chapter two
that the salvation of the Gentiles was possible only if they were integrated
into Judaism.
Origen does not give any information about the writings that the
Ebionites used but he adds some new details to their profile. According
to Origen, the assumption that Easter should be celebrated in the way of
the Jews, is characteristic of the Ebionite heresy (in Matth comm. ser. ).
Origen’s comments seem to be connected to the so-called “Quartodec-
iman controversy,” which concerned the timing of Passover/Easter. The
Quartodecimans deemed it appropriate to celebrate Passover/Easter on
the th of Nisan, like the Jews did, irrespective of which day of the week
that might be. Others thought that Easter should always be celebrated
on Sunday. The Quartodeciman timing was common in Asian churches.
Thus, it was not restricted only to the Ebionite churches and Origen is
also well aware of that because he states: “somebody with no experience
perhapsdoessomeinvestigatingandfallsintotheEbioniteheresy...”
Obviously, these inexperienced “somebodies” were the Quartodecimans
whose position thereby is labeled as Ebionite heresy. What does this say
about the Ebionites themselves? If the Ebionites followed Jewish law, it
is natural that they sided with the Quartodecimans. Thus, although the
evidence is indirect, it is safe to assume that the Ebionites also followed
thesametimingofPassover/EasterastheQuartodecimans.
The most significant new feature Origen adds to the profile of the
Ebionites is that there were two factions among them which had different
views about Jesus’ virgin birth.
These are the two kinds of Ebionites, some confessing that Jesus was born
of a virgin as we do and others who deny this but say that he was born like
the other people. (Cels. .; trans. Klijn & Reinink ).This distinction has often played a central role in the attempts to recon-
struct the history of Jewish Christianity. For those scholars who argue
that the “nearly orthodox”Nazarenes were the real offshootof the earliest
Jerusalem community, this passage works as one stepping stone, which
helps them to connect Jerome’s and Epiphanius’ fourth century descrip-
tions of the Nazarenes to the “Nazarenes” described in Acts. The assump-
tion is that the Nazarenes were there all the time but were erroneously
called Ebionites by Origen.^5 However, this theory is problematic in many
respects. It is doubtful in my opinion if the kind of separate group of
the Nazarenes that Epiphanius describes inPanarion ever existed—
(^5) See Pritz , , , –.