mountainman

Dear Ben,

This thread is a bit of a mind-bender for at least two reasons:

1) I am happy to assume the canonical texts were extant in the second century CE, (the issue is not the canon), and

2) We are seeking attestation not for the canonical corpus but in fact for the non canonical corpus. I know it is exceeding difficult for a moment to suspend concentration and focus on the canonical corpus, however it is important IMO to do do, in order to examine the entire corpus of the NT apocrypha according to their own independent testimony.

I think what aa5874 has done above, is to ask from the non canonical sources where is the first mention of Mark and Luke, which of course, is a good question that I am still very much puzzled over.

You do have some of this material at your site. I am sure I have seen a number of patristic references there to the non canonical, and your TF page (which I have spend considerable time at recently -- thanks btw).

Best wishes,


Pete

mountainman

Mercer Dictionary of the Bible By Watson E. Mills, Roger Aubrey Bullard

mountainman

Summary of Early Witnesses to the Apocryphal NT

I have examined a total of almost two dozen of the NT apocryphal texts which are considered by current NT scholarship to have been written in the centuries prior to the council of Nicaea. By my counting I get a total of only eight ante-nicene authors (including Eusebius himself) who have either cited or made a reference to one or another of the non canonical texts. If you are aware of any references which I should have listed here, but have failed to identify, I'd appreciate a note letting me know of the oversight. Many thanks.

The Eight Author Sources for ante-nicene NT Apocrypha:

1) Tertullian - aPaul
2) Hippolytus - gThomas (which one?)
3) Irenaeus - gJudas, (IgThomas?)
4) Origen - gThomas (which one?), gPeter, gNazoreans
5) Clement of Alexandria - gJames
6) Commodius - eApostles (poet?)
7) Hegesippus - gNazoreans (fragments via Eusebius)
8) Eusebius - gNazoreans, gPeter,

Eusebius declares "heretical" the following swag ...

The Acts of Peter and Andrew,
The Acts of John,
The Acts of Andrew and John,
The Acts of Andrew and Matthew,
The Acts of Andrew
The Gospel of Peter,
The Gospel of Thomas,
The Gospel of Matthias,
The Gospel of (any others besides them)

Quote:

Originally Posted by EUSEBIUS no one belonging to the succession of ecclesiastical writers has deemed worthy of mention in his writings. 7 And further, the character of the style is at variance with apostolic usage, and both the thoughts and the purpose of the things that are related in them are so completely out of accord with true orthodoxy that they clearly show themselves to be the fictions of heretics. Wherefore they are not to be placed even among the rejected writings, but are all of them to be cast aside as absurd and impious.

If we disregard Eusebius for a moment then the list of NT Apocyrphal tractates which are so referenced -- and for which we have the text, rather than fragments (eg: gEgyptians, etc) appear to be reduced to 5 in number.

1.0 The Acts of Paul
2.0 The Gospel of Thomas
3.0 The Gospel of Peter
4.0 The Gospel of James
5.0 The Gospel of Judas



Summary of Source References
for the NT Apocrypha in the
Patristic Literature ....


1.0 The Acts of Paul
1.1 Tertullian, De baptismo 17.5)


2.0 The Gospel of Thomas
2.1 Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 5.7.20
2.2 Origen listed the "Gospel according to Thomas" heterodox apocryphal gospels in Hom. in Luc. 1.

3.0 The Gospel of Peter
3.1 Origen (253 a.d.), makes mention in commenting on Matthew 10:17
3.2 Eusebius (H. E., iii., 3, 2; and in H. E., iii., 25, 6) includes the Gospel of Peter among the forged heretical gospels-

4.0 The Gospel of James
4.1 mentioned by Clement of Alexandria -- "harmonies" of gospels ...


6.0 The Gospel of Judas
6.1 Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses (Against Heresies), I.31.1


7.0 The Epistle of the Apostles*
7.1 the (third ?)-century poet Commodian seems to use it in one place (see 11).


8.0 The Gospel of the Nazoreans
8.1 Hegesippus (a church writer whose five-volume 'Memoirs' are now lost, preserved only in a few quotations in the writings of Eusebius).
8.2 Fragments are preserved in the works of Origen (early in the third century) and
8.3 Eusebius (early in the fourth century);





EXPANDED NOTES of Source References
for the NT Apocrypha in the
Patristic Literature ....


