JEWS, GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THE. — An apocryphal work arising in a Jewish-Christian milieu. There is debate over whether it should be identified with other apocryphal Gospels referred to as those of the Nazarenes (v.), the Ebionites (v.), or the Twelve Apostles (v. APOCRYPHAL BOOKS).
The “classical” solution (so named by E. Amann), commonly accepted until 1900—still upheld by G. Bonaccorsi—groups these apocryphal works into two Gospels: one orthodox (v. GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THE JEWS, to be identified with the Gospel of the Nazarenes); the other heterodox (the Gospel of the Ebionites, to be identified with the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles).
In this solution, the Gospel according to the Jews would be the one referred to simply as “the Gospel” by converted Jews. It is said to have been composed in Aramaic toward the end of the 1st century, then soon translated into Greek. This work would already have been known to St. Ignatius of Antioch and cited by Clement of Alexandria and Origen. By the time of Eusebius, the Greek version was no longer known, but the original Aramaic text was preserved in the library of Caesarea in Palestine. St. Jerome (whose assertions are questioned by G. Bardy in *Mélanges de science religieuse*, 3 [1946], pp. 5-36) is said to have consulted it, found a copy also at Berea (Aleppo) among the Nazarenes (Gospel of the Nazarenes), and produced a Greek and Latin version of II. Some believe these were partial versions for personal use; Bardy argues that St. Jerome only intended to translate II. Fragments of the Latin version are preserved in the marginal notes of certain Greek manuscripts of Matthew, while fragments of the Greek version survive in the marginal notes of certain Greek manuscripts of Matthew, under the rubric: *το Ιουδαϊκόν*.
St. Jerome (followed by Zahn and Hilgenfeld) even considered it the original Aramaic version of Matthew. Harnack regards it as independent of the Synoptics, whereas Lagrange argues for its dependence on them.
The few fragments that have come down to us (eleven in the edition by Bonaccorsi, pp. 1-7) do not allow for an adequate resolution of the question.
Other solutions have been proposed by A. Schmidtke (1911) and H. Waitz (1912). The former distinguishes three Gospels: