chapter two
will be discussed in more detail below (Chapter ..), but—anticipating
that discussion—we may note here that the connection between Epipha-
nius’ Ebionites and the “Samaritan-Hellenistic” Christians would have
been even more clear if these Hellenists also understood themselves as
“poor”^39 and hated Paul not only because of his liberal interpretation
of the law but also because he had been involved with the execution of
Stephen (Acts :–:).
Thus, we may have to reckon with the possibility that, from very early
on, there may have been at least two types of Ebionites: () Hebrew/Ar-
amaic-speaking Ebionites (= Irenaeus’ Ebionites?) who shared James the
Just’s positive attitude towards the temple and accepted all the prophets,
and () Hellenistic-Samaritan Ebionites (= the predecessors of Epipha-
nius’ Ebionites) who totally rejected the worship in the temple, used only
the Pentateuch and, carrying with them the memory of Stephen’s execu-
tion, perceived Paul as one of their major opponents.
In the last analysis, Epiphanius—the greatdoctor confususof early
church history—may have been on the right track when he concluded
that the Ebionites of his day had adopted their ideas from the Samaritans
and from a certain Elchasai. Whatever the real history of Epiphanius’
Ebionites, it is perfectly clear that, in Epiphanius’ view, they had adopted
ideas which showed them to have strayed away not only from correct
Christian doctrine but also from what he considered genuinely Jewish
traditions.
Epiphanius’ Ebionites had such a clear and independent Jewish-Chris-
tian profile that they must have distanced themselves from other Chris-
tian as well as from other Jewish communities. They thus represent an
Thus, it is possible that some Hellenists found refuge among the Samaritans or closely
related groups after the execution of Stephen. In any case, it seems clear that Epiphanius’
Ebionites andRec. .– found something to build on in the traditions connected to
Stephen. Stephen’s “proclamation,” as it is described in Acts, probably found acceptance
among Hellenistic Jewish Christians who criticized the temple and sacrifices and saw
Jesus mainly as a prophet predicted by Moses. For this hypothesis, see also Luomanen
a.
(^39) Not only Epiphanius’ Ebionites but also modern scholars have suggested that
“poor” as the self-designation might go back to the Jerusalem community (see above
Chapter ..). If such is the case, there is no need to restrict this term only to the
“Hebrews” of the early Church. Even the Hellenists of the Jerusalem community were
surely bilingual enough to understand the meaning of the Hebrew word’ebyon.Moreover,
we know that Epiphanius’ Ebionites did perceive of themselves as “Ebionites” although
they spoke Greek and used Greek scriptures.