RE: Why Judaism and Christianity Don’t Hold Hands — And Never Did

Dear @grandpapulse,Your post presents a divisive and misleading portrayal of Christianity and Judaism as fundamentally opposed, claiming that Jesus came to dismantle Judaism entirely and replace it with a new religion called Christianity. As someone who values the continuity of God’s revelation from the Torah through the New Testament, I must challenge your interpretation, particularly your misunderstanding of Jesus’ reference to “an eye for an eye” in Matthew 5:38–39, your claim that Jesus broke the Sabbath and thus the Torah, your assertion that Jewish leaders engineered Jesus’ death, and your broader claim that Christianity transcends and replaces Judaism. Your arguments misrepresent the Torah, Jesus’ teachings, the identity of early believers, and the nature of God’s covenant. They also falter logically, as Jesus’ role as Messiah hinges on upholding, not contradicting, the Torah, and the term “Christianity” as a distinct religion only emerged centuries later. Allow me to address these points systematically, grounded in Scripture and historical evidence.

Misinterpreting the Torah’s “An Eye for an Eye” and Jesus’ “You Have Heard That It Was Said”

You claim that when Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,’” he is directly countering the Mosaic Law, presenting it as a system of retribution that he overrides with forgiveness. This fundamentally misreads the Torah. The principle of “an eye for an eye” (Exodus 21:24, Leviticus 24:20, Deuteronomy 19:21) is not about vengeance or personal retaliation, as you suggest. It establishes restorative justice, ensuring fair compensation for harm caused. For example, in Exodus 21:26–27, if a master destroys a slave’s eye, he must compensate by granting the slave freedom, not suffer the loss of his own eye. The Torah does not instruct victims to exact equivalent physical harm, as your interpretation would require to align with “vengeance.” Instead, it protects the vulnerable and ensures justice through restoration, a principle later reinforced in Jewish tradition (e.g., Mishnah Bava Kamma 8:1, which favors monetary compensation; see The Mishnah, trans. Herbert Danby, Oxford University Press, 1933, p. 338).

When Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said,” he is not rejecting the Torah but addressing misapplications or cultural attitudes, possibly influenced by oral traditions, that emphasized retaliation over mercy. His call to “turn the other cheek” (Matthew 5:39) builds on the Torah’s deeper intent—justice tempered by love (Leviticus 19:18, “love your neighbor as yourself”)—and elevates it to a personal ethic of non-retaliation. This is not a “divine override” of the Torah but a fulfillment of its moral core, as Jesus affirms: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17). Your claim that Jesus was demolishing the Torah ignores its restorative purpose and his role as its ultimate interpreter.

“Love Your Enemies” Is Rooted in the Torah

You argue that Jesus’ command to “love your enemies” (Matthew 5:43–44) is “not very Torah,” suggesting Judaism focuses narrowly on tribal identity. This misrepresents the Hebrew Scriptures. The Torah commands kindness to outsiders, such as returning a lost animal to an enemy (Exodus 23:4–5) and loving the stranger (Leviticus 19:34). Proverbs 25:21–22 (echoed in Romans 12:20) instructs providing food and drink to one’s enemy. Jesus’ teaching intensifies these principles, calling for proactive love, but it is firmly rooted in the Torah’s ethical vision and the prophetic hope for all nations to know God (Isaiah 2:2–4). Your claim that Judaism is inherently exclusive ignores its universal elements, which Jesus expands, not rejects.

The Sabbath: Affirming, Not Breaking, the Torah

You cite Jesus’ Sabbath healings (e.g., John 5:18) as evidence of him breaking the Torah, implying he rejected its authority. This claim is not only a misreading of first-century Jewish practice but also undermines Jesus’ messianic credentials. If Jesus broke the Sabbath and thus the Torah, he could not be the Messiah described in the Torah and Prophets, who is expected to uphold God’s Law (e.g., Isaiah 42:1–4, “He will bring forth justice to the nations”). Such an act would contradict his deity, as God does not err or change, as Malachi 3:6 states: “For I the Lord do not change.” Jesus did not come to accommodate sinners by altering the Torah, which is faultless; rather, sinners are at fault for breaking it, as the author of Hebrews affirms: “For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. For he finds fault with them…” (Hebrews 8:7–8). The fault lies with humanity’s failure to keep the covenant, not with the Torah itself.

