Wednesday, October 31, 2018

Ebionite and Nazarene

FacebookTwitterInstagram Ebionites & Nazarenes: Tracking the Original Followers of Jesus APOCALYPTICISM DECEMBER 29, 2015 The issue of the relationship of Jesus to the “Essenes,” as well as to the the Dead Sea Scrolls, whether Essene or otherwise, is central to our attempts to view Jesus in his historical contexts. In other words, we are essentially asking, in our historical Quest–“what kind of a Jew was Jesus?” We know that James the brother of Jesus assumed the leadership of the original Jerusalem-based Jewish followers of Jesus. Even Paul acknowledged the status of James and at least gave lip service to his authority. What this “Jesus” movement was called or just how it fit into the broader spectrum of Jewish groups and movements of the late 2nd Temple period is a complex issue. Josephus regularly reports three main sects or schools of Judaism: Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes,  (War 2: 119; Antiquities 13:171; 18:11). In one passage he mentions a “fourth” philosophy that he does not label but associates with Judas the Galilean, and treats as a kind of “subset” of the Pharisees (Antiquities 18:23). Elsewhere he seems to refer to this movement as the “Zealots,” which seems to be a rather loose designation for those who participated in the 1st Revolt against Rome (War 2:651; 7:268). He mentions John the Baptist, James the brother of Jesus, and Jesus himself (an a passage that has been heavily interpolated), but he never labels the group or movement/s to which they belonged. Like the group behind the sectarian writings of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest followers of Jesus, apparently, did not use a dominant self-identifying label but preferred a variety of descriptive terms. Paul’s letters are our earliest sources, dating to the 50s CE, and he never “names” his followers or the movement as a whole, but uses phrases like “the believers” or those “in Christ” (1 Thessalonians 1:7, 2:10; 1 Corinthians 14:22; Romans 16: 3, 7, 9; 1 Thessalonians 4:16). According to the book of Acts, which comes late in the 1st century, the followers of Jesus were called, or perhaps called themselves, “the Way” (Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 24:14, 22). The term “Christian” or “Christians” is mentioned twice, but presented as a newly minted designation, probably coming from outsiders, as the movement spread north to Antioch of Syria (Acts 11:26; 26:28). It is surely surprising for many to realize that the term “Christian” only occurs one other time in the entire New Testament, in one of our latest sources (1 Peter 4:16). This is, however, the name that apparently stuck as it shows up in our earliest Roman sources mentioning the movement, namely Suetonius, Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Lucian, and Galen (see texts here.). It is a Greek name, not a Hebrew or Aramaic one, but unfortunately the English term veils what was likely the more original connotation of the term, which would translate roughly as something like “Messianist.” There is, however, a reference in the book of Acts to a Hebrew name for the Jesus movement that might have well been its earliest formal appellation. Paul, on trial before the Roman governer Felix, is referred to as being “the ring leader of the sect of the Nazarenes” (Acts 24:5). Whether this term was used by “outsiders” to label the group, or within the movement itself, is difficult to know. Associated with the term “Nazarenes” is a second Hebrew designation, namely Ebionites, that was also apparently used for the earliest mostly-Jewish followers of Jesus. This Ebionite/Nazarene movement was made up of mostly Jewish followers of John the Baptizer and later Jesus, who were concentrated in Palestine and surrounding regions and led by “James the Just” (the oldest brother of Jesus), and flourished between the years 30-80 C.E. Non-Jews were certainly part of the mix but the dominant ethos of the group was an adherence to what Paul calls ioudaizein–to live according to Jewish law (Galatians 2:14). They were zealous for the Torah and continued to observe the mitzvot (commandments) as enlightened by their Rabbi and Teacher. The non-Jews in their midst were apparently expected to follow some version of the Noachide Laws (Acts 15: 28-29). The term Ebionite (from Hebrew ‘Evyonim) means “Poor Ones” and was perhaps related to the teachings of Jesus: “Blessed are you Poor Ones, for yours is the Kingdom of God” based on Isaiah 66:2 and other related texts that address a remnant group of faithful ones. I am convinced that Nazarene comes from the Hebrew word Netzer (drawn from Isaiah 11:1) and means “a Branch”—so the Nazarenes were the “Branchites” or followers of the one they believed to be the Branch–that is the Davidic Messiah. It is often confused with a completely different word,  Nazirite or Nazir, that refers to individuals, male or female, not a group, who took on a special vow based on Numbers 6. The two terms can sound alike in English are spelled differently in Hebrew. If I were guessing I would think the designation Nazarene was likely used by outsiders for the group, whereas the term Ebionite was more likely used