John the Baptizer and Qumran - Bible Odyssey

I was searching through YouTube for video footage of the Qumran caves and stumbled on this lifestyle video.
At 3:47 he talks about (what I understood this area to be inhabited by Essene community) the “yahad” and a story of Yahonan (John) joining the community and later leaving. Watch the video for more context.
I’ve never heard of this whatsoever. Have any of you? If so, where is this recorded or how was this story spread? Thank you.

Matthew 5 part I - verses 1-26  

“FIRST DISCOURSE, ADDRESSED TO THE DISCIPLES. THE NEW LAW, DESIGNED FOR THE COMMUNITY WHOSE MEMBERS WILL INHERIT THE KINGDOM (5:1-7:29)  

“Matthew now introduces the most striking and characteristic feature of his entire Gospel. … his greatest interest is in the moral life of the Christian community. This discourse, which is put at the forefront of his Gospel, deals with the righteousness which exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees (5:20), and is appropriate for those who pray for the kingdom of heaven and will inherit it. This righteousness is prophetic rather than rabbinical… and it is worth noting that the last of the five discourses … concludes on the same exalted note of transcendent righteousness (25:31-46). Some of Matthew’s special material, which is often assigned to an M [Hypothetical source for Matthew] source, has an inverted rabbinical interest; i.e. [in other words], it is directed against the law as understood by the Pharisees. But the passages which are drawn from the sermon as it is found also in Luke (6:20-49), and also from other parts of Q [hypothetical source for the synoptics], deal with right action in the widest sense of the word. The Sermon on the Mount is a whole new Torah or teaching tradition and not merely a new halakha [ancient Jewish commentary] or lawbook.  
“Jesus would not have given all this teaching on a single occasion. The sermon is made up of aphorism, maxims, and illustrations which were remembered and treasured out of many discourses.
…
“It is a curious fact that both Matthew (4:24-25) and Luke (6:17-19) begin their sermons after a summary of healings, and in each case the summary is based on Mark 3:7-12. Possibly Q introduced the sermon in a similar fashion. In any event, the sermon, like the preaching of John the Baptist in 3:1-12, is addressed to a group of people who have come away from their homes to hear the word.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 278-279)  

Chapter Five – The Sermon upon the Mountain  
-1. As he saw the throng [of] the people he ascended in [the] ascent of the mountain and sat. And his students approached unto him.  

“He went up on the mountain as he did when he was transfigured (17:1) and when he gave his parting commandment (28:16), and as Moses did to receive the law (Exod. [Exodus] 19).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 279)  
“The word μαθητης [mathytys] signifies literally a scholar.  
“… the disciples form the corona fratrum [“ring of brethren”] (cf. [compare with] Neh [Nehemiah] 8:4), and the crowds the second concentric ring. the mountain: It is not named, but functionally it is a mount of revelation (as frequently in the Bible and in Matt [Matthew]), a symbolic Sinai … sitting: This is a posture of Oriental teachers.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 639)  

-2. He opened his mouth to talk to them in his saying:  

“A solemn introduction. The sermon is a Matthean construction, pieced together from material scattered in Q [Quelle - a hypothetical source] (cf. Luke 6:20-49), Mark, and other material… the sayings have undergone revision. …  
“The Sermon on the Mount is the first of five major discourses in the Gospel … It is Matthew’s masterpiece and was early the most frequently cited section. Its literary genre remains disputed…The dominant themes of the sermon are the kingdom of God and justice. …
…
“… The sermon has been criticized as setting too high a standard, which remains unfulfillable (‘you cannot govern with the sermon’ [Bismarck]); but, understood against its Jewish background, it becomes a possible but still high standard of moral wisdom about life.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)

 

Fortunes ([compare with] Luke 6:20-23)  

“BEATITUDES (5:3-12). Cf. Luke 6:20b-23. A comparison of the two versions shows that Luke has four … beatitudes and Matt eight… Probably only Luke’s first three are authentic; his fourth comes from the early church; Matthew’s additional beatitudes are his own expansion from the Psalms. The common source is Q, and beyond that Jesus’s use of Isa [Isaiah] 61:1-4. In form, a beatitude is an exclamation of congratulations that recognizes an existing state of happiness, beginning with the Hebr [Hebrew] noun ’ašrê or the Gk [Greek] adj. [adjective] makarios. Here the gospel begins with a cry of joy, based on the nearness of the kingdom of God. The original beatitudes about the ‘poor,’ the ‘mourners,’ and the ‘hungry’ express Jesus’ mission to the needy in Israel and the dawn of a new era of salvation history. … God was conceived of as an Oriental king, and a king’s duty was to protect the weak. The long last beatitude about the persecuted reflects the experience of martyrdom in the early church and is explicitly christological (vv [verses] 1-12). Matthew’s editorial additions may be seen in several places.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)  

-3. “Fortunate are deprived of [אניי, ’ahNYaY] the spirit,  

“Their poverty is real and economic, but with a spiritual dimension. In Matt the addition of ‘in spirit’ changes the emphasis from social-economic to personal-moral… In the Bible economic destitution is an evil to be corrected (Deut [Deuteronomy] 15:11), and wealth is not an evil in itself; indeed, it is a necessity for the well-being of the kingdom, but it risks neglect of God and of the poor. God’s first priority is the care of the poor.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)  
“The Greek word rendered blessed is used in pagan literature to denote the highest stage of happiness and well-being, such as the gods enjoy. Here it stands for the Hebrew ’ashrê ‘how happy!’ as in Pss. [Psalms] 1:1; 32:1; 112:1. It is often used as a congratulatory salutation as in Luke 1:42; 11:27-28. … The poor, οι πτωχοι [oi ptokhoi], Hebrew ‘aniyyîm, primarily denotes their state of poverty, but they are the despised, oppressed, and pious poor of Pss. 9:18; 10:9; 12:5; 34:6; Jas. [James] 1:9; 2:5-6, who look to God for their vindication and for whom God cares. … they are afflicted in spirit (cf. Isa. 61:1) and ‘feel their spiritual need’ … The phrase in spirit, added by Matthew, is an accurate and happy gloss. (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 280-281)  

“for to them is kingdom [of] the skies.  
-4. Fortunate are the mourners [האבלים, Hah’ahBahLeeYM],
for they will be comforted.  

