The Nazarenes
“We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots
among the Jews all over the world. He
is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect…” (Acts
24:5) Following
are some pretty astounding quotes from the book written
by Ray Pritz, titled “Nazarene
Jewish Christianity”. His
astute research, and his ability to both speak and write
in Greek and Hebrew shed a new light on the first “era” of
the Christian church. First
he defines the term Nazarene, and who it applies to. He also points out that the early church
was so Jewish in its practices of worship—days of
worship—that the Jews considered it a “sect” of
Judaism, and not a separate religion. He says:
“It is
important to note that the name Nazarenes was at first applied
to all Jewish followers
of Jesus. Until
the name Christian became attached to Antiochian non-Jews,
this meant that the name signified the entire Church, not
just a sect. So
also in Acts 24:5 the reference is not to a sect of Christianity
but rather to the entire primitive Church as a sect of Judaism. Only when the Gentile Church overtook
and overshadowed the Jewish one could there be any possibility
of sectarian stigma adhering to the name Nazarene within
the Church itself. This should be borne in mind when considering
the total absence of the name from extant Christian literature
between the composition of Acts and 376[AD], when the panarion was
written. Even
after the name Christianoi had been commonly accepted
by Christians as the name they called themselves, it would
require some passage of time until the earlier name would
be forgotten and those who carried it condemned as heretics.” [Ray
A. Pritz, p. 15, par. 2, Nazarene Jewish Christianity, 1988, Jerusalem-Lieden, The Magnes
Press, The Hebrew University] “To
be sure, it is strange (not to say frustrating) that the
name is so universally ignored…Of course the lamentable
fact that precious few of those Greek fathers would have
been able to read a document in a semitic language only decreases
the likelihood that the name Nazarene could have been preserved
in their writings…So on the one hand it seems likely
that the name was preserved somewhere between Acts and Tertullian,
but on the other it is equally likely that it was infrequently
mentioned in non-Semitic script, which may be accounted for
by the predominance of Greek in early Church writing.” [ibid,
p.16, par 1, 3, 4]]
And
don’t forget, as Oskar Skarsaune brought out in his
masterful work In The Shadow of the Temple, Greek was
the language that the economies of the Mediterranean world
functioned on, it was the language of commerce and industry,
even after Rome conquered the world. The
Gospel being written in Greek was probably a key decision
the apostles made early on. Next, he describes the Nazarenes on into
the 2nd century, and how this group divided into
two groups, based on doctrinal differences.
Nazarenes and Ebionites
“Suffice
it to say at this point that Justin, around the beginning
of the second half of the second century, recognizes two
kinds of Christians of the Jewish race whom he differentiates
on christological grounds. One
group, whom Justin condemns holds doctrines which line up
well with what is known to us of Ebionite teaching. The
other group differs from Justin’s orthodoxy only in
continued adherence to Mosaic Law.”
[ibid, p. 21, par. 1] Ray
Pritz goes on to quote Justin,
Let it be admitted, moreover,
that there are some who accept Jesus, and who boast on
that account of being Christians, and yet would regulate
their lives, like the Jewish multitude, in accordance to
Jewish Law,--and these are the twofold sect of the Ebionites,
who either acknowledge with us that Jesus was born of a
virgin, or deny this, and maintain that he was begotten
like other human beings…
“This reference
to the two kinds of Ebionites must remind us
of the testimony of Justin, and it is not without significance
that here again they are to be separated on the basis of
Christology, and that one of the two sects holds the orthodox
line in the disputed matter while the other denies anything
divine in Jesus’ origins. If the more orthodox Jewish
Christians (who can only be faulted for keeping the
Law) are Nazarenes, then we have an early misuse of
the name Ebionite to include all Jewish Christian Law-keepers.” [ibid.
p. 21, par. 3-4] [emphasis throughout, mine]
early witnesses—two kinds
of Jewish Christians
“When we
come to Origen, however (and return to the East), we again
find two classes of Jewish Christians which he calls Ebionites. From
this point on, the name Ebionite becomes a catch-all for
Law-keeping Christians of Jewish background…While
Eusebius is aware of more than one kind of ‘Ebionite’ in
his sources, he has not succeeded very well in distinguishing
their traits.” [ibid. p. 27, par. 3] “In
summary we may say that Justin knows of two divisions of
Jewish Christians, one of whom held an orthodox Christology
with regard to the virgin birth and pre-existence of Jesus. Origen,
who also knows of two groups, identifies the unorthodox group
of Justin as Ebionites. While he calls his more orthodox
Jewish Christians Ebionites also, he is inconsistent in this,
and we may be justified in concluding that the two groups
did not carry the same name. Eusebius, in his turn, cannot
avoid seeing—in his sources, if not also from hearsay—two
distinguishable Jewish Christian groups, but he does not
succeed very well in discerning the beliefs which separate
them. For him there is only one name, Ebionite. This
establishes the continued existence, into the third century
at least, if not later, of a Jewish Christian entity whose
doctrines tend to distinguish it—in the direction of
“orthodoxy”—from the Ebionites. These
are the Nazarenes.” [ibid. p. 27, par 4, p. 28, par. 2-3]
Doctrines of the Nazarenes
These quotes
are from the Panarion 29.
