Thanks; is it online so that I can link to it? If not would you PM me a private copy for me to look at privately?StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Sun Oct 29, 2023 5:56 am The above post "What is an Ebionaen?" differs in some respects with my article "Ebionites" in Anchor Bible Dictionary II 260-261. (It includes a misspelling of Klijn in the text but is ok in the bibliography, Klijn and Reinink, Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Sects [Brill, 1973], a good collection.)
By using a new term I'm free to define what it means. I'm tired of nitt-picking differences compared to the gargantun features of Ebionaen Christianity:
- the Christian observance of the Mosaic law, and the doctorine of works.
- the rejection of Paul and the Faulines, and its Marcionism and inherent Crowleyism.
- the natural affinity with the Kararites and Samaratains, and Sukkoth and Pessach.
- the Christian emnity with the Sadducees and Pharasees.
- the affinity with the Essenes, but their rejection of the Essenian misogyny.
- the primacy of HAramaic over Greek, and hence interest in the PeshiitA.
- the role of the Ebioinaens as the root of the PeshiitA, and the Church of the East.
I feel HAramaic is necessary because although their character sets are the same, the languages are different, and the subsequent evolution of vowels went differently. I want a term that encompasses both when I don't need the distinction, as the diferences will be minor. If there was a Hebrew Matthew in Hebrew letters in Caesarea, it hasn't survived. But the Aramaic Matthew in Hebrew letters may have survived as the PeshittA - that's what the Church of the East says. Jerome said he was given access to the guarded copy in Caesarea, and translated, it/them, I read somewhere that he did both versions but I can't now find the reference.
I've defined the Ebionaens as Early Christians, which are defined by what's in their book of Matthew.
I ignore Qumran - it's been too heavily tampered with. I want to agree with Eisenman's conclusions reading the Habbukuk Pesher. I'll try to reach the same conclusions by reading the Ebionaen apocrypha: e.g. the Clementine literature. I'd rather spend my time on the, manifestly Early Christian, Nag Hammadi library.
I've drawn the line on distinguishing between the Ebionites from Nazarenes. I want to examine the consequences of the reasonable definitions that were made of the Ebionaens, rather than waste any more time on the definitions.
I'll use this post a ToDo list and ask people who are interested to start threads, and we'll point to them from here, and pull back conclusions into this thread.
- Was the New Testament Originally Written in Aramaic?
- What to make of the Gospel of the Hebrews?
- HAramaic: the Hebrew and Aramaic roots in the New Testament
- Are Faul's letters all derived from Marcion?
- Compare Whiston's Apostolic Consitutions with the Hierosolymitanus texts.
- What MS was Whiston's Apostolic Consitutions working from?
- I'll pull together the links for a trial and conviction of Rufinus by comparing his Tortured Trinitarian Travesty of the Clementines with the Greek fragments of them that were found.
- Shepherd of Hermas
- Travels of Peter
PS: This post is tagged with EcLive: so you can easily search for the important post that are kept up-to-date.