within the group as a self-description. It seems significant that the Dead Sea community also used this term Ebionite or “Poor Ones” to refer to their own movement (CD 19:9; 1QSb 5:21). This movement, that Josephus and others label as Essene (possibly from ‘Ossim, meaning “Doers of Torah”), who wrote or collected the Dead Sea Scrolls, pioneered certain aspects of this “Way” over 150 years before the birth of Jesus. They were a wilderness (out in the Arava, near the Dead Sea–based on Isaiah 40:3), baptizing (mikveh of repentance as entrance requirement into their fellowship), new covenant, messianic/apocalyptic group. They believed they were the final generation and would live to see the end and the coming of the Messiahs of Aaron and of Israel (the two anointed ones–priest and king). They saw themselves as the remnant core of God’s faithful people—preparing the Way for the return of YHVH’s Glory (Kavod) as set forth in Isaiah 40-66. They too referred to themselves as the Way, the Poor, the Saints, the New Covenanters, Children of Light, and so forth. Perhaps their most common designation was the Yachad–the brotherhood or community, and they referred to themselves as brother and sister. They were bitterly opposed to the corrupt Priests in Jerusalem, to the Herods, and even to the Pharisees whom they saw as compromising with that establishment to get power and influence from the Hellenistic/Roman powers. They had their own developed Halacha (interpretation of Torah), some aspects of which Jesus picks up (ideal of no divorce, not using oaths, etc.). They followed one they called the True Teacher (Teacher of Righteousness) whom most scholars believe lived in the 1st century BCE and was opposed and possibly killed by the Hasmonean King/Priests at the instigation of the Pharisees. John the Baptizer seems to arise out of this context and rekindle the apocalyptic fervor of the movement in the early decades of the first century CE. Jesus joined this movement and it remains our best insight into the conceptual world of an apocalyptic, messianic, movement of this period, akin to the Jesus movement. The variety of self-designations used by the John/Jesus/James movement, many of which had previously been used by the Essenes, is telling. Indeed, one might call the Jesus movement a further developed messianic “Essenism,” modified through the powerful, prophetic influence of Jesus as Teacher and the leadership of James his brother for nearly 40 years. Later, when Christianity developed in the 3rd and 4th centuries and gradually lost its Jewish roots and heritage, largely severing its homeland connections, the Gentile, Roman Catholic Church historians began to refer to Ebionites and Nazarenes as two separate groups—and indeed, by the late 2nd century there might have been a split between these mostly Jewish followers of Jesus. The distinction these writers make (and remember, they universally despise these people and call them “Judaizers”), is that the Ebionites reject Paul and the doctrine of the Virgin Birth or “divinity” of Jesus, use only the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, and are thus more extreme in their Judaism. They describe the Nazarenes more positively as those who accept Paul (with caution) and believe in some aspect of the divinity of Jesus, even possibly the virgin birth, but viewed him as “adopted” as Son of God at his baptism. What we have to keep in mind in reading these accounts from the Church fathers is that they are strongly prejudiced against any form of what they call “Judaizing” among Christians and they share the view that “Christianity” has replaced Judaism entirely overthrowing the Torah for both Gentile and Jew. I think it best today to use the collective term Ebionite/Nazarene in an attempt to capture the whole of this earliest movement, and it would be useful to revive the term Yachad as a collective designation for the community of the Hasidim/Saints.  Ebionite/Nazarene is a good historical designation to refer to those original, 1st century, mostly Jewish, followers of Jesus, gathered around James the brother of Jesus in Jerusalem, who were zealous for the Torah, but saw themselves as part of the New Covenant Way inaugurated by their “True Teacher” Jesus. James is a key and neglected figure in this whole picture (see essays on James). As the blood brother of Jesus, authority and rights of leadership were passed on to him. When he was brutally murdered in 62 CE by the High Priest Ananus (see Josephus, Antiquities 20.197ff), Simeon, a second brother [“cousin” according to Hegesippus] of Jesus took over the leadership of the Jerusalem based movement. Clearly we have the idea here of a blood-line dynasty, and according to the Gospel of Thomas, discovered in 1946 in upper Egypt, this dynastic succession was ordained by Jesus himself who tells his followers who ask him who will lead them when he leaves: “No matter where you are, you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being” (Gospel of Thomas 12, and additional primary texts here). Indeed, when Simeon was crucified by the Emperor Trajan around 106 C.E., one Judas, perhaps an aged third brother of Jesus, or at least a close relative of the bloodline, took