“They are succeeded
by the Nazarenes. They
lived at the same time, or before them, either with them
or after them. In
any case they are contemporaries. For
I cannot determine who are successors of whom. For, as I said, they were contemporaries
and possessed identical ideas. [1,2] They did not give themselves the name
of Christ, or that of Jesus, but they called themselves
Nazarenes. [1,3] All
Christians were called Nazarenes once. For a short time they were also given
the name Iessaiains, before the disciples in Antioch began
to be called Christians [1,4].” [Pritz,
1988]…”
“But they also did not
call themselves Nasaraeans, for the heresy of the Nasaraeans
existed before Christ and they did not know him. [6,2] However, everyone called Christians Nazarenes,
as I said before. This appears from the accusation against
Paul which was as follows: ‘We discovered that this
man is a pest, somebody disturbing the people, the leader
of the heresy of the Nazarenes’ [Acts 24:5] The holy apostle did not deny this name
although he was not a follower of the heresy, but he gladly
accepted the name which was inspired by the malice of his
opponents because it had been borne by Christ. [6,4] For
he said at the tribunal:
‘They did not find me in the temple speaking with somebody or causing
a riot. Nothing of what I am accused
of did I do. I admit to you that
I serve God in that way which they call heresy, believing everything which
is in the Law and the Prophets.’ [6,5] For
it is no wonder that the Apostle admitted he was a Nazarene because everybody
called Christians with that name at that time, because of the city of Nazareth
and because at this time there was no other name in use. Therefore persons were called Nazarenes
who came to believe in Christ, of whom it is written that ‘he will be
called a Nazarene’ [Matt. 2:23].” [ibid. p. 33, par. 2, taken from
the panarion 29]…”When they heard
the name Nazarenes from others, they did not reject it, because they saw what
was meant by those who called them by this name, viz. that they called them
by this name because of Christ, since our Lord himself was also called Jesus
the Nazarene, as appears from the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. [6,8] For he grew up in the city of Nazareth,
at the time a village, in the house of Joseph after being born according to
the flesh in Bethlehem of Mary, even virgin, who was betrothed to Joseph. He moved to that same Nazareth when he
settled down in Galilee after his departure from Bethlehem. [7,1] These heresies,
just mentioned, of which we are giving a brief sketch, passing over the name
of Jesus, did not call themselves Iesaians and did not keep the name Jews;
they did not call themselves Christians, but Nazarenes, taking this name from
the place Nazareth. But actually
they remained wholly Jewish and nothing else. [7,2] For they use not only the
New Testament but also the Old, like the Jews. For
the Legislation and the Prophets and the Scriptures, which are called the Bible
by the Jews, are not rejected by them as they are by those mentioned above. They are not at all mindful of other things but live according to the
preaching of the Law as among Jews: there is no fault to find with them apart
from the fact that they have come to believe in Christ. [7,3] For they also
accept the resurrection of the dead and that everything has its origin in God.
They proclaim one God and his Son Jesus Christ. [7,4] They have a good mastery
of the Hebrew language. For the entire Law and the Prophets and what is called
the Scriptures, I mention the poetical books. Kings,
Chronicles and Esther and all the others, are read by them in Hebrew as is
the case with the Jews, of course [7,5] Only in this respect they differ from
the Jews and Christians [he must mean Gentile Greco-Roman “Christians”]:
with the Jews they do not agree because of their belief in Christ, with
the Christians [i.e the Greco-Roman “Christians”] because they are trained in the Law, in circumcision, the Sabbath
and other things.” [ibid.
pp. 33-34, par’s. 3 & 1]
“For thus
it is with every heresy, often trying to outdo each other
in the matter prescribed concerning keeping of the Sabbath
and circumcision and other things.” [ibid. p. 34, par. 2]
“However they are very
much hated by the Jews. For not only the Jewish children
cherish hate against them but the people also stand up
in the morning, at noon, and in the evening, three times
a day and they pronounce curses and maledictions over them
when they say their prayers in the synagogues. Three
times a day they say: ‘May God curse the Nazarenes.’ [9,3]
For they are more hostile against them because they proclaim
as Jews that Jesus is the Christ, which runs counter to
those who are still Jews who did not accept Jesus. [9,4]
They have the entire Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew. It is carefully preserved by them in Hebrew
letters, as I wrote in the beginning.” [ibid. p.
35, par 1, from the panarion]
“We may
include here information found elsewhere in the panarion.
1.
They use both Old and New Testaments (7.2).
2.
They have a good knowledge of Hebrew and read
the Old Testament and at least one gospel in that language.
(7,4; 9,4).
3.
They believe in the resurrection of the dead
(7,3).
4.
They believe that God is creator of all things
(7,3).
5.
They believe in one God and his son Jesus Christ
(7,3).
6.
They observe the Law of Moses (7,5; 5,5; 8,1ff).
7.
They were joined by Elxai and later adopted
his book.
8.
Ebion came out of them (30,2,1).
9.
Earlier they were called Iessaioi (5,1-4).
10.
They had their origin from the Jerusalem congregation
which fled to Pella before 70 (7,8).
11.
Geographical location of Pella, Kokoba, and
Coele Syria (7,7)
12.
They are hated and cursed by the Jews (9,2-3).”
