Before venturing further, I wish to examine how modern scholars have reacted to those complexities. In attempting to reconstruct the history of late antique Jewish-Christian relations, they depend heavily on theologically driven writings, particularly the Adversus Judaeos literature. The modern history of the endeavor can be divided into three phases. In the earliest, ‘‘supersessionist’’ phase, epitomized by Adolf von Harnack’s work, Christianity was thought of as springing onto the scene - almost fully formed - somewhere between ad 30 and 70. Judaism, considered to have become already ossified, ceased thereafter, according to the supersessionist account, to retain any vitality or to offer any challenge to the soon to be victorious Church. Nevertheless, many Christian leaders continued to worry about Jews and Judaism. They either composed tracts entitled Adversus Judaeos, or inserted diatribes against or arguments with Jews and Judaism within other writings, particularly exegetical treatises. Marcel Simon, writing a generation after Harnack, concludes from the same evidence not that Judaism ceased to function once Christianity was born, but rather that it continued to be a genuine and troublesome issue for the Church. On the basis of Simon’s depiction of a vibrant Judaism and Jewish community flourishing alongside the growing Christian community, scholars developed another account of Jewish-Christian relations: one in which there was a ‘‘parting of the ways’’ (as it is often described) somewhere between ad 30 and the fourth century. According to this theory, either at the time of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in ad 70 or perhaps after the second Jewish revolt (ad 132-5), Jews and Christians went their separate ways without any further interaction, mutual dependence, or mutual influence. Most scholars in the middle years of the twentieth century opted for a definitive parting of the ways at the second moment, the Jewish revolt in Palestine (also known as the Bar Kokhvah rebellion), when supposedly real Christians would have had to choose, as it was imagined, between their Messiah, Jesus, and the revolutionary war hero and erstwhile Messiah, Bar Kokhvah. (Nowadays, many scholars would question the very existence of a messianic figure in Bar Kokhvah’s time.)
Other scholars in recent years have begun to rethink even the parting of the ways construct. Whether they emphasize further interaction despite the split, or question
The notion of a parting altogether, they consider that the evidence, both archaeological and literary (and especially the Adversus Judaeos literature), points to continued interaction between Jews and Christians well into the late antique period. In addition, when one diversifies (as one must) one’s classifications, it becomes harder to talk about partings: there are many more crossovers. Which community of Jews parted from which Christian group? When and where? As Paula Fredriksen argues (2003: 48), the very fact that the orthodox Christian Fathers, such as John Chrysostom of Antioch, continued to rail against Jews and Judaism shows that they continued to perceive them as a particular threat. Moreover, other evidence indicates that the laity were less concerned about intermingling than were their leaders. In fact (particularly in urban settings such as Antioch), Jews, Christians, and pagans - however defined - freely mixed and interacted. They approached each other for medical help and magic potions; they attended each other’s festivals and temple rites. Of course, it was that very intermingling that upset church Fathers like Chrysostom; but it only serves to show us that people on the ground saw little reason to segregate themselves from their neighbors. Even the rabbinic texts testify to Jewish consultations with magicians and Christian doctors (Hirshman 1996: 114). The ambiguity of the archaeological evidence further illustrates the difficulties of trying to sort out the Jews from the Christians, particularly in urban settings.
World History
