The termJudeo-Christian is used to groupChristianity and Judaism together, either in reference toChristianity's derivation from Judaism, Christianity's recognition ofJewish scripture to constitute theOld Testament of the ChristianBible, orvalues supposed to be shared by the two religions. The termJudæo Christian first appeared in the 19th century as a word for Jewish converts to Christianity. The term has received criticism, largely from Jewish thinkers, as relying on and perpetuating notions ofsupersessionism, as well as glossing over fundamental differences between Jewish and Christian thought, theology, culture and practice.
In theUnited States, the term was widely used during theCold War in an attempt to invoke a unified American identity opposed tocommunism.
The use of the term "Abrahamic religions" to refer to the common grouping of faiths which are attributed toAbraham (Islam, theBaháʼí Faith,Samaritanism,Druzism, and other faiths in addition to Judaism and Christianity) is also sometimes seen as problematic.[1]
The term "Judæo Christian" first appears in a letter byAlexander McCaul which is dated October 17, 1821.[a] The term in this case referred toJewish converts to Christianity.[3] The term was similarly used byJoseph Wolff in 1829, in reference to a type of church that would observe some Jewish traditions in order to convert Jews.[4] Mark Silk states in the early 19th century the term was "most widely used (in French as well as English) to refer to the early followers of Jesus who opposed" the wishes ofPaul the Apostle and wanted "to restrict the message of Jesus to Jews and who insisted on maintaining Jewish law and ritual".[5]
Friedrich Nietzsche used the German term"Judenchristlich" ("Jewish-Christian") to describe and emphasize what he believed were neglected aspects of the continuity which exists between the Jewish and Christian worldviews. The expression appears inThe Antichrist, published in 1895 but written several years earlier; a fuller development of Nietzsche's argument can be found in the prior work,On the Genealogy of Morality.
The concept ofJudeo-Christian ethics or Judeo-Christian values in anethical (rather than a theological or liturgical) sense was used byGeorge Orwell in 1939, along with the phrase "the Judaeo-Christian scheme of morals".[6] According to theologianRichard L. Rubenstein, the "normative Judaeo-Christian interpretation of history" is to treat human suffering, such as a plague, as punishment for human guilt.[7]
According to historian K. Healan Gaston, the term became a descriptor of the U.S. in the 1930s, when the country sought to forge a unified cultural identity in an attempt to distinguish itself fromfascism andcommunism in Europe. Becoming part of theAmerican civil religion by the 1940s, the term rose to greater prominence during theCold War, especially when it was used to express opposition tocommunist atheism. In the 1970s, the term became particularly associated with the AmericanChristian right. It is sometimes employed in a separate context in political attempts to restrictimmigration andLGBT rights.[8]
The rise ofantisemitism in the 1930s led concerned Protestants, Catholics, and Jews to take steps to increase mutual understanding and lessen the level ofantisemitism in the United States.[9] In this effort, precursors of theNational Conference of Christians and Jews created teams consisting of a priest, a rabbi, and a minister, to run programs across the country, and fashion a more pluralistic America, no longer defined as a Christian land, but "one nurtured by three ennobling traditions:Protestantism,Catholicism andJudaism....The phrase 'Judeo-Christian' entered the contemporary lexicon as the standard liberal term for the idea that Western values rest on a religious consensus that included Jews."[10]
In the aftermath of World War II and theHolocaust, "there was a revolution in Christian theology in America. […] The greatest shift in Christian attitudes towards the Jewish people sinceConstantine converted the Roman Empire."[11] The rise ofChristian Zionism, religiously motivated Christian interest, and support for the state ofIsrael increased interest in Judaism amongAmerican evangelicals. This interest is especially focused on areas of commonality between the teachings of Judaism and their own beliefs.
