Putting Papias in Order

… yet another collection of the fragments of Papias, indebted to Chronicon and Text Excavation and Hypotyposeis and, of course, the giants whose shoulders they stand on. The translations are copied from T.C. Schmidt’s Chronicon page and Ben C. Smith’s Text Excavation page except where otherwise indicated; those translations that are under copyright are presented here under the fair use doctrine. Please refer to these sources for more information about the quotes, their translations, and some of the original language texts.

The purpose of this list is that a different arrangement, by book and subject matter in Papias, could help me study the fragments of Papias better. I hope it helps others also. I have tried to err on the side of caution when attributing references to a certain book in Papias, going by the indications in the writers who quote Papias instead of devising a hypothesis about the scheme of the author’s work, which must be derived from such data.

I’ve made an attempt at being inclusive regarding hypothetical and even dubious claims of fragments belonging to Papias, which are presented for the reader to test for themselves and keep what is good.

See also the Early Christian Writings page on Papias.

(A) General: Floruit

(A) (1) Irenaeus and others record that John the Theologian and Apostle survived until the times of Trajan; after which Papias of Hierapolis and Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, both of whom heard him, became well known.
-Eusebius of Caesarea, Chronicon 220th Olympiad/100AD

(A) (2) In the third year of the reign of the emperor mentioned above [Trajan], Clement committed the episcopal government of the church of Rome to Evarestus, and departed this life after he had superintended the teaching of the divine word nine years in all. But when Symeon also had died in the manner described, a certain Jew by the name of Justus succeeded to the episcopal throne in Jerusalem. He was one of the many thousands of the circumcision who at that time believed in Christ. At that time Polycarp, a disciple of the apostles, was a man of eminence in Asia, having been entrusted with the episcopate of the church of Smyrna by those who had seen and heard the Lord. And at the same time Papias, bishop of the parish of Hierapolis, became well known, as did also Ignatius, who was chosen bishop of Antioch, second in succession to Peter, and whose fame is still celebrated by a great many.
-Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.34.1-3.36.2

(A) (3) Bishop Irenaeus writes that John the Apostle survived all the way to the time of Trajan: after whom his notable disciples were Papias, Bishop of Hieropolis, Polycarp of Smyrna, and Ignatius of Antioch.
-Jerome, Chronicon 220th Olympiad [100AD]

(A) (4) Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, who was a disciple of John the Divine, and a companion of Polycarp, wrote five books of Oracles of the Lord, wherein, when giving a list of the Apostles, after Peter and John, Philip and Thomas and Irenaeus wrote that John the Apostle remained until the times of Trajen, after whom were Papias Bishop of Heirapolis, Polycarp of Smyrna and Ignatius of Antioch.
-Prosper of Aquitania, Epitome of Chronicles Section 550 [106AD]

(A) (5) Irenaeus and others record that John the Theologian and Apostle survived until the times of Trajan; after which Papias of Hierapolis and Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, both of whom heard him, were becoming known.
-George Syncellus, Chroniconology, 424

(A) (6) And until the times of Trajan these [successors of the Apostles] continued the priesthood, while the beloved disciple still was present in [this] life. After this time also Polycarp of Smyrna became famous who received the Episcopate from John. And the man Papias of Heirapolis, who was also particularly skillful in scripture, sacredly presided over his city. After them Quadratus became eminent in the prophetic gift, being distinguished together with the daughters of Philip. And there were many more than they who manifested the apostolic gifts, who obtained the succession after the apostles. [This] history, as far as it is possible for me, hands down one after another similar things concerning Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Papias. For now it sets forth as much as [possible] the earliest demonstration of apostolic teaching.
-Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos, Ecclesiastical History 3.2.40-55

(A) (7) About this time Clement became eminent in Rome and Ignatius also conversed in Antioch. Papias was also writing in Heirapolis. Pancratius, as well, as Polycarp of Smyrna were also preminent. They were disciples of Peter, but Polycarp of the bosom friend.
-Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos, Ecclesiastical History 3.18.1-8

(A) (8) Indeed concerning Papias, Quadratus, Aristides and Castor we have spoken of previously, but now we have to discuss the other writings of Justin.
-Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos, Ecclesiastical History 4.5.72-73

(B) General: Chiliasm

(B) (1) For even previously, Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis and Nepos, Bishop of areas of Egypt, thought the same as Victorinus concerning the thousand year Kingdom.
-Preface to Jerome’s revised version of Victorinus’ Commentary on the Apocalypse

(B) (2) Papias, a hearer of John, and bishop of Hierapolis in Asia, wrote only five books, which he entitled An Exposition of Discourses of the Lord. Wherein, when he asserts in his preface that he is not following promiscuous statements, but has the Apostles as his authorities, he says:

I used to inquire what had been said by Andrew, or by Peter, or by Philip, or by Thomas or James, or by John or Matthew or any other of the Lord’s disciples, and what Aristion and the Elder John, the disciples of the Lord, were saying. For books to read do not profit me so much as the living voice clearly sounding up to the present day in the persons of their authors.

From which it is clear that in his list of names itself there is one John who is reckoned among the Apostles, and another the Elder John, whom he enumerates after Aristion. We have mentioned this fact on account of the statement made above, which we have recorded on the authority of very many, that the two later epistles of John are not the work of the Apostle, but of the Elder. This Papias is said to have promulgated the Jewish tradition of a Millennium, and he is followed by Irenaeus, Apollinarius and the others, who say that after the resurrection the Lord will reign in the flesh with the saints. Tertullian also in his work On the hope of the faithful, Victorinus of Petau and Lactantius follow this view.
-Jerome, On Illustrious Men, 18

(B) (3) The growth of this heresy is described for us by Irenaeus, bishop of the church of Lyons, a man of the apostolic times, who was a disciple of Papias the hearer of the evangelist John.
-Jerome, Letter to Theodora 75.3

(B) (4) And the…great Methodius…and also Irenaeus bishop of Lyons and Papias bishop of Heirapolis, Methodius won the crown of martyrdom, the latter were apostolic men….But however, when they diminish the truth and were brought to speak against the common and ecclesiastical dogma, in these things we do not follow them, but we take nothing away from their patristic honor and glory.
-Photius, from a letter to Archbishop and Metropolitan Aquileias

(B) (5) Therefore, at this Apollonarius the heretic, with his companions, abandoned the glorious illumination of the living words and became blind to the faith like the Jews. He dared to speak, like the Pharisees, that after the resurrection of the dead, we shall live again for a thousand years in Jerusalem with the Messiah, with bodily pleasures, and childish sacrifices, and earthly libations before him [the Messiah?]. After these things are fulfilled, at that time we shall be taken up into heaven. And he was not shamed by the voice of Paul who said, “The kingdom of God is not of eating or drinking. But of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” [Romans 14:17]. Also in like manner Irenaeus bishop of Lyon in Gaul wandered in these matters, which are in the book of Papias as Eusebius narrates.
-John of Dara, On the Resurrection of Bodies 2.13

(C) General: Historical Source

For indeed Eusebius Pamphilius, beginning from the times of Christ until the times of Constantine the Great, traversed the events which happened to the church, collecting events from both Philo and Josephus, Clement the Stromatist and Hegesippus, Hippolytus and Papias, he brought together his history, while teaching the sacred principles one after another.
-Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos, Ecclesiastical History 1.1.70-76

(D) General: Translation into Latin

It is a false rumor which has reached you to the effect that I have translated the books of Josephus and the volumes of the holy men Papias and Polycarp. I have neither the leisure nor the ability to preserve the charm of these masterpieces in another tongue.
-Jerome, Letter to Lucinius (71.5)

(E) Unclear Location: Revelation (and the Number of the Beast)

(E) (1) But these things being so, and since this number stands in all the earnest and ancient copies, and since the very men who had seen John with their own eyes testify to it, and since the word teaches us that the number of the name of the beast according to the counting of the Greeks through the letters in it is six hundred sixty-six, that is, the number of tens shall be equal to that of the hundreds, and the number of hundreds equal to that of the units, for that number which expresses the digit six being adhered to throughout indicates the recapitulations of that apostasy, taken in its full extent, which occurred at the beginning, during the intermediate periods, and which shall take place at the end. I do not know how some erred, having followed a private [reading], and have set aside the middle number of the name, taking away a count of fifty and wishing there to be a single ten instead of six tens.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.30.1

(E) (2) With regard however to the inspiration of the book (i.e. the Apocalypse) we hold it superfluous to speak at length; since the blessed Gregory (I mean, the Divine) and Cyril, and men of an older generation as well, Papias, Irenaeus, Methodius and Hippolytus, bear testimony to its genuineness.
-Andrew of Caesarea, On the Apocalypse Preface

(F) Unclear Location: John Returned from Banishment

(F) (1) And that you may be still more confident, that repenting thus truly there remains for you a sure hope of salvation, listen to a tale? which is not a tale but a narrative, handed down and committed to the custody of memory, about the Apostle John. For when, on the tyrant’s death, he returned to Ephesus from the isle of Patmos, he went away, being invited, to the contiguous territories of the nations, here to appoint bishops, there to set in order whole Churches, there to ordain such as were marked out by the Spirit.

Having come to one of the cities not far off (the name of which some give), and having put the brethren to rest in other matters, at last, looking to the bishop appointed, and seeing a youth, powerful in body, comely in appearance, and ardent, said, “This (youth) I commit to you in all earnestness, in the presence of the Church, and with Christ as witness.” And on his accepting and promising all, he gave the same injunction and testimony. And he set out for Ephesus. And the presbyter taking home the youth committed to him, reared, kept, cherished, and finally baptized him. After this he relaxed his stricter care and guardianship, under the idea that the seal of the Lord he had set on him was a complete protection to him. But on his obtaining premature freedom, some youths of his age, idle, dissolute, and adepts in evil courses, corrupt him. First they entice him by many costly entertainments; then afterwards by night issuing forth for highway robbery, they take him along with them. Then they dared to execute together something greater. And he by degrees got accustomed; and from greatness of nature, when he had gone aside from the right path, and like a hard-mouthed and powerful horse, had taken the bit between his teeth, rushed with all the more force down into the depths. And having entirely despaired of salvation in God, he no longer meditated what was insignificant, but having perpetrated some great exploit, now that he was once lost, he made up his mind to a like fate with the rest. Taking them and forming a hand of robbers, he was the prompt captain of the bandits, the fiercest, the bloodiest, the cruelest.

Time passed, and some necessity having emerged, they send again for John. He, when he had settled the other matters on account of which he came, said, “Come now, O bishop, restore to us the deposit which I and the Saviour committed to thee in the face of the Church over which you preside, as witness.” The other was at first confounded, thinking that it was a false charge about money which he did not get; and he could neither believe the allegation regarding what he had not, nor disbelieve John. But when he said “I demand the young man, and the soul of the brother,” the old man, groaning deeply, and bursting into tears, said, “He is dead.” “How and what kind of death?” “He is dead,” he said, “to God. For he turned wicked and abandoned, and at last a robber; and now he has taken possession of the mountain in front of the church, along with a band like him.” Rending, therefore, his clothes, and striking his head with great lamentation, the apostle said, “It was a fine guard of a brother’s soul I left! But let a horse be brought me, and let some one be my guide on the way.” He rode away, just as he was, straight from the church. On coming to the place, he is arrested by the robbers’ outpost; neither fleeing nor entreating, but crying, “It was for this I came. Lead me to your captain;” who meanwhile was waiting, all armed as he was. But when he recognized John as he advanced, he turned, ashamed, to flight. The other followed with all his might, forgetting his age, crying, “Why, my son, dost thou flee from me, thy father, unarmed, old? Son, pity me. Fear not; thou hast still hope of life. I will give account to Christ for thee. If need be, I will willingly endure thy death, as the Lord did death for us. For thee I will surrender my life. Stand, believe; Christ hath sent me.”

And he, when he heard, first stood, looking down; then threw down his arms, then trembled and wept bitterly. And on the old man approaching, he embraced him, speaking for himself with lamentations as he could, and baptized a second time with tears, concealing only his right hand. The other pledging, and assuring him on oath that he would find forgiveness for himself from the Saviour, beseeching and failing on his knees, and kissing his right hand itself, as now purified by repentance, led him back to the church. Then by supplicating with copious prayers, and striving along with him in continual fastings, and subduing his mind by various utterances of words, did not depart, as they say, till he restored him to the Church, presenting in him a great example of true repentance and a great token of regeneration, a trophy of the resurrection for which we hope; when at the end of the world, the angels, radiant with joy, hymning and opening the heavens, shall receive into the celestial abodes those who truly repent; and before all, the Saviour Himself goes to meet them, welcoming them; holding forth the shadowless, ceaseless light; conducting them,to the Father’s bosom, to eternal life, to the kingdom of heaven.

Let one believe these things, and the disciples of God, and God, who is surety, the Prophecies, the Gospels, the Apostolic words; living in accordance with them, and lending his ears, and practising the deeds, he shall at his decease see the end and demonstration of the truths taught.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Clement of Alexandria, Who is the Rich Man Who Shall Be Saved?, 42

(F) (2) It was at this time that the apostle John returned from his banishment in the island and took up his abode at Ephesus, according to an ancient Christian tradition.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, 3.20.11

(G) Unclear Location: Angels Thrown Down

(G) (1) And Papias has thus word for word: “some of them, that is, the divine Angels of old, [130] he gave (authority) to rule over the earth and commanded (them) to rule well.” And then says the following: “And it happened that their arrangement came to nothing.”

