User talk:PiCo/Archive 4

Formal mediation

 * WP:Formal mediation is the way to go. Make it so, #1! Ignocrates (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I asked, but she can't afford the time commitment, given all her off-wiki responsibilities. Also, I doubt that would accept the role, even if he has the time; it would probably require that he recuse himself from a case if mediation fails and this dispute ends up in arbitration. You will have to choose one of the other mediators on the list, assuming this really happens. Btw, WP:DRN is another option, but that has a higher success rate for two-person disputes. Cheers! Ignocrates (talk) 00:34, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Gospel of Matthew - draft for request to formal mediation
(The mediation process involves filing a request form - this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation#File_a_request has both the form template and some current open cases. I'll follow the headings given in the template - remember that everything I write is a suggestion)

Editors involved in this dispute
 * 1) RetProf - filing party
 * 2) PiCo
 * 3) Tgeorgescu
 * 4) In ictu oculi
 * 5) Ignocrates
 * 6) Eusebeus
 * 7) Atethnekos
 * 8) Davidbena
 * 9) StAnselm
 * 10) Ckruschke

Articles affected by this dispute


 * 1) Gospel of Matthew (main)
 * 2) Hebrew Gospel hypothesis (secondary)

Other attempts at resolving this dispute
 * 1) ANI, 3 February 2014 (link)
 * 2) Article talk page, 26 January 2014 (link)
 * 3) Article talk page, 30 January 2014 (link)
 * 4) Article talk page, 30 January 2014 (link)
 * 5) Article talk page, 31 January 2014 (link)
 * 6) Article talk page, 1 February 2014 (link)
 * 7) Fringe theories noticeboard, 2 August 2013 (link)

Issues to be mediated

(The Hebrew Gospel hypothesis is the idea that the Gospel of Matthew was first written in Hebrew or Aramaic and later translated into, or formed the basis of, the present Gospel)
 * To what extent, if at all, should the Hebrew Gospel hypothesis be represented in the Gospel of Matthew article?

Great start
I created a new header for comments so as not to muck up your draft proposal. Ignocrates (talk) 15:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

In addition to, , & , I would also invite to the party. He indicated an interest when I raised the subject on Ret.Prof's talk page. This grouping provides a nice balance of the traditional perspective (David & Ret.Prof) and the so-called modern perspective (you & me). I'm pretty sure the atmosphere will be collegial within this group and we can get a lot done. Ignocrates (talk) 15:58, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I would also consider asking &  to participate, or at least bring them in to comment after the sausage is made and there is a rough draft. These two guys will be at each others' throats, but they would also contribute a lot of intellectual firepower to the discussion. Of course, anyone else that wants to contribute can participate. Ignocrates (talk) 16:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I saw your note requesting feedback, so here are my comments:


 * Involved editors: I would add StAnselm to the list. Til made a valuable contribution to the FTN; that's why I included him. He is a very effective "change agent", and I am more interested in creating a quality article in mediation than appeasing various parties with their individual axes to grind. That's all I can think of at present, other than Mr. Retired and Mr. Vanished. Ignocrates (talk) 01:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Articles affected: Oral gospel traditions is the other big one, but we can focus on the Gospel of Matthew for now because that will bring this Aramaic/Hebrew Matthew business to a head.


 * Other attempts: I took Oral gospel traditions to WP:RSN and WP:FTN, but the list of attempts is fine if we confine this mediation to the Gospel of Matthew. The MC might ask why we didn't attempt to resolve the content dispute using WP:DRN and WP:NPOVN first, and we will need to answer that question. I think the answer is that we need privileged communication to keep this dispute resolution process with being used as a pinata on the way to arbitration. I'm being called away, so more to come... Ignocrates (talk) 01:36, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Issues to be mediated: I would go from big picture to small examples. What is the central question being asked here? Should material on the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew be included in the article? (It was excluded citing WP:SCOPE. There is a question of who gets to "decide" that.) If it doesn't belong in the Gospel of Matthew, does it belong anywhere? Strictly speaking, that question is not relevant if we are restricting mediation to one article. Assuming we decide it belongs in the article to some extent, the rest of the mediation will be to iron out those details. You might include the specific example you cited in that context. Ignocrates (talk) 02:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The purpose of mediation: The mediators will ask you for a statement of purpose; what you hope to achieve by mediation. You are asking for a definitive ruling and a binding directive in mediation. That is something the mediator won't do because they can't. Mediators don't have the community authority to bind anyone to anything. They are there to facilitate only. It's up to the participants to bind themselves to a voluntary agreement. If the involved parties can't do that, mediation fails and its on to something else. There is no such thing as handing the dispute over to arbitration if mediation fails; they are completely independent processes. I think that covers it unless you have questions. Ignocrates (talk) 02:31, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


 * If we go through mediation and par chance I prevail, how would the decision be enforced?? - Ret.Prof (talk) 03:25, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * There is no "prevailing" and "enforcement". The whole point of mediation is to reach a voluntary, mutually acceptable agreement. If you want to "prevail" I suggest we skip this mediation process and you request arbitration as the filing party. Ignocrates (talk) 04:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I really was not clear on that point. Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 04:50, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * @Ret.Prof, yes, Ignocrates is right and I was under a misapprehension - there's no binding decision at the end of mediation, just mutual agreement between parties.PiCo (talk) 05:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Revisions
Ok, revisions to the draft: Please let me know what you think - @Ret.Prof in particular, are you happy with that statement of the issue? Are you aware that it means you'll have to argue that the article as it exists gives inadequate coverage to the Hebrew Gospel hypothesis? PiCo (talk) 06:30, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Involved editors: a few names added. Hard to decide who's involved - don't want too many, nor to leave anyone out. I guess we need to canvas after we have this draft sorted out.
 * Articles affected: Added Hebrew Gospel hypothesis as secondary article affected. RetProf, you realise that adding this means you'll have to argue why the secondary article isn't sufficient in itself for this topic? Or to put that the other way, why the coverage of HGH in the main article isn't already adequate?
 * Other attempts. No change. On DRN I guess we could say that so many editors have been involved over such a long period that it's unlikely DRN could add anything at this stage. On NPOVN I think nobody has disputed the neutrality, and it's more a due weight question given the existence of the secondary article, although some say it's a fringe issue, but in either case I don't think neutrality arises.
 * Issues to be mediated: now has a bullet point identifying a single issue, the extent to which Hebrew Gospel hypothesis needs to be covered in Gospel of Matthew. I cut all the rest because it give the position of one party (the filing party) - the committee will ask for positions and arguments in due course, so this is premature.
 * The purpose of mediation: I don't see anything about that on the Requests for mediation page - see this request for mediation on something relating to India that's been accepted by the committee: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/India_Against_Corruption. I guess our purpose is to seek a solution to the issue, but that's sort of obvious. Anyway, nothing now about binding decisions and so on.

Comments on the revisions
I started a new section to keep the comments separated from your revisions. Ignocrates (talk) 14:39, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Involved editors: The key identifier is to ask the question: If this person chose to not participate or withdrew from mediation, is there any point in having a mediation? By that criterion, Ret.Prof and In ictu oculi are involved editors for sure. I would say I am not involved; I'm willing to contribute but mediation is not pointless if I don't. You might want to group editors in that way.

Articles affected: I have a big problem with this. At least half of an article on a historiography of scholarship on the Gospel of Matthew will be to review the testimony of the Church Fathers (by scholars of course, not just pasting in primary sources). There's nothing hypothetical about a scholarly review of documents that anyone can read (assuming you are adept at Koine Greek and Latin). That could be accomplished by an extensive rewrite of the Hebrew Gospel hypothesis article I suppose, but it could also be a new article.

Purpose: I know a statement of purpose is not required by the mediators. However, if no one can agree on the purpose for being there or the definition of "success" the mediation will fail.

That's all I have. I would rather move forward quickly with something, even in rough form, to find out if the involved editors are even on the same planet on this issue. We may come to the conclusion that an attempt at mediation is pointless because half of them with sit on the sidelines with their arms crossed and disavow the whole process. Ignocrates (talk) 15:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I wish to add here that I fully support User:Ret.Prof's amendments and revisions to existing articles on the subject of the Gospel of Matthew and/or Hebrew Gospel. On a different talk page, I posted a link to Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's lecture on the original New Testament Mss. The gist of Dr. Erhman's message in that video, repeated time after time again, is that "the original New Testament MSS do not exist." This is crucial in understanding the current texts of our N.T. Gospels, and how they may have developed - either by way of translations (with scribal errors or omissions), or later recensions and/or interpolations, etc. etc. Ehrman's view on Papias is well-known, but his view can do little to cancel the understanding of great men like Jerome who wrote: "Matthew, also called Levi, an apostle after having been a publican, was the first to compose a gospel of Christ in Judea in Hebrew letters and words for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed. But who afterwards translated it into Greek is not sufficiently certain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilius the martyr so diligently collected." - Jerome (On Illustrious Men). These words, my friends, cannot be slighted by any scholar who is worth his salt. The secondary sources which support this view, no doubt, have taken this statement into consideration – albeit, the opinion is disputed by scholars. Although Aramaic is no longer a spoken language in Israel, it is still a literary language, read daily by Jews. Any scholar who knows Aramaic and who studies the Greek N.T. can tell you that, in the Greek evangelion (Gospel) of Matthew, there are telltale signs of a translation, such as when he translates verbatim and quite innocently Aramaic idioms. Idioms are never meant to be translated verbatim! The Greek writer also often gives a free rendering, or loose translation (paraphrase), of the vorlage (parent text) which he used to make his translation, just as we can see by Jesus’s quote of Hillel the elder in Matt. 7:12, and where we can compare his words with Hillel’s original words copied down in the Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 31a), and who actually said: “Whatsoever is hated by thee, refrain from doing the like of which to thy neighbour. This is the entire law.” (Aramaic: דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד. זו היא כל התורה כולה). While Tobit (4:16) who was earlier than Hillel repeats a similar theme, it is clear that Jesus was quoting from his older contemporary, Hillel, by virtue of his concluding with his exact same words. Obviously, some Aramaic words were misunderstood by the early Greek translator. For example, the words "Simon the zealot" (Aramaic: שמעון קניי) were misunderstood by the Greek translator as meaning "Simon the Canaanite." See: Matt. 10:4 - cf. Luke 6:15. Had the original copy of Matthew's Gospel been written initially in Greek, it would have been impossible for a copyist to write Canaanite (Greek: Kananaios) for a word whose vorlage (master copy) had written there in the original Greek, Ζηλωτής (= Zealot). The change is too radical. There is, however, a phonetic similarity between the Aramaic word for "zealot" and the word "Canaanite." Davidbena (talk) 17:20, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * David, PiCo is asking if you have any comments on a second draft of his request for mediation. That's all we care about right now, so that we can begin the mediation process. Thanks. Ignocrates (talk) 18:55, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Ignocrates, I have no further comments nor changes on a second draft of PiCo's request for mediation. Davidbena (talk) 00:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


 * @Ignocrates, I thought about dividing the editors into two groups as you suggest, but I think it won't work - it's just impossible to decide who's essential. Tgeorgescu, for example, opened the ANI case, but he hardly ever comments on Talk and doesn't seem to be an active editor. It was Eusebeus who suggested seeking a topic ban. In Ictu was exasperated on the Talk page but no more than you.
 * I don't quite follow your point about articles affected - in the first half you seem to be objecting to the adjective "hypothetical" applied to Hebrew Gospel hypothesis, but that's the title of the linked article. I've added a brief explanation of the hypothesis in case that's what you mean.
 * @Davidbena, thanks for joining in.
 * @Ret.Prof, so that we can move forward quickly, are you happy to file a request with the committee? PiCo (talk) 23:49, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * PiCo, let's go with your suggestion of Hebrew Gospel hypothesis as the alternate article. I think your list of 10 editors is fine too. Tally-ho! Ignocrates (talk) 00:42, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Good. Now @Ret.Prof? PiCo (talk) 00:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * This is has been one of the worst months I have ever spent at Wikipedia. The ANI experience is not a good one. I have been pounded to a bloody pulp and I am truly exhausted. I'm taking a break, but I will be back. - Ret.Prof (talk) 13:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Should Ret.Prof's "stepping back" from formal mediation be interpreted as a statement that he has no interest in mediation? If walking away from ANI without a scratch causes this much exhaustion, I wonder what arbitration will be like, where there will be no "stepping back". Ignocrates (talk) 15:06, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

PiCo, please leave this draft in preparation of a request for formal mediation accessible on your talk page. We may resume this discussion if/when Ret.Prof returns, and in any case, this attempt at mediation will need to be documented for a request for arbitration. Failing a resumption of mediation, I'm pondering whether to file a request for arbitration myself. I'm going to pose that question in a new section. Ignocrates (talk) 18:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


