same Gospel should bear two names, one according to its reputed authors, the other according to the community which used it, is not surprising.[4]

I decided to WP:be bold and move the Nazoraeans content to the talk page. The first paragraph is a history of the name Nazarenes from Jesus to the 4th century. Why is that relevant to an article on the Gospel of the Apostles? The second paragraph details what Sabine Baring-Gould thought about the Gospel in 1874. Unless there is some specific historical interest in her, why do we care? Is there anything here worth keeping? If there is, I'm not seeing it. Ovadyah (talk) 00:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sabine Baring-Gould was a he :), but no, not remotely relevant.In ictu oculi (talk) 02:28, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oops! Pardon my (lack of) French! :0) Ovadyah (talk) 17:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Memoirs of the Apostles[edit]

This use of apomnemoneumata "memoirs" has led some writers to think that Justin may have been referring to a different book, such as Origen's Gospel of the Twelve under a slightly different name, The Recollections of the Apostles.
He says that these Recollections were a Gospel. He adopted the word used by Xenophon for his recollections of Socrates. The Memorabilia of Xenophon concerned the martyred philosopher, while the Memorabilia of the Apostles concerned the martyred Redeemer. It is probable that this Hebrew Gospel of the Twelve was the only one with which Justin Martyr was acquainted.[citation needed]
Justin Martyr was a native of Samaria, and his acquaintance with Christianity was probably made in the communities of Nazarenes scattered over Syria. By family he was a Greek, and was therefore by blood inclined to sympathize with the Gentile rather than the Jewish Christians. This double tendency is manifest in his writings.
Justin Martyr's Christian training took place in the Nazarene Church, in the orthodox, milder section. He no doubt inherited the traditional prejudice against St. Paul, for he neither mentions him by name, nor quotes any of his writings. That he should have omitted to quote St. Paul in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew is not surprising; but had he seen the Epistles of the Apostle of the Gentiles, he would have cited them, or shown that they had influenced the current of his thoughts in his two Apologies addressed to Gentiles. Therefore the Gospel of the Twelve may predate Paul.[5]

This unsourced content is either unsupported by scholarship or demonstrably false. It appears to be little more than OR. Previous scholarship has not demonstrated a connection between the Memoirs of the Apostles and the so-called Gospel of the Twelve (Gospel of the Epigrams of the Twelve). Also, Xenophon's "recollections" of Socrates was not given the title Memoirs of Xenophon until the middle ages. Several scholars have noted a complete lack of support for the use of this name in ancient times. Finally, the bit about it being "probable" that Justin Martyr was only acquainted with a Hebrew Gospel of the Twelve is OR. Justin's use of the LXX for scriptural quotations makes it clear that he was reliant on Hellenistic Judaism. I won't even comment on the section that was lined out and rightly labeled as fiction. Ovadyah (talk) 16:31, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In his dialogue with Trypho Justin frequently refers to the Gospel story by the neutral apomnemoneumata "memoirs" of the Apostles, avoiding the loaded term evangelion, "Good News".[6][7]

I copied the remaining text for the Memoirs of the Apostles section, which is inaccurate, but at least it is sourced. The sentence claims that Justin avoided the use of the term evangelion because he regarded it to be a "loaded term". In fact, Justin uses the terms euaggelion and apomnemoneumata in the same sentence in 1 Apology 66.3, where he makes it clear that they are equivalent terms and he is referring to "gospels" in the plural.

The apostles in the memoirs which have come from them, which are also called gospels, have transmitted that the Lord had commanded them as follows, "that Jesus had taken bread, etc."

— 1 Apol. 66.3

I will fix up the remaining content for now, so that what is said is at least accurate. Ovadyah (talk) 17:03, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

name="Aune 1987 p.67" David Aune (1987). The New Testament in its Literary Environment. Westminster John Knox Press. p. 67. ISBN 978-0664219123. p.67 - "described the Gospels as 'reminiscences [apomnemoneumata] of the apostles' (1 Apology 66.3; 67.3) and "reminiscences of Peter" (Dialogue with Trypho 106.3). Thus Justin, like Matthew, Luke, and Papias, prefers to designate the... "

Move Aune ref for now while section is being reorganized. Ovadyah (talk) 16:51, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gospel of the Twelve[edit]

Walter Richard Cassels (1874) and Pierson Parker (1940) considered it a different "edition" of Gospel of the Hebrews.