[Rev. 12:9] And the great dragon was thrown (down), the ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world, he was thrown to the earth, and his angels were thrown (down).
– Andrew of Caesarea, On the Apocalypse Book 12.34

(G) (2) Naturally. For heaven does not bear an earthly mentality, because darkness has nothing in common with light. If it is placed with the article “the Satan,” it is not as (though) another is been placed alongside the devil -and if it is placed like an overstatement, such as “the devil and the Satan”-rather he is called by two (names)-the one (the devil) because he slanders virtues and those who desire them and he (slanders) God himself to human beings, as he represented him (God) slanderously to Adam, and the other (Satan), as he is opposed to both the master and his servants. One must know that the fall of the devil that happened after the cross is not that (of) place, (but) as (a fall to) inefficacy from those former (powers), just as he also confessed to Anthony, the verse of the song had been fulfilled in him. “The swords of the enemy he utterly destroyed to the end.” Therefore, his fall is the annulment of his evil [131] machinations, after the complete rejection of him from heaven and the rule belonging to him, as it is said. It had been said by the blessed Justin the martyr (that) after the coming of Christ and the decree against him (to send him) to Gehenna, the devil is to become a creature blasphemer even (to the extent that) he had never before so shamelessly blasphemed God.
– Andrew of Caesarea, On the Apocalypse Book 12.34 f. in Greek mss.

(G) (3) And Papias, in his discourses, put it this way: Heaven did not countenance his earthly plans, since communication between light and darkness is impossible. He [satan] fell to earth to dwell here, and people came to where he lived. However, he did not let them enjoy their natural passions, rather, he beguiled them into many evils. But Michael and his forces who are overseers of the world helped humanity, as Daniel learned. They established laws and made the prophets wise. All this constituted a battle against the dragon [satan] who [always] set obstacles for humanity. And this struggle extended to Heaven , to Christ. Then Christ came, and the law which had been impossible for others [to fulfill] He realized in His own body, according to the Apostle. He caused sin to retreat and condemned satan, and by His death He spread His righteousness over everyone. Once this happened, the victory of Michael and his forces was realized, and the dragon was unable to resist any longer. This was because the death of Christ made a laughing-stock of him and hurled him to earth. Christ spoke about this, saying: “I saw satan fall from heaven like a bolt of lightning”. The Doctors of the Church (the vardapet s) understood this to refer not to his first fall, but to his second which occurred because of the crucifixion. This [second] fall was not one which occurred in a particular place as the first [fall] had, but rather concerned the expectation of future judgement and punishment . For he had failed in battle, as Anton [St. Anthony] himself confessed in a psalm he wrote about this: “The enemy’s weapons were completely destroyed.” For Christ had judged him and he fell absolutely. The Doctors of the Church teach that until this fall he [satan] had hopes of returning to his former glory, but afterwards he fell completely. On this [topic] Irenaeus takes the words of the martyr Justin as follows…
– Andrew of Caesarea, On the Apocalypse Book 12.34 f. in Armenian mss.

(H) Unclear Location: Exegesis of the Seven Days of Genesis

(H) (1) Being thirty years old when He came to be baptized, and then possessing the full age of a Master, He came to Jerusalem, so that He might be properly acknowledged by all as a Master. For He did not seem one thing while He was another, as those affirm who describe Him as being man only in appearance; but what He was, that He also appeared to be. Being a Master, therefore, He also possessed the age of a Master, not despising or evading any condition of humanity, nor setting aside in Himself that law which He had appointed for the human race, but sanctifying every age, by that period corresponding to it which belonged to Himself. For He came to save all through means of Himself-all, I say, who through Him are born again to God -infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men. He therefore passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, thus sanctifying infants; a child for children, thus sanctifying those who are of this age, being at the same time made to them an example of piety, righteousness, and submission; a youth for youths, becoming an example to youths, and thus sanctifying them for the Lord. So likewise He was an old man for old men, that He might be a perfect Master for all, not merely as respects the setting forth of the truth, but also as regards age, sanctifying at the same time the aged also, and becoming an example to them likewise. Then, at last, He came on to death itself, that He might be “the first-born from the dead, that in all things He might have the pre-eminence,” the Prince of life, existing before all, and going before all.

They, however, that they may establish their false opinion regarding that which is written, “to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,” maintain that He preached for one year only, and then suffered in the twelfth month. [In speaking thus], they are forgetful to their own disadvantage, destroying His whole work, and robbing Him of that age which is both more necessary and more honourable than any other; that more advanced age, I mean, during which also as a teacher He excelled all others. For how could He have had disciples, if He did not teach? And how could He have taught, unless He had reached the age of a Master? For when He came to be baptized, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who has mentioned His years, has expressed it: “Now Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old,” when He came to receive baptism); and, [according to these men, ] He preached only one year reckoning from His baptism. On completing His thirtieth year He suffered, being in fact still a young man, and who had by no means attained to advanced age. Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years, and that this extends onwards to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth andfiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord, [affirming] that John conveyed to them that information. And he remained among them up to the times of Trajan. Some of them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also, and heard the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the [validity of] the statement. Whom then should we rather believe? Whether such men as these, or Ptolemaeus, who never saw the apostles, and who never even in his dreams attained to the slightest trace of an apostle?
-Hypothetical Fragment (John Chapman 1908), Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2.22.4-5 (link)

(H) (2) Therefore this Word, when it made light, is called Wisdom; when it made the sky, Understanding; when it made land and sea, Counsel; when it made sun and moon and other bright things, Power; when it calls forth land and sea, Knowledge; when it formed man, Piety; when it blesses and sanctifies man, it has the name of God’s fear. Behold the seven horns of the Lamb, the seven eyes of God—the seven eyes are the seven spirits of the Lamb; seven torches burning before the throne of God seven golden candlesticks, seven young sheep, the seven women in Isaiah, the seven churches in Paul, seven deacons, seven angels, seven trumpets, seven seals to the book, seven periods of seven days with which Pentecost is completed, the seven weeks in Daniel, also the forty-three weeks in Daniel; with Noah, seven of all clean things in the ark; seven revenges of Cain, seven years for a debt to be acquitted, the lamp with seven orifices, seven pillars of wisdom in the house of Solomon. Now, therefore, you may see that it is being told you of the unerring glory of God in providence; yet, as far as my small capacity [cf. Eusebius] shall be able, I will endeavour to set it forth. That He might re-create that Adam by means of the week, and bring aid to His entire creation, was accomplished by the nativity of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Who, then, that is taught in the law of God, who that is filled with the Holy Spirit, does not see in his heart, that on the same day on which the dragon seduced Eve, the angel Gabriel brought the glad tidings to the Virgin Mary; that on the same day the Holy Spirit overflowed the Virgin Mary, on which He made light; that on that day He was incarnate in flesh, in which He made the land and water; that on the same day He was put to the breast, on which He made the stars; that on the same day He was circumcised, on which the land and water brought forth their offspring; that on the same day He was incarnated, on which He formed man out of the ground; that on the same day Christ was born, on which He formed man; that on that day He suffered, on which Adam fell; that on the same day He rose again from the dead, on which He created light? He, moreover, consummates His humanity in the number seven: of His nativity, His infancy, His boyhood, His youth, His young-manhood, His mature age, His death. [cf. Irenaeus]
-Hypothetical Fragment (John Chapman 1908), Victorinus of Pettau, On the Creation of the World [ANF, vol. 7, p. 343] (link)

