Judaizers, Ebionites, and the Book of Hebrews

Throughout most of the book of Acts, Christianity was considered a denomination or “sect” within Judaism (called the “Nazarenes”¹), the other Jewish sects being the Pharisees,² the Sadducees,³ and the Essenes.⁴ Membership of Gentiles was allowed in the synagogues, but always in a secondary status and only by making a commitment to observe the Law of Moses and undergoing circumcision. In the new Nazarene (Jewish-Christian) Faith, many assumed that the same was required of Gentile converts (proselytes). The conversion of Gentiles to the Nazarene Faith was first seen in Peter’s preaching to Cornelius’ household in Acts 10. Upon his return to Jerusalem he was accused by some of breaking the kosher laws: “You went in to uncircumcised men and ate with them!” (Acts 11:3). Peter’s defense was to recount his vision of the sheet lowered from heaven, and the fact that these Gentiles had received the Spirit in the same manner as the Apostles did on Pentecost. Peter declared, “Who was I that I could withstand God?” (Acts 11:17). It is clear from this account that the primary objection was not the conversion of Gentiles, or even that Gentiles were not obeying the kosher laws regarding food. Their objection was that Peter himself, as a Jewish Christian, was not following the Law of Moses, and by extension he was not establishing the right precedent for the new Gentile converts to observe the Law.

A little later in Paul’s ministry we see the Spirit of Truth leading further away from the assumptions of the “Nazarene” sect. Unlike the other Jewish sects, Paul’s version of the Gospel taught that “the Law of Christ,”⁵ known as “the New Covenant,”⁶ completely superseded the Mosaic Law for both Jews and Gentiles who embrace Christ by faith.⁷ Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles had barely begun when this distinction brought trouble and opposition from within the new Jesus movement. This distinction also coincided with the name “Christian” displacing the name “Nazarene” in the churches outside of Judea. The conflict began to manifest itself when certain Nazarenes from the Jerusalem church (who were formerly Pharisees) began following behind Paul’s travels and preaching, insisting that the Gentile converts must be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses, something that was common to Judaism at large.

Paul wrote the book of Galatians to the churches he had recently established on his first missionary journey. This was in response to these former Pharisees, “Judaizers,” from the Jerusalem Church who objected to the direction that Christianity was taking under Paul’s ministry. In Galatians, Paul denounced the “Judaizers” as “false brethren” and warned the recent Gentile converts that if they placed themselves under the Law of Moses, and were circumcised, they have “fallen from grace.”⁸

Of course, Paul’s authority for establishing Christian doctrine was being challenged on the basis that he was not one of the original Twelve, not taught by Jesus Himself, since he had been converted after Jesus’ ascension to heaven. This is why Paul stressed his unique conversion and encounter with Jesus, and his commission by Jesus to the Gentiles which occurred on the road to Damascus. In Galatians, Paul also felt the need to establish his credentials, that he was personally taught his Gospel message by Jesus Himself after his encounter with Jesus on the Damascus road.⁹

The conflict between Paul and the Judaizers came to a head in Acts 15 as the issue was brought before the leadership of the mother Church in Jerusalem. At the Jerusalem Council,¹⁰ James (pastor of the Jerusalem church), Peter, and the remaining elders resolved the issue concerning Gentile converts within the new “Nazarene” community, decreeing in writing that Gentile converts need not observe the Mosaic Law or circumcision. However, this council did not address whether Jewish converts must continue to observe the Mosaic Law. That issue would present itself later in Acts 21 but again was not resolved.

The schismatic sect of Judaizers apparently did not entirely accept the judgment of the Jerusalem council. The conflict with Paul and his ministry continued to fester. The influence of the Judaizers continued creating division within the churches as far away as Greece and Italy. Paul was forced to address this issue in several of his letters.¹¹

It is clear that the “Nazarene” church in Jerusalem under the leadership of James, Jesus’ brother, mostly continued to consider the Law of Moses to be binding on Jewish Christians while at the same time Paul was teaching just the opposite, that Jewish believers were no longer under the Law of Moses, the TUTOR meant to lead Israel to Christ. Paul taught that after “faith” in Christ comes, individual Jews are no longer under the TUTOR – the Law of Moses. Galatians 3-5 makes this point very clear. Yet, in Romans 14, Paul also made it clear that Jewish believers who continued to practice the Law of Moses for conscience’s sake ought not be judged by Jewish or Gentile believers who did not continue the traditions. Yet he considered such Jewish believers as “weak in the Faith.”

In Galatians 2:11-16 Paul tells of a situation which arose in the Antioch church where Peter had been visiting and had been eating non-kosher with the Gentiles of that church. But when “certain brethren” came from the Jerusalem church to Antioch, Peter failed to take a stand for the truth and unity of the church, but separated from the Gentile believers and would only eat kosher with the Jewish believers. Paul boldly rebuked Peter in front of the whole congregation for patronizing and appeasing the Judean believers instead of standing for the truth of the Gospel, thus reintroducing the division which Paul so diligently opposed and sought to heal.