During the late 1940s, evangelical proponents of the new Judeo-Christian approach lobbied Washington for diplomatic support of the new state of Israel. From the 1990s, continuing through the first two decades of the 21st century, interest in and a positive attitude towards America's Judeo-Christian tradition has become mainstream amongevangelicals and (to some extent) the political conservative movement in the United States.[12]
American Christians, particularly those aligned with the Christian Right, have historically extended strong support to the State of Israel. This support is rooted in conservative Protestant theology, which views Jews as God's chosen people with a special biblical status and role. However, this perspective is paradoxical, as it also considers Jews in need of conversion to Christianity for salvation. Beyond theological reasons, liberal Christian and secular organizations have also played significant roles in advocating for Jewish migration to Palestine and the establishment of Israel, often citing humanitarian concerns. This multifaceted support has influenced U.S. foreign policy towards Israel, reflecting the complex interplay between religious beliefs and political activism within the American Christian community.[13]
In contrast, by the 1970s,mainline Protestant denominations and theNational Council of Churches were more supportive of Palestinians than Israel.[14]Natan Sharansky observed in 2019 that, for the first time, he was encountering the situation of nations with ample governmental support for Israel but disinterest and even overt hostility by the Jewish populace.
The scriptural basis for this new positive attitude towards Jews among evangelicals is found inGenesis 12:3, in which God promises that he will bless those who blessAbraham, and curse those who curse them. In the evangelical interpretation this promise includes the descendants of Abraham. Other factors in the newphilo-Semitism include gratitude to the Jews for contributing to the theological foundations of Christianity and being the source of the prophets andJesus; remorse for theChurch's history of antisemitism; and fear that God will judge the nations at the end of time based on how they treated the Jewish people.[citation needed] Moreover, for many evangelicals Israel is seen as the instrument through which prophecies of theend times are fulfilled.[15]
The use of the term "Judeo-Christian" in 21st century discourse has been criticized for equating two different faiths and being a vector forIslamophobia by exclusion.[16][17][18]
The Jewish community's attitude towards the concept has been mixed. In the 1930s, "In the face of worldwide anti-semitic efforts to stigmatize and destroy Judaism, influential Christians and Jews in America labored to uphold it, pushing Judaism from the margins of American religious life towards its very center."[10] DuringWorld War II, Jewish chaplains worked with Catholic priests and Protestant ministers in order to promote goodwill, addressing servicemen who, "in many cases had never seen, much less heard aRabbi speak before".[10] At funerals for the unknown soldier, rabbis stood alongside the other chaplains and recited prayers in Hebrew. In a much-publicized wartime tragedy, the sinking of theDorchester, the ship's multi-faith chaplains gave up their lifebelts to evacuate seamen and stood together "arm in arm in prayer" as the ship sank. A 1948 postage stamp commemorated their heroism with the words: "interfaith in action".[10]
In the 1950s, "a spiritual and cultural revival washed over American Jewry" in response to the trauma of the Holocaust.[10] American Jews became more confident in their desire to be identified as different.
Two notable books addressed the relationship between contemporary Judaism and Christianity,Abba Hillel Silver'sWhere Judaism Differs andLeo Baeck'sJudaism and Christianity, both motivated by an impulse to clarify Judaism's distinctiveness "in a world where the term Judeo-Christian had obscured critical differences between the two faiths".[19] Reacting against the blurring of theological distinctions, RabbiEliezer Berkovits wrote that "Judaism is Judaism because it rejects Christianity, and Christianity is Christianity because it rejects Judaism."[20] Theologian and authorArthur A. Cohen, inThe Myth of the Judeo-Christian Tradition, questioned the theological validity of the Judeo-Christian concept and suggested that it was essentially an invention ofAmerican politics, whileJacob Neusner, inJews and Christians: The Myth of a Common Tradition, writes, "The two faiths stand for different people talking about different things to different people."[21]
Law professor Stephen M. Feldman looking at the period before 1950, chiefly in Europe, sees invocation of a "Judeo-Christian tradition" assupersessionism:
Once one recognizes that Christianity has historically engendered antisemitism, then this so-called tradition appears as dangerous Christian dogma (at least from a Jewish perspective). For Christians, the concept of a Judeo-Christian tradition comfortably suggests that Judaism progresses into Christianity—that Judaism is somehow completed in Christianity. The concept of a Judeo-Christian tradition flows from the Christian theology of supersession, whereby the Christian covenant (or Testament) with God supersedes the Jewish one. Christianity, according to this belief, reforms and replaces Judaism. The belief, therefore, implies, first, that Judaism needs reformation and replacement, and second, that modern Judaism remains merely as a "relic". Most importantly the belief of the Judeo-Christian tradition insidiously obscures the real and significant differences between Judaism and Christianity.[22]
