Talk:Ebionites: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 16:58, 17 June 2024 editLoremaster (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers55,212 edits →No primary sources Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 11:49, 28 June 2024 edit undoLoremaster (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers55,212 editsm →Robert Eisenman
(8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 64:		Line 64:
	\|leading_zeros=0		\|leading_zeros=0
	\|indexhere=yes}}		\|indexhere=yes}}
	{{Broken anchors\|links=
	* <nowiki>]</nowiki> Anchor ] links to a specific web page: ]. The anchor (#Persecution of Christians by Christians) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"Persecution of Christians by Christians","appear":{"revid":5105639,"parentid":5084650,"timestamp":"2004-08-08T19:12:37Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":339712202,"parentid":339709573,"timestamp":"2010-01-24T12:14:42Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"very_different":false,"rename_to":"Persecution of Christians in Ottoman Empire"} -->
	}}

	== This article has an unclear citation style ==		== This article has an unclear citation style ==

	I suggest that all contributors to the ] article follow the example of the ] article when it comes to notes, citations and sources from now on. So we have a lot of work to do. :) —-] (]) 15:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)		I suggest that all contributors to the ] article follow the example of the ] article when it comes to notes, citations and sources from now on. So we have a lot of work to do. —-] (]) 15:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

	== ~~Controversial?~~ ==		== No primary sources ==

		⚫	Here we have an article about a "group of Christians" that are devoid of any primary sources. I notice one contributor is obsessed with the "bloodline theory of Jesus Christ" as found in the book "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" even though it had nothing to do with Pierre Plantard and the Priory of Sion, and Plantard distanced himself from the nonsense in late 1982 on a French radio programme. Also Plantard actively criticised the book from 1989 onwards. The subject matter has been dead in France for ages. Plantard was a spent force in 1989 when his latest manifestation of the Priory of Sion was responsible for the final demise of Pierre Plantard, who died in 2000. It's only the British people that ever became obsessed with "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail". Plantard himself had no interest in the "Jesus Bloodline" from the get-go because he was an old-fashioned French Roman Catholic, as can be gleaned from his works and writings. ] (]) 07:47, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
	Why is the topic of “He was not of one faith” so controversial? ] (]) 13:39, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

			:As the Misplaced Pages article on the ] clearly states in the introduction section: "Since historical records by the Ebionites are scarce, fragmentary and disputed, much of what is known or conjectured about them derives from the polemics of their Gentile Christian opponents, specifically the Church Fathers." This fact has never prevented numerous respected secular and religious encyclopedias of having entries on the subject of Ebionites.
	:Hello Hzea,

		⚫	:As I suggested 4 years ago, the Ebionites article has an unclear citation style. We should all focus on improving it, which means, among other things, making proper use of primary sources (the Church Fathers and the Jewish-Christian gospels) when and where needed.
	:Thank you for your contributions to the Ebionites page on Misplaced Pages. Your recent edits have been reversed due to a few issues: the sentences were written in an idiosyncratic manner, didn't fit properly with the surrounding content, or included redundant information.

		⚫	:That being said, you are the one who is obsessed with ] since no one here currently believes in the Priory of Sion myth of Pierre Plantard nor the conspiracy theories of the authors of <i>The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail</i>. I've been watching over the ] article for years to ensure, among other things, that readers know that the Priory of Sion has been thoroughly debunked as a hoax.
	:For example, you wrote: "But the followers of the Ebionites were not of one faith. Some of them believed that Christ was a different personality from Jesus of Nazareth."

			:However, what you seem to fail to understand is that the uncontroversial notion that James the Just is the biological brother (or half-brother) of Jesus is NOT related to unfounded speculation of a Jesus bloodline from Mary Magdalene. (For the record, I personally think that Jesus didn't father any biological children due to a vow of celibacy because of his belief that marriage would cease to exist in the Kingdom of God on Earth, and his alleged promotion of ]s as role models.)
	:Firstly, it's unnecessary to say "followers of the Ebionites" when "Ebionites" suffices. Secondly, the introduction section of the Ebionites article focuses on the beliefs that many (but not all) Ebionites seem to have shared. It's more appropriate to discuss their divergent beliefs in another section of the article, which is already the case if you look at the subsection "Judaism, Gnosticism and Essenism" in the "Views and Practices" section.

		⚫	:Bottom line: Please avoid engaging in unprovoked and absurd personal attacks against contributors to the Ebionites article. --] (]) 14:14, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
	:Additionally, you wrote: "some of them denied the crucifixion of Christ"

			::FYI: You'll be happy to know that the mention of ″relatives of Jesus″ (which could be misinterpreted as promoting the hypothesis of Jesus bloodline from Mary Magdalene) has now been deleted from the Ebionites article. --] (]) 09:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
	:Beyond the grammatical issues (e.g., missing capital "S" for "some" and missing period at the end), it would be more appropriate to include this notion in the subsection "Judaism, Gnosticism and Essenism" within the "Views and Practices" section of the article.

	:Thank you for understanding and for your efforts to improve the article.