“Some rabbis gave the name ‘Comforter’ to the Messiah.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 281)  

-5. “Fortunate are the meek [הענוים, Vah'ahNahVeeYM], for they will inherit [את, ’ehTh], for they will inherit the land.  

“Πραεις [“Praeis”] here means meek or humble-minded rather than gentle. It represents ‘the meek’ of Ps. [Psalm] 37:11, who are ‘the poor looked at from a different point of view. … The English word ‘meek’ now has unfortunate associations, but that was not always true: Moses was ‘very meek, above all men’ (Num. [Numbers] 12:3).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 282)  
“For they shall inherit the earth.] Or, την γυν [tyn gun], the land. Under this expression, which was commonly used, by the prophets to signify the land of Canaan, in which all temporal good abounded, Judg. [Judges] xviii. 9, 10.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 52)  

-6. “Fortunate are the hungry and the thirsty to righteousness,
for they will be satiated.  

“… the word righteousness added …” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 282)  
“[Matthew] adds ‘justice’ in vv 6 and 10, both as a formal divider and as one of the great themes of his Gospel.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)  

-7. “Fortunate are the compassionate,
for they will be compassioned.  
-8. Fortunate are [the] pure of heart,
for they will see [את, ’ehTh] Gods.  

“Such people will see God, not merely in the metaphorical sense of worshiping in his house (Ps. 42:2), nor in a purely mystical sense, but rather in the sense that God will reward them by permitting them to see him face to face in the age to come (Rev. [Revelation] 22:4). This beatitude of Jesus is distinctive and we know of no rabbinical saying like it.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 285)  

-9. “Fortunate are pursuers of peace,
for sons of Gods they will be called.  

“Hillel, Jesus’ contemporary, said, ‘Be of the disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace’ (Aboth¹ 1:2). Such person will be called sons of God. In the O.T. [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] the phrase ‘sons of God’ occasionally refers to angels or divine beings (Job 38:70, but it most often means the Hebrews whom God created (Deut. 32:6), who are the objects of God’s love and care and are under obligation to obey him. For example, Hos. [Hosea] 1:10 promises that the repentant Israelites, who have not been God’s people, will be called ‘sons of the living God’) see on 4:3). Vss. [verses] 44-45 furnish the best possible comment on this verse. Those who seek peace by loving their enemies are doing as God himself does, and are his true sons in every way.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 286)  
“The Rabbis had democratized the royal ideology of the king as peacemaker and enjoined it on everyone. In Matt peace-making is closely related to the love of neighbor and hence to the beatitude of the merciful. Matthew thus transforms a short messianic manifesto into a program of life, a list of desirable qualities or virtues.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)  

-10. “Fortunate are the pursued because of [בגלל, BeeGLahL] the righteous,
for to them is [the] kingdom of the skies.  
-11. Fortunate are you if they revile and pursue you,
and libel [ויעלילו, VeYah`ahLeeYLOo] upon you because of me.  

“Falsely is probably an unnecessary gloss; some Western authorities and the Sinaitic Syriac omit it, as does Luke.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 287)  

-12. “Be happy and rejoice,
for your reward is multitudinous in skies;
see [הרי, HahRaY], thus they pursued [את, ’ehTh] the prophets that were before you.”  

“… neither Jesus nor the rabbis hesitated to speak of reward, since God had promised it. … in the last analysis, it is a gracious gift, for ‘when you have done all that is prescribed for you, say, “We are mere slaves; we have only done what we ought”’ (Luke 17:10). … The O.T. tells how prophets like Amos and Jeremiah were persecuted. In the first century it was also believed that Isaiah had been martyred by being sawed in two …” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 288)  

 

Salt and light (Mark 9:50, Luke 14:34-35)  

-13. “You are salt [of] the land;
and if is lost to salt its saltiness,
how [כיצד, KaYTsahD] will you return it?
Lo, it is not fit [יצלח, YeeTsLahH] anymore to any thing,
except [כי אם, KeeY ’eeM] to send it forth the outside to be trampled [מרמס, MeeRMahÇ], to legs of the people.  

The only sensible explanation I’ve heard is that salt scraped from salt pans contained impurities, and once the sodium chloride was leached the remainder was discarded.  

-14.“You are [the] light of the world.
A city dwelling upon a mountain is not able to be hidden.  
-15. Also, no lighting a candelabra and putting it under a vessel;
rather [אלא, ’ayLah’] upon a stand [כן, KayN] put it,
and thus [אז, ’ahZ] light all comers [to] the house.  

“A bushel (μοδιος [modios] is more nearly a ‘peck-measure’ …” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 290)  

-16. “Thus [כך, KahKh] light, if you please, your light before sons of ’ahDahM ["man", Adam],
so that [למען, LeMah`ahN] they see your deeds, the good,
and honor [את, ’ehTh] your father that is in skies.”  
 

The Instruction and the Prophets  

“These sayings, like 23:1-3, seem to teach a complete acceptance of the old religion, while in other passages the new and the old are sharply contrasted; see, e.g. [for example], 11:12-13 (=Luke 1:16); 15:11 (=Mark 7:15); Luke 13:10-17; Mark 3:1-6. The same apparent contradiction is found even in the sermon, for Jesus sweeps aside the law of oaths (vss. 33-37). … Jesus accepted the O.T. law in principle and assumed that it was the permanently binding revelation of God; but he made the ritual commandments subordinate to moral duties, opposed the development of purity laws, and went further than the Pharisees in relaxing the sabbath laws to meet human needs. In fact, his emphasis on the spirit of the law, and his occasional quoting of one passage against another, necessarily involved a new view of Torah.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 291)  
“… (5:17-20). These verses give the basic legal principles of the sermon. They are the most controversial verses in Matt and there is no consensus on their interpretation. The interpreter must try to state the problem clearly and to provide a historically honest judgment, even at the price of theological tidiness. The problem arises because the plain sense of the words is that Jesus affirms the abiding validity of the Torah; but this contradicts Paul (e.g., Gal [Galatians] 2:15, 16; Rom [Romans] 3:21-31). Moreover, no major Christian church requires observance of all 613 precepts of the OT law, ethical and ceremonial, but only the ethical commands such as the Decalogue and the commands to love God and neighbor. Thus, there is a gap between the teaching here and the teaching and practice of the churches. The position adopted here is the following: (a) There are contradictions with the NT on penultimate matters… (b) Historically Matt (and James) inclined more to the Jewish-Christian side of early Christian polemic… There are two common exegetical strategies for evading the plain meaning (a) reinterpretation, esp. [especially] through v 18d; but cf. 23:23; (b) denial of authenticity. This latter approach contains much truth. Apart from v [verse]18, the verses are probably postpaschal and reflect the outlook of Jewish Christianity, which, as a separate movement, was eventually defeated by Paulinism and died out (perhaps to be reborn in a different form as Islam)… But denial of the authenticity of vv 17, 19, 20 does not make Jesus hold the same view as Paul.  
“Law in Matt. Jesus probably did not break in principle with Torah but only with Pharisaic halaka^2. Yet he was a free spirit who directly confronted and resolved life situation in his healing and parables without carefully citing texts. Matthew remains in the same line of basic fidelity to Torah but with a concentration on the more important values (23:23) and with a lawyerly concern to provide textual support for innovations. Paul prefers an ethics of values like faith, hope, love, and walking in the Spirit to a legal ethics, but he does cite the Decalogue as applicable to Christians (Rom 13:8-1) even though the ceremonial laws do not bind Gentile converts according to his gospel. As far as most modern Christians are concerned, Paul won this fight and they follow him. But Matthew, by exerting a powerful influence on church life, has acted as a moderating influence on radical Paulinism, which can easily become libertinism and antinomianism.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 641)  

-17. “Do not think that I came to stop [לבטל, LeBahTayL] [את, ’ehTh] the Instruction or [את, ’ehTh] the prophets;
I did not come to stop; rather to revive [לקים, LeQahYayM]!  

“Jews, in their second-century controversies with Christians, quoted it thus: ‘I, the gospel, am not come to take away the Torah of Moses, but to add to it.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 291)  
“Dot not imagine that I am come to violate the law – καταλυσαι [katalusai] from κατα and λυω, I loose, violate, or dissolve … But I am come, πλυρωσαι [plurosai] to complete …” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 55)  
“In the background lies a pair of rabbinic expressions, qwm and bṭl. Qwm means to ‘confirm’ or ‘establish’ the law by putting it on a better exegetical footing… bṭl means to ‘void, abolish, suspend, neglect, cancel’ a law.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 641)  

-18. “Truly [אמן, ’ahMayN] say I to you,
until pass the skies and the land,
even י [YooD] one or serif [תג, ThahG] one will not pass from the Instruction before revives the whole.  
-19. Therefore [לכן, LahKhayN], any, the relaxer [of] one from the commandments the little the these and teaches thus [את, ’ehTh] the folks [הבריות, HahBReeYOTh],
little he will be called in kingdom of the skies.  

“Whoever … relaxes …. refers to the rabbinical prerogative of declaring certain actions permitted or forbidden. One of the least of these commandments: The rabbis drew distinctions between ‘light’ and ‘heavy’ precepts … To teach men so is, if possible, worse than breaking the law oneself… The saying could easily have been used against Paul.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 292-293)  

-20. “Say I to you, if will not be your righteousness multiple from [the] righteousness of the recounters and the PROoSheeYM [Pharisees “pure, abstemious”],
you will not enter into [the] kingdom of the skies.”  

“There was no finer standard of righteousness in the ancient world than the Pharisaic, with its emphasis on personal holiness and social responsibility. But, like most systems of ethics, it was adjusted to the capabilities of mankind, and it made allowances for the weakness of human nature and the demands made on man by his environment… Jesus, on the contrary, would have men aspire, not to what is socially expedient, but to that righteousness which will be perfectly manifest in the kingdom of God. His disciples are, so far as possible, to live in this age as though they were already living in the age to come.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 293-294)  
“This verse almost certainly comes from Matthew’s reaction and provides the thematic heading for the rest of the chapter, a ‘more abundant righteousness/justice.’ A sense of abundance (perisseuein) is characteristic of every level of early Christianity. For Matthew the essence of what Jesus brought is a superior ethic, a higher justice. His is a moral piety. His great opponents are the rabbinic heirs of the Pharisees at Jamnia. Note that he does not explicitly say that the Pharisees will not enter the kingdom. The verse is a warning to Christians.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 641)  

 

Anger and reconciliation [והתפייסות, VeHeeThPahYaYÇOoTh]  

“The first of six hypertheses. They are usually called antitheses, because interpreters were impressed by Jesus’ sovereign authority over the OT Torah and by the cases where his teaching seems to contradict the OT or be opposed to it, e.g., on divorce, which the OT presupposes and which Jesus prohibits (or restricts). The present interpretation emphasizes rather that Jesus seems to go beyond OT teaching by deepening and radicalizing it, by returning to the original will of God, but that he never moves in a lax direction, whence hyperthesis… Also to be noted is that the formula “It was said …, but I say’ is close to an exegetical formula common in the rabbinic schools: first a Bible quotation, then “You might think this means … but I say to you. …’ As a matter of fact, here in the sermon an OT text is followed by a false interpretation, which Jesus then corrects; see on 5:43. Yet the hypertheses, although exegetical in form, are materially revelation for Matthew.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 641)  
“Contrasts … (vss. 21-26, 27-30, 33-37) are alike in that Jesus takes an O.T. maxim and surpasses it by forbidding not only the overt crime but the disposition behind it. But Contrasts … (vss. 31-32, 38-42, 43-47) are annulments of the existing code as it was popularly understood.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 294)  

-21. “You have heard that [כי, KeeY] it is said to [the] firsts,
‘Do not murder.’ and ‘Every murderer is required to judgement.’  

“Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time] τοις αρχαιοις [tois arkhaiois] to or by the ancients. By the ancients, we may understand those who lived before the law, and those who lived under it…  
“… Murder from the beginning has been punished with death; and it is, probably, the only crime that should be punished with death. There is much reason to doubt, whether the punishment of death, inflicted for any other crime, is not in itself murder, whatever the authority may be that has instituted it.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 57)  
“Biblical law comes in two forms: apodictic and casuistic. Apodictic takes the ‘Thou shalt not’ form familiar from the Decalogue; casuistic takes the forms, ‘If anyone…’ or ‘Whoever …’ or ‘In the case that. …’ Here we have an apodictic command followed by case law.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 642)  

-22. “And say I to you,
every the angry upon his brother is required to judgment;
the sayer to his brother ‘empty-head’ [ריק, RaYQ], is required to justice [of] the ÇahNHehDReeYN [Sanhedrin], and he who says ‘fool’ [אויל, ’ehVeeYL] is required to [the] fire of GaY-HeeNOM [“Valley of Henna”].  

“Without a cause is not found in some of the best MSS [manuscripts] and earliest fathers. It is a gloss which seriously weakens Jesus’ teaching. …  
“… A first-century rabbi is quoted as saying, ‘He who hates his neighbor, behold he is one who belongs to the shedders of blood.’ …  
“… A talmudic passage, however, reads: ‘He who says ‘slave’ to his neighbor shall be excommunicated; he who says ‘bastard’ to him shall receive the forty [lashes]; he who says ‘godless’ to him, is a matter of his life.’ …  
“Raca has often been identified with the rabbinical rēqa’, ‘good-for-nothing’ or ‘wretch,’ which would mean about the same as ‘fool.’ But a Greek insult ραχας [rakhas], of which racha is probably a vocative, has been discovered in a papyrus… Its exact meaning is unknown.  
“By the first century A.D. many Jews believed in the hell (Gehenna) of fire as a place where sinners were tormented, either after the final judgment or in the intermediate period before the judgment. The name is derived from the gê Hinnôm or valley of Hinnom (Josh. [Joshua] 15:8), southwest of Jerusalem, where human sacrifices had been offered and refuse was still burned. When this allusion was combined with the ideas of Isa. 31:9; 66:24, the conception of a fiery hell resulted (Enoch 54:1-2; 56:3-4; II Baruch 59:10; 85:13). The older idea had been that good and bad alike went to Sheol, where there was no punishment and no joy.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 295-296)  
“The council] Συνεδριον [Sunedrion], the famous council known among the Jews by the name of sanhedrin. It was composed of seventy-two elders, six chosen out of each tribe. This grand Sanhedrin not only received appeals from the inferior sanhedrins, or court of twenty three, … but could alone take cognizance, in the first instance, of the highest crimes, and alone inflict the punishment of stoning.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 57)  

-23. “Therefore, if you bring [את, ’ehTh] your offering unto the altar,
and there remember that [כי, KeeY] to your brother is a word against you,
-24. leave [את, ’ehTh] your offering there before the altar,
and go commence [תחלה, TheHeeLaH] to make acceptables [להתרצות, LeHeeThRahTsOTh], to your brother,
and after that [כך, KahKh] come and approach [את, ’ehTh] your offering.  

“This case presupposes the Temple standing and must stem from before AD 70. It also presupposes that Jesus approves of the Temple and the sacrificial system. After the crucifixion some Christians would regard the Temple system (or administration) as spiritually bankrupt, as did the Qumran community, although others would continue to worship there. first ... then: This priority of ethics over cult reflects OT prophetic teaching: there can be no true worship of God without justice, a doctrine called ethical monotheism for short and often considered the center of the OT. Since perfect justice eludes us until the kingdom comes, we must worship imperfectly, trusting in God’s mercy.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 642)  
“As the Mishnah says, ‘The day of Atonement atones for offenses of man against God, but it does not atone for offenses against man’s neighbor, till he reconciles his neighbor’ (Yoma 8:9).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 296)  
“The original word, δωρον [doron], which we translate gift, is used by the rabbins in Hebrew letters דורון doron, which signifies not only a gift, but a sacrifice offered to God.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 58)  

-25. “Hasten to be reconciled with man, your contender while still you are [בעודך, Be`ODKhah] in [the] way with him,
lest he deliver you to justice,
and the judge deliver you to police,
and you are sent forth to house the enclosure [הסהר, HahÇoHahR, “prison”].  

“Agree with thine adversary quickly] Adversary, αντιδικος [antidikos], properly a plaintiff in law …” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 58)  

-26. “Truly, say I to you,
you will not go out from there until that you pay [את, ’ehTh] the pence [הפרוטה, HahPROoTaH] the last.”  

“The uttermost farthing] Κοδραντην [Kodrantyn]. The rabbins have this Greek word corrupted into קרדיונטס kordiontes, and קינטריק kontarik [sic], and say, that two פרוטות prutoth, make a kontarik, which is exactly the same with those words in Mark xii. 42 … Hence it appears, that the λεπτον, lepton, was the same as the prutah. The weight of the prutah was half a barley corn, and it was the smallest coin among the Jews, as the kodrantes, or farthing, was the smallest coin among the Romans.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 59)

