Secret Alias wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 8:50 pm
It is incredible to believe that the core text of the Clementines was written by the Ebionites Irenaeus reports to us. The heretical parts of the text are the original parts.
I think the sources that are thought to have been incorporated into (and re-worked in) the Grundschrift could have been written by the Ebionites Irenaeus reports to us. Take Rec. 1.68-71, for example:
Then said James, "We must first inquire from what Scriptures we are especially to derive our discussion." Then he, with difficulty, at length overcome by reason, answered, that it must be derived from the law; and afterwards he made mention also of the prophets.
To him our James began to show, that whatsoever things the prophets say they have taken from the law, and what they have spoken is in accordance with the law. He also made some statements respecting the books of the Kings in: what way, and when, and by whom they were written, and how they ought to be used.
And when he had discussed most fully concerning the law, and had, by a most clear exposition, brought into light whatever things are in it concerning Christ, he showed by most abundant proofs that Jesus is the Christ, and that in him are fulfilled all the prophecies which related to his humble advent ...
To which he added this also: "Do not think that we speak of two unbegotten Gods, or that one is divided into two, or that the same is made male and female. But we speak of the only-begotten Son of God, not sprung from another source, but ineffably self-originated" ...
And when matters were at that point that they should come and be baptized, some one of our enemies [i.e., Saul] entering the temple with a few men, began to cry out ... While he was thus speaking, and adding more to the same effect, and while James the bishop was refuting him, he began to excite the people and to raise a tumult, so that the people might not be able to hear what was said.
Therefore he began to drive all into confusion with shouting, and to undo what had been arranged with much labour, and at the same time to reproach the priests, and to enrage them with revilings and abuse, and, like a madman, to excite every one to murder, saying, "What do ye? Why do ye hesitate? Oh sluggish and inert, why do we not lay hands upon them, and pull all these fellows to pieces?"
When he had said this, he first, seizing a strong brand from the altar, set the example of smiting. Then others also, seeing him, were carried away with like readiness. Then ensued a tumult on either side, of the beating and the beaten. Much blood is shed; there is a confused flight, in the midst of which that enemy attacked James, and threw him headlong from the top of the steps; and supposing him to be dead, he cared not to inflict further violence upon him ...
Then after three days ... that enemy had received a commission from Caiaphas, the chief priest, that he should arrest all who believed in Jesus, and should go to Damascus with his letters, and that there also, employing the help of the unbelievers, he should make havoc among the faithful; and that he was hastening to Damascus chiefly on this account ...
In the above we can see what Irenaeus says about Ebionites in AH 1.26.2:
Those who are called Ebionites agree that the world was made by God; but their opinions with respect to the Lord are similar to those of Cerinthus and Carpocrates. They use the Gospel according to Matthew only, and repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the law. As to the prophetical writings, they endeavour to expound them in a somewhat singular manner: they practice circumcision, persevere in the observance of those customs which are enjoined by the law, and are so Judaic in their style of life, that they even adore Jerusalem as if it were the house of God.
Not that I am suggesting it, but it's
as if Irenaeus got his information from the above supposed Ebionite source. The Jewish Christians in Rec. 1.68-71 believe in one God, repudiate Paul, expound the prophetical writings in somewhat singular manner, and, since it is in a pre-70 CE context, they adore Jerusalem
literally as the house of God, since the events take place
in the Temple among priests.
And I think this section (which, if I recall correctly, is more or less all that is thought to be from an Ebionite source in all of the Recognitions' ten books) could thus be one of the "few genuine passages" that Epiphanius mentions above:
But they use certain other books as well -supposedly the so-called Travels of Peter written by Clement, though they corrupt their contents while leaving a few genuine passages.
But by the time the Grundshrift is thought to have been compiled (mid to late third century CE), Ebionites had evolved to reject the prophetical writings and certain parts of the Torah, like the citation in your OP suggests and as Epiphanius says.