(H) (3) Taking their start from Papias the great, of Hierapolis, the disciple of the Apostle who leaned on Christ’s bosom, and Clement, Pantaenus the priest of the Alexandrians and Ammonius, the great scholar, those ancient and first expositors who agree with each other in understanding all the work of the six days (as referring) to Christ and His Church.
-(Pseudo)Anastasius of Sinai, Contempl. Anagog. In Hexaemeron 1

(H) (4) So then the more ancient expositors of the churches, I mean Philo, the philosopher, and contemporary of the Apostles, and the famous Papias of Hierapolis, the disciple of John the Evangelist…and their associates, interpreted the sayings about Paradise spiritually, and referred them to the Church of Christ.
-(Pseudo)Anastasius of Sinai, Contempl. Anagog. In Hexaemeron 7

(I) Unclear Location: Garden of Eden

(I) (1) Where then was the first man placed? Clearly in paradise, just as it is written: And God planted paradise in the east, in Eden, and placed there the man whom he had formed. And thence he was cast out into this world for failure to obey. Therefore the elders, the disciples of the apostles, say that those who have been translated are translated thither, for paradise was prepared for just and spirit-borne men, to which [place] the apostle Paul also was carried and heard words not to be uttered, as to us in the present; and those who have been translated remain there until the consummation, anticipating incorruptibility.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.5.1

(I) (2) § 1. Matthew testifies that the Lord said that Moses writes that Adam spoke in this way: Now this is a bone from my bones, flesh from my flesh, because of this a man will leave [his] father and mother etc. [Matt 19:5]
But the words of the Lord do not agree with the discourses of Moses. For, because Adam, showing deference, prophesied by divine inspiration, he was related by Moses to have said this; yet God, who formed these words in the heart of Adam by divine inspiration, the father himself was related correctly by the Lord to have spoken. For both Adam produced this prophecy and the father, who inspired it, is rightly said to have produced.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Victor of Capua, Pseudo-Polycarp, S. C. Carlson’s translation (link)

(J) Unclear Location: Many Mansions

And as the presbyters say, Then those who are deemed worthy of an abode in heaven shall go there, others shall enjoy the delights of paradise, and others shall possess the splendour of the city; for everywhere the Saviour shall be seen according as they who see Him shall be worthy. [They say, moreover], that there is this distinction between the habitation of those who produce an hundred-fold, and that of those who produce sixty-fold, and that of those who produce thirty-fold: for the first will be taken up into the heavens, the second will dwell in paradise, the last will inhabit the city; and that was on this account the Lord declared, “In My Father’s house are many mansions.” For all things belong to God, who supplies all with a suitable dwelling-place; even as His Word says, that a share is allotted to all by the Father, according as each person is or shall be worthy. And this is the couch on which the guests shall recline, having been invited to the wedding. The presbyters, the disciples of the apostles, affirm that this is the gradation and arrangement of those who are saved, and that they advance through steps of this nature; also that they ascend through the Spirit to the Son, and through the Son to the Father, and that in due time the Son will yield up His work to the Father, even as it is said by the apostle, “For He must reign till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” For in the times of the kingdom, the righteous man who is upon the earth shall then forget to die. “But when He saith, All things shall be subdued unto Him, it is manifest that He is excepted who did put all things under Him. And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” John, therefore, did distinctly foresee the first “resurrection of the just,” and the inheritance in the kingdom of the earth; and what the prophets have prophesied concerning it harmonize [with his vision]. For the Lord also taught these things, when He promised that He would have the mixed cup new with His disciples in the kingdom.
-Hypothetical Fragment (Roberts-Donaldson 1867), Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.36.1-3

(K) Unclear Location: Peace Among Animals

As to the union and concord and tranquility of the animals, who are of different kinds and by nature hostile to each other and inimical, the elders say that it will indeed be so at the coming of Christ when he will rule over all.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Irenaeus, Declaration of the Apostolic Preaching, 61

(L) Unclear Location: Punishment for Sins

As I have heard from a certain presbyter, who had heard it from those who had seen the apostles, and from those who had been their disciples, the punishment [declared] in Scripture was sufficient for the ancients in regard to what they did without the Spirit’s guidance. For as God is no respecter of persons, He inflicted a proper punishment on deeds displeasing to Him.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4.27.1

(M) Unclear Location: Came to Call the Sick

§ 4. The same in this: I do not want to call your friends but the poor and the weak etc. (Luke 14:12-13)

He teaches that not friends but whoever are sick are to be called to a meal. But if the lame or anyone of them would be a friend, without a doubt such is at least to be called for friendship, where these com-mands almost seem to oppose each other. For if not the friends but the lame and blind are to be invited, it would affect those that are friends too, then we should by no means call. But, I decide to understand first to owe them in this place whom of this would esteem the earthly considerations, not in view of divine contem-plation. These are, therefore, friends to be left.

Accordingly, he proposed examples of weakness, which we can necessarily desire for none, unless so much for the fruit of the eternal reward.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Victor of Capua, Pseudo-Polycarp, S. C. Carlson’s translation (link)

(N) Unclear Location: Completed the Work

§ 5. The same in this: I have completed the work you have given me to do (John 17:4).
How does he commemorate the fulfillment of the work of human salvation when he had not yet climbed the standard of the cross? But by the determination of his will, by which he decided to undergo all the marks of the venerable passion, he properly means that he completed the work himself.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Victor of Capua, Pseudo-Polycarp, S. C. Carlson’s translation (link)

(O) Book I: A Hearer of Aristion and the Presbyter John

(O) (1) There are extant five books of Papias, which bear the title Expositions of Oracles of the Lord. Irenaeus makes mention of these as the only works written by him, in the following words: “These things are attested by Papias, an ancient man who was a hearer of John and a companion of Polycarp, in his fourth book. For five books have been written by him.” These are the words of Irenaeus.

But Papias himself in the preface to his discourses by no means declares that he was himself a hearer and eye-witness of the holy apostles, but he shows by the words which he uses that he received the doctrines of the faith from those who were their friends. He says:

“But I shall not hesitate also to put down for you along with my interpretations whatsoever things I have at any time learned carefully from the elders and carefully remembered, guaranteeing their truth. For I did not, like the multitude, take pleasure in those that speak much, but in those that teach the truth; not in those that relate strange commandments, but in those that deliver the commandments given by the Lord to faith, and springing from the truth itself. If, then, any one came, who had been a follower of the elders, I questioned him in regard to the words of the elders,-what Andrew or what Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the disciples of the Lord, and what things Aristion and the presbyter John, {the disciples of the Lord [in Greek mss., not in Syriac mss.]}, say. For I did not think that what was to be gotten from the books would profit me as much as what came from the living and abiding voice.”

