| Part ofa series on |
| Jewish Christianity |
|---|
 |
Ancient groups |
Ebionites (Ancient Greek:Ἐβιωναῖοι,romanized: Ebiōnaîoi, derived fromHebrewאֶבְיוֹנִים,[1]ʾEḇyōnīm, meaning 'the poor' or 'poor ones') as a term refers to aJewish Christian sect that existed during the early centuries of theCommon Era.[2][3]
Since historical records by the Ebionites are scarce, fragmentary and disputed, much of what is known or conjectured about them derives from thepolemics of theirGentile Christian opponents, specifically theChurch Fathers —Irenaeus,Origen,Eusebius, andEpiphanius of Salamis — who saw the Ebionites as distinct from other Jewish Christian sects, such as theNazarenes.[4][5][6][7]
The Church Fathers generally agree on key points about the majority of Ebionites, such as theirvoluntary poverty and rejection ofproto-orthodox Christian beliefs in Jesus'divinity,pre-existence, andvirgin birth; they argue these Ebionites believed that Jesus was amere man, born the natural son ofJoseph andMary, who, by virtue of hisrighteousness in perfectly following theletter and spirit of theLaw of Moses, wasadopted as the son of God to be aMessiah.[8]
According to these patristic sources, the Ebionites insisted on the necessity of following both the Law of Moses and themoral teachings of Jesus to be righteous; they reveredJames the Just, brother of Jesus, as an exemplar of righteousness and the true successor to Jesus (rather thanPeter), while rejectingPaul as afalse apostle and anapostate from the Law.[9][10][11]: 88
However, the Church Fathers diverge on details regarding some specific Ebionite views about Jesus (the nature and mission ofChrist), their use of additionalscripture to theHebrew Bible (one, some or all of theJewish–Christian gospels), and their lifestyle practices (religious vegetarianism,ritual washing, etc.). These variations reflect the evolving andschismatic nature ofearly Christian sects, as well as the tendency of patristic polemicists to conflate different sects and misattribute unusual views and practices, more typical ofGnostic Christianity than Jewish Christianity, to Ebionites to discredit them.[12]: 39
Somemodern critical scholars argue the Church Fathers' condemnation of Ebionites as "heretics" and "Judaizers" is both ironic and tragic, since many Ebionite views may have been closer to the authentic views of not only thefirst disciples of Jesus but also of thehistorical Jesus himself.[13][8]
The hellenized Hebrew termEbionite was first applied byIrenaeus in thesecond century without making mention of Nazarenes (c. 180 CE).[14][15]Origen wrote "for Ebion signifies 'poor' among the Jews, and those Jews who have received Jesus as Christ are called by the name of Ebionites."[16][17]Tertullian was the first to write against aheresiarch calledEbion; scholars believe he derived this name from a literal reading ofEbionaioi as 'followers of Ebion', a derivation now considered mistaken for lack of any more substantial references to such a figure.[18][19] The termthe poor (Greek:ptōkhoí) was still used in its original, more general sense.[18][19] Modern Hebrew still uses the Biblical Hebrew termthe needy for almsgiving to the needy atPurim.[20]
ScholarJames D. Tabor argues that the Ebionites most likely named themselves after the poor, the first of many groups of people mentioned in theBeatitudes ofJesus asblessed and meriting entry in the comingKingdom of God on Earth.[13]
The earliest reference to a sect that might fit the description of the later Ebionites appears inJustin Martyr'sDialogue with Trypho (c. 155-60).[citation needed] Justin distinguishes betweenJewish Christians who observe theLaw of Moses but do not require its observance upon others and those who believe the Mosaic Law to be obligatory on all.[21]Irenaeus (c. 180) was probably the first to use the termEbionites to name a sect he labeled heretical "Judaizers" for "stubbornly clinging to the Law".[22]Origen (c. 212) remarks that the name derives from theHebrew wordevyon, meaning 'poor'.[23]Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 310–320 – 403) gives the most complete account in hisheresiology calledPanarion, denouncing eighty heretical sects, among them the Ebionites.[24]: 30 [25] Epiphanius mostly gives general descriptions of their religious beliefs and includes quotations from theirgospels, which have not survived. According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, the Ebionite movement "may have arisen about the time of thedestruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem" (70 CE).[2] The tentative dating of the origins of this sect depends on Epiphanius writing three centuries later and relying on information for the Ebionites from theBook of Elchasai, which may not have had anything to do with the Ebionites.[26]
Paul talks of his collection for the "poor among the saints" in the Jerusalem church, but this is generally taken as meaning the poorer members of the church as a whole.[27]