 * @Ignocrates, do not try to "interpret" my taking a break. I am an old guy who is tired of all the conflict. I need a rest. Nothing more! Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 19:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Move to arbitration?
If formal mediation fails to get off the ground because we can't even reach a consensus over whether to file a request for mediation, that still counts as a failed attempt at mediation in my opinion. The question is what, if anything, to do next. The only remaining options are do nothing, and carry on as we have for over 3 years, or file for arbitration and take our chances. Any thoughts about filing for arbitration and who should be the filing party? Please discuss. Thanks. Ignocrates (talk) 18:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I have put the question to Tom Paris. Ignocrates (talk) 19:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I noticed yesterday that you raised some concerns about mediation. (See above) Are you having second thoughts? Do you now feel a move to arbitration would be better? In any event, please do not read anything into the fact that I am taking a break. I am an old guy who needs a rest...that is all. Thanks for all the good work you do! Cheers! - Ret.Prof (talk) 20:00, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Based on your comments yesterday about "prevailing" and "enforcement", I'm concerned about a lack of good faith during the mediation process, assuming we even get there. Ignocrates (talk) 22:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Lack of good faith! Now you are being unfair. You brought up that stuff. Several of us had believed Formal Mediation would be binding. Now I am starting to get pissed off upset at your bullshit behaviour! Sorry for language. Probably a sign I need a break! However I feel I being unfairly harassed for taking a break after a terrible ordeal. - Ret.Prof (talk) 22:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You asked me what my concerns are, so I told you. There is nothing more to be inferred from my comments. Ignocrates (talk) 23:52, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Sometimes a break is just a break
Please do not go reading all sorts of stuff into my taking a break. I do not like conflict. I found the ANI brutal. I am exhausted and need a break from all the conflict. Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 19:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I let Tom Paris know about your decision to not engage in mediation in case he wants to take a different action at ANI. Ignocrates (talk) 19:25, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * @Ret.Prof, I don't intend to take this anywhere without your cooperation. I will say you "do not like conflict" (that's your comment on your own Talk page), and that you found the ANI brutal. And what are you doing? You're avoiding confrontation by running away, or "taking a break" as you put it. That's not what Gandhi did, or Mandela. And in a few months you'll be back at Gospel of Matthew, trying to reintroduce the same old stuff, and the same people will get annoyed again, but next time won't be like this time, because if you get them annoyed enough they'll force arbitration on you. If you thought the ANI was brutal, wait till you see arbitration! Mediation, in contrast, is gentle - everyone has to agree, nothing is imposed. Your only real option is to stop editing religious articles, or even stop editing Wikipedia.


 * Wikipedia isn't real. It's a community of perhaps a thousand people in total (yep, that about how many people make the bulk of edits, just a handful). They tend to be quasi-autistic, interacting online instead of in the real world, hiding behind funny names. I don't know why you want to be one of them, but you do seem to be congenitally timid. And yet you're a good person, with much in your life to be proud of. What you did in Africa touched lives. Can you not return to the real world, if not in Africa then in your own community? Give Wiki-bloody-pedia up, it ain't worth the heartache!PiCo (talk) 21:24, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind....even inspiring words. I have looked through my edits of the past two days and I don't think I have said or done anything to indicate I am backing away from mediation. Yes the ANI I found unsettling. I could have been banned. Not so with mediation. There really is nothing to fear! My decision to take a break is not about you or about mediation...it is about me. When I get tired, I can get snippy, make mistakes and look incompetent. Read nothing more into my break than that. I am not running away, but trying to prepare myself to be a good Wikipedia editor. Thanks again for the good will. Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 22:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I left a note on the ANI page as well. The case is not closed yet. An invitation to achieve a mediated solution is being served up on a silver platter. If we have to go through another round of this passive-aggressive behavior, it will be the final time. Ignocrates (talk) 22:10, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Tally-ho!
Tom has said it would be unfair for me to take a break. Therefore: Tally-ho! and away we go. Since this depends on good faith let us put our differences behind us and make this work. I have no problems with the good work you have done so far. I am happy to file a request with the committee. - Ret.Prof (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Please give me the final draft you want me to post. Also the link where it should be pasted. - Ret.Prof (talk) 01:11, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * PiCo asked you to review his second draft, so please do that if you haven't already. Leave comments if you think there should be changes. After you are satisfied with the latest version, he wants to run it by and go through the same process. At that point, once everyone is satisfied with the proposal, we would like you to file the request with the Mediation Committee. Ignocrates (talk) 01:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * It looks good to me! Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 02:04, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * That's great. Thanks for responding so promptly. I will leave it to to contact In ictu oculi, since he is coordinating everything, and we will give Mr. Eye-blink a few days to review it and make comments. Meanwhile, you can take a break and PiCo will contact you when we are ready to file a request. Ignocrates (talk) 02:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks LOL - Ret.Prof (talk) 13:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for doing this, I wonder if academic sources will hold the day. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Draft amended (all relevant threads for GospMatt Talk January added, 3 people taken off interested parties list) and pasted to RetProf's Talk page with request that he make any final edits and file request.PiCo (talk) 09:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Filing today
I will be filing a request for mediation today. Below is the proposed draft. Should anyone have any concern or like to be added, please contact me immediately. Note Please be reassured that I'll only attack the arguments, not editors and I will expect do the same for me. Mediation is based on good faith and good will. - Ret.Prof (talk) 13:42, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Request for Formal Mediation

Editors involved in this dispute
 * 1) Ret.Prof - filing party
 * 2) PiCo
 * 3) Tgeorgescu
 * 4) In ictu oculi
 * 5) Ignocrates
 * 6) Eusebeus
 * 7) Davidbena

Articles affected by this dispute


 * 1) Gospel of Matthew (main)
 * 2) Hebrew Gospel hypothesis (secondary)

Other attempts at resolving this dispute
 * 1) ANI, 3 February 2014 (link)
 * 2) Article talk page, 26 January 2014 (link)
 * 3) Article talk page, 30 January 2014 (link)
 * 4) Article talk page, 30 January 2014 (link)
 * 5) Article talk page, 31 January 2014 (link)
 * 6) Article talk page, 1 February 2014 (link)
 * 7) Fringe theories noticeboard, 2 August 2013 (link)

Issues to be mediated

(The Hebrew Gospel hypothesis is the idea that the Gospel of Matthew was first written in Hebrew or Aramaic and later translated into, or formed the basis of, the present Gospel) - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:03, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * To what extent, if at all, should the Hebrew Gospel hypothesis be represented in the Gospel of Matthew article?

Questions or comments on filing
Please do not change the draft. Leave comments here. - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I have not included User:Liz, User:Shirt58, User:Raquel Baranow,  User:Eric Kvaalen, etc. because I did not think they were interested. If I have missed anybody that should be a party to the mediation, please let me know immediately. - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:42, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't understand not including, since he was involved in so many of the discussions with Ret.Prof and Davidbena on the GoM talk page. He should be #8. I agree with leaving the rest off the list. Ignocrates (talk) 17:24, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I have asked him. - Ret.Prof (talk) 17:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note, Ret.Prof (And sorry, I have been busy the past couple days, and I have a number of things to respond to on here, so now I will). I'm not entirely sure what it means to be involved, but I checked the history and I've edited the GoM article on this very topic, and I was clearly involved with a least a couple recent discussions.  On the other hand, I don't believe I've ever reverted anyone, or been reverted by anyone on this "involved" list at the GoM or HGH articles.  I have no problem being listed either way, and would defer to others' judgement.  If I had to guess, I would guess that I am involved. -- Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 21:42, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * @ Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions), thanks for replying to RetProf. You mention what it means to be formally involved. I'm not sure either - perhaps you could ask an admin. But I think it would mean you could have the right to comment without the obligation. That would be good, as you know the literature. I want this to be a friendly, non-emotional debate, although I'll be arguing against RetProf. You would be an excellent go-to person for technical academic references, if you wish to be involved.PiCo (talk) 23:06, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * About to file. Hmmmm Am I reading this correctly. Atethnekos will not be formally named in my filing but he will be a go-to person for technical academic references. I will wait ten minutes, then proceed as I do not want to look as though I am delaying. Cheers - 23:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * If he's willing to be added to the filing, add him. What I mean is he shouldn't feel obliged to speak, but should have the right to do so, as he has much useful knowledge of the literature.PiCo (talk) 23:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Done! Filing has begun - Ret.Prof (talk)


