The source investigates the complex historical transition of early Christianity from a Jewish sect into a distinct global religion, challenging the idea that this "parting of the ways" was a single, abrupt event. It maps a three-century progression of rhetorical, theological, and institutional maneuvers by key figures who gradually constructed a separate Christian identity through the negation of Jewish practice and the appropriation of Hebrew scripture. While Paul is seen as the architect of internal reform, later writers like Ignatius of Antioch created a conceptual binary between the two faiths, and the author of Barnabas argued for a total covenantal break. The text further explores how external pressures, such as the Bar Kokhba revolt and Roman fiscal policies, accelerated this divorce, culminating in Justin Martyr’s systematic supersessionism and the eventual state-enforced separation under Constantine. Ultimately, the document portrays the emergence of Christianity not as a sudden departure, but as a cumulative archeology of alterity that transformed the Jew into the essential "Other" of the Christian self-understanding.
Engineering_Christianity_s_Break_from_Judaism.m4a
0. The Archeology of Alterity.pdf
The historical inquiry into the identity of the first Church Father to initiate a formal break with Judaism reveals a complex, multi-layered process rather than a single, discrete event. Modern scholarship, particularly since the late twentieth century, has increasingly challenged the traditional "parting of the ways" metaphor, suggesting that the separation was neither immediate nor uniform across the Mediterranean world.[1, 2, 3] Instead of a single "first" figure, the transition from a sect within Second Temple Judaism to a distinct global religion involved a series of rhetorical, theological, and institutional maneuvers executed by various early Christian writers over three centuries. This report analyzes the pivotal figures—from the Apostle Paul and Ignatius of Antioch to Justin Martyr and Melito of Sardis—who incrementally constructed the boundaries of Christian identity through the negation of Jewish practice and the appropriation of Jewish scripture.
Historiographical Foundations and the Taxonomy of Separation
To identify the first Church Father to break with Judaism, one must first navigate the evolving historiography of the "parting of the ways." The term itself was popularized by James D.G. Dunn, who initially located a decisive split around the year 135 CE, following the Bar Kokhba revolt.[1, 2] However, more recent scholars have pushed this date much later, with some suggesting that the ways did not fully part until the fourth or even fifth century, under the reign of Constantine or Theodosius.[1, 4, 5]
The concept of "Jewish Christianity" as a category distinct from "Gentile Christianity" was largely the product of nineteenth-century German scholarship, specifically the Tübingen School led by Ferdinand Christian Baur.[6] Baur posited a fundamental conflict in the first century between a Law-oriented Petrine faction and an antinomian Pauline faction, which eventually reached a synthesis in the late first-century Roman church.[6] This paradigm, while influential, often simplifies the lived reality of early believers who frequently maintained "nested" identities as both Judeans and Christ-followers.[7, 8]
| Period | Predominant Scholarly View on the "Split" | Key Influencing Factors |
|---|---|---|
| Mid-19th Century | Mid-to-late 1st Century (Baur) | Conflict between Peter and Paul |
| Mid-20th Century | Post-70 CE (Parkes) | Destruction of the Temple and rise of Rabbinic Judaism |
| Late 20th Century | 135 CE (Dunn) | End of the Bar Kokhba Revolt and Hadrianic bans |
| 21st Century | 4th Century or Later (Boyarin, Reed) | Institutionalization of Orthodoxy and Imperial intervention |
The difficulty in naming a "first" figure lies in the distinction between an internal theological debate and an external social break. While some point to Paul as the architect of the breach, others argue that Paul remained firmly within a Jewish matrix, viewing his mission to the nations as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy rather than its rejection.[1, 4, 9] The following sections investigate the primary candidates for the "first" to initiate this rupture, categorized by the nature of the break they proposed.