/Archive 1

/Archive 2

		The Purple Star
		In recognition of the insults and other damage you received. As I think we all know by now, there is occasionally a price to be paid for acting with integrity. Thank you for having done so, despite the difficulties involved. John Carter 17:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are now evidently some results available regarding a related matter here. Thought you might like to know. Oh, yes, and on a completely unrelated matter, I have this seemingly random list of pages I would welcome your perhaps looking over, if you are so inclined. Joses, James the Just, John the Baptist, Pauline Christianity, Nazarene (sect), James Tabor, Robert Eisenman, Herod the Great, Essenes, Gospel of the Ebionites, Tiberius Iulius Abdes Pantera, Clopas, Mandaeism, Historicity of Jesus. There's no real rush on any of those, of course. Thanks again for all your efforts. John Carter 17:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the star! I will take a look at these when I return, but for now I'm taking a break. Ovadyah 18:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting neo-ebionite group has come on the scene at ebionim.org. --Ovadyah (talk) 22:21, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think part of the problem regarding the article is the rather insistent editing of a particular individual regarding some likely fringe speculation. In gathering a bibliography from these encyclopedias and similar works, I haven't seen either Eisenman or Tabor mentioned in these sources. If and when I finish the bibliography, which I could either add to the existing article or create as a separate one, would you believe that there might be some interest in filing an RfC regarding these speculations? Personally, I can think of several other obscure groups which might be subject to the same sort of possibly good-faith additions of fringey sources, and it might be a good idea to maybe establish how much weight to give such speculation, and, also, how much weight, if any, to give to beliefs or revelations regarding this earlier group which other currently active religious groups might have. I note there are a few "Ebionite" named groups in Melton's Encyclopedia of American Religions, which more or less establishes their notability, and it might be that they have some sort of tenet of their faiths regarding the earlier group which might or might not be significant enough to mention in the main article on the older group. John Carter (talk) 18:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think an RfC is justified, however, I requested RfCs on this article several times in the past without success. There are few people on Wiki with enough expert knowledge to be helpful. Eisenman has kind of faded away as a serious scholar. Tabor, on the other hand, is a major contributor to the field of biblical studies. He presents several papers every year at major meetings like SBL. I'm more inclined to include his material, with proper weighting, than sources from 100 years ago. Unfortunately, it's hard to find people willing to contribute to the article that don't either have a POV to push or an axe to grind. Good luck. --Ovadyah (talk) 22:42, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]