It is worth while observing here that the name John is twice enumerated by him. The first one he mentions in connection with Peter and James and Matthew and the rest of the apostles, clearly meaning the evangelist; but the other John he mentions after an interval, and places him among others outside of the number of the apostles, putting Aristion before him, and he distinctly calls him a presbyter. This shows that the statement of those is true, who say that there were two persons in Asia that bore the same name, and that there were two tombs in Ephesus, each of which, even to the present day, is called John’s. It is important to notice this. For it is probable that it was the second, if one is not willing to admit that it was the first that saw the Revelation, which is ascribed by name to John

And Papias, of whom we are now speaking, confesses that he received the words of the apostles from those that followed them, but says that he was himself a hearer of Aristion and the presbyter John. At least he mentions them frequently by name, and gives their traditions in his writings. These things we hope, have not been uselessly adduced by us.
-Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.39.1-7

(O) (2) Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, who was a disciple of John the Divine, and a companion of Polycarp, wrote five books of Oracles of the Lord, wherein, when giving a list of the Apostles, after Peter and John, Philip and Thomas and Matthew he included among the disciples of the Lord Aristion and a second John, whom also he called `The Elder.’ So some think that this John is the author of the two short and catholic Epistles, which are published in the name of John; and he gives as the reason that the primitive (fathers) only accept the first epistle. Some too have wrongly considered the Apocalypse also to be his (i.e. the Elder John’s) work. Papias too is in error about the Millennium, and from him Irenaeus also.
-Philip of Side, History of Christianity, fragment from codex Baroccianus 142 in the Bodleian Library

(O) (3) But indeed of the three [epistles] of John, except the first, the following two [epistles] are disputed as far as many [are concerned].  And opinion has it that there was another elder John, who lived with John in Ephesus as Papias the Heirapolitan says, recording that there are two tombs in Ephesus of the same name, John.  And he says one is called “Elder” and [one is called] the Disciple [ὁμιλητὴν] himself.  For cataloging the Elders of the apostles he also makes mention of these two, asserting in this way, “If one who followed the Elders should come, I inquired about the words of the Elders, what Andrew or Peter said, or Phillip or James or what John or Matthew or any other of the disciples of the Lord [said].  And what Aristion and the Elder John [said].  For I did not think I ought [to receive] so much from books but from a living voice.” Indeed the second and third epistle [of John] and also the Apocalypse some imagine that they belong to this Elder who lived in Ephesus.
-Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos, Ecclesiastical History 2.46.18-37

(P) Book I: Authorship of Mark and Matthew

(P) (1) Then under that he says further: But already, as the blessed elder used to say, since the Lord, being an apostle of the almighty, was sent toward Hebrews, Paul through modesty, as one sent to the gentiles, does not inscribe himself as apostle of Hebrews, both through honor toward the Lord and on account that he wrote the epistle to the Hebrews from his abundance, being a preacher and apostle of gentiles.

And again in the same books Clement sets the tradition of the earliest elders concerning the order of the gospels, in this way: He says that those of the gospels having the genealogies were published openly, but that the gospel according to Mark had this economy: While Peter was preaching the word publicly in Rome and speaking out the gospel by the spirit, those who were present, who were many, called upon Mark, as having followed him from far back and remembering what was said, to write up the things that were said, and having made the gospel he gave it out to those who had requested it. When Peter came to know, he neither directly prevented nor encouraged it. But John, last of all, knowing that the bodily facts had been made clear in the gospels, urged by friends, borne by the spirit of God, made a spiritual gospel. So much for Clement.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Clement of Alexandria, quoted by Eusbeius, Ecclesiastical History 6.14.4-7

(P) (2) Mark, the interpreter of Peter, having remembered the things that he taught in his duty wrote it down, but not in order, and began with the word of prophecy announced beforehand through Isaiah.
-Hypothetical Fragment (suggested, e.g., by S.C. Carlson), Victorinus of Pettau, Commentary on the Apocalypse of John 4.4

(P) (3) Papias gives also in his own work other accounts of the words of the Lord on the authority of Aristion who was mentioned above, and traditions as handed down by the presbyter John; to which we refer those who are fond of learning. But now we must add to the words of his which we have already quoted the tradition which he gives in regard to Mark, the author of the Gospel.

“This also the presbyter said: Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teaching to the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord’s discourses, so that Mark committed no error while he thus wrote some things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely.” These things are related  by Papias concerning Mark. But concerning Matthew he writes as follows: “So then Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew language, and every one interpreted them as he was able.” And the same writer uses testimonies from the first Epistle of John and from that of Peter likewise. And he relates another story of a woman, who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is contained in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. These things we have thought it necessary to observe in addition to what has been already stated.
-Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.39.13-16

(P) (4) And so greatly did the splendor of piety illumine the minds of Peter’s hearers that they were not satisfied with hearing once only, and were not content with the unwritten teaching of the divine Gospel, but with all sorts of entreaties they besought Mark, a follower of Peter, and the one whose Gospel is extant, that he would leave them a written monument of the doctrine which had been orally communicated to them. Nor did they cease until they had prevailed with the man, and had thus become the occasion of the written Gospel which bears the name of Mark.

And they say that Peter when he had learned, through a revelation of the Spirit, of that which had been done, was pleased with the zeal of the men, and that the work obtained the sanction of his authority for the purpose of being used in the churches. Clement in the eighth book of his Hypotyposes gives this account, and with him agrees the bishop of Hierapolis named Papias. And Peter makes mention of Mark in his first epistle which they say that he wrote in Rome itself, as is indicated by him, when he calls the city, by a figure, Babylon, as he does in the following words: “The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son.”
-Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 2.15.1-2

(P) (5) Peter sent the first catholic epistle from Rome, having, according to Eusebius, Mark the evangelist as a follower. At this time, he composed the gospel at the Romans’ request, according to Clement in the sixth book of his Hypotyposeis and Papias the bishop of Hierapolis.
-George Syncellus, Chroniconology, 403

(P) (6) Peter implanted such a radiance of piety in the hearers that it was not sufficient to have a hearing only nor did he want the word of God to remain unwritten. And Peter allowed Mark, who at this time followed the apostle, to preserve part of the memory of the unwritten teaching for them in writing. And at first he [Peter] did not allow this [lit. deliver], until he was prevailed upon to think the man [Mark] worthy. After the apostle perceived that the Spirit of God instructed him, he delighted in the eagerness of the men and from this ordained the writing to be read in the churches. Clement records this reason [why] the Gospel According to Mark [was written] in the eighth [book] of his Hypotyposeis. And Papias bishop of Hierapolis, agreeing with him, also details [the same].

And on account of this Peter spoke the Gospel According to Mark. But Peter mentions Mark in his first epistle which opinion has that he wrote when he lived in Rome, in which figuratively he also calls Rome “Babylon”, saying thusly “She who is chosen with you in Babylon greets you, as does also my son Mark. And Luke in the Acts calls him John. But they say that Mark, having first put in order Egypt and Alexandria, preached the gospel which he composed to the assembled church and there founded the monastic polity of Christians. At first so great a multitude of both men and women, they say, flowed together at the entrance [of the church], that having marked out the entire polity [as it relates] to their philosophy and way of life through asceticism, their diet and conduct, he placed upon them the celebrated philosophies of Philo, whom opinion has that he even entered into the company of Peter while he preached the divine word at Rome
-Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos, Ecclesiastical History 2.15.1-36

(P) (7) But concerning the cause of the writing of the Gospel According to Mark we have pointed out a little above in chapter 15 of the present work; how Peter ended the outrage of that abominable Simon [Magus] who played the man [possible sexual reference]. And at evening the light of faith was implanted [in them] and so great a longing of his words in the souls of the listeners that he did not want the words to remain as [unwritten]. And he entreated Mark who at this time followed the apostle, to leave a written record of the unwritten sayings for him. Accordingly after the apostle was glad at the good eagerness of their faith, he dictated to Mark the Gospel and from this he ordained the writing to be read in the churches. .Clement records this reason [why] the Gospel According to Mark [was written] in the eighth [book] of his Hypotyposeis. And likewise Papias Bishop of Hierapolis, as was clearly described a little ways above in the 15th chapter of the present treatise.
-Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopoulos, Ecclesiastical History 2.45.83-101

(Q) Unclear Location (Book I?): Woman Accused of Many Sins

[Assumption based on the position of this story in the presentation of Eusebius.]

(Q) (1) And he relates another story of a woman, who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is contained in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. These things we have thought it necessary to observe in addition to what has been already stated.
-Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.39.16

(Q) (2) And there was at that time in Menbij [Hierapolis] a distinguished master who had many treatises, and he wrote five treatises on the Gospel. And he mentions in his treatise on the Gospel of John, that in the book of John the Evangelist, he speaks of a woman who was adulterous, so when they presented her to Christ our Lord, to whom be glory, He told the Jews who brought her to Him, “Whoever of you knows that he is innocent of what she has done, let him testify against her with what he has.” So when He told them that, none of them responded with anything and they left.
-Agapius of Menbij, Universal History, Year 12 of Trajan [110AD]

(Q) (3) The story of that adulterous woman, which other Christians have written in their gospel, was written about by a certain Papias, a student of John, who was declared a heretic and condemned.  Eusebius wrote about this. There are laws and that matter which Pilate, the king of the Jews, wrote of.  And it is said that he wrote in Hebrew with Latin and Greek above it.
-Vardan Arewelts’i, Explanations of Holy Scripture (translation by Robert Bedrosian)

(R) Book I (Presumably): Authorship of the Gospel of John

(R) (1) The fourth Gospel is that of John, one of the disciples. When his fellow-disciples and bishops entreated him, he said, “Fast ye now with me for the space of three days, and let us recount to each other whatever may be revealed to each of us.” On the same night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should narrate all things in his own name as they called them to mind. And hence, although different points are taught us in the several books of the Gospels, there is no difference as regards the faith of believers, inasmuch as in all of them all things are related under one imperial Spirit, which concern the Lord’s nativity, His passion, His resurrection, His conversation with His disciples, and His twofold advent,-the first in the humiliation of rejection, which is now past, and the second in the glory of royal power, which is yet in the future. What marvel is it, then, that John brings forward these several things so constantly in his epistles also, saying in his own person, “What we have seen with our eyes, and heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, that have we written.” For thus he professes himself to be not only the eye-witness, but also the hearer; and besides that, the historian of all the wondrous facts concerning the Lord in their order.
-Hypothetical Fragment (Richard Bauckham 1993), Muratorian Canon

(R) (2) (i) The Gospel of John was made known and given to the Churches by John, while he yet remained in the body; as (one) Papias by name, of Hierapolis, a beloved disciple of John, has related in his exoteric, that is, in his last five books; but he wrote down the Gospel at the dictation of John, correctly. But Marcion the heretic, when he had been censured by him because he held heretical opinions, was cast off by John. Now he had brought writings or letters delivered to him from the brethren that were in Pontus.

– Preface to John, Vat. Reg. lat 14, J. B. Lightfoot’s translation

(R) (2) (ii) The Gospel of John, even during his lifetime, was published and distributed to the churches, as Papias, called the Hierpolitan, the beloved disciple of John, has reported in his explications (?), namely the last (?) five books. But Marcion, the heretic, described/wrote down the/a Gospel, while John dictated correctly the true one. Since he [Marcion] has been disapproved by him[John], for him [John] having got to know the Antitheses of him [Marcion], John rebuked him. He [Marcion], indeed, had brought him writings or letters from the brethren who were in Pontus.
– Preface to John, Vat. Reg. lat 14, Markus Vincent’s translation (link)

(R) (2) (iii) This gospel, then, after the apocalypse was written was made manifest and given to the churches in Asia by John, as yet still in the body, as the Heiropolitan, Papias by name, dear disciple of John, transmitted in his Exoteric, that is, the outside five books. He wrote down this gospel while John dictated. Truly Marcion the heretic, when he had been disapproved by him because he supposed contrary things, was thrown out by John. He in truth carried writings or epistles sent to him from the brothers who were in Pontus, faithful in Christ Jesus our Lord.
– Preface to John, Vat. Reg. lat 14, Ben C. Smith’s translation (link)

(R) (2) (iv) The Gospel of John was made public and given to the churches by John when he was still alive; as Papias by name, of Hierapolis, dear disciple of John, recalled in the “exoteric”, that is the outside, five books; he in fact wrote down the gospel as John was directly stating the truth. Yet Marcion the heretic when he had been rejected by him because he supposed contrary matters was expelled. He even brought him the writings and letters by John from the brothers who were in Pontus.
– Preface to John, Vat. Reg. lat 14, S.C. Carlson’s translation (link)

(R) (3) For the last of these, John, who was called the son of thunder, when he was exceedingly old, as both Irenaeus and Eusebius handed down to us, as well as succession of other believers who were historians, at that time when the terrible heresies were sprouting, dictated the gospel to his respectable disciple Papias the Heirapolitan for the completion of those who preached the word before him to the gentiles throughout all the world.
-Balthasar Cordier, Catena Patrum Graecorum in Sanctum Joannem [1630 AD]

(S) Book I (Presumably): The Authorship of the Four Gospels

5. And the rest of the followers of our Saviour, the twelve apostles, the seventy disciples, and countless others besides, were not ignorant of these things. Nevertheless, of all the disciples of the Lord, only Matthew and John have left us written memorials, and they, tradition says, were led to write only under the pressure of necessity.