	:Best regards,

	—] (]) 15:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

	::What about adding a page titled “The Development of Belief”?This is a page with this title that is present on many pages that talk about sects and I know several sources that mentioned the development of the Ebionite doctrine

	::And because there are websites that talk about the Ebionite, you find conflicting information because their belief changed over time. For example, website says that they says Jesus is the son of God, and another website says that they says Jesus is not the son of God. So I think that it is a good idea, especially since there are people who ask what their belief actually is, Because of this problem. ] (]) 18:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
	:::Your suggestion of creating a new section isn't necessary since I've now substantially revised the content within the introduction section of the Ebionites article in order to resolve this dispute. —] (]) 01:04, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
	:::P.S. Since there is a lot of misinformation and disinformation on the Internet, we must verify if the source you want to use for content you want to add to the Ebionites article is considered a ]. ] (]) 01:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
	::::Ok, the important thing is that you told me to add it in the subsection “Judaism, Gnosticism, and Esseneism.” ? ] (]) 07:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
	:::::Yes, but only if we can determine that your source is reliable and can be read in English to make sure it says what you claim it says. ] (]) 10:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
	::::::My source is St. Takla Haymanout Coptic Orthodox Website. in this page. The website can make it in English
	::::::https://st-takla.org/books/helmy-elkommos/cross/look-alike-origins.html ] (]) 10:46, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
	:::::::Whether or not it can be translated in English, an Arabic text on the website of a church is obviously not a reliable source... Please find an essay/book originally written in English by a respected scholar or, at the very least, an entry in a respected secular encyclopedia. ] (]) 15:14, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
	:::::::By the way, your source is mistaken. Irenaeus, in his work ''Against Heresies'', primarily targeted the teachings and beliefs of various Gnostic sects. The specific passage your source cited refers to the beliefs of a Gnostic sect that followed the teachings of Basilides. Basilides was an early Christian Gnostic religious teacher in Alexandria, Egypt, who taught from about 117 to 138 AD.
	:::::::The sect of Basilides held some quite distinctive views on the nature of Jesus' crucifixion. They believed that Jesus was not the one who was crucified on the cross. Instead, Simon of Cyrene, the man compelled by the Romans to carry Jesus' cross as described in the Synoptic Gospels, was transformed to appear as Jesus, and it was Simon who was crucified in Jesus' place. Meanwhile, Jesus appeared as Simon and stood by, observing the crucifixion. According to Basilides, Jesus was an immaterial being or phantasm who could change form at will, thus escaping physical suffering and death. This belief is a reflection of the Gnostic view that the material world is inherently corrupt and that the divine is entirely spiritual and thus not subject to physical suffering.
	:::::::Irenaeus strongly opposed these teachings, arguing for the very real incarnation and physical suffering of Jesus as central to Christian salvation doctrine. He believed that by denying the real crucifixion and suffering of Jesus, the Gnostics undermined the entire Christian message of redemption and salvation through Jesus' sacrifice.
	:::::::<b>However, unlike the Gnostics, the Ebionites never denied the suffering and crucifixion of Jesus. They simply did not view it as an atoning sacrifice for the sins of mankind.</b> ] (]) 17:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

	== No primary sources ==

⚫	Here we have an article about a "group of Christians" that are devoid of any primary sources. I notice one contributor is obsessed with the "bloodline theory of Jesus Christ" as found in the book "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" even though it had nothing to do with Pierre Plantard and the Priory of Sion, and Plantard distanced himself from the nonsense in late 1982 on a French radio programme. Also Plantard actively criticised the book from 1989 onwards. The subject matter has been dead in France for ages. Plantard was a spent force in 1989 when his latest manifestation of the Priory of Sion was responsible for the final demise of Pierre Plantard, who died in 2000. It's only the British people that ever became obsessed with "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail". Plantard himself had no interest in the "Jesus Bloodline" from the get-go because he was an old-fashioned French Roman Catholic, as can be gleaned from his works and writings. ] (]) 07:47, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

⚫	:As I suggested 4 years ago, the ] article has an unclear citation style. We should all focus on improving it, which means, among other things, making proper use of primary sources as ~~much~~ as ~~possible~~.
⚫	:That being said, you ~~seem~~ obsessed with ~~beating~~ dead ~~horses~~ since no one here currently believes in the Priory of Sion myth of Pierre Plantard nor the conspiracy theories of the authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. I've been watching over the ] article for years to ensure, among other things, that readers know that the Priory of Sion has been thoroughly debunked as a hoax. However, what you seem to fail to understand is that the uncontroversial notion that James the Just is the biological brother (or half-brother) of Jesus is NOT related to unfounded speculation of a Jesus bloodline from Mary Magdalene. (For the record, I personally think that Jesud had taken a vow of celibacy, and therefore didn't father any biological children, because of his belief that mariage would cease to exist in the Kingdom of God on Earth and his alledged promotion of eunuchs as role models.)
⚫	:Bottom line: Please avoid engaging in unprovoked and absurd personal attacks against contributors to the Ebionites article. --] (]) 14:14, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

