Online Encyclopedia
Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
ERATURE
Online EncyclopediaEncyclopedia Home :: EMS-EUD
del.icio.us it!
|
ERATURE . (b) Legendary. (d) Didactic. See also:Book of See also:Baruch (see Sirach (see EccLEsIAs- BARUCH). TICUS). See also:Judith. See also:Tobit. ii. Hellenistic Jewish Literature: See also:Historical and Legendary. Didactic. Additions to See also:Daniel (q.v.), Book of See also:Wisdom (see W1s- , See also:Esther (q.v.). DOM, BOOK OF.) See also:Epistle of See also:Jeremy (q.v.). 2 See also:Maccabees (q.v.). See also:Prayer of See also:Manasses (see MANASSES). Since, all these books are dealt with in See also:separate articles, they See also:call for no further See also:notice here. 2 (a). Other Old Testament Apocryphal Literature: (a) Historical. (c) Apocalyptic. See also:History of Johannes Hyr- (See separate See also:article.) canes. (b) Legendary. (d) Didactic or Sapiential. Book of See also:Jubilees. Pirke Aboth. Paralipomena Jererniae, or the See also:Rest of the Words of Baruch. Martyrdom of See also:Isaiah. Pseudo-Phile's See also:Liber Antiquitatutn. Books of See also:Adam. annex and Jambres. JJoseph and Asenath. (a) Historical.—The History of Johannes See also:Hyrcanus is mentioned in I See also:Mace. xvi. 23-24, but no trace has been discovered of its existence elsewhere. It must have See also:early passed out , of circulation, as it was unknown to See also:Josephus. (b) Legendary.—The Book of Jubilees was written in See also:Hebrew by a Pharisee between the See also:year of the See also:accession of Hyrcanus to the high-priesthood in 135 and his See also:breach with the See also:Pharisees some,years before his See also:death in ios B.C. Jubilees was translated into See also:Greek and from Greek into Ethiopic and Latin. It is i Thus some of the additions to Daniel and the Prayer of Manasses are most probably derived from a Semitic See also:original written in See also:Pales-tine, yet in compliance with the prevailing See also:opinion they are classed under Hellenistic Jewish literature. Again, the See also:Slavonic See also:Enoch goes back undoubtedly in parts to a Semitic original, though most of it was written by a Greek See also:Jew in See also:Egypt. preserved in its entirety only in Ethiopic. Jubilees is the most advanced pre-See also:Christian representative of the midrashic. tendency, which was already at See also:work in the Old Testament 1 and 2 See also:Chronicles. As the chronicler rewrote the history of See also:Israel and See also:Judah from the basis of the Priests' See also:Code, so our author re-edited from the Pharisaic standpoint of his See also:time the book of See also:Genesis and the early chapters of See also:Exodus. H,is work constitutes an enlarged See also:targum on these books, and its See also:object is to prove the See also:everlasting validity of the See also:law, which, though revealed in time, was See also:superior to time. See also:Writing in the palmiest days of the Maccabean dominion, he looked for the immediate See also:advent of the Messianic See also:kingdom. This kingdom was to be ruled over by a See also:Messiah sprung not from Judah but from See also:Levi, that is, from the reigning Maccabean See also:family. This kingdom was to be gradually realized on See also:earth, the transformation of See also:physical nature going See also:hand in hand with the ethical transformation of See also:man. (For a See also:fuller See also:account see JUBILEES, BOOK OF.) Paralipomena Jeremiae, or the Rest of the Words of Baruch.—This book has been preserved in Greek, Ethiopic, Armenian and Slavonic. The Greek was first printed at See also:Venice in 16o9, and next by Ceriani in r868 under the See also:title Paralipomena Jeremiae. It bears the same name in the Armenian, but in Ethiopic it is known by the second title. (See under BARUCH.) Martyrdom of Isaiah.—This Jewish work has been in See also:part preserved in the See also:Ascension of Isaiah. To it belong i. 1, 2a, 66-13°; ii. 1-8, 12; v. I'-14 of that book. It is of Jewish origin, and recounts the martyrdom of Isaiah at the hands of See also:Manasseh. (See ISAIAH, ASCENSION OF.) Pseudo-See also:Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum.—Though the Latin version of this book was thrice printed in the 16th See also:century (in 1527, 1550 and 1599), it was practically unknown to See also:modern scholars till it was recognized by See also:Conybeare and discussed by See also:Cohn in the Jewish Quarterly See also:Review, 1898, pp. 279-332. It is an Haggadic revision of the Biblical history from Adam to the death of See also:Saul. Its See also:chronology agrees frequently with the LXX. against that of the Massoretic See also:text, though conversely in a few cases. The Latin is undoubtedly translated from the Greek. Greek words are frequently transliterated. While the LXX. is occasionally followed in its See also:translation of Biblical passages, in others the Massoretic is followed against the LXX., and in one or two passages the text presupposes a text different from both. On many grounds Cohn infers a Hebrew original. The See also:eschatology is similar to that taught in the. similitudes of the Book of Enoch. In fact, Eth. En. Ii. 1. is reproduced in this connexion. Prayers of the departed are said to be valueless. The book was written after A.D. 70; for, as Cohn has shown, the exact date of the fall of See also:Herod's See also:temple is predicted. See also:Life of Adam and See also:Eve.—Writings dealing with this subject are extant in Greek, Latin, Slavonic, See also:Syriac, Armenian and Arabic. They go back undoubtedly to a Jewish basis, but in some of the forms in which they appear at See also:present they are christianized throughout. The. See also:oldest and for the most part Jewish portion of this literature is preserved to us in Greek, Armenian, Latin and Slavonic. (i.) The Greek Ocilynutc See also:rep; 'Aberµ Kai Eiiac (published under the misleading title 'Aaoci Xvinr MwvQEwr in See also:Tischendorf's Apocalypses Apocryphae, 1866) deals with the Fall and the death of Adam and Eve. Ceriani edited this text from a See also:Milan MS. (Monumenta Sacra et Profana, v. 1). This work is found also in Armenian, and has been published by the Mechitharist community in Venice in their Collection of Uncanonical Writings of the Old Testament, and translated by Conybeare (Jewish Quarterly Review, vii. 216 sqq., 1895), and by Issaverdens in 19o1. (ii.) The Vita Adae et Evae is closely related and in part identical with (i.). It was printed by W. See also:Meyer in Abh. d. Munch. Akad., Philos.-philol. Cl. xiv., 1878. (iii.) The Slavonic Adam book was published by Jaji6 along with a Latin translation (Denkschr. d. Wien. Akad. d. Wiss. xlii., 1893). This version agrees for the most part with (i.). It has, moreover, a See also:section, §§ 28-39, which though not found in (i.) is found, hi (ii.). Before we discuss these three documents we shall mention other members of this literature, which, though derivable ultimately from Jewish See also:sources, are Christian in their present See also:form. (iv.) The Book of Adam and Eve, also called the Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, translated from the Ethiopic (1882) by See also:Malan. This was first translated by See also:Dillmann (Das christl. Adambuch See also:des Morgenlandes, 1853), and the Ethiopic book first edited by See also:Trump (Abh. d. Munch. Akad. xv., 1879-1881). (v.) A Syriac work entitled See also:Die Schatzhohle translated by Bezold from three Syriac See also:MSS. in 1883 and subsequently edited in Syriac in 1888. This work has See also:close See also:affinities to (iv.), but is said by Dillmann to be more original. (vi.) Armenian books on the Death of Adam (Uncanonical Writings of O.T. pp. 84 sqq., 1901, translated from the Armenian), Creation and Transgression of Adam (op. cit. 39 sqq.), See also:Expulsion of Adam from See also:Paradise (op. cit. 47 sqq.), Penitence of Adam and Eve (op. cit. 71 sqq.) are mainly later writings from Christian hands. Returning to the question of the Jewish origin of i., ii., iii., we have already observed that these See also:spring from a See also:common original. As to the See also:language of this original, scholars are divided. The See also:evidence, however, seems to be strongly in favour of Hebrew. How otherwise are we to explain such Hebraisms (or Syriacisms) as 1.11 Ake. TO eXawv 4E a$rov (§ 9), ov etire, . . . 127? 0ayeiv See also:air' airoll (§ 21). For others see §§ 23, 33. Moreover, as See also:Fuchs has pointed out, in the words See also:gall Ev µaraiots addressed to Eve. (§ 25) there is a corruption of 1:+5_n into a'SS,n. Thus the words were: " See also:Thou shalt have pangs." In fact, Hebraisms abound throughout this book. (See Fuchs, Apok. u. Pseud. d. A.T. ii. 511; Jewish Encyc. i. 179 sq.) Jannes and Jambres.—These two men are referred to in 2 Tim. iii. 8 as the See also:Egyptian magicians who withstood See also:Moses. The book which treats of them is mentioned by See also:Origen (ad Matt. See also:xxiii. 37 and See also:xxvii. 9 [Jannes et Mambres Liber]), and in the Gelasian See also:Decree as the Paenitentia Jamnis et Mambre. The names in Greek are generally 'Iavvnr Kai 'Ia,Opij (= n'i~n't eu') as in the Targ.