inclusive tendencies of Jesus’ ministry, the Law-free gospel of Paul and
other Hellenist believers, and the high Christology evident in several New
Testament writings.
Both the historical and theological factors invoked as determinative
for the separation entail difficulties. In the theological domain, the
downplaying of the ritual aspects of the Torah has some precedent in Dias-
pora Judaism, and high Christology has parallels in early Jewish logos and
wisdom theology and in ideas about divine mediation centered on princi-
pal angels like Yahoel and Metatron and on human figures like Enoch and
other exalted patriarchs. Some of the historical arguments are equally
shaky. The earliest mention of the Pella tradition comes from the fourth-
century church father Eusebius and stands in some doubt. Similarly, the
traditions concerning Yavneh and theBirkat Ha-minimdate to the Tal-
mudic period. The rabbis at Yavneh did not have the Christian movement
on their agenda, and theBirkat Ha-minimwas not current in the first cen-
tury in a form that would have targeted believers in Jesus; indeed, it may
not have been added to theAmidaorEighteen Benedictionsuntil the third
century. There are also indications of ambiguity, contact, and overlap be-
tween “Judaism” and “Christianity” in the second through fifth centuries,
factors that to many interpreters are most evident in the phenomena of
“Judaizing” and “Jewish-Christianity.”
The verb “Judaize” — “to live like a Jew” — is used in several Christian
sources for Gentile believers in Jesus who adopted Jewish practices like cir-
cumcision, Sabbath observance, and kosher diet (e.g., Gal. 2:14; Ignatius,
Magn.10:2-3). Yet in the patristic literature, the label just as often has noth-
ing to do with following Jewish customs. In some of the church fathers it is
a polemical label for Christians whose Christology is too “low” or who in-
terpret the Old Testament literally instead of figuratively. Like the phe-
nomenon “anti-Judaism,” “Judaizing” need not imply direct contact with
or influence from Jews or Judaism. More often it reflects intra-Christian
theological disputes and seems not to have been encouraged by non-
Christian Jews.
The category “Jewish-Christianity” is no less slippery, complicating
rather than clarifying the parting of the ways. The ambiguous label is a
modern creation that can refer either to ethnic Jews who believed in Jesus
or to people of any ethnicity — Jew and non-Jew alike — whose devotion
to Christ included aspects of Torah observance. Jewish-Christianity in
both these senses is attested in the New Testament and other early Chris-
tian sources. Further muddying the waters, some scholars use the label415Early Judaism and Early ChristianityEERDMANS -- Early Judaism (Collins and Harlow) final text
Tuesday, October 09, 2012 12:04:19 PM