Papias himself knows several New Testament books, whose dates are themselves controversial, and was informed by John the Evangelist, Aristion, the daughters of Philip and others who had themselves heard the Twelve Apostles.

He is also called a companion of the long-lived Polycarp (69–155),[4] Agapius of Hierapolis dates one of his histories to the 12th year of Trajan's rule (110 AD).

[note 2]How to interpret these quotations from Papias has long been a matter of controversy, as the original context for each is missing and the Greek is in several respects ambiguous and seems to employ technical rhetorical terminology.

[24][25] The apparent claim that Matthew wrote in Hebrew—which in Greek could refer to either Hebrew or Aramaic[26]—is echoed by many other ancient authorities.

[27] Modern scholars have proposed numerous explanations for this assertion, in light of the prevalent view that canonical Matthew was composed in Greek and not translated from Semitic.

Within the 2nd century, this relation of Peter to Mark's Gospel is alluded to by Justin[34] and expanded on by Clement of Alexandria.

Bauckham argues that the Muratorian Canon (c. 170) has drawn from Papias; the extant fragment, however, preserves only a few final words on Mark and then speaks about Luke and John.

[31] Agapius of Hierapolis (10th century) offers a fuller summary of what Papias said here, calling the woman an adulteress.

[47] The parallel is clear to the famous Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53–8:11), a problematic passage absent or relocated in many ancient Gospel manuscripts.

[49] Since the passage in John is virtually unknown to the Greek patristic tradition;[50] Eusebius has cited the only parallel he recognized, from the now-lost Gospel according to the Hebrews, which may be the version quoted by Didymus the Blind.

Indeed, the Acts of the Apostles makes this clear: "Falling headlong he burst open in the middle and his intestines spilled out.

For his eyelids, they say, were so swollen that he could not see the light at all, and his eyes could not be seen, even by a doctor using an optical instrument, so far had they sunk below the outer surface.

His genitals appeared more loathsome and larger than anyone else's, and when he relieved himself there passed through it pus and worms from every part of his body, much to his shame.

"Two late sources (Philip of Side and George Hamartolus) cite the second book of Papias as claiming that John was killed by the Jews.

[61][62] Papias relates, on the authority of the daughters of Philip, an event concerning Justus Barsabbas, who according to Acts was one of two candidates proposed to join the Twelve Apostles.

This account may be connected to a verse from the longer ending of Mark: "They will pick up snakes in their hands, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them.

[67] Eusebius’ use of sources suggests that he himself did not always exercise the soundest of critical judgement, and his negative assessment of Papias was in all likelihood dictated simply by a distrust of chiliasm.

[71] Yoon-Man Park cites a modern argument that Papias's tradition was formulated to vindicate the apostolicity of Mark's Gospel, but dismisses this as an unlikely apologetic route unless the Peter-Mark connection Papias described had already been accepted with general agreement by the early church.