-Jon. on Exod. i. 15; vii. i 1. In the See also:Talmud they appear as trazot ']See also:rat'. Since the western text of 2 Tim. iii. 8 has Mapi3pis, See also:Westcott and See also:Holt infer that this form was derived from a Palestinian source. These names were known not only to Jewish but also to See also:heathen writers, such as See also:Pliny and See also:Apuleius. The book, therefore, may go back to pre-Christian times. (See Schtirer3 iii. 292-294; Ency. Biblica, ii. 2327-2329.) See also:Joseph and Asenath.—The statement in Gen. xli. 45, 50 that Joseph married the daughter of a heathen See also:priest naturally gave offence to later Judaism, and gave rise to the fiction that Asenath was really the daughter of See also:Shechem and Dinah, and only the See also:foster-daughter of Potipherah (Targ.-Jon. on Gen. xli. 45; Tractat. Sopherim, xxi. 9; Jalkut Shimoni, c. 134. See See also:Oppenheim, Fabula Josephi et Asenethae, 1886, pp. 2-4). Origen also was acquainted with some form of the See also:legend (Selecta in Genesin, ad Gen. xli. 45, ed. Lommatzsch, viii. 89-9o). The Christian legend, which is no doubt in the See also:main based on the Jewish, is found in Greek, Syriac, Armenian, Slavonic and See also:Medieval Latin. Since it is not earlier than the 3rd or 4th century, it will be sufficient here to refer to See also: Thus in iv. 1-4, "Who is See also:wise? He that learns from every man. . . . Who is mighty? He that subdues his nature. . . . Who is See also:rich? He that is contented with his See also:lot. . . . Who is honoured? He that honours mankind." (See further PIRKE ABOTH.) 2 (b). New Testament Apocryphal Literature:
(a) Gospels:
Uncanonical sayings of the See also:Lord in Christian and Jewish writings.
See also:Gospel according to the Egyptians.
See also:Hebrews.
Protevangel of See also: Peter. See also:Preaching of Peter. Acts of Thomas. Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. Apostolic constitutions. (c) Epistles: The See also:Abgar Epistles. Epistle of Barnabas. „ See also:Clement. " Clement's " 2nd Epistle of the See also:Corinthians. Epistles on Virginity. to James. Epistles of See also:Ignatius. Epistle of Poly-See also:carp. Pauline Epp. to the Laodiceans and Alexandrians. 3 Pauline Ep. to the Corinthians. (d) Apocalypses: see under APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE. (a) GosPELs.--Uncanonical Sayings of the Lord in Christian and Jewish Sources.—Under the See also:head of canonical sayings not found in the Gospels only one is found, i.e. that in Acts xx. 35. Of the rest the uncanonical sayings have been collected by Preuschen (Reste der ausserkanonischen Evangelien, 1901, pp. 44-47). A different collection will be found in Hennecke, NTliche Apok. 9-11. The same subject is dealt with in the elaborate volumes of Resch (Aussercanonische Paralleltexte zu den Evangelien, vols. i.-iii., 1893–1895). To this section belongs also the See also:Fayum Gospel Fragment and the See also:Logia published by Grenfell and See also:Hunt.l The former contains two sayings of Christ and one of Peter, such as we find in the canonical gospels, Matt. See also:xxvi. 31-34, See also:Mark xiv. 27-30. The See also:papyrus, which is of the 3rd century, was discovered by Bickell among the Rainer collection, who characterized it (Z. f. kath. Theol., 1885, pp. 498-504) as a fragment of one of the See also:primitive gospels mentioned in See also:Luke i. I. On the other hand, it has been contended that it is merely a fragment of an early patristic See also:homily. (See Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, ii. 780–790; See also:Harnack, Texte and Untersuchungen, v. 4; Preuschen, op. cit. p. 19.) The Logia (q.v.) is the name given to the sayings contained in a papyrus See also:leaf, by its discoverers Grenfell and Hunt. They think the papyrus was probably written about A.D. 200. According to Harnack, it is an See also:extract from the Gospel of the Egyptians. All the passages referring to Jesus in the Talmud are given by Laible, Jesus Christus See also:im Talmud, with an appendix, " Die talmudische,n Texte,” by G. Dalman (2nd ed. 1901). The first edition of this work was translated into See also:English by A. W. Streane (Jesus Christ in the Talmud, 1893). In Hennecke's NTliche Apok. Handbuch (pp. 47-71) there is a valuable study of this question by A. Meyer, entitled Jesus, Jesu Junger and das Evangelium im Talmud and verwandten jildischen Schriften, to which also a See also:good bibliography of the subject is prefixed. Gospel according to the Egyptians.—This gospel is first mentioned by Clem. Alex. (Strom. iii. 6. 45; 9. 63, 66; 13. 