6. For Matthew, who had at first preached to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to other peoples, committed his Gospel to writing in his native tongue, and thus compensated those whom he was obliged to leave for the loss of his presence.

7. And when Mark and Luke had already published their Gospels, they say that John, who had employed all his time in proclaiming the Gospel orally, finally proceeded to write for the following reason. The three Gospels already mentioned having come into the hands of all and into his own too, they say that he accepted them and bore witness to their truthfulness; but that there was lacking in them an account of the deeds done by Christ at the beginning of his ministry.

8. And this indeed is true. For it is evident that the three evangelists recorded only the deeds done by the Saviour for one year after the imprisonment of John the Baptist, and indicated this in the beginning of their account.

9. For Matthew, after the forty days’ fast and the temptation which followed it, indicates the chronology of his work when he says: “Now when he heard that John was delivered up he withdrew from Judea into Galilee.”

10. Mark likewise says: “Now after that John was delivered up Jesus came into Galilee.” And Luke, before commencing his account of the deeds of Jesus, similarly marks the time, when he says that Herod, “adding to all the evil deeds which he had done, shut up John in prison.”

11. They say, therefore, that the apostle John, being asked to do it for this reason, gave in his Gospel an account of the period which had been omitted by the earlier evangelists, and of the deeds done by the Saviour during that period; that is, of those which were done before the imprisonment of the Baptist. And this is indicated by him, they say, in the following words: “This beginning of miracles did Jesus”; and again when he refers to the Baptist, in the midst of the deeds of Jesus, as still baptizing in Ænon near Salim; where he states the matter clearly in the words: “For John was not yet cast into prison.”

12. John accordingly, in his Gospel, records the deeds of Christ which were performed before the Baptist was cast into prison, but the other three evangelists mention the events which happened after that time.

13. One who understands this can no longer think that the Gospels are at variance with one another, inasmuch as the Gospel according to John contains the first acts of Christ, while the others give an account of the latter part of his life. And the genealogy of our Saviour according to the flesh John quite naturally omitted, because it had been already given by Matthew and Luke, and began with the doctrine of his divinity, which had, as it were, been reserved for him, as their superior, by the divine Spirit.
-Hypothetical Fragment (Charles Hill 1998), Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.24.5-13

(T) Book I (Presumably): The Beginnings of the Four Gospels

§ 3. The same on the beginning of the gospel according to Mark.
Reasonably, the evangelists used different beginnings although the one and the same purpose of evangelization is represented.
Matthew, as writing to Hebrews, composed the order of the genealogy of Christ, so that he would show that Christ had descended from this progeny, from which all the prophets had foretold him to be born.
But John, based in Ephesus, made the beginning of the gospel from the reason of our redemption, of us who from the gentiles as it were did not know the law, which reason is evident from him that God wished his son to be incarnated for our salvation.
Luke, however, began from Zacharias the priest so that he would declare the divinity of Christ to the gen-tiles by the miracle of the birth of his son and by the office of so many preachers.
From which Mark too declares the ancient qualifications of the prophetic mystery of the coming of Christ so that his preaching had been proven not to be new but uttered from ancient times or account of that.
The evangelists were concerned with using introductions, which each decided to set forth that for the listeners. Thus nothing is found to the contrary where even for different writings the same basis is arrived at.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Victor of Capua, Pseudo-Polycarp, S. C. Carlson’s translation (link)

(U) Book I: Called Children

Those who practised guilelessness towards God they used to call children, as Papias also shows in the first book of the Expositions of the Lord, and Clement of Alexandria in the Paedagogue.
-John of Scythopolis, Scholia on The Celestial Hierarchy of Dionysius the Areopagite 2.5

(V) Book II: Death of James and John

(V) (1) Papias in his second book says that John the Divine and James his brother were killed by the Jews.
-Philip of Side, History of Christianity, fragment from codex Baroccianus 142 in the Bodleian Library

(V) (2) After Domitian, Nerva reigned one year, who recalled John from the island (i.e. Patmos), and allowed him to dwell in Ephesus. He was at that time the sole survivor of the twelve Apostles, and after writing his Gospel received the honour of martyrdom. For Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, who was an eye-witness of him, in the second book of the Oracles of the Lord says that he was killed by the Jews, and thereby evidently fulfilled, together with his brother, Christ’s prophecy concerning them, and their own confession and undertaking on His behalf. For when the Lord said to them; Are ye able to drink of the cup that I drink of?, and they readily assented and agreed, He said; My cup shall ye drink, and with the baptism that I am baptized shall ye be baptized. And reasonably so, for it is impossible for God to lie. So too the learned Origen affirms in his interpretation of S. Matthew’s Gospel that John was martyred, declaring that he had learnt the fact from the successors of the Apostles. And indeed the well-informed Eusebius also in his Ecclesiastical History says; `Thomas received by lot Parthia, but John, Asia, where also he made his residence and died at Ephesus.’
-An interpolation into George Hamartolus’ Chroniconology

(V) (3) § 2. The same to these words of Christ: you drink my cup etc. [Matt 20:23]
By this kind of drink he means the passion that James indeed was to most recently perfect by martyrdom, yet his brother John to depart without martyrdom, although he also withstood many afflictions and exiles, but Christ judged the mind prepared for martyrdom to be a martyr. For the apostle Paul said I die daily; while it is impossible for a person to die daily, in his death by which this life is ended once. But since for the gospel he is continually prepared for death, he testified about himself to die daily under this meaning. It is also read that the blessed John had been plunged in a vat of boiling oil in the name of Christ.
-Hypothetical Fragment, Victor of Capua, Pseudo-Polycarp, S. C. Carlson’s translation (link)

(W) Unclear Location (Book II, IV, or V?): A Resurrection and Surviving Deadly Poison

[Dennis MacDonald puts this in Book V. It is not explicitly assigned to a book by Philip of Side or Eusebius.]