1.0 The Acts of Paul
1.1 Tertullian, De baptismo 17.5)


2.0 The Gospel of Thomas
2.1 Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 5.7.20
2.2 Origen listed the "Gospel according to Thomas" heterodox apocryphal gospels in Hom. in Luc. 1.

3.0 The Gospel of Peter
3.1 Origen (253 a.d.), makes mention in commenting on Matthew 10:17
3.2 Eusebius (H. E., iii., 3, 2; and in H. E., iii., 25, 6) includes the Gospel of Peter among the forged heretical gospels-
3.3 In the winter of 1886-7 a large fragment of the Greek text of the Gospel of Peter was discovered
in a tomb of a monk at Akhmîm in Upper Egypt. It is a manuscript from the 8th century.
A smaller 2nd-3rd century fragment was discovered later at Oxyrhynchus, Egypt.


4.0 The Gospel of James
4.1 mentioned by Clement of Alexandria -- "harmonies" of gospels ...


5.0 The Gospel of Philip
5.1 Gnostic library at Nag Hammadi, Egypt (1945).


6.0 The Gospel of Judas
6.1 Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses (Against Heresies), I.31.1
6.2 Publication following discovery and translation (2006)



7.0 The Epistle of the Apostles*
7.1 the (third ?)-century poet Commodian seems to use it in one place (see 11).


8.0 The Gospel of the Nazoreans
8.1 Hegesippus (a church writer whose five-volume 'Memoirs' are now lost, preserved only in a few quotations in the writings of Eusebius).
8.2 Fragments are preserved in the works of Origen (early in the third century) and
8.3 Eusebius (early in the fourth century);


9.0 The Infancy Gospel of Thomas [Syriac and Greek Texts]
9.1 Irenaeus quotes a non-canonical story that circulated about the childhood of Jesus (possible only!)


10.0 The Acts of John the Theologian*

11.0 The Acts of Thomas
11.1 No witnesses before the before the 4th century: The original composition
is probably to be dated in the first half of the 3d century, slightly later
than the Acts of Peter, John, and Paul, which are attested in the 2d century.
Some sections, particularly the originally independent Hymn of the Pearl,
presuppose conditions in the Parthian period, which ended with the establishment
of the Sassanian Empire in 226 C.E. It is likely that Acts Thom. underwent
redactional development, including adaptation by Manicheans, in the late 3d
or 4th centuries.


12.0 The Acts of Peter
12.1 No witnesses ... The Acts of Peter
From "The Apocryphal New Testament"
M.R. James-Translation and Notes
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924
Written, probably by a resident in Asia Minor (he does not know much about Rome),
not later than A. D. 200, in Greek. The author has read the Acts of John very carefully,
and modelled his language upon them. However, he was not so unorthodox as Leucius,
though his language about the Person of our Lord (ch. xx) has rather suspicious
resemblances to that of the Acts of John.



13.0 The Gospel of Mary [Magdalene]



14.0 The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles
14.1 NHC 6.1

15.0 The Letter of Peter to Philip*
15.1 NHC x.x



16 to 20
==========
The Acts of Peter and Andrew ------- EUSEBIUS ("Heretical")
The Acts of John*(*H) --------------- EUSEBIUS ("Heretical")
The Acts of Andrew and John (*H) ---- EUSEBIUS ("Heretical")
The Acts of Andrew and Matthew (*H) - EUSEBIUS ("Heretical")
The Acts of Andrew*(*H) ------------- EUSEBIUS ("Heretical")


21 to 23
==========
The Gospel of the Egyptians - NO TEXT
The Gospel of the Ebionites - NO TEXT
The Gospel of the Hebrews - NO TEXT