 * "Involved" in the context of mediation means you were an active participant in the on-going talk page discussions and/or active in the editing process on the GoM article. It has nothing to do with being an "involved editor" in arbitration, which would mean in that context you were a participant in or a witness to conduct that could potentially result in sanctions. Ignocrates (talk) 18:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I am of the opinion that the source brought down by User:Ret.Prof, namely, William Lane Craig & J. P. Moreland (Ed), The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, John Wiley & Sons, 2009. p 602 is a valid source when taken together with other research, especially in the remark: “Virtually every piece of external evidence that we have from the first few centuries regarding the authorship and composition of the Gospels concurs that Matthew’s Gospel was the first written, that it was written in the Hebrew language and later translated, etc.,” and should be used as support of his views that the Greek Gospel of Matthew (evangelion) was autographed (penned) by Matthew, and that the original text was a prototypical Aramaic/Hebrew text - no longer extant, by which translations were made, and from which we have our current MSS of Matthew's Gospel. It would be, in my opinion,  tendentious editing (under the guise of rejecting what has been unjustly dubbed as "fringe") to deny that some scholars hold such views based on the evidence, mainly primary sources, left to us by the Church Fathers (Jerome, Eusebius, Irenaeus, Origen and Epiphanius), albeit, the view is still disputed amongst scholars. In keeping with Wikipedia's policy of "neutrality" when scholars disagree, it is therefore wholly right and fitting that this source be used as proof of such claims.Davidbena (talk) 19:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I think here, as in all books which are written for the sake of conveying a message, good editors ought to know when to decipher the good from the bad, and not to discard a book altogether simply because some points in it may have been spurious or inaccurate. I have yet to see a book where there are no inaccuracies.Davidbena (talk) 20:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Davidbena, I'm a little shocked to see you giving the McGrews any weight at all. As PiCo pointed out, they are not scholars in biblical studies. I guess that is why we are headed to mediation. Ignocrates (talk) 03:15, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I suspect that a book published by Blackwells and edited by William Lane Craig stands a good chance of being accepted as a reliable source. Nevertheless, I have serious doubts that the essay inside it by the McGrews would pass. As noted, one of them is a housewife and amateur metaphysician, then other is a professor of philosophy - neither has relevant qualifications/background to biblical studies. Also, the McGrews' article is all about proving that Jesus is God by means of the Christian scripture. This contradicts the very first essay in the book, which defines natural philosophy as "the practice of philosophically reflecting on the existence and nature of God independent of real or apparent divine revelation or scripture". I think it would be a mistake to bring up this essay at the mediation. Edwards would be fine. PiCo (talk) 05:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The key to understanding what I said here is this: "good editors ought to know when to decipher the good from the bad," seeing that some things written in his book stand on their own merit and cannot be discredited. Overall, I agree with you, Ignocrates, that we are in need of a more reliable source.Davidbena (talk) 16:42, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

James Edwards on Papias
Once again a good point. It is what NPOV is all about. James Edwards 2009 points out that Papias is supported by 75 ancient witnesses who testified to the fact that there was a Hebrew Gospel in circulation. Google Link Twelve of the Church Fathers testified that it was written by the Apostle Matthew. Google Link No ancient writer, either Christian or Non Christian, challenged these two facts. Google Link The first 124 pages is a detailed, scholarly and meticulous evaluation of the historical evidence. (See box below) The academic community, even those who disagree about his position on Luke and Q, were awed by these 124 pages! {| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #f2dfce; font-weight:normal; text-align:left;" | The first 124 pages is a detailed, scholarly and meticulous evaluation of the historical evidence.
 * style="text-align:center;" | Evidence adduced by 
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |

Earliest Paralipomena

 * Rabban Gamaliel (Date of Birth is unknown but scholars agree he was a contemporary of Jesus) Let us turn to the end of the Gospel, where it is written  "I came  not to take away from the Law of Moses, nor to add to the Law of Moses."


 * Ignatius (b. 43 A.D.) I know and believe that after His resurrection He lived in the flesh, for when He came to those disciples with Peter, Jesus said, “Take hold of me, handle me, and see that I am not a bodiless demon." And immediately they touched Him and believed.


 * Papias (b. 63 A.D.) Matthew collected the oral teachings of Jesus (logia) in a Hebrew dialect (en Hebraidi dialecto), and everyone  translated  (hermeneusen) them to the best of their ability... and the Gospel of the Hebrews sets forth another account of the woman accused of many sins before the Lord."
 * Pantaenus the Philosopher Pantaenus went to India where the Christian community had collected Matthew's writings. Indeed,  Bartholomew, one of the Apostles, had preached to Indian people, and left them Matthew's Gospel in Hebrew script, which they had preserved. After many good deeds, Pantaenus finally became the head of the School in Alexandria, and expounded the treasures of divine doctrine both orally and in writing.


 * Justin (b. 100 A.D.)  SEE the Paralipomena according to Justin Martyr BELOW.
 * Hegesippus (b. 110 A.D.)    He (Hegesippus) mentions also some things from the Syriac (Aramaic) Gospel of the Hebrews  concerning a Hebrew dialect, by which he evidences that he was converted from Judaism to Christianity.


 *  Irenaeus (b. 114 A.D.)   Matthew composed a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome and laying the foundations of the Church.
 *  Irenaeus  Those who are called Ebionites accept that God made the world. However their opinions with respect to the Lord are quite similar to those of Cerinthus and Carpocrates. They use only Matthew's gospel, and reject the Apostle Paul, calling him an apostate from the Law..
 *  Irenaeus  For the Ebionites, who use only Matthew's gospel, are convicted out of that very book as not holding right views about the Lord.


 * The Translator Symmachus As to these translators it should be stated that Symmachus was an Ebionite. But the heresy of the Ebionites, as it is called, asserts that Christ was the son of Joseph and Mary, considering him a mere man, and insists strongly on keeping the law in a Jewish manner, as we have seen already in this history. Commentaries of Symmachus are still extant in which he appears to support the doctrine laid down  using Matthew's Gospel.


 * Clement of Alexandria (b. 150 A.D.)  As it is also written in the Gospel of the Hebrews,  “He that is amazed will prevail, and he that prevails shall rest in peace.”
 * Clement of Alexandria  Matthew the Apostle constantly said, that "If the neighbour of an elect man sins, the elect man has sinned. For had he conducted himself as the Word prescribes, his neighbour also would have been filled with such reverence for the life he led as not to sin.


 * Hippolytus (b 170 A.D.) Bartholomew, again, preached to the people of India, to whom he also gave a copy of Matthew's Gospel.
 * Hippolytus Matthew, having composed a Gospel in Hebrew script, published it in Jerusalem, and slept in Hierae of Parthia.


 * Origen (b. 185 A.D.) The first Gospel was composed by Matthew, who was once a tax collector, but afterwards an Apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism, and published in Hebrew script.


 * Ephem the Syrian Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew script.


 * Eusebius (b. 260 A.D.) They (the Apostles) were led to write only under the pressure of necessity. Matthew, who had at first preached to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to other nations, committed the Gospel according to himself to writing in his native dialect. Therefore he supplied the written word to make up for the lack of his own presence to those from whom he was sent.
 * Eusebius Christ himself taught the reason for the divisions of souls that come to pass in houses, as we have found in the Gospel among the Jews in Hebrew script, in which He said, “I will choose for myself the best which my Father in Heaven has given me.”
 * Eusebius  But the Gospel composed in Hebrew script which has reached our hands turns the threat not against the man who had hid the money, but against him who has lived dissolutely – for it told of three: one wasted his master’s possessions with harlots and flute-girls, one multiplied his gains, and one hid the talent. Accordingly, one was accepted, one was only rebuked, and one was cast into prison.


 * Didymus the Blind (b. 313 A.D.) There are many people with two names. Scripture calls Matthew “Levi” in the Gospel of Luke, but they are not the same person. Rather Matthias who replaced Judas, and Levi are the same man with a double name. This is obvious in the Gospel of the Hebrews.


 * Epiphanius (b. 315 C.E. - Bishop of Salamis) The [Nazarenes] have Matthew's gospel complete in Hebrew. They have this preserved gospel as it was first written in Hebrew script.
 * Epiphanius  They only accept Matthew's gospel, and like the followers of Cerinthus and Merinthus, they use it alone. They call it the Gospel of the Hebrews, for in truth Matthew alone in the New Testament expounded and declared the Gospel in Hebrew script.
 * Epiphanius ...and Matthew's Gospel was actually composed in Hebrew script.
 * Epiphanius ...which they call the Hebrew Gospel is written the following, “There was a certain man named Jesus, about thirty years old, who chose us. He came to Capernaum and entered the house of Simon, surnamed Peter, and said, ‘As I passed by the Sea of Galilee, I chose John and James, sons of Zebedee, and Simon, and Andrew, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas Iscariot; and you Matthew, sitting at the tax office, I called and you followed me. You therefore, I want to be the Twelve Apostles, to symbolize and be a testimony unto Israel.’”
 * Epiphanius Matthew was the first to become an Evangelist and was directed to compose the first Gospel.
 * Epiphanius As I said, Matthew was privileged to be the first to compose a Gospel, and this was absolutely right because he had repented of many sins.
 * Epiphanius Matthew composed his gospel in Hebrew script.


 * Chrysostom Of Matthew, it is reported, that the Jews who believed came to him. They asked him to leave in writing those same things, which he had preached to them orally. Therefore Matthew composed the Gospel in Hebrew script.


 * Jerome ( b. 345 A.D.) In the Gospel of the Hebrews, which was composed in the Syro-Chaldaic dialect (Aramaic) but in Hebrew script, that the Nazarenes make use of at this day, (I mean the Gospel of the Apostles, or, as it is generally maintained, Matthew's gospel, a copy of which is in the library at Caesarea), the following narrative is given: “Behold the mother of the Lord and his brothers said to him, ‘John the Baptist baptizes for the forgiveness of sins. Let us go and be baptized by him.’ But Jesus said to them, ‘in what way have I sinned that I should go and be baptized by him? Unless perhaps, what I have just said is a sin of ignorance.’” And in the same volume, “‘If your brother sins against you in word, and makes amends, receive him seven times a day.’ Simon, His disciple, said to Him, ‘Seven times in a day!’ The Lord answered and said to him, ‘I say unto thee, until seventy times seven.’ ”
 * Jerome  Also, the Gospel entitled According to  the Hebrews, recently translated by me into Greek and Latin, which Origen often quotes, states, after the Resurrection of the Saviour: “Now the Lord, after he had given His grave clothes to the servant of the priest, appeared to James, for James had taken an oath that he would not eat bread from that hour on which he had drunk the cup of the Lord until he saw Him risen from the dead.” And a little further on the Lord says, “‘bring a table and bread.’” And immediately it is added, “He took bread and blessed and broke and gave it to James the Just and said to him, ‘My brother, eat your bread, for the Son of Man is risen from the dead.’”
 * Jerome Matthew, also called Levi, who used to be a tax collector and later an apostle, composed the Gospel of Christ, which was first published in Judea in Hebrew script for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed. This Gospel was afterwards translated into Greek (though by what author uncertain). Now this Hebrew original is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which Pamphilus the Martyr so diligently collated. I have also had the opportunity of having this volume transcribed for me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, Syria, who use it. It should be noted that wherever the Evangelist (whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord and Saviour) quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the language of the Septuagint but Hebrew Scriptures, from which he quotes these two sayings: "Out of Egypt have I called my Son"  and,  "hence he shall be called a Nazarene.”
 * Jerome In the Gospel which I have recently translated, he puts forth evidence respecting the person of Christ saying " But I have both seen him in the flesh after the resurrection and believe that it was he and when he came to Peter, and to those who were with Peter, he said to them, ' Behold, touch me and see how I am not a bodiless demon, and straightway they touched him and believed”
 * Jerome Pantaenus (sent to India by Demetrius, Bishop of Alexandria) found that Bartholomew, one of the Twelve Apostles, had preached the Advent of the Lord Jesus according to Matthew's Gospel composed in Hebrew script, which he brought back to Alexandria.
 * Jerome The first to compose a gospel was Matthew, the tax collector named Levi who published the Gospel in Judea in Hebrew script, chiefly for the Jews who believed in Jesus.
 * Jerome "In Bethlehem of Judea." This [Judea] is a clerical error. For I believe that it was first published by the Evangelist [Matthew] as we read in the original Hebrew script. (i. e., Micah V, 1) "Judah," not "Judea".
 * Jerome In the Gospel of the Hebrews, for “bread essential to existence,” I found instead of "supersubstantial" bread “Mahar”, which means “of tomorrow”; so the sense is: our bread for tomorrow, that is, of the future, give us this day.
 * Jerome In the Gospel which the Nazarenes and the Ebionites use which I have recently translated from Hebrew to Greek, and which most people call the authentic Gospel of Matthew, the man who had the withered hand is described as a mason who begged for help in the following words: “I was a stone-mason, earning a living with my hands. I beg you, Jesus, restore my health to me, so that I need not beg for my food in shame.”
 * Jerome In the Gospel that the Nazarenes use, for “son of Barachias” we find written “son of Jehoiada.”
 * Jerome In the Gospel called According to the Hebrews, Barabbas is interpreted as “son of their rabbi”, who was condemned for sedition and murder.
 * Jerome In the Gospel that we have often mentioned,  "the very great lintel of the Temple broke and fell into pieces".
 * Jerome  In the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew it states, ‘Give us this day our bread for tomorrow.'
 * Jerome  For when the Apostles thought Him to be a spirit, or in the words of the Gospel of the Hebrews, which the Nazarenes read, “A bodiless demon”
 * Jerome But in the Gospel which is composed in Hebrew script and which the Nazarenes read, the whole fountain of the Holy Spirit descends upon Him, for the Lord is Spirit and where the Spirit resides, there is liberty. Further in the Gospel which we have just mentioned we find the following written: “ And it came to pass, as the Lord ascended from the water, the whole fountain of the Holy Spirit descended upon Him and rested on Him saying, ‘My Son, in all the prophets was I waiting for You that You should come and I might rest in You. For You are My rest. You are My first begotten Son that prevails for eternity.’ ”
 * Jerome In the Gospel According to the Hebrews that the Nazarenes read, it says, “Even now my mother the Holy Spirit carried me away.” This should upset no one because “spirit” in Hebrew is feminine, while in our language it is masculine and in Greek it is neuter. In divinity there is no gender.
 * Jerome In the Gospel of the Hebrews that the Nazarenes read there belongs among the most serious sins, "He that has grieved the spirit of his brother."
 * Jerome As we also read in the Hebrew Gospel, the Lord says to his disciples: ”And never be joyful, except when you behold your brother with love.”
 * Jerome Whoever has read the Song of Songs knows that the Word of God is also the bridegroom of the soul. And whoever accepts the Gospel circulating under the title Gospel of the Hebrews, which we most recently translated, in which it is said by the Saviour, “Even now my mother, the Holy Spirit, carried me away by one of my hairs,” will not hesitate to say that the Word of God proceeds from the Spirit, and that the soul, which is the bride of the Word, has the Holy Spirit (which in Hebrew is feminine in gender, RUA).
 * Jerome In the Gospel composed in Hebrew script we read not that the curtain of the temple was torn, but that the astonishingly large lintel of the temple collapsed.
 * Pope Damasus (To Jerome) To his most beloved son Jerome:  DAMASUS, Bishop, sends greetings in the Lord. The orthodox Greek and Latin versions [of the Gospel of Matthew] put forth not only differing but mutually conflicting explanations of the saying 'Hosanna to the son of David'. I wish you would write...stating the true meaning of what is actually written in the Hebrew text.
 * Jerome (Reply) “Matthew, who composed his Gospel in Hebrew script, wrote, 'Osanna Barrama', which means 'Hosanna in the Highest.’”
 * Jerome I will now speak of the New Testament, which was undoubtedly composed in Greek, with the exception of the Apostle Matthew, who was the first in Judea to produce a Gospel of Christ in Hebrew script. We must confess that as we have it in our language, it is marked by discrepancies, and now that the stream is distributed into different channels we must go back to the fountainhead.