over the leadership of the community. As far as “beliefs” of the Ebionites, the documents of the New Testament, critically evaluated, are our best sources, including some of the fragmentary traditions still embedded in the book of Acts (7:37-53). There are fragments and quotations surviving from their Hebrew Gospel tradition (see see A. F. J. Klijn, Jewish-Christian Gospel Tradition, E. J. Brill, 1992), the so-called Pseudo-Clementine materials, as well as some of the traditions reflected in texts such as the “Hebrew Matthew” preserved by Ibn Shaprut, and now published in a critical edition by George Howard (The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, Mercer University Press, 1995). Based on what we can reliably put together from these sources we can say the Ebionite or Nazarene movement could be distinguished by the following views: 1) Jesus as a human being with father and mother but designated a “Prophet like Moses,” or “the Anointed of the Spirit,” who will be revealed in power as the “Son of Man coming in the Clouds of heaven,” following his rejection and death (Acts 7:37; Luke 4:18-19; Mark 10:35-45; 13:26-27). 2) Disdain for eating meat and even the Temple slaughter of animals, preferring the ideals of the pre-Flood diet and what they took to be the original ideal of worship (see Genesis 9:1-5; Jeremiah 7:21-22; Isaiah 11:9; 66:1-4). This reflects a general interest in seeking the “Path” reflected in the pre-Sinai revelation, especially the time from Enoch to Noah. For example, divorce was shunned, as violating the Edenic ideal, even though technically it was later allowed by Moses (Mark 10:2-11). 3) Dedication to following the whole Torah, as applicable to Israel and to Gentiles, but through the “easy yoke” or the “Torah of liberty” of their Teacher Jesus, which emphasized the Spirit of the Biblical Prophets in a restoration of the “True Faith,” the Ancient Paths (Jeremiah 6:16; Matthew 11:28-30; James 2:8-13; Matthew 5:17-18; 9:13; 12:7), from which, by and large, they believed the establishment Jewish groups of 2nd Temple times had departed. 4) Rejection of the “doctrines and traditions” of men, which they believed had been added to the pure Torah of Moses, including scribal alterations of the texts of Scripture (Jeremiah 8:8). Generally, the movement came to have a very negative view of Paul as an “apostate from the Torah,” though it is possible that in the 2nd and 3rd centuries there were branches of the Nazarenes who were more tolerant of Paul as the “apostle to the Gentiles,” but who as Jews, nonetheless, insisted on Torah observance. For much more on the whole “underbelly” of the original Jesus movement led by James the brother of Jesus, its relationship with the Dead Sea Scroll sect, and the Ebionites and their subsequent history, see Robert Eisenman, James the Brother of Jesus (Penguin, 1998). There is a new abridged edition of this work as well here, but I recommend the original for serious students of early Christianity. On “Jewish Christianity” more generally, see H-J Schoeps, Jewish Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969), out of print but still useful for students as a general introduction. For a modern interpretation of the Ebionite ideals, reflecting the peaceful ideas of vegetarianism and non-violence, see Keith Akers, The Lost Religion of Jesus: Simple Living and Non-Violence in Early Christianity (Lantern Book, 2000). Finally, there is an active “Ebionite” movement today, that seeks to revive and reflect these ancient perspectives, see the web site: ebionite.org. 5 0 Related Articles Rethinking Flesh and Spirit CHRISTIAN ORIGINS AUGUST 9, 2018 The Jesus Dynasty: Seven Main Ideas APOCALYPTICISM OCTOBER 21, 2018 Two Widely Held Assumptions About Early Christianity that Should Be Questioned 2ND TEMPLE JUDAISM OCTOBER 7, 2018 The Messiah Before Jesus 2ND TEMPLE JUDAISM SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 Morton Smith and A “Secret Gospel of Mark” CHRISTIAN ORIGINS SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 “Cold Case Christianity and the Resurrection of Jesus”–Read these Six Posts and You will Never View Things the Same CHRISTIAN ORIGINS SEPTEMBER 14, 2018 Rethinking Flesh and Spirit CHRISTIAN ORIGINS AUGUST 9, 2018 The Jesus Dynasty: Seven Main Ideas APOCALYPTICISM OCTOBER 21, 2018 SSL Security You Can Trust Subscribe to Blog via Email Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Email addresses are confidential. Email Address Email Address SUBSCRIBE Most Popular Two Widely Held Assumptions About Early Christianity that Should Be Questioned Was Jesus a Carpenter? The Messiah Before Jesus Sorting out the Jesus Family: Mother, Fathers, Brothers and Sisters The Jesus Dynasty: Seven Main Ideas Who Was the Mysterious “Disciple Whom Jesus Loved?” Did John the Baptist Eat Bugs, Beans, or Pancakes? The Top Seven Fateful Verses from the New Testament (1) “Jewish Bloodguilt” The Surprising Ending of the Lost Gospel of Peter “Cold Case Christianity and the Resurrection of Jesus”–Read these Six Posts and You will Never ... Index of Posts Dropdown Menu Index of Posts Dropdown Menu Search Using Key Words Search for: Type and hit enter... Like Us on Social Media Sign Up for TaborBlog Newsletter This private Newsletter is sent periodically to subscribers with special news and updates from Dr. Tabor. Email addresses are confidential. Sign Up Here Email* First Name Last Name Submit Email Marketing You Can Trust Copyright @ 2017 James Tabor | Design by NoLimitProductions.ca |SmartBlog by ThemeForest Top NAVIGATE HOME ABOUT THIS BLOG ABOUT DR. TABOR ACADEMIC LINKS IN MEMORIAM MEDIA GALLERY

