Robert Goldenberg asserts that it is increasingly accepted among scholars that “at the end of the 1st century [AD] there were not yet two separate religions called “Judaism” and “Christianity” “
My two cents
Very interesting, and profound in ways that some won’t care to realise. If the books comprising the New Testament were written by the first century AD, then it’s misleading to infer they were written for Christians (to the exclusion of Jews).
Particularly in the first century, there was a higher level of commonality between (what eventually became labelled) Christianity and Judaism. It’s interesting to hear of certain (Christian and Protestant) denominations who say theirs is simply a restoration of first-century Christianity; if that were true, then there would be a much stronger Jewish/Old Testament element to their denomination, theology, and style of worship. In many cases, I think that the historical Jewish element takes them out of their comfort zone, so they’re not bothered with casting it off.
I think this is why Messianic Judaism is interesting to me; some dismiss it as syncretism, but that conclusion is based on assumptions that are historically incorrect and anachronistic.
I keep going back to their conception of Olive Tree Theology. Can you hold to that and be a theonomist at the same time?
Goldenberg R, cited in Wikipedia (2011). Split of early Christianity and Judaism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_of_early_Christianity_and_Judaism, accessed 24 January 2011.