The Torah prohibits “work” on the Sabbath (Exodus 31:15), but Jewish tradition debated what constituted work. Some Pharisees viewed healing as a violation, while others permitted acts of mercy, such as saving a life (Mishnah Yoma 8:6; see Danby, The Mishnah, p. 172). Jesus’ healings prioritize human need, aligning with the Torah’s principle that “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27). By declaring himself “Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28), Jesus asserts authority to interpret the Torah’s intent, not abolish it, echoing the prophetic call for mercy over sacrifice (Hosea 6:6, quoted in Matthew 12:7). Recognized as a rabbi by his followers and even opponents (e.g., John 1:38, where disciples call him “Rabbi,” meaning “teacher”; John 3:2, where Nicodemus addresses him as “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God”; John 20:16, where Mary Magdalene calls him “Rabboni,” a respectful term for a teacher), Jesus refuted the Pharisees’ misinterpretations using the Torah and Prophets themselves (e.g., citing David’s actions in 1 Samuel 21:1–6 in Matthew 12:3–4). Your claim that his actions were heretical ignores the Torah’s emphasis on compassion and the diversity of Jewish thought, including among groups like the Essenes, who emphasized purity and mercy (see The Dead Sea Scrolls, trans. Geza Vermes, Penguin, 2011, p. 89).

John 8: A Targeted Critique, Not a Rejection of Judaism

You highlight Jesus’ words in John 8:39–44, “You are of your father the devil,” as evidence of him rejecting Judaism entirely. This misreads the context. Jesus is addressing specific religious leaders who rejected him, not condemning Judaism as a whole. His critique echoes the prophets, who rebuked Israel’s leaders for hypocrisy while affirming God’s covenant (e.g., Isaiah 1:10–17). The dispute centers on their reliance on Abrahamic lineage rather than faith in God’s revelation through Jesus. As a rabbi (John 1:38, 3:2, 20:16), Jesus corrected their errors using the Torah and Prophets, not by dismissing them. If he believed the Torah’s teachings were lies, he would have no basis for quoting them as spiritual truth (e.g., Matthew 4:4, citing Deuteronomy 8:3; Matthew 22:37–40, citing Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18) or claiming to be the Messiah promised in the Torah (e.g., Deuteronomy 18:15). Your portrayal of this as a “battlefield” between Jesus and Judaism ignores the intra-Jewish nature of the debate, including among early followers like the Nazarenes, a Jewish sect explicitly identified in Acts 24:5 as the group to which Paul belonged: “For we have found this man a plague, one who stirs up riots among all the Jews throughout the world and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes” (see also Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book 4, Chapter 22).

The Cross: A Shared Responsibility, Not Jewish Culpability

You claim Jewish leaders engineered Jesus’ death, implying a fundamental enmity between Judaism and what you call Christianity. This oversimplification distorts the biblical narrative and perpetuates harmful stereotypes. While some religious leaders conspired against Jesus (John 11:47–53), this does not indict all of Judaism. Many Jews followed Jesus (John 12:11), including members of the Nazarene sect (Acts 24:5). Moreover, Jesus himself declared his sovereignty over his death in John 10:17–18: “For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.” This statement clearly establishes that Jesus’ death was a voluntary act in fulfillment of God’s redemptive plan, not a result of any group unilaterally taking his life. The New Testament further attributes his death to human sinfulness, with both Jewish leaders and Roman authorities involved (Acts 4:27, “For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus… both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel”). Emphasizing Jewish culpability, as your post does, contradicts Jesus’ own words and ignores the broader biblical narrative that his death fulfilled God’s plan for salvation (Isaiah 53:4–6, Acts 2:23).

Paul’s Identity and the Covenant’s Continuity

Your post frames Christianity as a separate religion that replaces Judaism, but this ignores the identity of early believers and the nature of God’s covenant. Jesus was not a Christian, nor were his disciples; they were Jewish followers of the Messiah, rooted in the Torah and Prophets. The term “Christian” was not used by Jesus or his followers but was a derogatory label applied by pagans in Antioch (Acts 11:26) and later used mockingly by King Agrippa when addressing Paul (Acts 26:28; see F.F. Bruce, The Book of Acts, NICNT, Eerdmans, 1988, p. 228). Paul never identified as a Christian; before the Sanhedrin, he declared, “I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees” (Acts 23:6), affirming his Jewish identity and training under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). Paul saw his faith in Jesus as the fulfillment of his Jewish calling, not a departure from it, and was identified as a leader of the Nazarene sect (Acts 24:5).