Moved unsourced statement to Talk. This is a duplicate of a sourced statement in the section on Jerome. Ovadyah (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gospel of the Apostles[edit]

Justin Martyr quotes "the book that is called the Gospel" as if there were but one. It has been frequently observed that the quotations of Justin are closer to the parallel passages in the Gospel of the Hebrews than to other gospels.[citation needed] But the only Gospel he names is the Gospel of the Twelve.[citation needed]

I moved these two unsourced statements to Talk. They are not only inaccurate; they are completely false. It has been frequently observed that the quotations of Justin are closer to the parallel passages in Matthew and Luke. The evidence based on narrative accounts of the life of Jesus and the sayings of Jesus is overwhelming. And it is an OR statement to say the only Gospel Justin names is the Gospel of the Twelve. Justin uses the term gospel or gospels three times, and he never uses it with specificity as to the author or authors, other than the single case where he mentions the "memoirs of the Apostles" and "gospels" in the same sentence. Ovadyah (talk) 17:08, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


  1. ^ Schneemelcher NTA Vol.1 Philip Vielhauer, introduction to Gospel of the Nazarenes
  2. ^ F.L. Cross & E.A. Livingston, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, Oxford University Press, 1989. p 957 & 722.
  3. ^ The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 4. New York, NY : Doubleday, 1992. p. 1049-1052
  4. ^ Sabine Baring-Gould, The Lost And Hostile Gospels, 1874; Print on demand Nabu Press, undated. p 122
  5. ^ Sabine Baring-Gould, The Lost And Hostile Gospels, 1876 reprint Nabu Press, 2010. p 123 - 128
  6. ^ Vernon Kay Robbins Jesus the teacher: a socio-rhetorical interpretation of Mark 1984 "80 In the Dialogue with Trypho, Justin, in spite of frequent reference to the Apomnemoneumata of the Apostles, never once calls them gospels. He uses the term euaggelion twice in the dialogue.
  7. ^ David Aune The New Testament in its literary environment p67 "described the Gospels as "reminiscences [apomnemoneumata] of the apostles" (1 Apology 66.3; 67.3) and "reminiscences of Peter" (Dialogue with Trypho 106.3). Thus Justin, like Matthew, Luke, and Papias, prefers to designate the... "

Adding new content[edit]