  An Amateur's Journey Through the Bible

Today we will be talking about the Ebionites:
Ebionites is a patristic term referring to a Jewish Christian movement that existed during the early centuries of the Christian Era. They regarded Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah while rejecting his divinity and his virgin birth and insisted on the necessity of following Jewish law and rites. They used only one of the Jewish–Christian gospels, the Hebrew Book of Matthew starting at chapter three; revered James, the brother of Jesus (James the Just); and rejected Paul the Apostle as an apostate from the Law. Their name suggests that they placed a special value on voluntary poverty. Ebionim was one of the terms used by the sect at Qumran who sought to separate themselves from the corruption of the Temple. Many believe that the Qumran sectarians were Essenes. Since historical records by the Ebionites are scarce, fragmentary and disputed, much of what is known or conjectured about the Ebionites derives from the Church Fathers who wrote polemics against the Ebionites, who they deemed heretical Judaizers. Consequently, very little about the Ebionite sect or sects is known with certainty, and most, if not all, statements about them are conjectural. At least one scholar distinguishes the Ebionites from other Jewish Christian groups, such as the Nazarenes. Other scholars, like the Church Fathers themselves from the first centuries after Jesus, consider the Ebionites identical with the Nazarenes. The early Christians called themselves preferably "Ebionim" (the poor; comp. Epiphanius, l.c. xxx. 17; Minucius Felix Octavius, ch. 36), because they regarded self-imposed poverty as a meritorious method of preparation for the Messianic kingdom, according to Luke vi. 20, 24: "Blessed are ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God"; and "Woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation" (=Messianic share; Matt. v. 3, "the poor in spirit," is a late modification of the original; comp. Luke iv. 18, vii. 22; Matt. xix. 21 et seq., xxvi. 9 et seq.; Luke xix. 8; John xii. 5; Rom. xv. 26; II Cor. vi. 10, viii. 9; Gal. ii. 10; James ii. 5 et seq.). Accordingly they dispossessed themselves of all their goods and lived in communistic societies (Acts iv. 34 et seq.). In this practise the Essenes also were encouraged, partly by Messianic passages, such as Isa. xi. 4, xlix. 3 (comp. Ex. R. xxxi.), partly by Deut. xv. 11: "The poor shall never cease out of the land"—a passage taken to be a warning not to embark upon commerce when the study of the Law is thereby neglected (Ta'an. 21a; comp. also Mek., Beshallaḥ, ii., ed. Weiss, 56; see notes).
The reconstructed Ebonite gospel using ancient citations done by judaizer scholars: https://www.jesuswordsonly.com/images/stories/JWOBook/ogm2012.htm
Name:
The term Ebionites derives from the common adjective for "poor" in Hebrew, which occurs fifteen times in the Psalms and was the self-given term of some pious Jewish circles (e.g. Psalm 69:33 ("For the LORD heareth the poor") and 1 QpHab XII, 3.6.10). The term "Ebionim" was also a self description given by the people who were living in Qumran, as shown in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The term "the poor" was at first a common designation for all Christians, a reference to their material and voluntary poverty. The hellenized Hebrew term "Ebionite" (Ebionai) was first applied by Irenaeus in the second century without making mention of Nazarenes (c.180 CE). Origen wrote "for Ebion signifies 'poor' among the Jews, and those Jews who have received Jesus as Christ are called by the name of Ebionites." Tertullian was the first to write against a heresiarch called Ebion; scholars believe he derived this name from a literal reading of Ebionaioi as "followers of Ebion", a derivation now considered mistaken for lack of any more substantial references to such a figure. The term "the poor" (Greek ptōkhoí) was still used in its original, more general sense. Modern Hebrew still uses the Biblical Hebrew term "the needy" both in histories of Christianity for "Ebionites" (אביונים) and for almsgiving to the needy at Purim.
History:
The earliest reference to a group that might fit the description of the later Ebionites appears in Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho (c. 140). Justin distinguishes between Jewish Christians who observe the Law of Moses but do not require its observance upon others and those who believe the Mosaic Law to be obligatory on all. Irenaeus (c. 180) was probably the first to use the term "Ebionites" to describe a heretical judaizing sect, which he regarded as stubbornly clinging to the Law. Origen (c. 212) remarks that the name derives from the Hebrew word "evyon," meaning "poor." Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 310–320 – 403) gives the most complete account in his heresiology called Panarion, denouncing eighty heretical sects, among them the Ebionites. Epiphanius mostly gives general descriptions of their religious beliefs and includes quotations from their gospels, which have not survived. According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, the Ebionite movement "may have arisen about the time of the destruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem (AD 70)." The tentative dating of the origins of this sect depends on Epiphanius writing three centuries later and relying on information for the Ebionites from the Book of Elchasai, which may not have had anything to do with the Ebionites. Paul talks of his collection for the "poor among the saints" in the Jerusalem church, but this is generally taken as meaning the poorer members of the church rather than a schismatic group. The actual number of groups described as Ebionites is difficult to ascertain, as the contradictory patristic accounts in their attempt to distinguish various sects sometimes confuse them with each other. Other groups mentioned are the Carpocratians, the Cerinthians, the Elcesaites, the fourth century Nazarenes and the Sampsaeans, most of whom were Jewish Christian sects who held gnostic or other views rejected by the Ebionites. Epiphanius, however, mentions that a group of Ebionites came to embrace some of these views despite keeping their name. As the Ebionites are first mentioned as such in the second century, their earlier history and any relation to the first Jerusalem church remains obscure and a matter of contention. There is no evidence linking the origin of the later sect of the Ebionites with the First Jewish-Roman War of 66–70 CE or with the Jerusalem church led by James. Eusebius relates a tradition, probably based on Aristo of Pella, that the early Christians left Jerusalem just prior to the war and fled to Pella beyond the Jordan River, but does not connect this with Ebionites. They were led by Simeon of Jerusalem (d. 107) and during the Second Jewish-Roman War of 115–117, they were persecuted by the Jewish followers of Bar Kochba for refusing to recognize his messianic claims. According to Harnack, the influence of Elchasaites places some Ebionites in the context of the gnostic movements widespread in Syria and the lands to the east. After the end of the First Jewish–Roman War, the importance of the Jerusalem church began to fade. Jewish Christianity became dispersed throughout the Jewish diaspora in the Levant, where it was slowly eclipsed by gentile Christianity, which then spread throughout the Roman Empire without competition from "judaizing" Christian groups. Once the Jerusalem church was eliminated during the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135, the Ebionites gradually lost influence and followers. According to Hyam Maccoby (1987), their decline was due to marginalization and "persecution" by both Jews and Christians. Following the defeat of the rebellion and the expulsion of all Jews from Judea, Jerusalem became the Gentile city of Aelia Capitolina. Many of the Jewish Christians residing at Pella renounced their Jewish practices at this time and joined to the mainstream Christian church. Those who remained at Pella and continued in obedience to the Law were deemed heretics. In 375, Epiphanius records the settlement of Ebionites on Cyprus, but by the fifth century, Theodoret of Cyrrhus reported that they were no longer present in the region.
