Epiphanius had many sources. Though he did not always fully understand them or properly combine them, he preserved much, some of which would otherwise be lost.
In his Panarion Epiphanius listed his Heresy 18 as Nasaraioi. With sigma.
(In his Ancoratus, according to MPG 43. 40, it is even spelled with double sigmas.)
Nasaraioi were presented as a law, Torah, observant, Jewish group, though with their own interpretation of Torah. It has been suggested that Mandaeans knew of this group, and in their Mandaic Aramaic they referred to a group, as true religious observers, spelled with tsade. (Some Mandaean approval of the Baptist rather than Jesus may be worth noting.)
Epiphanius listed separately as a Christian heresy, Nazarenes (the version of that name in his time in his opinion, though of course, in some uses, especially in Semitic languages, Nazarenes meant Christians), his Heresy 29, which he compared and contrasted with Ebionites, his Heresy 30.
One possible factor, I suggest and speculate here, is that, given a choice between Jesus followers being (self-)regarded as true observers of Torah (with some association with sigma-spelling) or being regarded as holy (with some association with zeta-spelling), eventually, for the proto-orthodox, the latter gained prominence.
In his Panarion Epiphanius listed his Heresy 18 as Nasaraioi. With sigma.
(In his Ancoratus, according to MPG 43. 40, it is even spelled with double sigmas.)
Nasaraioi were presented as a law, Torah, observant, Jewish group, though with their own interpretation of Torah. It has been suggested that Mandaeans knew of this group, and in their Mandaic Aramaic they referred to a group, as true religious observers, spelled with tsade. (Some Mandaean approval of the Baptist rather than Jesus may be worth noting.)
Epiphanius listed separately as a Christian heresy, Nazarenes (the version of that name in his time in his opinion, though of course, in some uses, especially in Semitic languages, Nazarenes meant Christians), his Heresy 29, which he compared and contrasted with Ebionites, his Heresy 30.
One possible factor, I suggest and speculate here, is that, given a choice between Jesus followers being (self-)regarded as true observers of Torah (with some association with sigma-spelling) or being regarded as holy (with some association with zeta-spelling), eventually, for the proto-orthodox, the latter gained prominence.
Statistics: Posted by StephenGoranson — Thu Dec 05, 2024 4:48 am