Back to Home

Epiphanius’ Panarion vs the Aramaic Way (374–377 AD)

This page removes modern labels and later church framing. We focus on how Epiphanius’ Panarion was used by Rome to attack Aramaic Way‑followers—Yhwh’s line—who held to Yhwh’s Word (the Five Books) without priests, kings, temple‑economy, or add‑ons. We avoid the term “Hebrew” (modern label) and “Torah” (replace with Yhwh’s Word), and we keep Yhwh exactly as written.

Who Were the Aramaic Way‑Followers?

In the centuries leading up to the council religion of Rome, there were communities that followed Yhwh alone—no temple‑priest system, no king line, no blood‑exchange doctrines. Here we call them Yhwh’s line (the Aramaic Way‑followers). They guarded Yhwh’s Word (the Five Books) and rejected later additions and foreign overlays.

  • One Yhwh — absolute oneness; no tri‑parts, no divine intermediaries.
  • Return (teshuvah) — turning back and walking in what Yhwh’s Word already spoke; no human sacrifice doctrines.
  • No priest‑class — obedience is personal and direct; no permanent priesthoods.
  • No kings — king systems belong to the opposing temple stream.

What Is the Panarion and Why Does It Matter?

Between 374–377 AD, Epiphanius compiled the Panarion (“medicine chest”), cataloging groups he labeled as errors to be cured. In doing so, he helped enforce Rome’s orthodoxy against communities that kept Yhwh’s Name and Yhwh’s Word central. His framing folds all non‑Roman groups into a single polemic, erasing distinctions and pushing the temple‑church line as the only valid path.

Hostile witnesses like Epiphanius are useful precisely because they confirm that non‑Roman communities still existed who honored Yhwh’s Name, kept to the Five Books, and refused later overlays.

How the Labels Get Weaponized

Later writers attached shifting names—“Nazarene,” “Ebionite,” “Judaizer,” and others—to collapse diverse Aramaic communities into a single caricature. This page avoids those later identities when they smuggle in church doctrine. We use Aramaic Way‑followers and Yhwh’s line unless directly quoting hostile sources.

  • No “Hebrew” label — modern term; not used here.
  • “Torah” → “Yhwh’s Word” — keep to the Five Books language you require.
  • Dates as AD — remove “CE.”

Rome’s Program Against Yhwh’s Line

After the council pivot and imperial decrees (4th century AD), the Roman religion pressed for uniformity. Texts preserving Yhwh written out, and practices anchored only in the Five Books, were marginalized or destroyed. In polemics like the Panarion, adherence to Yhwh’s Word was recast as a heresy that had to be cured.

  • Erasing Yhwh by substitution titles.
  • Prioritizing temple‑church structures over direct obedience.
  • Retrofitting older communities under new, imperial labels.

Reading the Panarion Without Swallowing It

Treat the Panarion as a late, hostile map: it points to the existence of communities keeping Yhwh’s Word, but its descriptions are framed to discredit them. Where it claims those groups accepted imperial doctrines, we flag that as the polemic speaking.

Rule here: no New‑Temple texts are used to prove or disprove other New‑Temple texts. We trace Yhwh’s line by what aligns with the Five Books and with pre‑AD witness, then note how 4th‑century writers attacked it.

Locked‑In Language for This Page

  • Write Yhwh exactly like this.
  • Say Yhwh’s Word (never “Torah”).
  • Avoid “Hebrew” — use Aramaic Way‑followers / Yhwh’s line.
  • Use AD for dates (no CE).
  • No New‑Temple proof‑texting; hostile sources only indicate what they tried to erase.

Context Sources (hostile / late)

  • Epiphanius, Panarion (late 4th‑century AD polemic) — used only to identify what Rome opposed.
  • Later quotations about Aramaic‑language groups (Jerome and others) — treated strictly as hostile witnesses.
  • Archaeological notices of divine‑name handling and name erasure (name substitution practices in late antiquity).