So we see that
their beliefs were orthodox, in that they believed Jesus
was the Son of God, they believed in his pre-existence as
God, Yahweh. We
also see they adhered to the Old Testament Law, especially
the observance of the Sabbath and, by extension Holy Days
of Leviticus 23, and dietary laws of Leviticus 11. We
see Epiphanius’
attitude toward the Nazarenes, what he’s trying to
describe is often hindered because he’s also out to
attack them as well, being a Greco-Roman Christian church
historian. Ray
Pritz also said about Epiphanius “It would be more
accurate to say that Epiphanius is using (or even recalling)
Eusebian information and expanding it for his own purposes.” He
also says “Epiphanius wrongly grouped the Nazarenes
together with other sects.”
He goes on to
say “It is only in pan. 29,7 that he has preserved for us
the testimony of a knowledgeable source.”
Panarion 9,7
“The data
in this section present us with a body in every way ‘orthodox’ except
for its adherence to the Law of Moses. If
we remember that the Jewish Church of Jerusalem also kept
the Law through the period covered by the book of Acts, then
we have a picture of the earliest Jewish Christian community. Two items from section 7, the flight
to Pella and the geographical data, are dealt with below.
- They use both Old and New Testaments. This implies, though it is not clearly
stated, that they make use also of Paul. We
know from Jerome that the Nazarenes respected Pauline writings,
a fact which sets them apart from other Jewish Christian
groups. In fact it is generally a characteristic
of the heresies [he means “heretics”] that
they reject some portion of scripture. The
very fact that Epiphanius can credit them with acceptance
of canonical scripture is a strong statement in favor of
their ‘orthodoxy’. The fact that they read the Old Testament ‘and
at least one gospel’ in Hebrew, which they know well,
only serves to confirm their Jewish background.
- Section 7,3 gives us three brief pieces of information
about the doctrines of the Nazarenes. One need make only a quick comparison
with the opening chapters of Acts to see that these basic
doctrines had a place in the teaching of the earliest Jerusalem
Church: the resurrection of the dead (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15;
4:10); God is creator of all things (4:24); and belief
in one God and his child Jesus Christ (3:13, 26; 4:27,
30). To this
point we have nothing that would differentiate the Nazarene
sect from the primitive Church. The picture is not full, certainly,
but what we are given in every way confirms the identity
of the Nazarenes as the heirs of the earliest Jerusalem
congregation. Even Epiphanius has nothing condemnatory
to say about the data thus far.” [ibid. p. 44, par.
2-4]
- “The parting
of the ways is at the Law of Moses. It is their observance
of the Law—and this alone—which, for Epiphanius,
separates the Nazarenes from the main [emerging Greco-Roman]
Church. ‘Only
in this respect they differ from the…Christians.’ It is this one thing which stands
out that is essentially the only thing remembered by
subsequent Fathers against the sect, starting with the anacephalaiosis. It makes little difference that
the first Jewish believers continued to keep the Law
(Acts 15; 21:20-26); it is immaterial that the epistle
to the Galatians was addressed to Christians from gentile background
or that Paul perhaps never wrote against Jewish Christians keeping the Law. [Proof of this can be seen
from a careful reading of Romans 14:1-23.] The significance
of all of this has long since been lost to men like Epiphanius. The Law is taboo [to the Greco-Roman
Christians]. To
attempt to keep it is to put oneself under a curse [according
to Epiphanius, is what Ray Pritz is driving at]. If
the Nazarenes want to observe parts of the Law, then
they are ‘Jews and nothing else.’ Never
mind if the same could be said for James or Peter, or,
indeed, Paul. For our purpose, of course, this
matter of the Law only reinforces the conviction that
we have a body of Jewish believers who have managed to
preserve the very earliest traditions of their forebears.” [ibid.
p. 45, par. 1] [emphasis mine throughout]
So, again, we
find the very descendants of the first Church of God in Jerusalem,
founded by Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit on Pentecost
31 or 32AD, still adhering to the customary days of worship
commanded in the Old Testament law, just as the early Jerusalem
church had. Nothing
has changed. Even the apostle Paul said the choice
for
“days of worship”, although optional now under the freedoms of
the New Testament, was a matter of individual Christian
conscience. And this early “era” of
the church would not be robbed of that freedom of choice. This fact stands
out throughout this research.
Possible source of Epiphanius and
Jerome
We see from this
quote that Epiphanius and Jerome were using a credible source
for the facts they were passing on in their history of the
early Jewish Christians. It also answers how long the Nazarenes
existed in the Middle East.
“Schmidtke
in his pioneering work…tried to show that both Epiphanius
and Jerome were primarily dependent on Apollinaris for their
knowledge of the Nazarenes and their writings. His conclusions are still generally accepted…The
important point for our investigation is that Jerome did study under Apollinaris, an extremely
learned and informed man who spent his entire long life in
the area of Laodicea and Antioch, that is, in the vicinity
of Beroea…From the foregoing considerations we may
conclude that, while Jerome may or may not have had personal
contact with the body of Nazarene Christians, he was certainly
well enough situated to have learned much about them from
contemporaries who did know them well. Not the least important corollary to this is that Jerome may be considered
a good witness to their continued existence until at least
the end of the fourth century.” [ibid. pp. 50-51,
par. 3 & 2 resp.]
“The Nazarenes,
who accept Christ in such a way that they do not cease
to observe the old law,
explain the two houses as the two families, viz. of Shammai
and Hillel, from whom originated the Scribes and Pharisees. Akiba,
who took over their school, is called master of Aquila
the proselyte, and after him came Meir who has been succeeded
by Joannes the son of Zakkai and after him Eliezer and
further Telphon, and next Joseph Galiaeus and Joshua
up to the capture of Jerusalem. [i.e.
135AD]…
“We may
first note the complete lack of condemnation of the Nazarenes
by Jerome. They are simply those “who accept Christ in such a way that they do not cease to observe
the old Law.” True,
there are places where he castigates them precisely for that,
but the only place where he dwells on and attacks it is in
his controversy on the whole matter of Law observance with
Augustine.” [ibid. p. 58, par.1-2]
What we see from
the quote above, which Ray Pritz comments on, is that the
Nazarenes had an active and ongoing dialogue with rabbinic
Judaism. We will
see evidence that this dialogue became heated at times, due
especially to Nazarene evangelism, which must have continued
to have a powerful impact on the Jews in the land of Israel
as well as the whole Middle East and Asia Minor. Ray Pritz says: “The Nazarenes must
have remained on such intimate terms with rabbinic Judaism
that they were familiar with the names of its leaders into
the second century.” [ibid. p. 62, par. 4]
Nazarene Isaiah Commentary
Ray Pritz goes
on to comment on the Isaiah commentary of the Nazarenes: “As
we noted at the outset, these passages are very important,
perhaps informative as anything we will consider in this
study. We have been able to trace through them
an active Nazarene presence well into the third century. The sect which produced this document
was actively engaged in a dialogue—heated, no doubt—with
rabbinic Judaism. It was familiar with the developments
within Judaism and rejected the authority of the pharisaic
scholars to interpret scripture definitively. The Nazarenes of this work may themselves
have continued to keep the Law of the Pentateuch, but they
did not see it binding on those who believed from among the
Gentiles.”
Let’s interrupt
this quote right here and notice something. We
don’t want to miss this, because it is an extremely
important distinction. I can’t over-emphasize the importance
of this. The
Nazarenes were basically what we would call non-Torah
observant in their attitude that Gentile believers could
keep “the law of Christ”, that is, Gentile believers
had the freedom in Christ to be Sunday/Christmas/Easter observing,
and still be Holy Spirit indwelt believers in Jesus Christ. But
for them, they chose to adhere to the Old Testament Law of
God, as magnified by Jesus in Matthew 5:17-48. i.e.
they were non-Torah observant, but leaned toward being Torah
observant. They
were quite similar to the early Church of God in Jerusalem
before Acts 15 and the book of Romans, chapter 14 was written,
but they fully understood the freedoms given in those two
passages to believers, freedoms which gave the believer freedom
of choice for “days of worship.” I
have had communication with a Torah observant Messianic congregation
in Oregon, which adheres to the Old Testament Law in similar
fashion, and yet recognizes that some of the Gentile—Sunday/Christmas/Easter
Christian churches are truly Holy Spirit inspired and indwelt. These
little distinctions mustn’t be missed, because they
help us understand this first “era” of the Christian
church. Ray Pritz
continues.
“Nor did
they accept as binding on themselves (or on any Jews) the
Oral Law as embodied in the Mishnah. These Jewish Christians viewed Paul and
his mission favorably and evidently accepted—in theory
at least—the unity of the Church as composed of both
Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ. Their Christology too called Christ the
Son of God. The
document itself displays an active familiarity with the Hebrew
language and must have been written in either Hebrew or Aramaic…And
finally, this group had not lost hope that the Jewish people
might yet turn to accept Jesus as the Messiah.” [ibid.
p. 70, par. 2]
Look at it this
way. Say you know of a Sabbatarian Church of
God or some people in one. They
observe the 7th Day Sabbath, the Holy Days of
Leviticus 23, and the dietary laws of Leviticus 11. And
yet they recognize that Holy Spirit indwelt people can and
do exist in Sunday observing evangelical churches, say like
the Calvary Chapel’s whose sermon transcripts grace
this site. Say
they even recognize some of these more Holy Spirit inspired
churches as being genuine sister-churches in Christ. This
would be a modern-day example of what was just described
by Ray Pritz above. That is the picture of the Nazarenes that
existed from 31AD to the early 400s AD. Does
such a Sabbatarian Church of God exist? Maybe, but Sabbatarians have been so used
to being beat up over their observance of the Old Testament
Law, just as their early 1st , 2nd and 3rd century forebears were,
that they are suspicious of the Sunday observing Gentile
churches. And they are suspicious of these other
Christians trying to convince them that their Sabbath/Holy
Day observance is wrong, which we are learning from this
study, and as Romans 14 clearly points out—it is not
wrong—it is a matter of freedom of choice, and they
are not going to be bullied into giving up something they
believe is better. They are afraid of allowing any syncretization
of teaching to cross over into their churches, because they
are fully aware of the forced syncretization that took place
in 325AD, which essentially destroyed the Nazarene “era” of
the Christian church. They are fully aware of the nasty changes
that were forced upon believers by Constantine in 325AD. Finish
reading this article before you pass judgment. Ray
Pritz now summarizes his research.