Later, when Paul travelled to Jerusalem, this festering conflict arose again. This time Paul capitulated to James and the elders of the Nazarene community in Jerusalem because it was their jurisdiction not his.

Acts 21:17-25 (NKJV) 17 And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; 21 but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. 22 What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. 23 Therefore DO WHAT WE TELL YOU: We have four men who have taken a vow. 24 Take them and be purified with them and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. 25 But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.” 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.

Here Paul had to choose between the lesser of two evils. He could stand firm on the Gospel message given to Him through the Spirit of Truth by Jesus, thus openly disobeying the leadership of James and the elders (and perhaps cause a riot and major split between the “Nazarene” branch and the “Christian” branch), or else he could obey the church leadership which commanded him, “Do what we tell you ….” Paul’s submission in this case should be seen in light of the fact that the Jerusalem church had previously decided that Peter would exercise jurisdiction over Jewish evangelism and Paul would exercise jurisdiction over Gentile evangelism.¹² Paul had no direct authority over the Jerusalem church first established by the Eleven Apostles and now led by James. Paul himself had taught on several occasions that all believers are under God-appointed authority and must be submissive to it. Paul also had no issue with observing the Jewish Law himself by tradition (not obligation) when among Jewish brethren who observed the Law. He did so merely to avoid offending Jews or Jewish Christians who considered themselves bound by the Law and its traditions. This is consistent with Paul’s teaching in Romans 14.¹³

The Nazarene sect in Jerusalem seems to have prospered up until the martyrdom of James around AD 62. Paul was martyred in Rome about AD 66, and very shortly thereafter Peter fully endorsed all of Paul’s letters just before his own martyrdom in Rome around AD 67.¹⁴ This apparently left the Nazarene community in Judea without strong leadership in the years leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, which no doubt provided an opening for those who were the most “zealous for the Law.” The Temple was destroyed and the Levitical priesthood was completely disbanded in AD 70 which was certainly God’s own judgment concerning not only the unbelieving Jews, but also the unresolved issue within the Jewish “Nazarene” community, whether Jewish believers were under obligation to observe both the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ, or under obligation only to the Law of Christ as Paul taught. The Jewish Christians of Jerusalem and Judea were forced into a very difficult choice to make as they fled the destruction by Rome. Would they accept God’s own judgment concerning this question (since they could no longer practice the Mosaic ordinances according to the Law without the Temple and priesthood)? Would they join with the much larger Jewish-Gentile “Christian” movement in Antioch and Ephesus which was based on Paul’s Gospel and which had already spread throughout the Roman Empire? Or would they continue to be “zealous for the Law,” do as the unbelieving Jews were doing and adapt the Law to the new situation and thus continue to reject Paul’s teaching and his letters, and thus become a completely separate religion apart from Christianity?

The question of what became of the “Nazarene” (Judean) community after the destruction of Jerusalem is obscure. We know that after AD 70, the Apostle John took up residence in Ephesus and inherited oversight of the churches Paul had established in Asia Minor, writing all of his books after this date. A great deal of John’s material was clearly meant to reinforce Paul’s prior teaching. The church in Ephesus under John’s leadership became the new capitol of Christianity after Jerusalem’s destruction. And this church had a very large mixed congregation of Jew and Gentile. It was clearly “Pauline” in its theology, unlike the “Nazarene” congregation in Judea under James had been.

Yet, it is clear from church history that the Nazarene community did indeed heed Jesus’ warnings in Luke 21 to flee Judea when they saw the Roman armies beginning to surround Jerusalem. John himself was among the “Nazarenes” who relocated. Yet the resistance to Paul and his teaching by the thousands of “Nazarenes” who remained “zealous for the Law” could not be expected to just disappear. Their zeal certainly did not diminish at all throughout Paul’s entire ministry. From the early chapters of Acts until the destruction of Jerusalem this opposition to Paul within the “Nazarene” community festered, as zealots sought to control the direction of the new Messianic movement away from Pauline Christianity. Their opposition to Paul’s taking Christianity in the direction of salvation entirely by grace alone, along with the complete obsolescence of the Mosaic system for all believers, did not diminish in the slightest right up to the destruction of Jerusalem. It is hard to imagine that their zeal for the Law of Moses suddenly evaporated and they were all absorbed into the Pauline Christianity of Antioch and Ephesus. The extreme “Judaizers” whom Paul called “false brethren” within the Nazarene community might have been suppressed somewhat by the letter circulated from the Jerusalem council (Acts 15), but there is no record or evidence of their separation from the larger “Nazarene” community prior to AD 70. Rather, the events of Acts 21 imply that they still had a lot of clout and influence even towards the end of Paul’s ministry. Even the most “zealous” of the Judaizers certainly accepted Jesus as the Jewish Messiah and considered this foundational to the “Nazarene” Faith. Yet their zeal for the Mosaic system seems to have outweighed their devotion to Christ. And they certainly rejected the new “revelation” of the Spirit given to Paul regarding the “mystery” described in 1 Corinthians 1-2 and elsewhere.

So what happened to these thousands of displaced and disbursed “Nazarenes” who were so “zealous for the Law” that they were patronized and placated by James, Peter, and even perhaps Paul to a lesser degree? Irenaeus informs us of a significant Jewish-Christian sect in his day (about a century after the destruction of Jerusalem) that seems identical to these displaced zealots. They became known as “Ebionites” (meaning “poor ones”). They were fiercely devoted to the Law of Moses and rejected all of Paul’s letters and Acts (written by Paul’s companion Luke). They traced their lineage back to James and the “Nazarene” Jerusalem church. They certainly did not just appear on their own, accepting Jesus as the Messiah, without first being evangelized. It is also easy to see why they might have even supposed James to have fully agree with them in opposing Paul regarding the Jewish believers’ obligations to the Law, since James had indeed patronized the thousands of zealots for the Law in Acts 21. In the second chapter of his lone epistle, James elevated “the Royal Law,” quoting from the Ten Commandments, and then immediately stressed that “faith without works is dead,” two points which could easily be interpreted as opposing Paul’s teaching. Of the Gospels, the Ebionites accepted only Matthew (written originally in Aramaic) minus the birth narrative which indicates a virgin birth.¹⁵ Instead they claimed that Joseph was Jesus’ true father and that Jesus was God’s son merely by “adoption” due to His perfect observance of Moses’ Law.¹⁶ They emphatically denied the Son’s preexistence which had been taught plainly by Paul and then later affirmed by John’s writings (which they also naturally rejected).¹⁷ It seems virtually impossible to deny the connection between the early Judaizers (whom Paul called “false brethren”) among the Nazarenes and the Ebionites who were significant enough in Irenaeus’ day to be included in his massive five-volume work, “Against Heresies.”

That the early Judaizers among the Nazarenes openly opposed Paul, considering him an apostate from the Law, makes it virtually certain that they rejected Paul’s teaching concerning Christ’s pre-human existence. To reject Paul’s and then John’s books, accepting only Matthew’s Gospel, is to reject preexistence. In fact, there is nothing I can find about the Judaizers in Scripture and the 2nd century Ebionites that appears to conflict in any way. The Ebionites described by Irenaeus are the remnants of the “Judaizers” within the Nazarene church of Judea after AD 70. At the very least they were the spiritual descendants of those in the Jerusalem church described in Acts 21 who were all “zealous for the Law” and who James sought to appease by having Paul himself participate in Temple sacrifices, and whom Peter had previously sought to appease as described by Paul in Galatians 2:11-4. This implies that they were no small minority. With the destruction of Jerusalem, this group no longer had the organized Jerusalem church as their base of support or operation, nor any strong leadership, none of the original Apostles. Many were no doubt forced by their devotion to Moses to resist being absorbed into Pauline “Christianity” which was thriving in the very large congregations in Antioch and Ephesus.

This brings us to the main point of this article, the book of Hebrews. This letter to Jewish believers was Paul’s last attempt, just before his martyrdom, to warn Jewish Christians against the “Judaizers,” the “false brethren,” who had been opposing his ministry for decades. Many modern commentators suppose that Hebrews was written to keep Jewish Christians from returning to Temple Judaism as practiced by the scribes and Pharisees, thus rejecting Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. But I am increasingly convinced that this was not the threat nor Paul’s intent for Hebrews. Rather, I propose that by the time Hebrews was composed the objection to Paul’s new “revelation” concerning the “mystery” (which involved both the Son’s preexistence and the inclusion of the Gentiles as equals in Christ) had advanced to the point of denying the Son’s pre-human existence.

