Talk:Jesus outside the New Testament

Duplication of existing Wikipedia material
This article appears to quote from and duplicate Oral tradition and the historical Jesus "As Jews, this group worshiped at the Temple in Jerusalem, revered written Law called Torah Shebiktav and the Oral tradition called Torah Shebeal Peh. This ..." etc. In ictu oculi (talk)
 * And I see that both articles are by yourself history. Why the duplication? In ictu oculi (talk)

e.g. Oral tradition and the historical Jesus "When the Second Temple at Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70, this oral tradition was no longer tenable and it became necessary for it to be written ... Canonical gospels "When the Second Temple at Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70, this oral ... Jesus outside the New Testament "When the Second Temple at Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70, this Oral ...

I have similar concerns of duplication of content, and I expressed them a little here, asking for more input: Talk:Historicity_of_Jesus. In the past, I have sort of proposed creating a spin out article from Historicity of Jesus which focuses exclusively on the ancient sources which discuss Jesus, and their historical merit. However, my proposal was shot down as the consensus was there were already too many spin out articles, and we need to try to organize things better and be more concise. It appears this article does just the opposite of the consensus, and I fear it was created without community input, or concern on the hierarchy behind out "series of articles" pertaining to Jesus. -Andrew c [talk] 02:15, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Back to the fountainhead
Andrew, I actually agree with you. I am not sure what the solution is. The problem is that sources explain that during the formative years of Early Christianity 75 ancient witnesses testify to the fact that there was a Hebrew Gospel in circulation. Google Link Over 12 different witnesses testify that it was written by the Apostle Matthew. Google Link No ancient writer either Christian or Non-Christian challenges these two facts. Google Link

Nicholson, Parker, Edwards, Bütz and others agree with Jerome. Thus the Hebrew Gospel is the basis for a number of topics. How do we go back to the fountainhead without duplicating material? The matter is further complicated by the fact that the Catholic Church and a number of scholars believe that Jerome was wrong and that the Gospel of Matthew in the Bible was written by Matthew. I will defer to your wisdom. Until then I will redirect the article as a sign of good faith Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 03:59, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Jewish-Christian Gospels NPOV
As with Oral tradition and the historical Jesus, wholesale pastes from old content on Jewish-Christian Gospels, Gospel of the Hebrews etc. with prominence given to the views of Edward Nicholson (librarian) 1881.