The actual number of sects described as Ebionites is difficult to ascertain, as the contradictorypatristic accounts in their attempt to distinguish various sects sometimes confuse them with each other.[19] Other sects mentioned are theCarpocratians, theCerinthians, theElcesaites, the fourth centuryNazarenes and theSampsaeans, most of whom were Jewish Christian sects who heldgnostic or other views rejected by the Ebionites. Epiphanius, however, mentions that a sect of Ebionites came to embrace some of these views despite keeping their name.[28]
As the Ebionites are first mentioned as such in the second century, their earlier history and any relation to the firstJerusalem church remains obscure and a matter of contention. There is no evidence linking the origin of the later sect of the Ebionites with theFirst Jewish-Roman War of 66–70 CE or with the Jerusalem church led byJames.Eusebius relates a tradition, probably based onAristo of Pella, that the early Christians left Jerusalem just prior to the war andfled to Pella,[29]Jordan beyond theJordan River, but does not connect this with Ebionites.[18][19] They were led bySimeon of Jerusalem (d. 107) and during theSecond Jewish-Roman War of 115–117, they were persecuted by the Jewish followers ofBar Kochba for refusing to recognize his messianic claims.[28] As late as Epiphanius (310–403), members of the Ebionite sect resided inNabatea, andPaneas,Moabitis, and Kochaba in the region ofBashan, nearAdraa.[30] From these places, they dispersed and went intoAsia (Anatolia),Rome andCyprus.[30]
According to Harnack, the influence ofElchasaites places some Ebionites in the context of thegnostic movements widespread in Syria and the lands to the east.[19][31]
After the end of theFirst Jewish–Roman War, the importance of theJerusalem church began to fade.Jewish Christianity became dispersed throughout theJewish diaspora in theLevant, where it was slowly eclipsed byGentile Christianity, which then spread throughout theRoman Empire without competition from Jewish Christian sects.[32][page needed] Once the Jerusalem church was eliminated during theBar Kokhba revolt, which ended in 136 CE, the Ebionites gradually lost influence and followers. Some modern scholars, such asHyam Maccoby, argue the decline of the Ebionites was due to marginalization andpersecution by both Jews and Christians.[10] Maccoby's views as expressed in his works from the 1980s and 1990s have, however, been nearly universally rejected by scholars.[33] Following the defeat of the rebellion and the subsequent expulsion of Jews from Judea, Jerusalem became the Gentile city ofAelia Capitolina. Many of the Jewish Christians residing at Pella renounced their Jewish practices at this time and joined the mainstream Christian church. Those who remained at Pella and continued in obedience to the Law were labeled heretics.[34][better source needed] In 375, Epiphanius records the settlement of Ebionites on Cyprus, but by the 5th century,Theodoret of Cyrrhus reported that they were no longer present in the region.[28]
The Ebionites are still attested, if as marginal communities, down to the 7th century. Some modern scholars argue that the Ebionites survived much longer and identify them with a sect encountered by the historianAbd al-Jabbar ibn Ahmad around the year 1000.[12] There is another possible reference to Ebionite communities has them existing around the 11th century in northwesternArabia, inSefer Ha'masaot, the "Book of the Travels" of RabbiBenjamin of Tudela, a rabbi from Spain. These communities were located in two cities,Tayma and "Tilmas",[35] possiblySaada in Yemen. The 12th century Muslim historianMuhammad al-Shahrastani mentions Jews living in nearbyMedina andHejaz who accepted Jesus as a prophetic figure and followed traditional Judaism, rejecting mainstreamChristian views.[36] Some scholars propose that interactions between Ebionite communities and early Muslims played a role in shaping theIslamic perspective on Jesus.[19][37]
Most patristic sources[citation needed] portray the Ebionites as Jews who zealously followed theLaw of Moses, reveredJerusalem as the holiest city[22] and restrictedtable fellowship only toGod-fearing Gentiles whoconverted to Judaism.[21]
Some Church Fathers describe some Ebionites as departing from traditionalJewish principles of faith andpractice. For example,Methodius of Olympus stated that the Ebionites believed that theprophets spoke only by their own power and not by the power of theHoly Spirit.[38]Epiphanius of Salamis stated that the Ebionites possessed a separationistChristology, which claimed that Jesus and the Christ are two different beings, and, therefore, the Christ is anangel of God who was incarnated in Jesus when he wasadopted as the son of God during hisbaptism,[24]: 30.14.5 [24]: 30.16.4–5 engaged in excessiveritual washing,[24]: 30.19.28–30 denied parts of the Law deemed obsolete or corrupt,[24]: 30.18.7–9 opposedanimal sacrifice,[24]: 30.16.4–5 [39] practicedvegetarianism[24]: 30.22.4 and celebrated a commemorative meal annually[40] on or aroundPassover withunleavened bread and water only, in contrast to the daily ChristianEucharist.[24]: 30 [41][42] The reliability of Epiphanius' account of the Ebionites is questioned by some scholars.[5][page needed][43] Modern scholarShlomo Pines, for example, argues that theheterodox views and practices he ascribes to some Ebionites originated inGnostic Christianity rather thanJewish Christianity and are characteristics of the JewishElcesaite sect, which Epiphanius mistakenly attributed to the Ebionites.[12]: 39
