The relation of theearly church to lateJudaism

Christianity began as a movement withinJudaism at a period when the Jews had long been dominated culturally and politically by foreign powers and had found in theirreligion (rather than in their politics or cultural achievements) the linchpin of theircommunity. FromAmos (8th centurybce) onward the religion of Israel was marked by tension between the concept ofmonotheism, with itsuniversal ideal ofsalvation (for all nations), and the notion of God’sspecial choice of Israel. In the Hellenistic Age (323bce–3rd centuryce), the dispersion of the Jews throughout the kingdoms of the eastern Mediterranean and theRoman Empire reinforced this universalistic tendency. But the attempts of foreign rulers, especially the Syrian kingAntiochus IV Epiphanes (in 168–165bce), to impose Greekculture in Palestine provokedzealous resistance on the part of many Jews, leading to the revolt ofJudas Maccabeus against Antiochus. In Palestinian Judaism the predominant note was separation and exclusiveness. Jewish missionaries to other areas were strictly expected to impose the distinctive Jewish customs ofcircumcision,kosher food, andSabbaths and other festivals. Other Jews, however, were not soexclusive, welcoming Greek culture and accepting converts without requiring circumcision.

The relationship of the earliest Christian churches to Judaism turned principally on two questions: (1) themessianic role ofJesus of Nazareth and (2) the permanent validity of theMosaic Law for all.

TheHebrew Scriptures presented history as the stage of a providential drama eventually ending in a triumph of God over all present sources of frustration (e.g., foreign domination or the sins of Israel). God’s rule would be established by an anointed prince, or Messiah (frommashiaḥ, “anointed”), of the line ofDavid, king of Israel in the 10th centurybce. The proper course of action leading to the consummation of the drama, however, was the subject of some disagreement. Among thediverse groups were the aristocratic andconservativeSadducees, who accepted only the five books of Moses (the Pentateuch) and whose lives and political power were intimately associated with Templeworship, and thePharisees, who accepted the force oforal tradition and were widely respected for their learning and piety. The Pharisees not only accepted biblical books outside the Pentateuch but also embraced doctrines—such as those onresurrection and the existence of angels—of recent acceptance in Judaism, many of which were derived from apocalyptic expectations that the consummation of history would be heralded by God’s intervention in the affairs of men in dramatic, cataclysmic terms. TheGreat Sanhedrin (central council) atJerusalem was made up of both Pharisees and Sadducees. TheZealots were aggressive revolutionaries known for their violent opposition toRome and its polytheisms. Other groups were theHerodians, supporters of the client kingdom of the Herods (adynasty that supported Rome) andabhorrent to theZealots, and theEssenes, a quasi-monastic dissident group, probably including the sect that preserved theDead Sea Scrolls. This latter sect did not participate in the Temple worship at Jerusalem and observed another religious calendar, and from their desert retreat they awaiteddivine intervention and searched prophetic writings for signs indicating the consummation.

What relation the followers of Jesus had to some of these groups is not clear. In thecanonicalGospels (those accepted as authentic by the church) the main targets ofcriticism are the scribes and Pharisees, whose attachment to the tradition of Judaism is presented as legalistic and pettifogging. The Sadducees and Herodians likewise receive an unfriendly portrait. The Essenes are never mentioned.Simon, one of Jesus’ 12disciples, was or had once been aZealot. Jesus probably stood close to the Pharisees.

Under the social and political conditions of the time, there could be no long future either for the Sadducees or for the Zealots: their attempts to make apocalyptic dreams effective led to the desolation of Judaea and the destruction of the Temple after the two major Jewish revolts against the Romans in 66–70 and 132–135. The choice for many Jews, who were barred from Jerusalem after 135, thus lay between the Pharisees and the emerging Christian movement. Pharisaism as enshrined in theMishna (oral law) and theTalmud (commentary on and addition to the oral law) became normative Judaism. By looking to the Gentile (non-Jewish) world and carefully dissociating itself from the Zealot revolutionaries and the Pharisees, Christianity made possible its ideal of a world religion, at the price of sacrificing Jewish particularity and exclusiveness. The fact that Christianity has never succeeded in gaining theallegiance of more than a small minority of Jews is more a mystery to theologians than to historians.