Book Nazarene Jewish Christianity by Ray Pritz

[Lori Jane]

This book was refered to by a fellow in one of my Bible Studies (thanks Robert!) and it was only ~120 pages so I got through it in two days. I want to share some quotes that caught my eye.

Mr. Printz wrote this is 1987 and here is his preface:

This book arose out of a fascination with that elusive enigma called Jewish Christianity. I first encountered it under other names as a modern phenomenon. Many of its adherents would claim a continuity of community over the centuries in various places and forms. While this may prove to be a less-than-tenable position, it is clear that scattered across the pages of relations between Judaism and Christianity are numerous Jews who, for a wide spectrum of reasons, have attached themselves to the Christian faith. These too range widely, from the self-hating Donins and Pfefferkorns of the later middle ages to the Edersheims and Chwolsons of more recent times, men proud of their Jewish heritage an whose scholarly contributions left no small mark on the search for Christian origins. A comprehensive study of both phenomena is still desirable.

The subject of this book was suggested to me over Christmas dinner by Randall Buth. While I was surprised to find that no comprehensive monograph had been done on the Nazarenes, the present study is only a small step in that direction.

Basically, Mr. Printz is trying to trace earliest writings to show us what the Nazarenes believed. He contents that Eusebius didn't know their actual name and lumped them in with the Ebionites who had very different views. And that there are no direct writings from this sect so we can only learn what they believe from others that were basically opponents or thought of their beliefs as a form of heresy (against the later catholic church).

Even in the writings of some of the Church Fathers from the third and fourth centuries and after, this proliferation of "Jewish Christian" sects led to confusion and to the confounding of different sects under the name "Ebionite." So convenient (and subtle) was this that it has caused not a few modern scholars to make the mistake of thinking that if we can box in the phenomenon known as Ebionism we will have defined Jewish Christianity. But Ebionism was not the direct heir of the Jewish apostolic church; it was at best only third generation, and to reconcile its doctrines with thoseof the New Testament requires no small amount of mental gymnastics.

All of the first Christians were Jews, either by birth or by conversion, and yet within a hundred years of the report that tens of thousands "from the circumcision" had believed in Jesus as Messiah, there remained only small, despised pockets of Jewish Christians, and of these a large percentage seem to have been adherents to various late-blooming hybrids of Christian teaching with that of some free-thinking individual. It has been the interest of the present writer for the past few years to trace whatever remains can be found of the heirs of that first Jewish church in Jerusalem, those who "continued in the apostles' doctrine." One event which would seem to provide the first link between that Jerusalem congregation and the Jewish Christianity of patristic writings is the report flight to Pella of the Dacapolis. This move to Pella was undertaken, according to Epiphanius, by the sect know as the Nazoraioi (Nazarenes). Or, as Epiphanius would rather express it, the Nazarens were the descendants of those Jerusalem believers who fled to Pella. If this notice of the Bishop of Salamis is correct, then we have the desired link and identity of the Jewish Christian sect which we should investigate. --Introduction

Acts 24:5 --Chapter 1, page 14
Paul was brought to Caesarea in 57 and tried before Felix the then governor of Judaea. The lawyer for the prosecution was Tertullus and it is his words recorded in Acts 24:5 where Paul was called the leader (or ringleader as some translations state) of the sect of the Nazarenes. "Paul seems to accept the title without hesitation and even to equate it with the honored term, "the Way"."

--Chapter 1, page 15

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,18 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. ...

18 This is usually thought to be 40-44, but see H. B. Mattingly, JTS 9 (1958), 26-37, who argues convincingly that the date my be set c. 60.

So wow the name "Christian" was in active use as an identifier of "the Church" until year 40 and possibly as late as year 60!

On page 24 the author is quoting Eusebius and asserts that the "others" of the same name as the Ebonites were in fact Nazarenes. This is the quote from Eusebius:

But there were others besides these who have the same name [the Nazarenes]. These have escaped the absurd folly of the first mentioned, [the Ebionites] and did not deny that the Lord was born of a Virgin and the Holy Spirit, but nevertheless agreed with them in not confessing his pre-existense as God, being Logos and Wisdom. Thus they [Nazarenes] shared in the impiety of the former class, [Ebionites] especially in that they were equally zealous to insist on the literal observance of the Law. They thought that the letters of the Apostle ought to be wholly rejected and called him an apostate from the Law. They used only the Gospel according to the Hebrws and made little account of the rest Like the former they used to observe the Sabbath and the rest of the Jewish ceremonial , but on Sundays celebrated rites like ours in commemoration of the Savior's ressurection. --HE III

So my big take away is that this original church did NOT believe Jesus pre-existed as God, the Logos or Wisdom! They did believe in the virgin birth by holy spirit. This is amazing to a non-trinitarian such as myself.

Page 27

Justin knew of two kinds of Jewish Christians but gives them no name in his extant works.34
34 ...while Justin might have spoken of Ebionites, it is almost certain that he never made a negative mention of Nazarenes.

On page 35 the author summarizes what his study of the writings of Epiphanius says about the Nazarenes:

1. They use both the old and New Testaments (7,2)
2. They have a good knowledge of Hebrew and read the Old Testament and a least one gospel in that language (7,4; 9,4)
3. They believe in the resurrection of the dead (7,3)
4. The 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; 5,4; 8,1ff)
7. The were joined by Elxai and later adopted his book (19,5,4; 53,1,3 with 19,1,4; 19,3,4ff and 19,4,1) [The author points out that this is most likely inaccurate and that Epiphanius "tends to join his heresies together"
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 in Pella, Kokaba, and Coele Syria (7,7)
12. They are hated and cursed by the Jews (9,2-3)

On page 53 under the heading "The Nazarenes in Jerome" the author states:

Let us deal first of all with the all-important issue of Christology. The clearest statement comes in Jerome's letter to Augustine, written about 404: "They believe in Christ, the Son of God, born of Mary the Virgin, and they say about him that he suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again."