While mainstreambiblical scholars do suppose someEssene influence on the nascent Jewish Christian church in some organizational, administrative and cultic respects, some scholars go beyond that assumption. Regarding the Ebionites specifically, a number of scholars have different theories on how the Ebionites may have developed from an EsseneJewish messianic sect.Hans-Joachim Schoeps argues that the conversion of some Essenes to Jewish Christianity after theSiege of Jerusalem in 70 CE may be the source of some Ebionites adopting Essene views and practices,[37][page needed] while some conclude that the Essenes did not become Jewish Christians, but still had an influence on the Ebionites.[44][page needed]
In theGospel of the Ebionites, as quoted by Epiphanius,John the Baptist and Jesus are portrayed asvegetarians.[45][46][47] Epiphanius states that the Ebionites had amended "locusts" (Ancient Greek:ἀκρίδες,romanized: akrídes) to "honey cakes" (Ancient Greek:ἐγκρίδες,romanized: enkrídes). This emendation is not found in any other New Testament manuscript or translation,[48][49] though a different vegetarian reading is found in a lateSlavonic version ofJosephus'War of the Jews.[50] Pines and other modern scholars propose that the Ebionites were projecting their own vegetarianism onto John the Baptist.[12]: 39
The strict vegetarianism of the Ebionites may have been a reaction to the cessation ofanimal sacrifices after thedestruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 CE and a safeguard against the consumption ofunclean meat in apagan environment.[51]James Tabor, however, argues that Ebionite disdain for eating meat and the Temple sacrifice of animals is due to their preference for the idealpre-Flood diet and what they took to be the original form of worship. In this view, the Ebionites had an interest in reviving the traditions inspired by pre-Sinai revelation, especially the time fromEnoch toNoah.[13]
The Church Fathers agree that most or all of the Ebionites rejected many of the precepts central toproto-orthodox Christianity, such as Jesus'divinity,pre-existence, andvirgin birth.[5][page needed] The Ebionites are described as emphasizing thehumanity of Jesus as the biological son ofJoseph andMary, who, by virtue of hisrighteousness in perfectly following theletter and spirit of theLaw of Moses, wasadopted as the son of God to fulfill the Hebrew scriptures.[8]
Origen (Contra Celsum 5.61)[52] and Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica 3.27.3) recognize some variation in the Christology of Ebionite sects; for example, that while all Ebionites denied Jesus' pre-existence, there was a sub-sect which did notdeny the virgin birth.[53]Theodoret, while dependent on earlier writers,[54] draws the conclusion that the two sub-sects would have used different gospels.[55] The Ebionites may have used only some or all of theJewish–Christian gospels as additionalscripture to theHebrew Bible. However, Irenaeus reports that they only used a version of theGospel of Matthew, which omitted the first two chapters (on thenativity of Jesus) and started with thebaptism of Jesus byJohn the Baptist.[22]
The Ebionites viewed Jesus as a Messiah in the mold of a new "prophet like Moses" foretold in Deuteronomy 18:15-19. They believed Jesus came to call all descendants of theTwelve Tribes of Israel who had strayed from the covenant with God, as well as potential converts from all Gentile nations, to repent and follow both the Law of Moses and Jesus' own expounding of the Law in order to become righteous and merit entry into the comingkingdom of God on Earth.[56][57]
According to Epiphanius alone, the Ebionites believed Jesus' mission as prophet and reformer included proclaiming the abolishment ofanimal sacrifices,[24]: 30, 16, 4–5 [39] rather thansubstituting himself for them through intentionalself-sacrifice. Consequently, they did not believe Jesus suffered and died for theatonement of the sins of Israelites or mankind. The Ebionites appear to have revered Jesus not as asavior, but as amartyr, who was arrested and sentenced to death bycrucifixion, both for hismessianic claim and his failed attempt at ending the Temple sacrificial system, in order to establish a moresimple form of worship based on authenticrepentance andworks of mercy.[56][57] Rejecting the belief in aphysical resurrection of the dead, while embracing a belief in immortal humansouls, some Ebionites may have believedJesus was resurrected in aspiritual body, rather than a physical one.[58][59]
Some of the Church Fathers argue that the Ebionites reveredJames the Just, brother of Jesus and leader of theJerusalem church, as the true successor to Jesus (rather thanPeter) and an exemplar ofrighteousness.[60] One of the popular primary connections of the Ebionites to James is that theAscents of James in thePseudo-Clementine literature are related to the Ebionites.[43] The other popularly proposed connection is that mentioned byWilliam Whiston in his 1794 edition ofJosephus, where he notes that we learn from fragments ofHegesippus that the Ebionites interpreted a prophecy ofIsaiah as foretelling themurder of James.[61]