As I did previously on the GE article, I created a Cleanup section to archive old content. This section is to discuss new content and organization of the article going forward. Ovadyah (talk) 13:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to focus initially on Justin Martyr's testimony about the Memoirs of the Apostles. There is potentially enough material here to create a separate article. A lot of work has been done on Justin, including speculations on where he got his source material and his purposes for writing. It might be possible to attribute specific quotations to the MA in a similar manner to how Epiphanius quoted from the GE. For example, Justin mentions a source which describes fire on the water at the time of Jesus' baptism. The only other time this is mentioned is by Cyprian in the mid-third century. It's possible that the great light on the water mentioned in both the GE and GH is related, somehow, but clearly, a great light is not the same as fire. Ovadyah (talk) 13:22, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, where is the clean up section located?In ictu oculi (talk) 10:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Anywhere above this section on adding new content is fine. You might want to use subheadings to keep the old content organized, just in case we want to go back and find something later. Ovadyah (talk) 14:25, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In ictu oculi, I'm running a bit behind on doing research for this article with all the other distractions. I looked in Schneemelcher and didn't see anything about Justin or the Memoirs of the Apostles. Is it in the New Testament Apocrypha? I found two resources that are a treasure-trove of information on Justin here and here. Based on an analysis of the baptismal scene in these two sources, the MA can't be the GE or the GH. I have a lot of homework to do, but more to come. Ovadyah (talk) 02:21, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry, I'm a bit behind too. I'm not sure if it's in Schneemelcher Vol.1 or 2 or neither. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 02:27, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Schneemelcher discusses the Kerygma Petri in volume 2 (I thought it was Petrou), but there is nothing about Justin here. I will find one more source, and then I think we will have enough source material to write the Memoirs section. Cheers. Ovadyah (talk) 17:32, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I finally have Koester's book on Ancient Gospels and Sarskaune's book on Justin Martyr, so I will resume working on this shortly. Koester gives a fascinating review of the usage of the word apomnemoneumata, which is more accurately translated as "recollections" or "rememberances" than "memoirs". It has a special meaning that indicates the trustworthy recollection of the sayings of Jesus by the Apostles, and it was apparently first used in this sense by Papias with respect to Mark's accurate recording of the recollections of Peter. According to Koester, it has nothing to do with the original meaning of the word euaggelion (gospel), which was used by Paul, Mark, and Ignatius to indicate the "good news" of the death, resurrection, and second-coming of Christ. Ovadyah (talk) 16:50, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Koester claims that the usage of the term "gospel" to describe a written record of Jesus' sayings was invented by Marcion, and that Justin's invention of the term "memoirs of the Apostles" is a conscious anti-Marcionite attempt to link the written record of the sayings of Jesus to the fulfillment of prophesies based on the Law and the Prophets, which Marcion rejected. Ovadyah (talk) 23:05, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have mostly completed the Name section for the "Memoirs of the Apostles". I may add a bit more about Justin's preference for the name "memoirs" over "gospels" because of his competition in Rome with his contemporary Marcion, who described his modified text of Luke as the "Gospel of the Lord". At some point, I will add a Composition section with some representative examples, if I'm still around. Ovadyah (talk) 01:36, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I started the Composition section....much more to come. The textual transmission of the gospels by Justin is far more complicated than I ever imagined. Justin relies heavily on two Testimonia sources, which were probably circulating within his school, and these in turn have gospel verses that are demonstrations of the fulfillment of prophesy. While these verses are occasionally excerpts from Matthew only, they are most often in the form of a harmonized gospel text of Matthew and Luke. Even when they are from Matthew alone, they often appear to be of no known text-type. The same text is also quoted in many cases by Clement of Alexandria and Irenaeus, and so may represent a text-type that did not survive the second century. Good stuff. Ovadyah (talk) 19:40, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added examples of Justin's accounts of the baptism and temptation of Jesus from the Dialogue with Trypho to the Composition section. What makes this so interesting is that Justin's source was the Disputation of Jason and Papiscus by Aristo of Pella, rather than using the Synoptic Gospels directly. This raises the question of whether there was a gospel harmony in circulation that was adapted by various authors to create their catechisms and testimonia (Koester) or different authors harmonized gospel passages for the purpose of creating their compositions (Bellinzoni). More to come... Ovadyah (talk) 22:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm considering adding an example from the birth narrative of Jesus that illustrates the harmonization of Matthew and Luke. I will probably focus on the part of the narrative about the appearance of the Magi because that is the fulfillment of the star prophecy. I need to read through Arthur Bellizoni's book and see what I can find there before I proceed further. Ovadyah (talk) 01:05, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the birth narrative material, the only passage referred to as "memoirs of the Apostles" is Dial. 106:4, which interprets the star prophecy of Num. 24:17, and it explains three names of the Messiah: Jacob, Israel, and East (or Rising). The source for this midrash is probably Aristo because the Magi are identified as coming from Arabia. This is an identification associated with him. Immediately preceding this in Dial. 106:3 is the identification of James and John as Boanerges, or Sons of Thunder, and following this midrashic explanation of the star prophecy are midrashic explanations of the names Rising and Israel. Justin took this explanation (probably from Aristo) and used it to develop an original scriptural proof that the Messiah is pre-existent in three steps as follows:

1. The name of the Messiah is Jesus (from Aristo, based on his proof-text of the fulfillment of the Star Prophecy).
2. The Name of the Messiah is eternal (from Genesis, i.e. a Sacred Name).
3. Therefore, if the Name of the Messiah is eternal, so, then, must be Messiah himself, by Name of Jesus.

This proof-text is probably why Justin is more than just a footnote in history. Ovadyah (talk) 18:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I revised the date of composition of the 1 Apology to ca. 155. It can be internally dated to no earlier than 151 because it mentions Felix, the Procurator of Egypt, and if the allusion to the death of Polycarp is correct, the date of composition is 155-156. Ovadyah (talk) 15:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to create a new article entitled Memoirs of the Apostles[edit]

I'm proposing that the Memoirs of the Apostles section of this article be split off into its own article for the following reasons:

1. It's clear after doing more investigation that Justin's use of the name Memoirs of the Apostles and sources relating to that name have nothing whatever to do with the Gospel of the Twelve known to Origen.
2. There is enough material on the Memoirs of the Apostles to create a stand-alone article based on reliable sources.