92), subsequently by Origen (See also:Horn. in Luc. i.) and See also:Epiphanius (Hoer. Ixii. 2), and a fragment is preserved in the so-called 2 Clem. Rom. xii. 2. It circulated among various heretical circles; amongst the Encratites (Clem. Strom. iii. 9), the Naassenes (Hippolyt. Philos. v. 7), and the Sabellians (Epiph. Haer. Ixii. 2). Only three or four fragments survive; see See also:Lipsius (Smith and See also:Wace, Dicl. of Christ. Biog. ii. 712, 713); Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, ii. 628-642; Preuschen, Reste d. ausserkanonischen Evangelien, 1901, p. 2, which show that it was a product of pantheistic See also:Gnosticism. With this pantheistic Gnosticism is associated a severe See also:asceticism. The distinctions of See also:sex are ' These editors have discovered (1907) a gospel fragment of the 2nd century which represents a See also:dialogue between our Lord and a See also:chief priest—a Pharisee.179 one See also:day to come to an end; the See also:prohibition of See also:marriage follows naturally on this view. Hence Christ. is represented as coming to destroy the work of the See also:female (Clem. Alex. Strom. iii. 9. 63). Lipsius and Zahn assign it to the See also:middle of the 2nd century. It may be earlier. Protevangel of James.—This title was first given in the 16th century to a writing which is referred to as The Book of James (s) 0i.(3Xor 'IaKWOov) by Origen (tom. xi. in Matt.). Its author designates it as `Iaropia. For various other designations see Tischendorf, Evang. Apocr.2 1 seq. The narrative extends from the Conception of the Virgin to the Death of See also:Zacharias. Lipsius shows that in the present form of the book there is See also:side by side a See also:strange " admixture of intimate knowledge and See also:gross See also:ignorance of Jewish thought and See also:custom,” and that accordingly we must " distinguish between an original Jewish Christian writing and a Gnostic recast of it.” The former was known to See also:Justin(See also:Dial. 78, sot) and Clem. Alex. (Strom. vii. 16), and belongs at latest to the earliest years of the 2nd century. The Gnostic recast Lipsius See also:dates about the middle of the 3rd century. From these two See also:works arose independently the Protevangel in its present form and the Latin pseudo-Matthaeus (Evangelium pseudo-Matthaei). The Evangelium de Nativitate Mariae is a redaction of the latter. (See Lipsius in Smith's Dict. of Christ. Biog. ii. 701-703.) But if we except the Zachariah and John See also:group of legends, it is not necessary to assume the Gnostic recast of this work in the 3rd century as is done by Lipsius. The author had at his disposal two distinct See also:groups of legends about See also:Mary. One of these groups is certainly of non-Jewish origin, as it conceives Mary as living in the temple somewhat after the manner of a vestal virgin or a priestess of See also:Isis. The other group is more in See also:accord with the orthodox gospels. The book appears to have been written in Egypt, and in the early years of the 2nd century. For, since Origen states that many appealed to it in support of the view that the See also:brothers of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former marriage, the book must have been current about A.O. 200. From Origen we may ascend to Clem. Alex. who (Strom. vi. 93) shows acquaintance with one of the chief doctrines of the book—the perpetual virginity of Mary. Finally, as Justin's statements as to the See also:birth of Jesus in a See also:cave and Mary's descent from See also:David show in all See also:probability his acquaintance with the book, it may with good grounds be assigned to the first See also:decade of the 2nd century. (So Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, i. 485, 499, 502, 504, 539; ii. 774-780.) For the Greek text see Tischendorf, Evang. Apocr.2 1-5o; B. P. Grenfell, An Alexandrian erotic Fragment and other Papyri, 1896, pp. 13-17: for the Syriac, See also:Wright, Contributions to Apocryphal Literature of the N.T., 1865, pp. 3-7; A. S. See also:Lewis, Studia Sinaitica, xi. pp. 1-22. See literature generally in Hennecke, NTliche Apok. Handbuch, 1o6 seq. Gospel of Nicodemus.—This title is first met with in the 13th century. It is used to designate an apocryphal writing entitled in the older MSS. uao,uvibuara Tov Kvpiov ii,Li:v 'I11aov Xpco-Tov 1rpaxOfvTa irri IIovriov IILXhTov: also " Gesta Salvatoris Domini . . . inventa Theodosio magno imperatore in Ierusalem in praetorio Pontii Pilati in codicibus publicis.” See Tischendorf, Evang. Apocr.2 pp. 333-335. This work gives an account of the See also:Passion (i.–xi.), the Resurrection (xii.–xvi.), and the Descensus ad Inferos (xvii.