Scholars, includingRobert Eisenman,[62][63]Pierre-Antoine Bernheim [fr],[64]Will Durant,Michael Goulder,[65]Gerd Ludemann,[66]John Painter[67] andJames Tabor,[13] argue for some form of continuity of the Jerusalem church into the second and third centuries and that the Ebionites regarded James as theirapostolic founder.[68][69]
Conservative Christian scholars, such asRichard Bauckham, hold that James and his circle in the early Jerusalem church held a "high Christology" (i.e. Jesus was apre-existent angelic or divine being) while the Ebionites held a "low Christology" (i.e. Jesus was a mere manadopted by God).[70] As an alternative to the traditional view ofEusebius that the Jewish Jerusalem church gradually adopted theproto-orthodox Christian theology of theGentile church, Bauckham and others suggest immediate successors to the Jerusalem church under James and the other relatives of Jesus were theNazarenes who acceptedPaul as an "apostle to the Gentiles", while the Ebionites were a laterschismatic sect of the early second century that rejected Paul.[71][56]
The Ebionites rejected thePauline Epistles,[3] and, according to Origen, they viewed Paul as an "apostate from the Law".[72] The Ebionites may have been spiritual and physical descendants of the "super-apostles" — talented and respected Jewish Christianministers in favour ofmandatory circumcision of converts — who sought to undermine Paul inGalatia andCorinth.[73]
Epiphanius relates that the Ebionites opposed Paul, who they saw as responsible for the idea thatGentile Christians did not have to becircumcised or follow theLaw of Moses, and named him anapostate from Judaism.[22] Epiphanius further relates that some Ebionites alleged that Paul was a Greek whoconverted to Judaism in order to marry the daughter of aHigh Priest of Israel, but apostatized when she rejected him.[74][11]: 88
No writings of the Ebionites have survived outside of a few quotes by others and they are in uncertain form.[2] TheRecognitions of Clement and theClementine Homilies, two third century Christian works, are regarded by general scholarly consensus as largely or entirelyJewish Christian in origin and reflect Jewish Christian beliefs. The exact relationship between the Ebionites and these writings is debated, but Epiphanius's description of some Ebionites inPanarion 30 bears a striking similarity to the ideas in theRecognitions andHomilies. Scholar Glenn Alan Koch speculates that Epiphanius likely relied upon a version of theHomilies as a source document.[25] Some scholars also speculate that the core of theGospel of Barnabas, beneath a polemical medievalMuslim overlay, may have been based upon an Ebionite or gnostic document.[75] The existence and origin of this source continues to be debated by scholars.[76]
John Arendzen classifies the Ebionite writings into four groups.[77]
Irenaeus stated that the Ebionites used theGospel of Matthew exclusively.[78]Eusebius of Caesarea wrote that they used only theGospel of the Hebrews.[79] From this, the minority view ofJames R. Edwards andBodley's LibrarianEdward Nicholson claim that there was only one Hebrew gospel in circulation, Matthew'sGospel of the Hebrews. They also note that the titleGospel of the Ebionites was never used by anyone in the early church.[80][81][82] Epiphanius contended that the gospel the Ebionites used was written by Matthew and called the "Gospel of the Hebrews".[83] Because Epiphanius said that it was "not wholly complete, but falsified and mutilated",[24]: 30.13.1 writers such asWalter Richard Cassels andPierson Parker consider it a different "edition" of Matthew's Hebrew Gospel;[84][85] however, internal evidence from the quotations inPanarion 30.13.4 and 30.13.7 suggest that the text was agospel harmony originally composed in Greek.[86]
Mainstream scholarly texts, such as the standard edition of theNew Testament apocrypha edited byWilhelm Schneemelcher, generally refer to the text Jerome cites as used by the Ebionites as theGospel of the Ebionites, though this is not a term current in the early church.[87][88]
The collection ofNew Testament apocrypha known as theClementine literature included three works known in antiquity as theCircuits of Peter, theActs of the Apostles and a work usually titled theAscents of James. They are specifically referenced by Epiphanius in his polemic against the Ebionites. The first-named books are substantially contained in the Homilies of Clement under the title of Clement'sCompendium of Peter's itinerary sermons and in theRecognitions attributed to Clement. They form an early Christian didactic fiction to express Jewish Christian views, such as the primacy ofJames the Just, brother of Jesus; their connection with theepiscopal see of Rome; and their antagonism toSimon Magus, as well asgnostic doctrines. ScholarRobert E. Van Voorst opines of theAscents of James (R 1.33–71), "There is, in fact, no section of the Clementine literature about whose origin in Jewish Christianity one may be more certain".[43] Despite this assertion, he expresses reservations that the material is genuinely Ebionite in origin.