The Fayum Fragment
The Fayum Fragment is perhaps the oldest Gospel fragment known to scholars. Harnack believes that the fragment belongs to the Gospel of the Hebrews a suggestion made before him already by Chiapelli.


 * Fayum Fragment “Before I must depart, all of you . . . will be offended on this night according to the Scripture : ‘ I will smite the shepherd and the sheep shall be scattered’ ” but Peter said, “Although even all, yet not I,” and Jesus said, “Before the cock crow twice you shall deny me three times. ... “

The Oxyrhynchus Fragments
Oxyrhynchus is a city in Upper Egypt, located about 160 km south-southwest of Cairo. It is also an archaeological site, considered one of the most important ever discovered. For the past century, the area around Oxyrhynchus has been continually excavated, yielding an enormous collection of papyrus texts dating from the time of the Early Church. Under this heading we bring two gospel fragments; the first was published by Grenfell and Hunt in 1904; the second in 1908; the former was discovered in 1903; the latter in December 1905. Besides these gospel fragments we also bring the Oxyrhynchus Sayings or Logia. These were found in 1897 and 1903. Oxyrhynchus 840, is a single, small vellum parchment leaf with 45 lines of text. It probably dates from before 200, but no more is determinable from this evidence. The fragment begins with a warning to an evildoer who plans ahead, but who does not take the next life into account. There follows sections of a narrative unparalleled in any other known gospel tradition. Jesus is called Savior, which is rare in the New Testament, but not unparalleled. The absence of connections in this piece to special interests within the early Christian community, as well as the presence of both numerous semitisms and an informed view on Temple matters lead naturally to a Hebrew Gospel link. Further, it is likely that the original document was composed at least by the early 2nd century, since it shares none of the uncontrolled fantasies about Jesus or the disciples that 2nd and 3rd century apocryphal accounts typically exhibit. Oxyrhynchus 1224 consists of two small papyrus fragments. They contain 12 logia, each about a sentence. Two of the longer ones are parallel to Mark 2:17 and Luke 9:50, but the differences in phrasing show they are textually independent of the Gospels. A precise date for composition is unknown; 50 A.D. is possible and some scholars have argued that the preservation of the Hebrew Gospel in Oxyrhynchus in Middle Egypt evinces the breadth of its dissemination in early Christianity. Oxyrhynchus 654 and other fragments show a link between the Hebrew Gospel and the Gospel of Thomas. (The relationship of the Hebrew Gospel to Thomas becomes more clear when it is understood that that Gospel according to the Hebrews, under various names, such as the Gospel according to Peter, according to the Apostles, the Nazarenes, Ebionites, Egyptians, etc., with modifications certainly, but substantially the same work, was circulated very widely throughout the early Church.)


 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus taught saying, “Do not worry all day or all night about your food, wondering what you will eat, or your clothes, wondering what you will wear. You are worth far more than the lilies that grow but do not spin. If you have one garment, what do you lack? Who can add years to your life? He, Himself will provide you with clothing!”
 * His disciples said unto Him : " When will you be manifest to us, and when shall we see you?"
 * He replied "When you shall be stripped and not be ashamed. The key of knowledge you hid; you entered not in yourselves and to them that were entering in you opened not."


 * Oxy Fragment Jesus said, "The Pharisee plans in advance, before doing wrong, he slyly reasons everything out. Be careful that you do not end up suffering the same fate as them. For the wicked of humanity receive retribution not only among the living, but they will also undergo punishment and much suffering later."


 * Leading them, he went into the place of purification itself and walked about in the Temple. Then Levi, a High Priest of the Pharisees came toward them and said to the Savior, "Who permitted you to wander in this place of purification and to see these holy vessels, even though you have not bathed and the feet of your disciples are unwashed? And now that you have defiled it, you walk around in this pure area of the Temple where only a man who has bathed and changed his clothes can walk, and even such a person does not dare to look upon these holy vessels."


 * Standing nearby with his disciples, the Savior replied, "Since you are here in the Temple too, are you clean?"


 * The Pharisee answered him saying, "I am clean, for I bathed in the Pool of David. I went down into the pool by one set of stairs and came back up by another. Then I dressed in white clothes and they were clean. Only then did I come and look at these holy vessels."


 * And the Savior said to him, "Woe to you blind guides who cannot see! You have washed in the running waters that dogs and swine are cast into day and night. And when you washed yourself, you scrubbed the outer layer of skin, the layer of skin that whores and flute-girls anoint with oil and wash and wipe and beautify for the lust of men; but within they are full of scorpions and all wickedness. But I and my disciples, who you say have not bathed, have been dipped in the waters of eternal life which come from . . . But woe unto the . ..


 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus continued to teach saying, “Then and only then will you will see more clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus taught saying, “If you do not fast, you will not find the Kingdom of Heaven. And if you do not remember the Sabbath Day and keep it holy, you shall never see your Heavenly Father.”
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus said: "I stood in the midst of the world, and in the flesh was I seen by the multitudes, and I found them drunken, and found none thirsty among them. My soul grieves over the plight of the sons of men, for their hearts are blind and do not see their poverty."
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus said: "Wherever there are two, they are not without God's presence; and where there is one only, I say, I am with him."
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus taught saying, “Just as a doctor does not treat his own, neither is a prophet acceptable in his own land.”
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus taught saying, “A city on a hill shall neither fall nor be hidden.”
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus said: "Thou hearest with one ear but the other thou hast closed."
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus taught saying, “He who seeks will find, he who finds will be surprised. He that is amazed will prevail, and he that prevails shall rest in peace.” (See Above - Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis [Miscellanies] 2.9.45 re the Hebrew Gospel)
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus said: "Who are they that draw you to the Kingdom? The Kingdom is in Heaven but they that are on Earth and the birds of the heaven and every creature that is under the earth and in Hades and the fishes of the sea, these are they that draw you to it. The Kingdom of Heaven is within you. Only he who knows himself can find it, for if you shall truly know yourselves, you are the sons and daughters of the Father Almighty, and ye shall know yourselves to be in the city of God, and you are the city."
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus taught saying, “A man will not hesitate to inquire boldly about the seasons, prating of the place of glory but you shall hold your peace, for many who are first shall be last, and those who are last shall be first. However, only a few truly find the Kingdom of Heaven.”
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus taught saying, “Everything that is not obvious, indeed all that is hidden from you shall be revealed. In truth, there is nothing closed that will not be revealed, nor is there anything which is buried, which will not be uncovered.”
 * Oxy Fragment  His disciples question Him and said, "How shall we fast? And how shall we pray? And how are we to give alms? And of such duties what are we to observe?" Jesus said, "See that you do not lose your reward. Do nothing save the things that belong to the truth, for if you do these, you shall know a hidden mystery.
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus taught saying, “Pray for those who persecute you.”
 * Oxy Fragment  Jesus taught saying, “He who is against you is for you and he who is far from you will draw near tomorrow.”
 * Oxy Fragment  When the Rabbis and Pharisees and priests saw Him, they were greatly upset, for he reclined with sinners. Overhearing them, Jesus explained, “The healthy have no need of a doctor”.



The Paralipomena according to Justin Martyr
Arthur Lillie argues that Justin Martyr is quoting from the  Hebrew Gospel. Lillie points out that although Justin mentions other books of the Bible by name, he never mentions the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Indeed, Justin states that he is citing the "Memoirs of the Apostles," the alternative title for Matthew's Hebrew Gospel. Dr. Gilles goes one step further, arguing that the wording shows that Justin cannot be quoting from the Canonical Gospels but rather a single work, probably Matthew's Hebrew Gospel. This position has been challenged by Nicholson and others.
 * Justin (b. 100 A.D.) When Jesus went down into the water, fire was kindled above the Jordan, and when He came up from the water, the Holy Spirit came upon Him. "You are my Son: this day I have begotten you" And later the voice spoke to him, saying, “You are My Son, today I have begotten You”. This is recorded in the Memoirs of the Apostles.
 * Justin Be kind and merciful even as your Heavenly Father is merciful.
 * Justin And our Lord Jesus Christ said: "In whatsoever things I may find you, in this will I also judge you."
 * Justin "To him that strikes you on the one cheek offer also the other, and him that takes away your cloak or coat forbid not. And whosoever shall be angry shall be in danger of the fire. And everyone that makes you go with him a mile, follow him two. And let your good works shine before men, that they, seeing them, may glorify your Father who is in Heaven.
 * Justin "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. For the Heavenly Father desires rather the repentance of the sinner rather than his punishment."
 * Justin  "Give to him who asks, and from him that would borrow, turn not away. For if you lend to them of whom you hope to receive, what good thing do you do? Even the tax collectors do this. Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust corrupt and where thieves break through, but lay up for yourself treasure in Heaven, where neither moth nor rust corrupts. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world and lose his own soul? And what shall a man give in exchange for it? Lay up, therefore, treasure in Heaven, where neither moth nor rust corrupts.
 * Justin  "You shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy strength, and thy neighbor as thyself.
 * Justin "If you love them that love you, what good thing do you do? For even the sexually immoral do this. But I say to you, pray for your enemies, and love them that hate you, and bless them that curse you, and pray for them that spitefully use you.
 * Justin "The New Law wishes you to Sabbatize always.
 * Justin "If your right eye offend you, cut it out; for it is better for you to enter the Kingdom of Heaven with one eye than having two eyes to be cast into everlasting fire.
 * Justin  "He who looks on a woman lustfully commits adultery with her in his heart before God.
 * Justin "What he wishes for himself, he wishes also for his neighbor,"
 * Justin "Many shall come in my name, clothed outwardly in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. And there shall be schisms and heresies."
 * Justin "This great wisdom of the Almighty, Maker of All shall be hidden from you.
 * Justin "They shall come from the East and from the West and shall sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdom of Heaven but the Sons of the Kingdom shall be cast out into the outer darkness.
 * Justin  "Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, but he that does the will of my Father who is in Heaven. For whosoever hears me and does my sayings, hears him that sent me. And many will say to me, Lord, Lord, have we not eaten and drunk in your name and done wonders? And then will I say to them, 'Depart from me, you workers of iniquity.’ Then there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth, when the righteous shall shine like the sun, and the wicked are sent into everlasting fire. For many shall come in my name clothed outwardly in sheep's clothing, but inwardly being ravening wolves, not bringing forth good fruit, and being hewn down and cast into the fire.
 * Justin Wishing to show them this also, that it is not impossible for flesh to ascend into Heaven as He had said, "that our dwelling-place is in Heaven." He was taken up into Heaven while they beheld, as He was in the flesh.

The Sinful Woman
This story has long been the subject of scholarly debate. Although it is part of the Gospel of John, most literary critics agree that it was not originally found there. Papias states that it is from the Hebrew Gospel.
 * Sinful Woman A woman condemned for sinful behavior was being sent to the customary place for stoning. When the Savior realized elders were making ready to stone her, he said to them, "Whoever has not sinned, let him cast the first stone. Whoever believes himself not to have sinned, let him take up a stone and smite her. No one dared for they knew themselves well and feared they may have to give account.

Early MSS transcripts
The most ancient manuscripts of Matthew's Gospel end with the following citation: "Here ends the copy of the Gospel of the apostle Matthew. He wrote it in the land of Palestine, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, in the Hebrew language, eight years after the bodily ascension of Jesus the Messiah into Heaven, in the first year of the reign of Claudius Caesar, Emperor of Rome." Also Theophylact and Euthymius do also assert this Gospel to have been written in the eighth year after Christ's Ascension.