Summary of the facts presented
in
“NAZARENE JEWISH CHRISTIANITY”
“Let us
bundle our gleanings. This
purposely limited analysis of five fragments from GH [Gospel
of the Hebrews] has yielded a picture of a group distinctive
from the Ebionites in its doctrine of the divine sonship
of Jesus and its acceptance of the Old Testament prophets. The Nazarenes who used this gospel clearly
affirmed the resurrection of Jesus from the dead but may
have had (at least at the time when the gospel was composed)
an incomplete doctrine of the Holy Spirit. The
recension of GH which we have examined may have revealed
a balance between Jesus’ humanity and his divinity,
and especially of his own self-awareness of a “dual
nature.”…“Along the way (and incidentally)
we have perhaps seen that Jerome is not to be trusted in
everything he says, but neither is he to be rejected out
of hand as unreliable.” [ibid. p. 94, par. 1]
“The patristic
evidence provides an interesting corollary to Schaffer’s
conclusion. We find references to the synagogue curse
in Epiphanius and Jerome. Epiphanius states:
However, they are very much
hated by the Jews. For
not only the Jewish children cherish hate against them
[where do you think they learn if from?], but the people
also stand up in the morning, at noon and in the evening,
three times a day, and they pronounce curses and maledictions
over them when they say their prayers in the synagogues. Three times a day they say: “May
God curse the Nazarenes.”
Jerome wrote
Augustine (ep. 112,13): “Until now a heresy is to be
found in all of the synagogues of the East among the Jews;
it is called ‘of the Minaeans’ and is cursed
by the Pharisees until now. Usually
they are called Nazarenes.” In Amos 1.11-12: “until today they blaspheme the Christian
people in their synagogues under the name of Nazarenes.” In
Is. 5.18-19:
“Three times each day they anathematize the Christian name in every synagogue
under the name of Nazarenes.” In Is. 49.7: “They curse him [Christ]
three times a day in their synagogues under the name of Nazarenes.”…[ibid.
p. 105, par. 2-3]
Let’s stop
and examine this last quote. What
would cause the Jews to curse the Nazarenes so powerfully
in their synagogues, if indeed this is true? Wouldn’t
it be powerful preaching and witnessing about Jesus being
the Messiah from fellow Sabbath, Holy Day observing Jews? We
have to read between the lines a little bit here. Ask “why?”
sometimes. The
Nazarenes were still having a powerful impact on Judaism. Today,
anti-missionaries are ranting and raving in similar fashion
because of the powerful witness of Jews
for Jesus, a tiny little Messianic Jewish evangelistic
organization whose impact is felt worldwide amongst Jews. Their
slogun goes somewhat like this: “To Make the Messiah,
Jesus, an unavoidable issue amongst their people, the Jews.” The Nazarenes were no different. The gospel was going to the Gentiles very
successfully, and they were not going to neglect their own
people. Now we’re somewhat at the end of
man’s age, close to the coming of the Messiah, Jesus
Christ’s 2nd coming, and God has just recently
restored the Jewish branch of the body of Christ, and they
in similar fashion are now evangelizing powerfully to their
people. [see http://www.unityinchrist.com/messianicmovement/messianicmovement.htm and http://www.jewsforjesus.org]
Ray Pritz continues
to summarizes his book thus:
“There
emerges from our considerations an entity, a viable entity
of Law-keeping Christians of Jewish background. These
were direct descendants of the first Jewish believers in
Jesus. They survived the destruction of Jerusalem
in part because they fled successfully to Pella of the Decapolis,
and in part because they had roots also in Galilee. These
Jewish Christians were called Nazarenes after Jesus, and
probably received the title on the basis of early Christian
interpretation of certain Old Testament passages (e.g. Isa.
11:1) as referring to the Messiah and specifically to Jesus
himself. The
Nazarenes were distinct from the Ebionites and prior to them. In fact, we have found that it is possible
that there was a split in Nazarene ranks around the turn
of the first century. This
split was either over a matter of christological doctrine
or over leadership of the community. Out of this split came the Ebionites,
who can scarcely be separated from the Nazarenes on the basis
of geography, but who can be easily distinguished from the
standpoint of Christology.
The
continued existence of this Nazarene entity can be traced
with reasonable certainty through the fourth century, contingent
upon the credence we give to the evidence of Epiphanius and
Jerome at the end of that century. While their corroborating testimonies
cannot fairly be dismissed, even without them we must allow
for the continuation of the Nazarenes at least to the third
century…They were to be found in the Galilee and probably
in Jerusalem until 135[AD], when all Jews were expelled from
the city. It would seem that members of the sect moved northward at a somewhat
later date and were to be found also in the area of Beroea
of Coele Syria near the end of the fourth century.” [ibid.