Last days of the Ebionite sect
Some scholars argue that the Ebionites survived much longer and identify them with a sect encountered by the historian Abd al-Jabbar ibn Ahmad around the year 1000. There is another possible reference to Ebionite communities existing around the 11th century in northwestern Arabia in Sefer Ha'masaot, the "Book of the Travels" of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela, a rabbi from Spain. These communities were located in two cities, Tayma and "Tilmas", possibly Sa`dah in Yemen. The 12th century Muslim historian Muhammad al-Shahrastani mentions Jews living in nearby Medina and Hejaz who accepted Jesus as a prophetic figure and followed traditional Judaism, rejecting mainstream Christian views. Some scholars argue that they contributed to the development of the Islamic view of Jesus due to exchanges of Ebionite remnants with the first Muslims.
Views and practices:
Judaic and Gnostic Ebionitis:
Most patristic sources portray the Ebionites as traditional Jews who zealously followed the Law of Moses, revered Jerusalem as the holiest city and restricted table fellowship only to Gentiles who converted to Judaism. Some Church Fathers describe some Ebionites as departing from traditional Jewish principles of faith and practice. For example, Epiphanius of Salamis stated that the Ebionites engaged in excessive ritual bathing, possessed an angelology which claimed that the Christ is a great archangel who was incarnated in Jesus and adopted as the son of God, opposed animal sacrifice, denied parts or most of the Law, practiced Jewish vegetarianism and celebrated a commemorative meal annually on or around Passover with unleavened bread and water only, in contrast to the daily Christian Eucharist. The reliability of Epiphanius' account of the Ebionites is questioned by some scholars. Shlomo Pines, for example, argues that the heterodox views and practices he ascribes to some Ebionites originated in Gnostic Christianity rather than Jewish Christianity and are characteristics of the Elcesaite sect, which Epiphanius mistakenly attributed to the Ebionites. Another Church Father who described the Ebionites as departing from Christian orthodoxy was Methodius of Olympus, who stated that the Ebionites believed that the prophets spoke only by their own power and not by the power of the Holy Spirit. While mainstream biblical scholars do suppose some Essene influence on the nascent Jewish-Christian Church in some organizational, administrative and cultic respects, some scholars go beyond that assumption. Regarding the Ebionites specifically, a number of scholars have different theories on how the Ebionites may have developed from an Essene Jewish messianic sect. Hans-Joachim Schoeps argues that the conversion of some Essenes to Jewish Christianity after the Siege of Jerusalem in 70 CE may be the source of some Ebionites adopting Essene views and practices, while some conclude that the Essenes did not become Jewish Christians, but still had an influence on the Ebionites. Epiphanius of Salamis, in his book Panarion, 30:17:5, said, "But I already showed above that Ebion did not know these things, but later, his followers that associated with Elchasai had the circumcision, the Sabbath and the customs of Ebion, but the imagination of Elchasai." Epiphanius made it clear that the original Ebionites were different from those heterodox Ebionites that he described.
Ebionite views on John the Baptist:
In the Gospel of the Ebionites, as quoted by Epiphanius, John the Baptist and Jesus are portrayed as vegetarians. Epiphanius states that the Ebionites had amended "locusts" (Greek akris) to "honey cake" (Greek ekris). This emendation is not found in any other New Testament manuscript or translation, though a different vegetarian reading is found in a late Slavonic version of Josephus' War of the Jews.Pines (1966) and others propose that the Ebionites were projecting their own vegetarianism onto John the Baptist. Robert Eisenman suggests that the Ebonim followed the Nazirite Oath that was associated with "James the brother of Jesus"
Jesus:
The majority of Church Fathers agree that the Ebionites rejected many of the precepts central to Nicene orthodoxy, such as Jesus' pre-existence, divinity, virgin birth, atoning death and physical resurrection. On the other hand, an Ebionite story has Jesus eating bread with his brother, Jacob ("James the Just"), after the resurrection, which indicates that the Ebionites, or at least the ones who accepted this version of the Gospel of the Hebrews, believed in a physical resurrection of Jesus. The Ebionites are described as emphasizing the oneness of God and the humanity of Jesus as the biological son of Mary and Joseph, who, by virtue of his righteousness, was chosen by God to be the messianic "prophet like Moses" (foretold in Deuteronomy 18:14–22) when he was anointed with the Holy Spirit at his baptism. Origen (Contra Celsum 5.61) and Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica 3.27.3) recognize some variation in the Christology of Ebionite groups; for example, that while all Ebionites denied Jesus' pre-existence, there was a sub-group which did not deny the virgin birth. Theodoret, while dependent on earlier writers, draws the conclusion that the two sub-groups would have used different Gospels. Of the books of the New Testament, the Ebionites are said to have accepted only a Hebrew (or Aramaic) version of the Gospel of Matthew, referred to as the Gospel of the Hebrews, as additional scripture to the Hebrew Bible. This version of Matthew, Irenaeus reports, omitted the first two chapters (on the nativity of Jesus) and started with the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist. The Ebionites believed that all Jews and Gentiles must observe the commandments in the Law of Moses in order to become righteous and seek communion with God.
James and the Ebionites
One of the popular primary connections of the Ebionites to James is that noted by William Whiston in his edition of Josephus (1794), where he notes regarding the murder of James, the brother of Jesus, "we must remember what we learn from the Ebionite fragments of Hegesippus, that these Ebionites interpreted a prophecy of Isaiah as foretelling this very murder." That Hegesippus made this connection from Isaiah is undisputed; however, Whiston's identification of Hegesippus as an Ebionite, while common in 18th and 19th century scholarship, is debatable. The other popularly proposed connection is that the Ascents of James in the Pseudo-Clementine literature are related to the Ebionites. The Book of Acts begins by showing Peter as leader of the Jerusalem church, the only church in existence immediately after the ascension, though several years later, Paul lists James prior to "Cephas" (Peter) and John as those considered "pillars" (Greek styloi) of the Jerusalem Church. Eusebius records that Clement of Alexandria wrote that Peter, James and John chose James, the brother of Jesus, as bishop of Jerusalem, but Eusebius also subjects James to the authority of all the apostles. Peter baptised Cornelius the Centurion, introducing uncircumcised Gentiles into the church in Judea. Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles, established many churches and developed a Christian theology (see Pauline Christianity). At the Council of Jerusalem (c 49), Paul argued to abrogate Mosaic observances for non-Jewish converts. When Paul recounted the events to the Galatians (Galatians 2:9-10), he referred only to the remembrance of the poor rather than conveying the four points of the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:19-21). James Dunn notes the conciliatory role of James as depicted in Acts in the tension between Paul and those urging the Law of Moses upon Gentiles. According to Eusebius, the Jerusalem church fled to Pella, Jordan after the death of James to escape the siege of the future Emperor Titus. After the Bar Kokhba revolt, the Jerusalem church was permitted to remain in the renamed Aelia Capitolina, but notably from this point onward all bishops of Jerusalem bear Greek rather than evidently Jewish names. Scholars such as Pierre-Antoine Bernheim, Robert Eisenman, Will Durant, Michael Goulder, Gerd Ludemann, John Painter and James Tabor argue for some form of continuity of the Jewish Jerusalem church into the second and third centuries and that the Ebionites regarded James, the brother of Jesus, as their leader. Scholars, including Richard Bauckham, distinguish the high Christology practiced by the Jerusalem church under James with the low Christology later adopted by the Ebionites. Tabor argues that the Ebionites claimed a dynastic apostolic succession for the relatives of Jesus. Epiphanius relates that the Ebionites opposed the Apostle Paul, who they saw as responsible for the idea that gentile Christians did not have to be circumcised or follow the Law of Moses, and named him an apostate. Epiphanius further relates that some Ebionites alleged that Paul was a Greek who converted to Judaism in order to marry the daughter of a high priest of Israel, but apostatized when she rejected him. As an alternative to the traditional view of Eusebius that the Jerusalem church simply became integrated with the Gentile church, other scholars, such as Richard Bauckham, suggest immediate successors to the Jerusalem church under James and the relatives of Jesus were the Nazoraeans who accepted Paul, while the Ebionites were a later offshoot of the early second century.
