Recovering Jewish-Christian Sects and Gospels (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)

chapter six

CONCLUSION: TOWARDS THE

HISTORY OF EARLY JEWISH CHRISTIANITY

.. The Ebionites and the Nazarenes

Historians are always faced with the challenge of bridging the gap be-
tween present and ancient realities. This cannot be reasonably accom-
plished without using concepts that are—at least provisionally—under-
standable to modern readers. In this regard, the concept of Jewish
Christianity fares relatively well since many people today have some sort
of idea what “Judaism” and “Christianity” are about and what the “mix-
ture” of these categories might involve. Things become problematic only
if these kinds of provisional ideas—whether of a scholarly nature or com-
mon sense—are not adjusted and refined according to the object of study.
In the this book, the category of Jewish Christianity is qualified by
drawing attention to theindicators of Jewish Christianity. The discussion
in the second main chapter of this volume revealed a variety of Jewish
Christianities, of which the following ones played key roles.
The Jewish Christianity ofIrenaeus’ Ebionitesinvolved obedience to
Jewish law (including circumcision), anti-Paulinism, rejection of Je-
sus’ virgin birth, reverence for Jerusalem (direction of prayer), use of
Matthew’s Gospel, Eucharist with water, and possibly the idea that
Christ/Spirit entered Jesus at his baptism. Irenaeus’ Ebionites are not easy
to locate because Irenaeus wrote in the West (Lyons) and was unlikely
to have had personal contacts with the Ebionites. Although this char-
acterization partly reflects an educated, Western view of the Ebionites
at the end of the second century, it has clear connections to what we
know about the early Jerusalem community. This justifies the assump-
tion that the Ebionites, as they were known to Irenaeus, were an offshoot
of the earliest Jerusalem community and probably closer to its Hebrew
faction.
Although Origen’s literary production mostly dates from the time he
wasactiveinCaesarea,hisreferencestotheEbionitesaresparseandthe
historical value of his discussion of the Ebionites is questionable. This is