	== Robert Eisenman ==		== Robert Eisenman ==
Line 121:		Line 89:
	Fringe. His works on The Dead Sea Scrolls are rightfully rejected. He is a Muslim by faith. ] (]) 07:52, 17 June 2024 (UTC)		Fringe. His works on The Dead Sea Scrolls are rightfully rejected. He is a Muslim by faith. ] (]) 07:52, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

	:I hope you are not suggesting that someone's Muslim faith automatically prevents him or her from doing good scholarship on Christianity... That being said, although I'm not a fan of Robert Eisenman's works, we cannot deny or suppress the fact that he is among the few modern scholars who have written on the subject of Ebionites. ~~Furthermore~~, we do not discuss the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Ebionites ~~article~~.		:I hope you are not suggesting that someone's Muslim faith (or Jewish faith or liberal Christian faith or lack of faith) automatically prevents him or her from doing good scholarship on Christianity... That being said, although I'm not a fan of Robert Eisenman's works, we cannot deny or suppress the fact that he is among the few modern scholars who have written on the subject of Ebionites. Furthemore, although one of Eisenman's book is used as a source, the article does not discuss the Dead Sea Scrolls nor link them to the Ebionites. --] (]) 14:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
	:--] (]) 14:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 11:49, 28 June 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ebionites article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Ebionites is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 9, 2007.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 13, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
December 22, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
December 24, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
April 12, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
October 24, 2007	Featured article review	Demoted
Current status: Former featured article

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Religion: Interfaith Mid‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Judaism Low‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Jewish history Mid‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Veganism and Vegetarianism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11

Topic specific archives

Peer Review Archive
Spiritual Ebionite Archive
Dispute Archive

Sources

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

This article has an unclear citation style

I suggest that all contributors to the Ebionites article follow the example of the Gospel of the Ebionites article when it comes to notes, citations and sources from now on. So we have a lot of work to do. —-Loremaster (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

No primary sources

Here we have an article about a "group of Christians" that are devoid of any primary sources. I notice one contributor is obsessed with the "bloodline theory of Jesus Christ" as found in the book "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" even though it had nothing to do with Pierre Plantard and the Priory of Sion, and Plantard distanced himself from the nonsense in late 1982 on a French radio programme. Also Plantard actively criticised the book from 1989 onwards. The subject matter has been dead in France for ages. Plantard was a spent force in 1989 when his latest manifestation of the Priory of Sion was responsible for the final demise of Pierre Plantard, who died in 2000. It's only the British people that ever became obsessed with "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail". Plantard himself had no interest in the "Jesus Bloodline" from the get-go because he was an old-fashioned French Roman Catholic, as can be gleaned from his works and writings. Octavius88 (talk) 07:47, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

As the Misplaced Pages article on the Ebionites clearly states in the introduction section: "Since historical records by the Ebionites are scarce, fragmentary and disputed, much of what is known or conjectured about them derives from the polemics of their Gentile Christian opponents, specifically the Church Fathers." This fact has never prevented numerous respected secular and religious encyclopedias of having entries on the subject of Ebionites.

As I suggested 4 years ago, the Ebionites article has an unclear citation style. We should all focus on improving it, which means, among other things, making proper use of primary sources (the Church Fathers and the Jewish-Christian gospels) when and where needed.

That being said, you are the one who is obsessed with flogging a dead horse since no one here currently believes in the Priory of Sion myth of Pierre Plantard nor the conspiracy theories of the authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. I've been watching over the Priory of Sion article for years to ensure, among other things, that readers know that the Priory of Sion has been thoroughly debunked as a hoax.

However, what you seem to fail to understand is that the uncontroversial notion that James the Just is the biological brother (or half-brother) of Jesus is NOT related to unfounded speculation of a Jesus bloodline from Mary Magdalene. (For the record, I personally think that Jesus didn't father any biological children due to a vow of celibacy because of his belief that marriage would cease to exist in the Kingdom of God on Earth, and his alleged promotion of eunuchs as role models.)

Bottom line: Please avoid engaging in unprovoked and absurd personal attacks against contributors to the Ebionites article. --Loremaster (talk) 14:14, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

FYI: You'll be happy to know that the mention of ″relatives of Jesus″ (which could be misinterpreted as promoting the hypothesis of Jesus bloodline from Mary Magdalene) has now been deleted from the Ebionites article. --Loremaster (talk) 09:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Robert Eisenman

Fringe. His works on The Dead Sea Scrolls are rightfully rejected. He is a Muslim by faith. Octavius88 (talk) 07:52, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I hope you are not suggesting that someone's Muslim faith (or Jewish faith or liberal Christian faith or lack of faith) automatically prevents him or her from doing good scholarship on Christianity... That being said, although I'm not a fan of Robert Eisenman's works, we cannot deny or suppress the fact that he is among the few modern scholars who have written on the subject of Ebionites. Furthemore, although one of Eisenman's book is used as a source, the article does not discuss the Dead Sea Scrolls nor link them to the Ebionites. --Loremaster (talk) 14:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Categories: