Talk:Dositheos (Samaritan)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Huh!

Is the topic or the article that is terribly confused? Dositheans affirming the Torah but denying the prophets make them extraordinarily ungnostic, yes really anti-gnostic. Gnosticism in general reject the Torah, Kings and other books where JHVH malbehaves, but affirm wisdoms and prophets. To me it seems Dositheos is a better candidate for the modern Samaritans (and others). Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 18:56, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, per the Wikipedia article, the Sadducees existed prior to the first century AD. The article on them indicates an origin of second century BC, I think. So how could their sect be based on a first century AD person? Lowell Boggs (talk) 03:22, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The etymology of the word is wrong. The Greek word for 'gift' is δώρον, and one cannot get 'dosi' from that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.151.199 (talk) 05:20, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant Greek term is δόσις, found in Homer. 2.29.159.71 (talk) 15:54, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]