The New Covenant, like the Old, was made with “the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jeremiah 31:31). Some attribute the Book of Hebrews, which quotes this prophecy (Hebrews 8:8), to an Essene who joined the Jewish Nazarene sect, rather than Paul, though Paul’s teachings align with its covenant theology (e.g., Romans 3:31; see Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, Doubleday, 1997, p. 683). There is no separate covenant with Gentiles or “Christians.” In Romans 11:17–24, Paul explains that Gentiles who believe in Jesus are grafted into the natural olive tree—Israel—sharing in the covenant promises through faith, not replacing Israel (see also Ephesians 2:12–13). The covenant remains with Israel, extended to all through the Messiah (Galatians 3:16, 29).

Christianity as a Later Development

Your use of “Christianity” as a first-century phenomenon is anachronistic. Christianity as a distinct, institutionalized religion emerged in the 3rd or 4th century, particularly after the Edict of Milan in 313 CE, when Constantine legalized and formalized it as a state-supported religion (see Diarmaid MacCulloch, Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years, Penguin, 2010, pp. 200–205). In the first century, Jesus’ followers were a Jewish sect, often called Nazarenes or the Way, who remained within Judaism, observing the Torah and worshiping in synagogues (Acts 24:5, 14; see Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Chapter 27). Jesus, his disciples, and early believers like Paul never identified as Christians; they saw themselves as Jews fulfilling Israel’s messianic hopes. The label “Christian” originated as a derogatory term by pagans in Antioch (Acts 11:26) and was used mockingly by Agrippa (Acts 26:28; see Bruce, The Book of Acts, p. 340). Your framing of Jesus as founding a separate religion ignores the Jewish context of his movement and the gradual development of Christianity centuries later.

Christianity Fulfills, Not Replaces, Judaism

Your claim that Christianity “transcends” Abraham and replaces Judaism, citing Jesus’ statement “Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58), misframes the relationship. Jesus’ claim to divinity affirms his preexistence, echoing God’s name in the Torah (Exodus 3:14). Far from rejecting Abraham, Jesus fulfills God’s promise: “through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed” (Genesis 12:3). Paul and other Jewish believers, including possibly the Essene-Nazarene author of Hebrews, saw this promise realized through faith in Christ (Galatians 3:16), extending Israel’s covenant to all who believe, Jew and Gentile alike, without abolishing Israel’s unique calling (Romans 11:29). If Jesus or New Testament authors believed the Torah was flawed, they would not have quoted it extensively as spiritual truth (e.g., Matthew 22:37–40, citing Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18). Your assertion that Christianity and Judaism have different cores overlooks their shared foundation in the Hebrew Scriptures, where Jesus embodies Israel’s mission as a light to the nations (Isaiah 42:6).

Final Thoughts

Your portrayal of Christianity and Judaism as irreconcilably opposed is logically and biblically untenable. The Torah’s “an eye for an eye” principle is about restorative justice, not vengeance, and Jesus’ teachings deepen its ethical demands, emphasizing mercy and love—principles rooted in the Hebrew Scriptures. If Jesus broke the Torah, as you suggest, he could not be the Messiah, as this would contradict his deity and God’s unchanging nature (Malachi 3:6). The Torah is faultless; sinners, not the covenant, are at fault (Hebrews 8:7–8). Recognized as a rabbi (John 1:38, 3:2, 20:16), Jesus refuted religious leaders’ errors using the Torah and Prophets themselves, proving them wrong by their own Scriptures. Your claim that Jewish leaders engineered Jesus’ death is undermined by Jesus’ own words in John 10:17–18, emphasizing his voluntary sacrifice, and by the shared responsibility of Jews and Gentiles (Acts 4:27). Paul’s identity as a Pharisee, the possible Essene-Nazarene authorship of Hebrews, and the covenant’s continuity with Israel, into which Gentiles are grafted (Romans 11), refute your claim that Christianity replaces Judaism. Jesus’ followers were identified as the sect of the Nazarenes (Acts 24:5), not Christians, and Christianity as a distinct religion emerged in the 3rd or 4th century, with the term “Christian” originating as a derogatory label from pagans (Acts 11:26, 26:28). The faith of Jesus’ followers emerges from Judaism as its fulfillment, extending God’s promises to all nations while affirming Israel’s covenantal role. I urge you to reconsider your claims in light of the Torah’s restorative justice, the Jewish identity of early believers, and the biblical and historical evidence of continuity and fulfillment.

Sincerely,
@greywarden100

Posted using MemeHive