Writings
Few writings of the Ebionites have survived and they are in uncertain form. The Recognitions of Clement and the Clementine Homilies, two third century Christian works, are regarded by general scholarly consensus as largely or entirely Jewish Christian in origin and reflect Jewish Christian beliefs. The exact relationship between the Ebionites and these writings is debated, but Epiphanius's description of some Ebionites in Panarion 30 bears a striking similarity to the ideas in the Recognitions and Homilies. Scholar Glenn Alan Koch speculates that Epiphanius likely relied upon a version of the Homilies as a source document.[25] Some scholars also speculate that the core of the Gospel of Barnabas, beneath a polemical medieval Muslim overlay, may have been based upon an Ebionite or gnostic document. The existence and origin of this source continues to be debated by scholars. John Arendzen (Catholic Encyclopedia article "Ebionites" 1909) classifies the Ebionite writings into four groups.
Gospel of the Ebionites:
Irenaeus stated that the Ebionites used Matthew's Gospel exclusively. Eusebius of Caesarea wrote that they used only the Gospel of the Hebrews. From this, the minority view of James R. Edwards (2009) and Bodley's Librarian Edward Nicholson (1879) claim that there was only one Hebrew gospel in circulation, Matthew's Gospel of the Hebrews. They also note that the title Gospel of the Ebionites was never used by anyone in the early Church. Epiphanius contended that the gospel the Ebionites used was written by Matthew and called the Gospel of the Hebrews. Because Epiphanius said that it was "not wholly complete, but falsified and mutilated", writers such as Walter Richard Cassels (1877) and Pierson Parker (1940) consider it a different "edition" of Matthew's Hebrew Gospel; however, internal evidence from the quotations in Panarion 30.13.4 and 30.13.7 suggest that the text was a Gospel harmony originally composed in Greek. Mainstream scholarly texts, such as the standard edition of the New Testament Apocrypha edited by Wilhelm Schneemelcher, generally refer to the text Jerome cites as used by the Ebionites as the Gospel of the Ebionites, though this is not a term current in the Early Church.
Clementine literature:
The collection of New Testament apocrypha known as the Clementine literature included three works known in antiquity as the Circuits of Peter, the Acts of the Apostles and a work usually titled the Ascents of James. They are specifically referenced by Epiphanius in his polemic against the Ebionites. The first-named books are substantially contained in the Homilies of Clement under the title of Clement's Compendium of Peter's itinerary sermons and in the Recognitions attributed to Clement. They form an early Christian didactic fiction to express Jewish Christian views, such as the primacy of James, the brother of Jesus; their connection with the episcopal see of Rome; and their antagonism to Simon Magus, as well as gnostic doctrines. Scholar Robert E. Van Voorst opines of the Ascents of James (R 1.33–71), "There is, in fact, no section of the Clementine literature about whose origin in Jewish Christianity one may be more certain". Despite this assertion, he expresses reservations that the material is genuinely Ebionite in origin.
Symmachus:
Symmachus produced a translation of the Hebrew Bible in Koine Greek, which was used by Jerome and is still extant in fragments, and his lost Hypomnemata, written to counter the canonical Gospel of Matthew. Although lost, the Hypomnemata is probably identical to De distinctione præceptorum mentioned by Ebed Jesu (Assemani, Bibl. Or., III, 1). The identity of Symmachus as an Ebionite has been questioned in recent scholarship.
Elkesaites:
Hippolytus of Rome (c.230) reported that a Jewish Christian, Alcibiades of Apamea, appeared in Rome teaching from a book which he claimed to be the revelation which a righteous man, Elkesai, had received from an angel, though Hippolytus suspected that Alcibiades was himself the author. Shortly afterwards, Origen recorded a group, the Elkesaites, with the same beliefs. Epiphanius claimed the Ebionites also used this book as a source for some of their beliefs and practices (Panarion 30.17). Epiphanius explains the origin of the name Elkesai to be Aramaic El Ksai, meaning "hidden power" (Panarion 19.2.1). Scholar Petri Luomanen believes the book to have been written originally in Aramaic as a Jewish apocalypse, probably in Babylonia in 116–117.
Religious and critical perspectives:
The mainstream Christian view of the Ebionites is partly based on interpretation of the polemical views of the Church Fathers who portrayed them as heretics for rejecting many of the central Christian views of Jesus and allegedly having an improper fixation on the Law of Moses at the expense of the grace of God. In this view, the Ebionites may have been the descendants of a Jewish Christian sect within the early Jerusalem church which broke away from its mainstream theology.
Islam
Islam charges Christianity with having distorted the pure monotheism of Jesus through the doctrines of the Trinity and through the veneration of icons. Paul Addae and Tim Bowes (1998) write that the Ebionites were faithful to the original teachings of Jesus and thus shared Islamic views about Jesus' humanity and also rejected the redemptive death, though the Islamic view of Jesus may conflict with the view of some Ebionites regarding the virgin birth, respectively denying and affirming, according to Epiphanius. Hans Joachim Schoeps observes that the Christianity Muhammad was likely to have encountered on the Arabian peninsula "was not the state religion of Byzantium but a schismatic Christianity characterized by Ebionite and Monophysite views." Thus we have a paradox of world-historical proportions, viz., the fact that Jewish Christianity indeed disappeared within the Christian church, but was preserved in Islam and thereby extended some of its basic ideas even to our own day. According to Islamic doctrine, the Ebionite combination of Moses and Jesus found its fulfillment in Muhammad.
Modern movements:
The counter-missionary group Jews for Judaism favorably mentions the historical Ebionites in their literature in order to argue that "Messianic Judaism", as promoted by missionary groups such as Jews for Jesus, is Pauline Christianity misrepresenting itself as Judaism. Some Messianic groups have expressed concern over leaders in Israel who deny Jesus' divinity and the possible collapse of the Messianic movement due to a resurgence of Ebionitism. In a 2007 polemic, a Messianic writer asked whether Christians should imitate the Torah observance and acceptance of rabbinic understanding of "neo-Ebionites", who are defined as those who accept Jesus as Messiah, reject Paul and claim Moses as the only guide for Christians.
Sources:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5411-ebionites
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_the_Ebionites
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish%E2%80%93Christian_gospels