p. 108, par. 1-2]
About this “It would seem that members of the sect moved northward”,
I have some pretty interesting speculation on where the Nazarenes
moved—coming up to, during and following the massive
Jewish-Roman War that took place from 132 to 135AD. Let
Ray Pritz continue:
“What we
have seen of their doctrines lines up well with the developing
christological doctrines of the greater catholic Church. [He
does not mean the Roman Catholic Church here, but the “universal
church” on the Gentile side.] The sect seems to have
been basically Trinitarian. They accepted the virgin birth and affirmed
the deity of Jesus. They
also seem to have had an embryonic, developing doctrine of
the Holy Spirit, one which was no more nor indeed less developed
than that of the greater Church at a comparable stage. Contrary
to other Jewish Christian groups of the time (and also current
to scholarly opinion) they did not reject the apostleship
of Paul. They
recognized his commission from God to preach to the gentiles,
and they seem fully to have accepted the fruit of his labors:
the “Church from the Gentiles.”…The Nazarenes,
as Jews, continued to observed certain aspects of Mosaic
Law, including circumcision and the Sabbath, [and this would
include the Holy Days of Leviticus 23, as well as dietary
laws], and it was this which brought about their exclusion
from the Church [i.e. the emerging Greco-Roman Church]. This rejection and exclusion was, however,
gradual.” [ibid. p. 109, par. 1]
“On the
Jewish side, the exclusion of the Nazarenes was not nearly
so gradual. At
the end of the first century, the birkat
ha-minim was formulated with the sect specifically named. This recorded in both patristic and Jewish
sources. Nonetheless,
we have found it possible that there was some limited synagogue
attendance by Nazarenes into the early decades of the second
century. In addition
to this, we find continued contact between the two communities
in the form of a polemic or dialogue. Such
contact should not surprise us, since the Nazarenes lived
in the same geographical areas with predominantly Jewish
communities. However, as the polemic and distrust grew,
the separation and isolation from the Jewish community were
increased. Different steps along the way effected
this separation: the flight to Pella, the birkat
ha-minim, the refusal of the Nazarenes to recognize and
support Bar Kochba. By
the middle of the second century, the rift was probably complete.” [ibid.
p. 109, par. 2]
“Of particular
interest is the Nazarene commentary on Isaiah. This work
shows clearly that the rejection was not solely from the
Jewish side. The
Nazarenes refused to accept the authority established by
the Pharisaic camp after the destruction of Jerusalem, and
in so refusing they adjudicated their own isolation from
the converging flow of what we call Judaism. Just
as they rejected the Church’s setting aside of the
Law of Moses, so also they refused the rabbis’ expansive
interpretations of it…From Talmudic sources we
have seen that the Nazarenes may have conducted an active
program of evangelism among the Jews. The
Isaiah commentary confirms that they never relinquished hope
that Jews would one day turn away from tradition and towards
Jesus: “O Sons of Israel, who deny the Son of God with
such hurtful resolution, return to him and to his apostles.””
[ibid. p. 110, par. 1-2]
Geography of the Nazarenes
Jerome tells
Augustine (ep. 112,13) that the Nazarene sect is
to be found among the Jews in all the synagogues of the East. At the time of writing, this would have
been highly unlikely, although it may have been not so far
wrong three hundred years earlier…Turning more to
specific references, we have the Pella tradition. Some Nazarenes doubtless remained there,
across the Jordan, while others, perhaps led by their aging
bishop Simon, returned after 70 or 73 to Jerusalem. They will not have stayed there past 135,
and with the Hadrianic persecution both Jerusalem and Pella
Nazarenes may have fled north.” [ibid. p. 120,
par. 1-2] “Our
final bit of geographical data revolves around Beroea of
Coele Syria. Epiphanius
(pan. 29,7) names this town (modern-day Aleppo) as a home of the Nazarenes. He
does not mention it in connection with the Ebionites. Jerome,
like Epiphanius, states in the present tense that the members
of the sect are living in Beroea of Syria. Black
notes that the two presbyters for whom Epiphanius wrote his panarion came from Beroea in Coele Syria (PG 41, 156). This must
greatly strengthen the credibility of what he says about
the place, as he would hardly have been likely to tell them
something of their own town which they would know to be patently
false. Neither
Epiphanius nor Jerome tells us how they got there, and we
can only surmise that they may have fled there during the
Hadrianic persecution which ended in 138 [AD]. Similarly,
we have no data as to the size of the group. It
is here we see the last traces of the Nazarenes.”
Now that leaves
us in a very interesting spot historically. We
know that Judeo-Christians are very extant in Asia Minor
up until 325AD. Asia Minor is pagan. Where did these Judeo-Christians come
from?
The Bar Kochba Revolt
First of all,
what was the Bar Kochba Revolt (spelled by some Bar Kokhba’s
Revolt)? Wikipedia defines it thus: “Bar
Kokhba’s Revolt (132-135CE) against the Roman Empire,
also known as The Second Jewish-Roman War or The Second Jewish Revolt, was a second
major rebellion by the Jews of Iudaea and the last of the
Jewish-Roman Wars.” Shira
Schoenberg writes “When Hadrian first became the Roman
emperor in 118 C.E., he was sympathetic to the Jews. He
allowed them to return to Jerusalem [from their expulsion
in 70AD—interesting to note, Jewish Christians had
been allowed to return and were a presence since 73AD] and
granted permission for the rebuilding of the Holy Temple.
The Jews’ expectations rose as they made organizational
and financial preparations to rebuild the temple. Hadrian
quickly went back on his word, however, and requested that
the site of the Temple be moved from its original location. He
also began deporting Jews to North Africa.” She
goes on to describe the next event.
“The
Jews organized guerilla forces and, in 123 C.E., began launching
surprise attacks against the Romans. From
that point on, life only got worse for the Jews. Hadrian
brought an extra army legion, the “Sixth Ferrata,” into
Judea to deal with the terrorism. Hadrian
hated
“foreign” religions and forbade the Jews to perform circumcisions. He appointed Tinneius Rufus governor of
Judea. Rufus was a harsh ruler
who took advantage of Jewish women.”