–xxvii.). Chapters i.–xvi. are extant in the Greek, Coptic, and two Armenian versions. The two Latin versions and a See also:Byzantine recension of the Greek contain i.–xxvii. (see Tischendorf, Evangelia Apocryphal, pp. 210-458). All known texts go back to A. D. 425, if one may See also:trust the reference to See also:Theodosius. But this was only a revision, for as early as 376 Epiphanius (Haer. i. I.) presupposes the existence of a like text. In 325 See also:Eusebius (H.E. ii. 2) was acquainted only with the heathen Acts of See also:Pilate, and knew nothing of a Christian. work. Tischendorf and See also:Hofmann, however, find evidence of its existence in Justin's reference to the "See also:Accra Hixhrou (A poi. i. 35, 48), and in See also:Tertullian's mention of the Acta Pilati (Apol. 21), and on this evidence attribute our texts to the first See also:half of the 2nd century. But these references have been denied by See also:Scholten, Lipsius, and See also:Lightfoot. Recently See also:Schubert has sought to derive the elements which are found in the Petrine Gospel, but not in the canonical gospels, from the original Acta Pilati, while Zahn exactly reverses the relation of these two works. Rendel See also:Harris (1899) advocated the view that the Gospel of Nicodemus, as we possess it, is merely a See also:prose version of the Gospel of Nicodemus written originally in Homeric centones as early as the 2nd century. Lipsius and Dobschiitz relegate the book to the 4th century. The question is not settled yet (see Lipsius in Smith's Dict. of Christ. See also:Biography, ii. 708-709, and Dobschiitz in Hastings' Bible See also:Dictionary, iii. 544-547). Gospel according to the Hebrews.—This gospel was cited by Ignatius (Ad Smyinaeos, iii.) according to See also:Jerome (Viris illus. 16, and in Jes. See also:lib. xviii.), but this is declared to be untrustworthy by Zahn, op. cit. i. 921; ii. 701, 702. It was written in Aramaic in Hebrew letters, according to Jerome (Adv. Pelag. iii. 2), and translated by him into Greek and Latin. Both these • See also:translations are lost: A collection of the Greek and Latin fragments that have survived, mainly in Origen and Jerome, will be found in See also:Hilgenfeld's NT extra Canonem receptum, See also:Nicholson's Gospel according to the Hebrews (1879), Westcott'sIntrod. to the Gospels, and Zahn's Gesch. des NTlichen Kanons, ii. 642-723; Preuschen, op. cit. 3-8. This gospel was regarded by many in the first centuries as the Hebrew original of the canonical See also:Matthew (Jerome, in Matt. xii. 13; Adv. Pelag. iii. 1). With the canonical gospel it agrees in some of its sayings; in others it is See also:independent. It circulated among the See also:Nazarenes in See also:Syria, and was composed, according to Zahn (op. cit. ii. 722), between the years 135 and 15o. Jerome identifies it with the Gospel of the Twelve (Adv. Pelag. iii. 2), and states that it was used by the See also:Ebionites (See also:Comm. in Matt. xii. 13). Zahn (op. cit. ii. 662, 724) contests both these statements. The former he traces to a mistaken See also:interpretation' of Origen (Hon. I. in Luc.). Lipsius, on the other hand, accepts the statements of Jerome (Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christian Biography, ii. 709-712), and is of opinion that this gospel, in the form in which it was known to Epiphanius, Jerome and Origen, was " a recast of an older original," which, written originally in Aramaic, was nearly related to the Logia used by St Matthew and the Ebionitic writing used by St Luke, " which itself was only a later redaction of the Logia." According to the most See also:recent investigations we may conclude that the Gospel according to the Hebrews was current among the Nazarenes and Ebionites as early as 100-125, since•Ignatius was See also:familiar with the phrase " I am no bodiless demon "—a phrase which, according to Jerome (Comm. in Is. xviii.), belonged to this Gospel. The name " Gospel according to the Hebrews " cannot have been original; for if it had been so named because of its See also:general use among the Hebrews, yet the Hebrews themselves would not have used this designation. It may have been known simply as " the Gospel." The language was Western Aramaic, the See also:mother See also:tongue of Jesus and his apostles. Two forms of Western Aramaic survive: the See also:Jerusalem form of the See also:dialect, in the Aramaic portions of Daniel and See also:Ezra; and the Galilean, in isolated expressions in the Talmud (3rd century), and in a fragmentary 5th century translation of the Bible. The quotations from the Old Testament are made from the Massoretic text.