(W) (1) But it is fitting to subjoin to the words of Papias which have been quoted, other passages from his works in which he relates some other wonderful events which he claims to have received from tradition. That Philip the apostle dwelt at Hierapolis with his daughters has been already stated. But it must be noted here that Papias, their contemporary, says that he heard a wonderful tale from the daughters of Philip. For he relates that in his time one rose from the dead.
-Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.39.8-9

(W) (2) And he tells another wonderful story of Justus, surnamed Barsabbas: that he drank a deadly poison, and yet, by the grace of the Lord, suffered no harm. The Book of Acts records that the holy apostles after the ascension of the Savior, put forward this Justus, together with Matthias, and prayed that one might be chosen in place of the traitor Judas, to fill up their number. The account is as follows: “And they put forward two, Joseph, called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias; and they prayed and said…”
-Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.39.9-10

(W) (3) Papias in his second book says that John the Divine and James his brother were killed by the Jews. The aforesaid Papias stated on the authority of the daughters of Philip that Barsabas, who is also called Justus, when challenged by the unbelievers drank serpent’s poison in the name of the Lord, and was shielded from all harm. He makes also other marvelous statements, and particularly about the mother of Manaim who was raised from the dead. As for those who were raised from the dead by Christ, (he states) that they survived till the time of Hadrian.
-Philip of Side, History of Christianity, fragment from codex Baroccianus 142 in the Bodleian Library

(X) Book IV: Food in the Kingdom of God

(X) (1) Therefore the foretold blessing indisputably belongs to the times of the Kingdom, when the righteous shall rise from the dead and reign and through the resurrection itself shall be honored by God, when also creation shall be freed and renewed, and shall grow a multitude of every kind of food from the dew of heaven and from the wealth of the earth. Just as the Elders, who saw John the disciple of the Lord, recalled hearing from him how concerning these times he used to teach that the Lord would say:

“Days will come in which the vines shall grow, when each one will have ten-thousand branches and every single branch ten-thousand twigs and on every single twig ten-thousand leaves and on every single leaf ten-thousand clusters, and on every single cluster ten-thousand grapes and each grape that is pressed will give twenty-five measures of wine. And when one of the saints plucks a cluster, another cluster shall call, ‘I am better, take me, bless the Lord through me.’ In the same way an ear of wheat will grow ten-thousand kernels of grain, and every single ear of wheat will have ten-thousand kernels and every single kernel will give five pounds of the finest pure flour, and the rest of the ripe fruits and the seeds and the grass will be like these in a following proportion. And all the creatures who desire these foods will receive them from the earth, becoming peaceable and united to one another, submissive to men and entirely obedient.”

These things Papias, the hearer of John, who was a companion of Polycarp, a man of ancient time, testifies in writing in the fourth of his books, for there are five books composed by him. And he adds saying “These things are believable to those who believe. For,” he says, “even Judas the betrayer who did not believe and questioned ‘And how will such things happen been accomplished by God?’ But the Lord said ‘those who come to those times shall see.’”
-Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 5.33.3-4

(X) (2) “Of this kingdom, the Lord reminded the Apostles before He suffered, saying: I will not drink of this fruit of the vine any more, until when I will drink with you again in the coming kingdom, which is the hundred parts multiplied, ten times, a thousand times, to greater things and better things.”
-Victorinus of Pettau, possible allusion, Commentary on the Apocalypse 21.6

(X) (3) “Therefore, after the Lord had described the coming Kingdom to the disciples as being glorious and wonderful, Judas, who confused by what was spoken, said ‘And yet who will see these things?’ And the Lord said, “Those who are worthy will see these things.'”
-Hippolytus of Rome, possible allusion, Commentary On Daniel 4.59

(X) (4) The same writer gives also other accounts which he says came to him through unwritten tradition, certain strange parables and teachings of the Savior, and some other more mythical things. To these belong his statement that there will be a period of some thousand years after the resurrection of the dead, and that the kingdom of Christ will be set up in material form on this very earth. I suppose he got these ideas through a misunderstanding of the apostolic accounts, not perceiving that the things said by them were spoken mystically in figures.
-Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.39.11-12

(X) (5) This he says, darkly indicating, I suppose, Papias of Hierapolis in Asia, who was a bishop at that time and flourished in the days of the holy Evangelist John. For this Papias in the fourth book of his Dominical Expositions mentioned viands among the sources of delights in the resurrection. … And Irenaeus of Lyons says the same thing in his fifth book against heresies, and produces in support of his statement the aforesaid Papias.
-John of Scythopolis, Scholia on The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy of Dionysius the Areopagite 7.3.5 (PG 4 p176)

(X) (6) Nor again (does Stephanus follow) Papias, the bishop and martyr of Hierapolis, nor Irenaeus, the holy bishop of Lyons, when they say that the kingdom of heaven will consist in enjoyment of certain material foods.
-Photius, Bibliothecae, 232, regarding Stephan Gobarus

(X) (7) Papias, bishop of Hierapolis in the Asia, who was educated with John the Evangelist, says in the fourth book of “Interpretations of the Lord” that delights shall exist through foods in the resurrection. What is more, Irenaeus says the same in <his> writing “Against Heresies”, from testimony from the book of Papias. Afterwards, he accepted this opinion of Apollonarius.
-John of Dara, On the Heavenly and the Earthly Hierarchy

(Y) Book IV: Judas

Judas did not die by hanging, but lived on, having been cut down before he was suffocated. And the acts of the apostles show this, that falling head long he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. This fact is related more clearly by Papias, the disciple of John, and the fourth book of the Expositions of the Oracles of the Lord as follows:

Judas walked about in this world a terrible example of impiety; his flesh swollen to such an extent that, where hay wagon can pass with ease, he was not able to pass, no, not even the mass of his head merely. They say that his eyelids swelled to such an extent that he could not see the light at all, while as for his eyes they were not visible even by a physician looking through an instrument, so far have they sunk from the surface.

His genitals appeared entirely disfigured, nauseous and large. When he carried himself about discharge and worms flowed from his entire body through his private areas only, on account of his outrages. After many agonies and punishments, he died in his own place. And on account of this the place is desolate and uninhabited even now. And to this day no one is able to go by that place, except if they block their noses with their hands. Such judgment was spread through his body and upon the earth.
-Apollinarius, A catena compiled by Cramer vol 3 p12

(Z) Dubious – likely from Papias of Lombardy, 11th century lexicographer

(Z) (1) Mary the mother of the Lord. Mary the wife of Cleophas or Alphaeus, who was the mother of James the bishop and apostle, and of Simon and Thaddeus, and of one Joseph. Mary Salome, wife of Zebedee, mother of John the evangelist and James. Mary Magdalene. These four are found in the gospel. James and Judas and Joseph were sons of an aunt of the Lord. James also and John were sons of another aunt of the Lord. Mary, mother of James the Less and Joseph, wife of Alphaeus, was the sister of Mary the mother of the Lord, whom John names of Cleophas, either from her father or from the family of the clan, or for some other reason. Mary Salome is called Salome either from her husband or her village. Some affirm that she is the same as Mary of Cleophas because she had two husbands.
– Clearly a quote from Papias of Lombardy in Bodleian 2397 (link), a Latin manuscript (dated 1302/1303)

(Z) (2) But, concerning the aloe which people brought, some say that it was a mixture of oil and honey, but aloe is certainly a kind of incense. The geographer and Papias report that there are fifteen kinds of aloe in India.
– Likely a reference to Papias of Lombardy in Vardan Vardapet, a 13th century Armenian historian