Symmachus produced a translation of theHebrew Bible inKoine Greek, which was used by Jerome and is still extant in fragments, and his lostHypomnemata,[89][90] written to counter the canonicalGospel of Matthew. Although lost, theHypomnemata is probably identical toDe distinctione præceptorum mentioned by Ebed Jesu (Assemani,Bibl. Or., III, 1). The identity of Symmachus as an Ebionite has been questioned in recent scholarship.[91]
Hippolytus of Rome reported that a Jewish Christian,Alcibiades of Apamea, appeared in Rome teaching from abook which he claimed to be the revelation which a righteous man, Elchasai, had received from an angel, though Hippolytus suspected that Alcibiades was himself the author.[92] Shortly afterwards,Origen recorded a sect, theElcesaites, with the same beliefs.[93] Epiphanius claimed the Ebionites also used this book as a source for some of their beliefs and practices (Panarion 30.17).[25][94][24]: 19, 1; 53, 1 Epiphanius explains the origin of the name Elchasai to beAramaicEl Ksai, meaning "hidden power" (Panarion 19.2.1). Scholar Petri Luomanen believes the book to have been written originally in Aramaic as a Jewishapocalypse, probably in Babylonia in 116–117.[11]: 96, 299, 331:note 7
The mainstream Christian view of the Ebionites is partly based on interpretation of the polemical views of theChurch Fathers, who portrayed them asheretics for rejecting many of theproto-orthodox Christian views of Jesus and allegedly having an improper fixation on theLaw of Moses at the expense of thegrace of God.[77] In this view, the Ebionites may have been the descendants of aJewish Christian sect within the earlyJerusalem church which broke away from its proto-orthodox theology possibly in reaction to theCouncil of Jerusalem compromise of 50 CE.[95][page needed]
Islam charges Christianity with having distorted the puremonotheism of the God of Abraham through the doctrines of theTrinity and through theveneration oficons. Paul Addae and Tim Bowes write that the Ebionites were faithful to the original teachings of thehistorical Jesus and thus sharedIslamic view of Jesus' humanity and also rejected proto-orthodox theories ofatonement.[96] Furthermore, the Islamic view of Jesus is compatible with the view of a minor sect within the Ebionites who embraced rather than denied the virgin birth of Jesus.[97][page needed][98]
Hans Joachim Schoeps observes that the Christianity whichMuhammad, the prophet of Islam, was likely to have encountered on the Arabian peninsula "was not the state religion of Byzantium but a schismatic Christianity characterized by Ebionite andMonophysite views":[37]: 137
Thus we have a paradox of world-historical proportions, viz., the fact that Jewish Christianity indeed disappeared within the Christian church, but was preserved in Islam and thereby extended some of its basic ideas even to our own day. According to Islamic doctrine, the Ebionite combination of Moses and Jesus found its fulfillment in Muhammad.