A careful examination of the things Hebrews stresses, and its logical flow, bears this supposition out. Hebrews does not stress Jesus as being the human Jewish Messiah, son of David. Instead, it begins by stressing His preexistence, His having been the “BEGOTTEN” of God (rather than adopted by God), thus His Son by procreation, and addresses various reasons for His being superior to the angels, including being God’s agent in creation, eventually even identifying Him with Melchizedek who appeared to Abraham. The second chapter describes the need for Him to become human in order to die on our account and lead us to the inheritance. The Ebionites, by claiming that Jesus was just a man fathered by Joseph, considered Him to naturally be “lower then the angels” by birth and origin from Joseph. Much of the remainder of the book stresses the New Covenant as superseding the inferior Mosaic Covenant, and that the Levitical priesthood was about to disappear. If Paul merely intended to keep Jewish Christians from returning to Temple Judaism, it seems his focus would be on proving the main disagreement with the Pharisees concerning Jesus, that the human Jesus was indeed the promised “Messiah” of the Davidic Covenant. Yet even though quoting from the Psalms several times, Hebrews does not give specific reasons for believing that Jesus is the “Christ” of the Davidic Covenant, the very foundation of the Jewish Messianic expectation. Rather, Hebrews repeatedly appeals to the promise in Psalm 110:4, “You are a priest unto the age according to the Melchizedek arrangement.” The central point of dispute between Jesus and Pharisaical Judaism was whether Jesus was legitimately “of the seed of David” (rather than being illegitimate) and thus had the potential to be the promised Messiah to sit on David’s Throne and restore Israel.

I conclude then 3 important things: (1) that the Ebionites are direct successors to some within the Jerusalem church who were “zealous for the Law,” who both Peter and James sought to appease rather than rebuke, and (2) that by the time Paul wrote Hebrews just before his martyrdom, denial of Jesus’ preexistence had become part of the Judaizers’ rejection of Paul’s teaching, and (3) that Hebrews was written specifically to warn the Jewish Christians at large not to be seduced by these Judaizer-Proto-Ebionites.

One final point worth considering is that the name “Ebionite” (Strongs # H34) means “the poor” in Hebrew. No doubt the “Ebionites” chose the name “The Poor” because Scripture is filled with promises that “the poor” will be delivered and exalted in Messiah’s Kingdom, especially in the Psalms. Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew taught that “the poor in spirit” will inherit the Kingdom, and that the last will be first. So it is easy to see why these zealots for the Law might adopt such a name. This term may have actually been already used by the more zealous among the Nazarenes before AD 70. In Rom. 15:26-27 Paul refers to his collecting donations from among various Gentile churches for “the poor [Heb. Ebionites] among the saints in Jerusalem,” reasoning, “For if the Gentiles have been partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister to them in material things.” This act, which involved a great deal of travel and hard work by Paul and his team, is alluded to in several places in Paul’s letters such as 1 Cor. 16:1-8. He also stressed in Acts 20:16 that his intent was to deliver the very generous donation to “the poor” (ebionites) in Jerusalem on the Feast of Pentecost. This was the specified time under the Law allotted for this kind of generous “free-will” offering. It is certain that Paul’s exhortation to the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 16:1-8 to “let each one of you put aside and save, as he may prosper,” was a direct reference to Deuteronomy 16:10: “Then you shall keep the Feast of Weeks to the LORD your God with the tribute of a freewill offering from your hand, which you shall give as the LORD your God blesses you.” Again, in 2 Corinthians 9:3-15 Paul addressed this pending donation again, exhorting them, “So let each one give as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver,” highlighting the “free-will” nature of the offering.

What was Paul’s motive for having the Gentile Christians provide significant financial relief to be delivered to this segment of the Jewish believers on Pentecost, the anniversary of the giving of the Law on Mt. Sinai? Paul’s message was always about the UNITY of the body of Christ and placing the needs of others above one’s own. Paul almost certainly hoped that this act of Gentile Christian charity to the Nazarene community, who had largely resisted his new revelation from the Spirit of Truth, would speak louder than words and might be a means of softening their resistance to Paul’s message. What occurred when he arrived and was received by the church in Jerusalem seems to be consistent with this intent by Paul as the leadership immediately sought to appease the zealots among them and have Paul participate in this appeasement.

Now that I have completed revising BBI Module 2, I am looking forward to beginning Module 10 next which will be a chapter-by-chapter exposition of Hebrews. I plan on presenting this line of thinking as an introduction to Hebrews, and it may require modifying some of the notes in the LGV to reflect this perspective. I am posting this here to see if anyone can perhaps see something I missed, either in confirming or falsifying this perspective. If so, please post it below.

1 Acts 24:15

2 Acts 15:5

3 Acts 5:17

4 Josephus, Antiquities, Bk. 13, ch. 5:9

5 Gal. 5:2

6 Heb. 8

7 Gal. 3:22-25

8 Gal. 5:1-10

9 Gal. 1:11-24; Eph. 3:1-7

10 Circa AD 48

11 Romans 2:17–29; Romans 3:9–28, Romans 5:1–11, 1 Corinthians 7:17–21, 1 Corinthians 9:20–23, Philippians 3:2–3, Titus 1:10–16.

12 Gal. 2:8-9

13 1 Cor. 9:20-20-22

14 2 Pet. 3:14-18

15 Against Heresies, Bk. 1, ch. 26

16 Bk. 3, ch. 21

17 Bk. 4, ch. 33