Nazareth and Life of JESUS

New FAQ About Intl Chat Donate Did Nazareth exist during the life of Jesus? Question: "Did Nazareth exist during the life of Jesus?" Answer: Did Nazareth exist during the life of Jesus? How can we know? What does the evidence say? These are questions that Christians are asked to answer more frequently by professed “skeptics” in our world today. It is curious that the first-century historicity of Jesus should be the subject of such contention, since this matter was effectively laid to rest long ago. There are several reasons often given for doubting the first-century historicity of Nazareth, and these reasons are largely built around arguments from silence. For one thing, Nazareth is never mentioned in the writings of Josephus, nor is it mentioned in any other first-century writings. Critics also contend that the biblical geography is in error, as there is no cliff near the synagogue to which Jesus was allegedly taken, as recounted in Luke 4:24–30. Generally speaking, arguments from silence are weak. We must ask just how much one would expect the contemporary writers to mention the town of Nazareth. Nazareth was a small and insignificant village, and Josephus had no real reason to mention it. The town’s insignificance is evident in the first chapter of John’s Gospel, when Nathaniel asks, “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” (John 1:46). Laying aside the problems with the argument from silence, we should also note that the claim that there is no first-century evidence for Nazareth is not entirely correct. In AD 70, at the end of the Jewish war with the Romans, the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed, and this meant that Jewish priests and their families had to be redeployed. An inscription was discovered in 1962 in Caesarea Maritima that documents that the priests of the order of Elkalir came to live in Nazareth. This has only been confirmed by later discoveries. For example, in 2009, the first Nazarene home to date from Jesus’ era was excavated by archaeologists. The house was a simple structure, consisting of two small rooms and a courtyard. The claim of incorrect geography carries a bit more weight than the argument from silence. The closest cliff to Nazareth to which Jesus might have been taken is roughly 2.5 miles away from the synagogue; however, there is no reason why Jesus could not have been taken that far. In conclusion, the claim that there is no historical evidence for the existence of the town of Nazareth in the first century stands refuted by the archaeological data, and many of the more informed atheist critics, even among those who deny the historicity of Jesus, have advised caution with using this argument. Recommended Resource: Josephus - The Complete Works More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free! Related Topics: Why did God command Abraham to sacrifice Isaac? Who was Ignatius of Antioch? Who are the various Herods mentioned in the Bible? Why is Jesus often referred to as Jesus of Nazareth? Who were the early church fathers? Return to: Questions about Apologetics Return to: GotQuestions.org Home Did Nazareth exist during the life of Jesus? Find Out How to... Spend Eternity with God Learn More Receive Forgiveness from God Learn More Navigation Statement of Faith The Gospel Crucial Questions Top 20 Random Article International Ask a Question Question of the Week What does the Bible say about the prosperity gospel? Preferred Bible Version: Save Subscribe to our Question of the Week Get our Questions of the Week delivered right to your inbox! Email Address Subscribe Statement of Faith The Gospel Crucial Questions Question of the Week Top 20 Questions Top 20 Articles Ask a Question Survey Random Page Citation Audio / MP3 Video Contact Us Serve With Us Promote Us Donate                © Copyright 2002-2018 Got Questions Ministries. All rights reserved. View our Site Map. Privacy Policy

Notsri or Branch

The Nazarene Creed
__________________________
Yahusha is the “Notsri” or “Branch”.  He was called Yahusha the Nazarene because that is what all followers of John the Baptist were called ( it was John who started the Sect of the Nazarenes as an offshoot of the Essenes).  John was prophesied to “make straight the The Way of (for) the Messiah” and teach the Messiah The Way of Salvation through Mikveh, Circumcision, and Offering.  So John was preparing The Way for the Branch, and those who followed John were called “Nazarenes” which means “followers of the Branch” and what they believed was called The Way.  John announced that he was not “the Branch”, and then declared Yahusha “the Branch”.  All the Nazarenes then followed Yahusha and John was murdered for being their leader.  A fate Yahusha then Sha’ul would face as Leaders of The Nazarenes.