— Hans Joachim Schoeps,Jewish Christianity[37]: 140
Irfan Shahîd, a Palestinian Christian scholar in the field ofOriental studies, counters that there is no evidence that the Ebionites remained until the 7th century, much less that they had a presence inMecca.[99]
Thecounter-missionary groupJews for Judaism favorably mentions the historical Ebionites in their literature in order to argue that "Messianic Judaism", as promoted by missionary groups such asJews for Jesus, isPauline Christianity misrepresenting itself as Judaism.[100] In 2007, some Messianic commentators expressed concern over a possible existential crisis for the Messianic movement in Israel due to a resurgence of Ebionitism, specifically the problem of Israeli Messianic leadersapostatizing from the belief in the divinity of Jesus.[101][102]
In fact, the Ebionites and the Nazarenes are one and the same; p. 137: "Following the devastation of the Jewish War, the Nazarenes took refuge in Pella, a community in exile, where they lay in anxious wait with their fellow Jews. From this point on it is preferable to call them the Ebionites. There was no clear demarcation or formal transition from Nazarene to Ebionite; there was no sudden change of theology or Christology."; p. 137: "While the writings of later church fathers speak of Nazarenes and Ebionites as if they were different Jewish Christian groups, they are mistaken in that assessment. The Nazarenes and the Ebionites were one and the same group, but for clarity we will refer to the pre-70 group in Jerusalem as Nazarenes, and the post-70 group in Pella and elsewhere as Ebionites."
The vegetarianism of John the Baptist and of Jesus is an important issue too in the Ebionite interpretation of the Christian life.
And when he had been brought to Archelaus and the doctors of the Law had assembled, they asked him who he is and where he has been until then. And to this he made answer and spake:I am pure; [for] the Spirit of God hath led me on, and [I live on] cane and roots and tree-food.
That there were two different views among the Ebionites as to the birth of Christ is stated frequently by Origen (cf. e.g. Contra Celsum V. 61), but there was unanimity in the denial of his pre-existence and essential divinity, and this constituted the essence of the heresy in the eyes of the Fathers from Irenæus on.
Irenaeus wrote that these Ebionites used the Gospel of Matthew, which explains Theodoret's remark. Unlike Eusebius, he did not link Irenaeus' reference to Matthew with Origen's remarks about the 'Gospel of the Hebrews'
Theodoret describes two groups of Ebionites on the basis of their view of the virgin birth. Those who deny the virgin birth use the Gospel of the Hebrews; those who accept it use the Gospel of Matthew.
These'Ebionites' are also the followers of Jamespar excellence, himself considered (even in early Christian accounts) to be the leader of'the Poor' or these selfsame'Ebionites'; p. 145: "For James 2:5, of course, it is'the Poor of this world ('the Ebionim' or'Ebionites') whom God chose as Heirs to the Kingdom He promised to those that love Him'"; p. 273: "...'the Righteous Teacher' and those of his followers (called'the Poor' or'Ebionim' - in our view, James and his Community, pointedly referred to in the early Church literature, as will by now have become crystal clear, as'the Ebionites' or'the Poor')."
The fact that he became the head of the Jerusalem church is something which is generally accepted.From an ABC interview with author.
So the 'Ebionite' Christology, which we found first described in Irenaeus about 180 is not the invention of the late second century. It was the creed of the Jerusalem Church from early times.
Since there is a good century between the end of the Jerusalem community and the writing down of the report quoted above (by Irenaeus), of course reasons must be given why the group of Ebionites should be seen as an offshoot of the Jerusalem community. The following considerations tell in favor of the historical plausibility of this: 1. The name 'Ebionites' might be the term this group used to denote themselves. 2. Hostility to Paul in the Christian sphere before 70 is attested above all in groups which come from Jerusalem. 3. The same is true of observance of the law culminating in circumcision. 4. The direction of prayer towards Jerusalem makes the derivation of the Ebionites from there probable.p. 56: "therefore, it seems that we should conclude that Justin's Jewish Christians are a historical connecting link between the Jewish Christianity of Jerusalem before the year 70 and the Jewish Christian communities summed up in Irenaeus' account of the heretics."
A connection between early Jerusalem Christianity (the Hebrews) and the later Ebionites is probable.
We may now assert quite confidently that the self-consciously low christology of the later Jewish sect known as the Ebionites does not, as has sometimes been asserted, go back to James and his circle in the early Jerusalem church.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)Those who accepted the virginal birth seem to have had more exalted views concerning Christ and, besides observing the Sabbath, to have kept the Sunday as a memorial of His Resurrection. The milder sort of Ebionites were probably fewer and less important than their stricter brethren, because the denial of the virgin birth was commonly attributed to all. (Origen, Horn. in Luc., xvii.) St. Epiphanius calls the more heretical section Ebionites, and the more Catholic-minded, Nazarenes.
