User:Erik755/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Nazarene (sect)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I have familiarity with the secondary literature from writing a paper about this group during my undergraduate studies. This article matters because it contributes to Church history, Jewish-Christian relations, and Jewish backgrounds of Christianity. The article helpfully discusses the linguistic difficulties the term possesses when you compare the appearance of the word in the New Testament and then in later Church Fathers. This is still a point of contention in the talk page. The article covers the practices and beliefs of the sect well, for the most part. Some things could be stated more carefully. Some key secondary sources are missing that can help clarify how the Nazarenes differ from the Ebionites. Some claims do not have references.

Evaluate the article
Lead section

The lead sentence does not mention the fourth century group called the Nazarenes. They are not mentioned until the second paragraph of the lead, but they have the largest section in the article. They should be mentioned in the first sentence and in the first paragraph.

Content

The article’s content is relevant to the topic and appears to be almost up to date (see below). The inclusion of the Arabic term for Nazarenes does not serve a clear purpose.

Tone and Balance

The article has a good tone and balance. There does not seem to be any indication persuasion toward a particular view is present, nor does it appear to be heavily biased. It does seem to be written from a neutral point of view.

Sources and References

Not all claims are backed by sources:

The Nazarenes were similar to the Ebionites, in that they considered themselves Jews, maintained an adherence to the Law of Moses, and used only the Aramaic Gospel of the Hebrews, rejecting all the Canonical gospels and the concept of Jesus being the Son of God which they deemed of Hellenist origin.[citation needed]

Modern scholars believe it is the Pasagini or Pasagians who are referenced by Cardinal Humbert, suggesting the Nazarene sect existed well into the eleventh century and beyond (the Catholic writings of Bonacursus entitled "Against the Heretics").

It is believed that Gregorius of Bergamo, about 1250 CE, also wrote concerning the Nazarenes as the Pasagians.

The Gospel of the Nazarenes is the title given to fragments of one of the lost Jewish-Christian Gospels of Matthew partially reconstructed from the writings of Jerome.

Those few who are initiated into the secrets of the Mandaean religion are called Naṣuraiia or Nasoraeans/Nasaraeans. The Mandaeans claim to have fled Jerusalem before its fall in 70 CE due to persecution by Jews. The word Naṣuraiia may come from the root n-ṣ-r meaning "to keep" since although they reject the Mosaic Law they consider themselves to be keepers of Gnosis.

The sources are not thorough and not entirely up to date, the following sources should be included:

Oskar Skarsaune, “Evidence for Jewish Believers in Greek and Latin Patristic Literature,” in Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries, ed. Oskar Skarsaune and Reidar Hvalvik (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007).

Oskar Skarsaune, “Fragments of Jewish Christian Literature Quoted in Some Greek and Latin Fathers,” in Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries, ed. Oskar Skarsaune and Reidar Hvalvik (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007).

Andrew S. Jacobs, “Matters (Un)-Becoming: Conversions in Epiphanius of Salamis,” Church History 81, no. 1 (March, 2012).

Wolfram Kinzing, “‘Non-Separation’: Closeness and Co-operation between Jews and

Christians in the Fourth Century,” Vigiliae Christianae 45, no. 1 (March, 1991).

Todd S. Berzon, “Known Knowns and Known Unknowns: Epiphanius of Salamis and the

Limits of Heresiology,” Harvard Theological Review 1, no. 75 (January 2016).

Organization and writing quality

The writings seems to be sufficient. I have not noticed any grammar or spelling errors. The organization makes sense.

Images and Media

There are no images or media

Talk Page Discussion

The primary discussion on the talk page is how to handle the ambiguous relationship between the Nazarenes of the first century and the group of the same name in the fourth century. Are they the same group? Do they have different names–Nazarenes v. Nazorean? Should they have separate pages?

It is a C-Class article

It is part of four wikiprojects: Christianity/Jewish; Judaism; Jewish history; Bible

Overall Impressions

The article appears underdeveloped. Not all sentences and paragraphs are clearly related to each other. There needs to be an infusion of more and recent scholarship. Some claims need to be corrected about how the Nazarenes most probably took the whole NT canon and did not reject Jesus’s divine status. The article does a good job of discussing both the first and fourth century groups. And does a good job discussing later reception history.