So let us simply list the declarations made by The Nazarene or made of him by his followers.  Then I will demonstrate that each and every one of these declarations apply to all of the children of Yahuah.  This is literally the declaration of our birthright and it belongs to all of us!  It is The Nazarene Creed:
known by Yahuah before the foundation of the world
the son of man
came into being/born “according to the flesh”; begotten “according to the Spirit”
fulfilled the Righteous requirements of The Law
embody the fullness of deity in human form
the image of the Almighty God
gods
the son of God
eternal priest in the order of Zadok
King in the order of Melchizedek
one with the Father
set apart during earthly life by the Ruach
a Righteous Judge over the Nations
demonstrated The Way by our life example
brought a living sacrifice, a perfect Lamb on Passover
defeated The Law of Sin and Death, through resurrection
have the authority to forgive sin
That is The Nazarene Creed!  A coming Kingdom of Royal Priests!!!!!!!!!
All Nazarenes have this Birthright and should boldly declare that they are sons of Yahuah, just like Yahusha did.  Yahusha never claimed to be Yahuah, or even equal to Yahuah.  In fact, he said he could not even conceive of such blasphemy!  We all are to have the same “mind” in us, that was in Yahusha, who denied incarnation outright:
----- Philippians 2 -----
5 Let this mind be in you (that Yahuah alone is the ONLY true God John 17:3) which was also in Yahusha the Messiah, 6 who, being in the form (human image) of Yahuah (we are all made in the image of Yahuah Genesis 1:27), 6 who, although Yahusha existed in the (human) form (image) of Yahuah (his Father; as all sons are images of their fathers), did not regard equality with Yahuah a thing to be grasped (Yahusha could not even wrap his mind around such blasphemy; he thought it robbing Yahuah of His Glory), 7 but made himself of no reputation (although he was born King of Israel and the Jews were trying to make him the Messiah ben David i.e. Conquering King, and he had inherited a King’s Ransom from Daniel), he instead assumed the form (role) of the suffering servant (Messiah ben Joseph to fulfill The Heavenly Scroll and the Feast Cycle), and coming into being as human (according to the flesh i.e. born human outside of any Divine intervention Romans 1:1-6). 8 And being found in the likness of a man (just like we all are found in the likeness of a man 1 Cor. 15:29), He humbled himself (before Yahuah) and became obedient (to the will of Yahuah that he must first come as Messiah ben Joseph the suffering servant and purchase the life of his brothers John 15:13, and fulfill his adoption covenant with Yahuah made in Zachariah Chapter 3) to the point of death, even the death of the stake (as foretold in The Heavenly Scroll, where Yahusha is portrayed as crucified, a Lamb that is slaughtered). 9 Therefore (because Yahusha fulfilled the adoption covenant in Zachariah Chapter 3 and The Heavenly Scroll) Yahuah also has highly exalted Yahusha ( with the Glory he had before the wold was John 17:5 as foretold in The Heavenly Scroll that Leo the Lion of the Tribe of Judah defeats Daco the dragon, then reigns as King) and (Yahuah) has given Yahusha (upon resurrection) the name which is above every name (Melchizedek, which he inherited through human bloodlines Hebrews 1:4), 10 that at the name of Yahusha every knee should bow (in respect to authority as he is our King; not divine worship), of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess (Strongs #3670, homologeo, enters into a marriage covenant) that Yahusha the Messiah is our King, to the glory of Yahuah the Father (Hebrews 1:3 Yahusha is the Glory of Yahuah and that Glory was written into the stars on Day 4 Psalms 19). -----
So Yahusha denied even being able to contemplate this idea that “Yahuah IS Yahusha” and that is the mind that should be in each of us. All those who have this same “mind”, will be given the right to become children of Yahuah!
----- John 1:12  -----
Yet to all who did receive Yahusha as the Messiah, to those who believed in (the covenant that bears) his name, he gave the right to become children of Yahuah.
Rav Shaul