Wikipedia picks
up with the story in 130AD: “In 130, Emperor Hadrian
visited the ruins of Jerusalem. At first sympathetic towards the Jews,
Hadrian promised to rebuild the city, but the Jews felt betrayed
when they found out that his intentions were to rebuild the
Jewish holiest city as a pagan metropolis, and a new pagan
temple on the ruins of the Second Temple was to be dedicated
to Jupiter.” Shira
Schoenberg continues the story. “In approximately 132
C.E., Hadrian began to establish a city in Jerusalem called
Aelia Capitolina, the name being a combination of his own
name and that of the Roman god Jupiter Capitolinus. He started to build a temple to Jupiter
in the place of the Jewish Holy Temple. As
long as Hadrian remained near Judea, the Jews remained relatively
quiet…” Wikipedia continues: “The Jewish
sage Rabbi Akiva (alternatively Akiba) convinced the Sanhedrin
to support the impending revolt, and regarded the chosen
commander Simon Bar Kokhba to be the Jewish Messiah, according
to the verse in Numbers 24:17: “There shall come a
star out of Jacob” (“Bar Kokhba” means “son
of a star” in the Aramaic language)…Most historians
believe that it was this messianic claim in favor of Bar
Kokhba that alienated many Christians (including Jewish Christians),
who believed that the true messiah was Jesus, and sharply
deepened the schism between Jews and Christians. The
Jewish leaders carefully planned the second revolt to avoid
mistakes that had plagued the first Great Jewish Revolt sixty
years earlier. In
132, a revolt led by Bar Kokhba quickly spread from Modin
across the country.”
Shira Schoenberg
continues: “When he [Hadrian] left in 132, the Jews
began their rebellion on a large scale. They seized towns and fortified them with
walls and subterranean passages. Under
the strong leadership of Simon Bar-Kokhba, the Jews captured
approximately 50 strongholds in Palestine and 985 undefended
towns and villages, including Jerusalem. Jews
from other countries, and even some gentiles, volunteered
to join their crusade. The Jews minted coins with slogans such
as
“The freedom of Israel” written in Hebrew. Hadrian
dispatched General Publus Marcellus, governor of Syria, to help Rufus, but
the Jews defeated both Roman leaders. The Jews then invaded the coastal region
and the Romans began sea battles against them.” Wikipedia continues.
“The Era of the redemption
of Israel”
“A sovereign
Jewish state was restored for two and a half years that followed. The functional public administration was
headed by Simon Bar Kokhba, who took the title Nasi Israel (ruler or prince of Israel). The “Era of the redemption of Israel” was
announced, contracts were signed and coins were minted with
corresponding inscriptions (some were overstruck Roman silver
coins). Rabbi Akiva presided over the Sanhedrin. The religious rituals were observed and
the korbanot (i.e. sacrifices) were resumed
on the Altar. Some attempts were made to restore the Temple
in Jerusalem.”
Roman reaction
Shira Schoenberg
best describes it: “The turning point of the war came
when Hadrian sent into Judea one of his best generals from
Britain, Julius Severus, along with former governor of Gemania,
Hadrianus Quintus Lollius Urbicus. By
that time, there were 12 army legions ]60,000 men approximately]
from Egypt, Britain, Syria and other areas in Palestine. Due to the large number of Jewish rebels,
instead of waging open war, Severus besieged Jewish fortresses
and held back food until the Jews grew weak. Only
then did his attack escalate into outright war. The
final battle of the war took place in Bethar, Bar-Kokhba’s
headquarters, which housed both the Sanhedrin (Jewish High
Court) and the home of the Nasi (leader). Bethar was a vital
military stronghold because of its strategic location on
a mountain ridge overlooking the Valley of Sorek and the
important Jerusalem-Bet Guvrin Road. Thousands of Jewish
refugees fled to Bethar during the war. In
135 C.E., Hadrian’s army besieged Bethar and on the
9th of Av, the Jewish fast day commemorating the
destruction of the first and second Holy Temples, the walls
of Bethar fell. After a fierce battle, every Jew in Bethar
was killed. Six days passed before the Romans allowed
the Jews to bury their dead. Following
the battle of Bethar, there were a few small skirmishes in
the Judean Desert Caves, but the war was essentially over
and Judean independence was lost. The Romans plowed Jerusalem with a yoke
of oxen. Jews
were sold into slavery and many were transported to Egypt. Judean
settlements were not rebuilt. Jerusalem
was turned into a pagan city called Aelia Capitolina and
the Jews were forbidden to live there. They
were permitted to enter only on the 9th of
Av to mourn losses in the revolt. Hadrian
changed the country’s name from Judea to Syria Palestina. In
the years following the revolt, Hadrian discriminated against
all Judeo-Christian sects, but the worst persecution was
directed against religious Jews. He made anti-religious decrees forbidding
Torah study, Sabbath observance, circumcision, Jewish courts,
meeting in synagogues and other ritual practices. Many Jews assimilated and many sages and
prominent men were martyred including Rabbi Akiva and the
rest of the Asara Harugei Malchut (ten martyrs). This
age of persecution lasted throughout the remainder of Hadrian’s
reign, until 138 C.E.”
