I'm not sure of what supposedly ancient origins material you are referring to; in this thread we are discussing an Early Christian Ebionaen Canon, and we draw on the writings of Ephiphanius, who is not supposed; in this thread we adhere to Good Faith.The point being made is about creating a reading list for a modern canon with supposedly ancient origins.The importance here is that therefore James belongs in the Early Christian Ebionaen Canon.
As I pointed out upthread:
Epiphanius says James is a forgery, but he also says that of their Matthew, which he quotes quite exactly and shows that it is more or less our(modern) Matthew; I think he just calls anything Ebionaen a "forgery" to slander them instead of debating the substance, so I accept that the James referred to is our Epistle of James, even though he gives no extracts to show that this is a reference to our epistle of James. Iraneus says Ebionaens read Luke as well as Matthew
The importance here is that therefore James belongs in the Early Christian Ebionaen Canon.
We have no need to take you up on your suggestion that we hide Epiphanius' slur of the book of James in our canon as he equally slurs the Ebionaen book of Matthew (see above): we invite anyone interested in the Early Christian Ebionaen Canon to read chapters 29 and 30 of his Panarion Book 1 so they can see for themselves how hard it is to make sense of his writings on the Nazarenes or Ebionaens, especially with all the FUD that is spread around here by some users of some accounts.Note that you could still have it in this canon without claiming it is being mentioned here in 30.23.1 as a forged book.
Statistics: Posted by ebion — Thu Mar 14, 2024 1:44 pm