chapter three
There are also some interesting points of contact between Q and the
Gospel of the Ebionitesand even between Q and the Nazarenes’ anti-
rabbinic collection. The Deuteronomistic interpretation of Jesus’ com-
mission and passion is apparent in the Nazarenes’ collection. However,
on the whole, the Nazarenes’ communal life and ideology—as it can be
reconstructed on the basis of their Isaiah commentary—does not show
any closer affinity with Q. The situation is a bit different with the Ebionites
whose profile as “poor” followers of Jesus, their non-sacrificial interpre-
tation of Jesus’ death^122 and, to some extent, their understanding of Jesus
as (the True) prophet^123 may have some resemblance to Q’s theology and
practice. On the other hand, there are also obvious differences. In Q the
Temple appears in positive light (Q :–) and Q accepts prophets up to
John the Baptist (Q :) while the Hellenistic-Samaritan branch of the
Ebionites, who used theGospel of the Ebionites, disregarded the prophets
between Moses and the True Prophet (see Chapter ..). Thus, Q and
theGospel of the EbionitesseemtosharesomemotifsbutlessthanQand
theGospel of the Hebrews.
The fact that Q was swallowed by Matthew’s gospel with its gentile
orientation was not—to use Robinson’s expression—the “swan song” of
the Q people.^124 The last movement of their symphony may have been the
Gospel of the Hebrews, which almost made its way into the New Testament
canon.
(^122) Q presumes Jesus’ death and vindication (Q:) but does not provide any salvific
interpretation of Jesus’ death. See Kloppenborg Verbin , –.
(^123) Q obviously depicts Jesus in line with Deuteronomistic prophets. However, I agree
with Kloppenborg (against Sato and Horsley) that the genre of Q is more that of a wisdom
collection. See Kloppenborg Verbin , –, –.
(^124) Cf. Robinson , .