I replied in the thread that I'm referencing, but I'd like to make a more comprehensive response here.
A good deal of badhistory and badreligion is going on here. A meme was posted stating that the Dead Sea Scrolls were hidden away because they were Satanic Dungeons and Dragons rules. I'm pretty sure that's a lame attempt at a joke, but to clarify, they were not rules for Dungeons and Dragons, and they were not hidden away because people thought they were Satanic.
Moving on, the author posted the meme as a retort to their sister who said that the Scrolls were holy scripture. Preposterous! No unenlightened sibling can truly know the content of the Dead Sea Scrolls! It takes a real enlightened mind to know the secrets of Qumran, and they sure as hell weren't no scripture! Wait, no. They are scripture. They're the earliest representations of all of the books of the Tanakh (except Esther, which was written in another place and time) that we have.
Okay, so we're zero for one on our claims here. Let's see what else they've come up with. Here we see a claim that John the Baptist was an Essene. If there wasn't a popular conception that the Essenes were the sect at Qumran that wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls, this might be another topic for another post. Since there is, we're covering it here.
So, was John the Baptist an Essene? At first, you might think so, as burmbastic seems to have done. The Essenes were a sect of Judaism that Josephus describes as living across ancient Israel, living communally, being celibate (in most cases), practicing some sort of collectivism, strict diets, purity, and other ascetic practices. John the Baptist is said to have come from the wilderness, and practiced asceticism of some sort, but that does not necessarily imply that he was an Essene. ^[1]
Now, there is a second question about the Essenes, and that is whether they were the specific sect that wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls. The prevailing theory is that yes, Essenes of some sort wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls. Eliezer Sukenik was a major proponent of that theory. Main arguments in favor of this theory cite the scroll of the Community Rule, and its similarities with Essene practices related by Josephus. There were mikvot (Jewish ritual baths) at the Qumran site, implying a traditional religious presence. Our old friend Pliny the Elder describes Essenes living in the same general area, on the west shore of the Dead Sea.
However, as this is a Jewish topic, there's a good amount of disagreement on the theory. Some theories suggest that the scrolls were not written at Qumran at all, and reflect some other origin, such as Jerusalem, an idea held by Norman Golb. Yizhar Hirschfeld considered the area to be home to a Hasmonean fort, which would explain the presence of the texts as routine religious materials.
Personally, I'm a fan of two other theories. First, the Qumran community was an ascetic sect who produced the texts, but wasn't necessarily a community of Essenes. An extension of that theory is proposed by Lawrence Schiffman, who is Professor of Jewish Studies at Yeshiva University. Schiffman suggests that a Sadducee group was present at Qumran and produced the texts, citing purity laws identical to writings attributed to the Sadducees by other rabbinic sources. In addition, some calendrical scrolls at Qumran follow Sadducee principles for dating the holidays.
TL;DR The Dead Sea Scrolls are not the Codex of Light and Darkness of the Eldritch Wizard Hebrews, and John the Baptist was just a bit of a loner.