Comments please. Ovadyah (talk) 18:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Split. Other sections have their own articles; why not this one? Seems reasonable. -- cheers, Michael C. Price talk 17:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ovadyah, thanks for the invite to comment: Per Eric Francis Osborn Justin Martyr pp123 don't most scholars (and the article) agree that the apomnemoneumata of the Apostles is just an expression for the canonical Gospels and Acts by someone (Justin Martyr) who couldn't quote them straight. I agree it looks overweight and unwieldy here, but the simple solution would be to cut and paste over to Justin Martyr, since he's the only possible source. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Or paste it into Diatesseron. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:39, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your input, both of you. I think everyone agrees that the section on the Memoirs doesn't belong in this article. So, the question now is where to put it. I would say probably not with the Diatesseron. There is no evidence that Justin (or his school) used the Gospel of John as a source, and John is an important component of the Diatesseron. In fact, the internal evidence is quite compelling that Justin did not compose a harmony, although a harmony may have been composed by his school, which was then used in part to create the source documents Justin used to write the Apology and the Dialogue. The only two choices that make sense to me are to include it as a section in the Justin Martyr article or create a new article. On one hand, Justin is the only possible source, so it could make sense to subordinate it. On the other hand, there are separate articles for the Apology and the Dialogue. It comes down to whether the material would look like an isolated fragment by itself or it can be made into a complete article that can stand on its own. I need to take a few days to think about it. Cheers. Ovadyah (talk) 04:29, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any content that doesn't fit inside Justin Martyr article? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:38, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, it could be subordinated into the Justin Martyr article. However, I was planning to show more examples of the method of composition of the proofs from prophesy that Justin refers to as Memoirs. This seems analogous in some ways to the discussion we had about merging the Gospel of the Ebionites into the Ebionites article. I have to think about what the completed article would look like. Ovadyah (talk) 05:01, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was stunned to read this quotation in the Justin Martyr article:

As Helmut Koester says,
"On the basis of the gospel quotations of the First Apology and the Dialogue with Trypho, one can conclude with great certainty that Justin also had composed a harmony of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke (he did not know the Gospel of John), which is lost but was used by his student Tatian for the composition of his famous and influential four-gospel harmony known as the Diatessaron." [17]

