-
Conclusion
- University of Illinois Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
97 Conclusion Let us begin this final chapter by summarizing the previous chapters’ arguments and conclusions. Having shown the widely divergent interpretations of the evidence regarding the relationship between early Judaism and Christianity on the idea of God, in chapter 2 we saw that Jewish devotion to one God was able to incorporate many practices that later monotheists rejected. However, this does not reflect a laxity of Jews in the Greco-Roman era about monotheism but represents a change in the definition of monotheism. There seems to have been a fervent, at times almost fanatical, adherence to the worship of only God Most High, the one true God, throughout the historical period in question . That this did not exclude the recognition of the existence of other gods, nor certain forms of interaction with them, is not a weakness of the monotheistic character of Judaism in this age. Rather, it indicates that the only form of Jewish monotheism that existed was different from what later generations of Jews and Christians called monotheism. Whether the differences and changes that resulted from later developments constitute an improvement is a value judgment that is inappropriate in the context of the historical study of this topic, since it requires the benefit of hindsight and the knowledge of developments, ideas, and issues that had not yet arisen at this point in history. While it is surely impossible to set aside our assumptions about the meaning of monotheism , it is nevertheless crucial that we seek to be fair to the sources and at the very least understand why they so often fail to live up to the standards of monotheism that many in our day seek to hold them to. McGrath_FINAL.indb 97 McGrath_FINAL.indb 97 11/14/2008 12:08:30 PM 11/14/2008 12:08:30 PM 98 Conclusion In seeking to identify the features that set Jews apart as recognizably different from other peoples and religious viewpoints in the GrecoRoman era, it was not my intention to ignore the genuine diversity of viewpoints that existed. However, the fact that non-Jewish observers recognized the Jews as having a distinctive allegiance to their God alone, and as rejecting images, suggests that these were features that most Jews held in common, or at least sufficient numbers for these things to be considered “typical.” In our time we rightly seek to avoid stereotypes, and yet human cultures will by definition bear characteristic features that distinguish them from others to a greater or lesser degree. Both Jews and non-Jews appear to have felt that Jewish allegiance to one God alone represented just such a factor. It is only within the context of their perceived Jewish distinctiveness that we can make sense of the other side of the evidence. The use of amulets, the presence of dedications to the gods of the underworld on Jewish funerary inscriptions when it was possible to make or purchase ones without this element, and various other features observable from archaeological and epigraphic evidence all suggest that there was some form of distinctive exclusivity about Jewish worship that was not contradicted by these practices. In other words, these features were elements of Jewish monotheism in this period rather than a departure from it. In view of these latter practices, what made Jews (and later Christians) stand out in the Greco-Roman world? The distinctive core, which constituted the observable uniqueness of Judaism, centered on the fact that the Jews as a rule offered sacrifice only to their own God. The various practices discussed in chapter 2 were not felt by Jews to detract from this exclusive allegiance to one God, nor were they felt by non-Jewish observers to obliterate Jewish distinctiveness. The differences of opinion that existed about issues other than sacrificial worship constituted elements of the legitimate diversity within early Judaism. Scholars researching other aspects of Jewish diversity in this period have noted that it was possible to agree on the authority of the Jewish Law and yet disagree on its interpretation. Some groups engaged in vitriolic rhetorical attacks on other Jews who did not agree with their understanding of the Torah. Nevertheless, these various groups, such as the Pharisees and Essenes, as well as the vast majority of Jews who belonged to no party or sect whatsoever, were all Jews, and their beliefs and practices were all forms of Judaism. The differences over exactly what allegiance to one God alone entailed, like differences of opinion about what one ought...