Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Nick's avatar

There's quite a bit of writing about this in early Christianity, beginning with the Pauline Epistles, which make up the earliest expression of Christian theology. After Paul's decisive break with the Judaizing elements, it doesn't seem to have been a great problem within the church. Tertullian and Augustine were also massively influential here. Another important influence to account for is that Christian theology came to be expressed through the language of neoplatonism (though there has always been speculation that Greek theories of monotheism were themselves borrowed from Jewish and Egyptian sources).

As a Christian, I never really experienced much anxiety about this. My understanding of Jewish chosenness was always that Jews had this special history *because* they would bring forth this messianic ministry (this is more or less Paul's take). So, Jews are "special" because of Jesus, Jesus was not special for being Jewish. This racial concept is antithetical to Christian theology as I understand it.

I read Pascal's Pensées just this year and he talks about the relationship between Judaism and Christianity extensively. His basic take is that post-Temple Judaism exists to provide independent verification of the messianic prophecies (a nice little irony that resembles God's sense of humor in scripture). But he also divides both Jews and Christians into those "of the flesh" (sinful) and "of the spirit" (redeemed). So, it ends up as kind of a wash. This is all to say that the racial or national aspect of choseness is dropped within one generation, and, where it is encountered later, is generally condemned as a form of idolatry of the flesh. The whole religion is founded upon the rejection of a national Messiah in favor of a universal one.

Expand full comment
Sean Domencic's avatar

Your analysis on the inherent genocidal urge of the Hebrew Scriptures seems to be rooted in a lot of the early hypotheses of the 19th century "higher criticism" school which has been widely challenged/discredited, even where some limited insights have been confirmed. There is the alternative possibility that the Scriptures, despite all the limits of its human authors, are coherently divinely inspired and that they are fulfilled in Jesus Christ, Who, rather than accidentally revolutionary Essene rabbic, might have been Who He said He was. For a thorough analysis of this from a historical-critical scholar--an expert on Second Temple Judaism--you should try out Pitre's recent "Jesus and Divine Christology."

The Book of Revelation clearly isn't just a reiteration of this-worldly messianic revenge fantasies: the protagonist of the apocalyptic text is the "Lamb who was slain" (see esp. the canticle in Chapter 12). The temptation that Christians are warned against is taking up the way of the "Beast" (Chapter 13), which is a thinly-veiled reference to the Roman Empire. Would that the Church had been more attentive in the days of Constantine!

The Messiah triumphed by non-violent love, and all who triumph with Him must "live exactly as he lived" (as in the other Johannine literature). The eschatological "upside-down kingdom" laid out in Revelation (and all of the Scriptures) is the core of what has given the Bible it's unshakeable, transformative, world-historical power. Generation after generation are intrigued and challenged by this Good News, and then convicted by some strange power that it's worth not killing for (like all the "gods of inevitable recurrence"), but dying for as Jesus did. Worth considering at least!

Expand full comment
22 more comments...

No posts