I verified that the quotation is accurate. Koester directly contradicts his conclusion in his 1990 book Ancient Christian Gospels, where he concludes that a harmony may have been composed by Justin's school, but it is not likely that Justin composed it himself. I will add this reference and update the article to reflect this new information. Ovadyah (talk) 04:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ovadyah, Interesting that Koester later withdraw that view, and sensibly, since there's no sign in Justin's quotes that he himself wrote it. I think the difference with these quotes is that the section already there in the Justin Martyr article shows it isn't when he was quoting from what. Whereas Apology and Dialogue have breakout standalone articles as actual texts which are confirmed did exist, and today do exist. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:09, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In ictu oculi, can you please clarify what you mean by the statement "it isn't when he was quoting from what"? I don't understand your wording here. Thanks. Ovadyah (talk) 12:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In ictu oculi, an important point to keep in mind is that the equation "memoirs of the Apostles = gospel harmony" is not a true statement. As Bellinzoni showed, there are many harmonized quotations of the ethical teachings of Jesus from Matthew and Luke that were apparently organized into a catechism. Justin never refers to them as "memoirs of the Apostles". He only uses that term selectively to refer to gospel quotations that demonstrate the fulfillment of prophecy. Also, as I showed in the example in the Composition section, Justin obtained other finished works, such as the Disputation between Jason and Papiscus, and used quotations from them to demonstrate the fulfillment of prophecy, which he refers to as "memoirs of the Apostles". That has nothing to do with a gospel harmony. It would be more correct to say that Justin's use of the term "memoirs of the Apostles" intersects at times with his use of a gospel harmony as a source. Ovadyah (talk) 13:12, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't (his own harmony) when he was quoting from that (memoirs). Yes, sure I don't know WHAT he meant, but it's purely his own quoting not a text. and so there's a subsection in the Justin Martyr article already which can contain this. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:23, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
He is quoting from Aristo of Pella's Disputation of Jason and Papiscus (according Skarsaune) in the example I provided, rather than a gospel harmony written either by Justin or his school. The point is, when I first began looking into the secondary literature, I assumed there was a gospel harmony Justin named the "memoirs of the Apostles". The reality is far more complicated than I imagined. However, none of this complexity would preclude merging into the JM article, as you said. Cheers. Ovadyah (talk) 00:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So far as I can tell, the relevant policies and guidelines to spinout would apply here. Specifically, WP:N would apply. That being the case, we would have to have the required number of independent reliable sources which devote a sufficiant degree of attention to the subject for there to be cause for a separate article. What would be best would be sources which discuss the subject as the main topic of the work being discussed, either as the subject of an article, a separate referenced encyclopedic entry, or the like. If it can be shown that there are sufficient independent reliable sources for such material, that would be fine. Otherwise, keeping the material in another article would work. The one caveat I would raise would be that there could not be any sort of WP:SYNTH or other violations. One point in particular to watch out for would be situations when multiple academics make statements which contain some similarities about the subject, but also differ enough about the subject to be, fundamentally, separate opinions. John Carter (talk) 20:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think everyone agrees that the material on the Memoirs of the Apostles doesn't belong in this article, so I have removed it to a draft article for now. Ovadyah (talk) 22:32, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After further reflection, I agree that the Memoirs of the Apostles material fits better in the Justin Martyr article than as a free-standing article. Unfortunately, the JM article is poorly sourced and reads like it was written for the clergy. Therefore, I am going to merge the MA material into that article and be done with it. Ovadyah (talk) 02:32, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ovadyah, Goodo. That seems like a sensible conclusion. And yes the Justin Martyr article appears to have old Schaff Herzog/Cath Enc/Enc Brit content at the base of some sections. Not that I'm volunteering to improve it... In ictu oculi (talk) 09:38, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know which is worse, the JM article or this G12 stub. It's depressing to see what Randy has done to this encyclopedia. I may add a bit more to the JM article, while I still have the books checked out from the university library. Ovadyah (talk) 14:45, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Back to cleanup[edit]

I removed this content to the talk page for discussion:

In regard to the "Memoirs of the Apostles," which are referred to some fifteen or twenty times by Justin, as the source of many of his quotations, Arthur Lillie (1882) and Waite Burlingame (1881) contends that Justin meant the Gospel of the Hebrews, as the Gospel of the Hebrews was also known as The Gospel of the Twelve Apostles. This was The Memoirs of the Apostles, referred to by Justin Martyr.[1][2]

This is junk pseudo-scholarship backed by 100-plus year old sources. At best, it might be of minor interest as a historical perspective. It is certainly not a consensus of modern scholars. Ignocrates (talk) 04:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a fresh look at this as soon as I can locate the references I had collected. Cheers. Ignocrates (talk) 22:17, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Scholars Cassels (1874) and Parker (1940) considered the Gospel of the Apostles mentioned by Jerome and Ambrose to be a different "edition" of the Gospel of the Hebrews.[3][4]

I removed the rest of the junk content. Schneemelcher states that Jerome was incorrect in identifying the Gospel of the Twelve with the Gospel of the Hebrews, since Origen clearly distinguishes between the two gospels in his list of heretical gospels. Therefore, there was no need for a separate section describing Jerome's mistake. I also stripped out the rest of the dubious references. The article is now a tiny stub, but there is nothing more to say on the subject. I question whether this should remain a stand-alone article, as opposed to being incorporated into a list of unknown gospels with a brief description. Ignocrates (talk) 01:54, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


  1. ^ Arthur Lillie, Buddha and early Buddhism 1882 extract The Gospel According to the Hebrews, Kessinger Publishing, 2005. pp 111–134
  2. ^ Waite Burlingame, History of the Christian Religion, to the Year Two Hundred, 1881 reprint BiblioBazaarPub, 2009. p 278
  3. ^ Walter Richard Cassels, Supernatural Religion - An Inquiry Into the Reality of Divine Revelation, 1874 reprint Read Books, 2010. Vol. 1, p 419- 422
  4. ^ Pierson Parker, A Proto-Lukan Basis for the Gospel According to the Hebrews, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 59, No. 4, 1940. pp 471