This gospel must have been translated at an early date into Greek, as Clement and Origen cite it as generally accessible, and Eusebius recounts that many reckoned it among the received books. The gospel is synoptic in See also:character and is closely related to Matthew, though in the Resurrection accounts it has affinities with Luke. Like Mark it seems to have had no history of the. birth of Christ, and to have begun with the See also:baptism. (For the literature see Hennecke, NTliche Apok. Handbuch, 21-23.)
Gospel of Peter.—Before 1892 we had some knowlege of this gospel. Thus See also:Serapion, See also:bishop of See also:Antioch (A.D. 190–203) found it in use in the See also: 1o) says that it represented the brethren of Christ as his half-brothers. In 1885 a See also:long fragment was discovered at See also:Akhmim, and published by Bouriant in 1892, and subsequently by Lods, See also:Robinson, Harnack, Zahn,:Schubert, Swete. Gospel of Thomas.—This gospel professes to give an account of our Lord's boyhood. It appears in two recensions. The more See also:complete recension bears the title ew a 'laparjkirov cbtXovbcl)ov p7jra els rd vau&cea rov Kupiov, and treats of the See also:period from the 7th to the 12th year (Tischendorf, Evangelia Apocrypha', 1876, 140-157). The more fragmentary recension gives the history of the childhood from the 5th to the 8th year, and is entitled I (Pry pa/.t,u a rov ayiov borovrbXou 6w/la irepi r'fjs aa2S&Ki)s avavrpo¢rijs rov Kupiov (Tischendorf, op. cit. pp. 158-163). Two Latin translations have been published in this work by the same scholar—one on pp. 164-18o, the other under the wrong title, Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium, on pp. 93-112. A Syriac version, with an English translation, was published by Wright in 1875. This gospel was originally still more Docetic than it now is, according to Lipsius. Its present form is due to an orthodox revision which discarded, so far as possible, all Gnostic traces. Lipsius (Smith's Dict. of Christ. Biog. ii. 703) assigns it to the latter half of the 2nd century; but Zahn (Gesch. Kan. ii. 771), on good grounds, to the earlier half. The latter See also:scholar shows that probably it was used by Justin (Dial. 88). At all events it circulated among the Marcosians (See also:Irenaeus, Haer. i. 20) and the Naasenes (See also:Hippolytus; Refut. v. 7), and subsequently among the Manichaeans, and is frequently quoted from Origen downwards (Horn. I. in Luc.). If the See also:stichometry of Nicephorus is right, the existing form of the book is merely fragmentary compared with its original See also:compass. For literature see Hennecke, NTliche Apokryphen Handbuch, 132 seq. Gospel of the Twelve.—This gospel, which Origen knew (Hom: I. in Luc.), is not to be identified with the Gospel according to the Hebrews (see above), with Lipsius and others, who have sought to reconstruct the original gospel from the surviving fragments of these two distinct works. The only surviving fragments of the Gospel of the Twelve have been preserved by Epiphanius (Haer. See also:xxx. 13-16, 22: see Preuschen, op. cit. c-1r) It began with an account of the baptism. It was used by the Ebionites, and was written, according to Zahn (op. cit. ii. 742), about A.D. 170. Additional information and CommentsThere are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML. Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide. |
|
|
[back] ERATOSTHENES OF ALEXANDRIA (c. 276-C. 194 B.C.) |
[next] ERBACH |