“The Romans demolished all 50 Jewish fortresses and 985 villages. The main conflicts took place in Judea,
the Shepula, the mountains and the Judean desert, though
fighting spread to Northern Israel. The
Romans suffered heavy casualties as well and Hadrian did
not send his usual message to the Senate that “I and
my army are well.”
Long-term consequences and historic
importance
Back to Wikipedia: “Modern
historians have come to view the Bar-Kokhba Revolt as being
of decisive historic importance. The
massive destruction and loss of life occasioned by the revolt
has led some scholars to date the beginning of the Jewish
diaspora from this date [and not the earlier Babylonian captivity
date]. They note
that, unlike the aftermath of the First Jewish-Roman War
chronicled by Josephus, the
majority of the Jewish population was either killed, exiled,
or sold into slavery after the Bar-Kokhba Revolt, and
the Jewish religious and political authority was suppressed
far more brutally. After
the revolt the Jewish religious center shifted to the Babylonian
Jewish community and its scholars. Judea
would not be a center for Jewish religious, cultural, or
political life again until the modern era, though Jews continued
to live there and important religious developments still
occurred there…Historian Shmuel Katz writes that even
after the disaster of the revolt: “Jewish life remained
active and productive. Banished from Jerusalem, it now centred
on Galilee. Refugees
returned…” He lists the communities left in Palestine:
“43 Jewish communities in Palestine in the sixth century: 12 on the coast, in the Negev, and east
of the Jordan, and 31 villages in Galilee and in the Jordan valley” Now let’s analyze what Mr. Katz
has just said here. In the 500AD’s—400
years later—there are now 43 Jewish communities, where there were once
985 villages and towns—communities. In
400 years there are 43 Jewish communities where there were once almost 1,000
communities.
What Can We Learn From All This? How
Does This Show Us Where the Nazarenes Might Have Gone?
Wars, especially
major ones, are very effective movers of people and populations. The Nazarenes were a church community,
a Jewish-Christian church community. There
are three major things that will move a religious population:
economics, religious persecution, and major war. We
find all three conditions being met here during the Bar-Kokhba
Revolt, the 2nd Jewish-Roman War. Remember
Ray Pritz said he thought the Nazarenes moved north? Then
he lists a few places where there are records of them being. But don’t forget, the apostle John,
the last apostle, had moved north to Asia Minor and headquartered
himself in Ephesus. The
evangelism of Paul, as we have just seen, created a lot of
Judeo-Christian congregations in Asia Minor. Polycarp,
the disciple of John is now bishop, ruler over this vast
area of Asia Minor and the Judeo-Christians up there. These
are friendly churches, keeping the Passover of the 14th Nisan,
and thus they are Sabbath/Holy Day observing Judeo-Christians. If
you were a Jewish Christian living in Israel coming up to
the Bar-Kokhba Revolt (or say you were foolish enough to
remain in Israel during that war)—knowing Polycarp
is in Asia Minor ruling over a bunch of friendly Judeo-Christian
congregations—where would you move to? If Stark’s figures are correct,
and three million Judeo-Christians were residing in Asia
Minor up to 325AD, where do you think they came from? They
all weren’t there to begin with, that’s for sure. Asia
Minor is pagan, it’s population is basically pagan
except for the Jewish synagogues that popped up all over
the coast of Asia Minor during and after the Diaspora of
the Babylonian captivity and then the First Jewish-Roman
War in 70AD. Also,
figure a good number of Judeo-Christians would have decided
to move north from 66-70AD, moving to Asia Minor where the
last remaining apostle, John, was headquartered in Ephesus. Put
yourself in their shoes. If
you had a family where would
you go? I
am postulating that there were two movements of Nazarene
Jewish Christians that moved north to Asia Minor, one from
66-70AD and the other from 132-135AD. A remnant stayed behind, and re-formed
the Jerusalem congregation, descendents of the original Church
of God at Jerusalem. As
you read excerpts from Oskar Skarsaune’s In
the Shadow of the Temple, a Jewish-Christian synagogue
dating to 73AD was recently found, having been inhabited
by these Jewish Christians, descendents of the Nazarenes,
up until the time of the Crusades. Pretty
astounding if you ask me. Remember
I said three things would move a religious community, economics,
persecution and war? Those
three things moved a religious community to the United States
from the Midlands of England in 1620, to Plymouth, Massachusetts. Persecution
and resulting economic hardship brought the Separatists from
the Midlands of England to Plymouth. Ten
years later the threat of impending civil war in England
brought 30,000 Puritans to Boston Harbour to escape persecution
and war. That was only four hundred years ago,
a relatively short time-span historically speaking, so we
have a well-documented history of the event. Looking
back 1900 years, through the lens of histories written by
a group’s detractors can be a little bit more difficult. There
is a very strong suspicion amongst historians and scholars
that many of these early histories written by the participants
themselves (i.e. the Nazarenes and Judeo-Christians of Asia
Minor) have been “lost” or destroyed. But
we can make a very educated guess, and that is what I have
done here.
Links to two
online resources on the Bar Kokhba Revolt:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/revolt1.html
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba’s_revolt
I highly recommend
purchasing
“Nazarene Jewish Christianity” by Ray A. Pritz. It
is a little over 100 pages, but he draws sound conclusions from the historic
evidence now at hand. I found my
copy on http://www.amazon.com.
|