Later Paralipomena
This category of Hebrew Paralipomena tends to be later and less reliable.
 * Islamic Hadith Uzza, who, during the Pre-Islamic Period became a Christian used to write with Hebrew script. He would copy from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write.
 * Cyril “The doctrine of the Jews cannot be joined to the doctrine of Christ. What connection can there be between the agreement of the Gospel of the Hebrews and the agreement of the Holy Gospels?”


 * Marius Mercator The followers of Ebion receive only the Gospel according to the Hebrews, they call the Apostle (Paul) an apostate . . .they make use of the Gospel according to Matthew alone.


 * Venerable Bede Here it must be noted that the ‘’Gospel according to the Hebrews’’, as it is called, is not to be reckoned among apocryphal but among ecclesiastical histories; for it seemed good even to the translator of Holy Scripture himself, Jerome to cite many testimonies from it, and to translate it into the Latin and Greek language.


 * Sedulius Scottus Then James, the son of Alphaeus, vowed not to eat bread from the table of the Lord until he saw Christ rising again, as is read in the Gospel of the Hebrews.
 * Sedulius Scottus In the Gospel of the Hebrews instead of "supernatural bread" I found moar, which means "tomorrow's bread".


 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel reads here: “If you be in My heart and do not the will of My Father who is in Heaven, I will cast you away from My heart.”
 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel has “the Kingdom of Heaven is plundered”.
 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel states, “I am grateful to you”.
 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel does not have, “three days and three nights”.
 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel has, “Corban is what you should gain from us”.
 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel has, “And he delivered unto them armed men, to sit near the cave and guard it day and night”.
 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel has not “to the Holy City,” rather “to Jerusalem”.
 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel states “son of John” for “Bar-Jona”.
 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel states immediately after the seventy times seven: “For in the prophets, after they were anointed with the Holy Spirit, there was found in them sinful speech.”
 * MarNote The Hebrew Gospel has, “And he denied and swore and cursed”.

Simply put the position of Papias that, "Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi and one of his followers, Matthew wrote an account about him in the local dialect." is supported by considerable evidence. - Ret.Prof (talk) 23:15, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * }
 * }
 * }
 * @Ret.Prof, these are irrelevant to the mediation. What you need to produce is at least one modern scholar who thinks that Papias was talking about a Hebrew version of Greek Matthew. Edwards doesn't - he thinks the apostle Matthew wrote a Hebrew gospel that's connected to Luke, and that Greek Matthew is by someone entirely different and got its name by mistake. PiCo (talk) 02:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gospel of Mark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Papias (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Request for mediation accepted

 * Yes, I would like to be a party to the mediation. StAnselm (talk) 03:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Content of Mark Template
Done. It was shockingly easy so I'll goto the other gospels and check to see if they need one. Ckruschke (talk) 12:45, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Ckruschke
 * I left a note here. Ignocrates (talk) 02:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Btw, see the new article (Nov. 2013) on the Multi-source hypothesis, which is highly relevant for GMk. The diagram is OR, but it is a close approximation of the conjectures of Philippe Rolland and Delbert Burkett. Fwiw (i.e. nothing), I agree with the idea behind these related conjectures. Imo, it would be more correct to think of the canonical Gospel of Mark as a harmony of "Marks". That aspect comes across very clearly in these conjectures. Ignocrates (talk) 15:50, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gospel of Mark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vaticanus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Why have you blanked your page?
Why have you blanked your page? I hope I did not cause offense. It is true we have a serious disagreement about the material from Casey 2014, but your input at the informal mediation is important. Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:46, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * @Ret.Prof, please don't read anything into my blanking this page, it was just to remove the Retired tag. On other matters, perhaps my style of writing comes across as rather unsympathetic, but it's not intended that way: I don't deliberately set out to upset people (well, not often). PiCo (talk) 14:55, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Good to hear. By the way the FCC is on of my favorite hangouts! Next time I am in town I will take you out to dinner to show you there are no hard feelings - Ret.Prof (talk) 15:00, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I had no idea you knew or visited Cambodia! I'll be here till early November - I'm researching Cambodian beliefs and their interrelationship with society. It would be nice to meet and talk. PiCo (talk) 15:06, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Small world ... years since I have been in Cambodia, but I have very fond memories of the FCC and the geckos running up and down the walls! --Rbreen (talk) 21:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Well well. We should organise a get-together one of these years. PiCo (talk) 06:57, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration
See WP:NOTADVOCATE, WP:BATTLE, WP:RGW, WP:DISRUPTSIGNS, and WP:IDHT for some arguments to build on in the evidence phase of arbitration. Policy pages carry the greatest weight by far. The other pages can be used to emphasize policy. ArbCom will expect to see clear evidence of disruption in the form of diffs and a remedy to prevent future disruption. I would have an WP:RFC or go to WP:NPOVN (or both) before arbitration. The arbs will want to see multiple attempts at dispute resolution before they agree to take a case, and it is better to be the one initiating them. Ignocrates (talk) 14:47, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * @Ignocrates: Thanks, but I used the wrong word, I should have said mediation. I'm certainly not suggesting arbitration at this stage. PiCo (talk) 03:50, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is at DRN:Gospel of Matthew. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Guy Macon (talk) 03:47, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=627124777 your edit] to Son of man may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:44, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * gospel of John]], when the crowd asks what Jesus means by the expression).{{sfn}Hurtado|2005|p=292} This use of the definite article ("the son of man" rather than "son of man") is not attested

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=627154596 your edit] to Son of man may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:30, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * to the four gospels) is far from settled, and no consensus seems likely.{sfn|Hurtado|2005|p=290}

Book of Elchasai
Hello PiCo, I just created my first article ever on Wikipedia: Book of Elchasai, and I would like for you to expand this article as much as possible. I used this site as a reference: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/elchasai.html, but within the site contains many references for sourcing by scholars and church fathers. Perhaps this may give you some interest as this article is around your editing field -- Thnx & Cheers -- JudeccaXIII (talk) 17:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

re Ret.Prof
Ret.Prof has been talking about himself in the first person plural on my talk page. Sorry to bother you with this, but maybe you could find out what's going on with him. He and I are currently incommunicado, and that's probably just as well for now. Ignocrates (talk) 00:52, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I also thought you should be aware of this. It's creepy, no? Ignocrates (talk) 01:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

No further messages please. And try to remember, behind every funny user-name there's a real and quite possibly vulnerable human being.

Halloween cheer!


Happy Halloween!

Hello PiCo: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!   –  JudeccaXIII (talk) 18:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC) Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Disambiguation link notification for December 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chronology of the Bible, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Asa, Paul and Jubilee. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits to Acts of the Apostles
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you removed some content from Acts of the Apostles without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 11:22, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe you didn't, but something in your computer did. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 11:51, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Fine, thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 12:01, 18 December 2014 (UTC)