Katz, Steven T. 1984. "Issues in the Separation of Judaism and Christianity after 70 C.E.: A Reconsideration." Journal of Biblical Literature no. 103:43–76.

"The situation after 70 saw a Church increasingly led by non-Palestinian centers, for example, Antioch and the cities of Asia Minor, while the common bonds of nationality, language, and attachment to the

sacred center-Jerusalem-were in decline. Judaism under the leadership of R. Yohanan ben Zakkai and his circle at Yavneh sought to reconstitute itself and to find a new equilibrium in the face of the disaster of 70.

Though precise contemporary Jewish evidence is in short supply,(3) it is not unreasonable to suggest that among the issues facing R. Yohanan and his circle was the question of theological divergencies, including the proper response to be adopted toward Jewish Christianity. The exact forms that this Jewish reaction took, however, are not known. Among the many actions of which the Jewish leaders have been accused, four are usually cited as particularly salient: (1) the circulation of official anti-Christian pronouncements; (2) the issuing of an official "ban" against Jewish Christians; (3) the issuing of a prohibition against the "reading" of "heretical books"; (4) the promulgation of the Birkat ha-Minim ("blessing against heretics"). Together these acts are said to add up to a concerted and intense anti-Christian policy on the part of the Yavneans ages and their immediate heirs. But is this calculation correct? Can this charge and the grand theories built upon it stand up to careful and unbiased scrutiny?" (p. 44)

(...)

"V. Conclusion

The lasting yield of this essay may seem, on first consideration, primarily negative, that is, the discrediting of much existing interpretation of long standing. But to so evaluate it would be to overlook the major positive result achieved. This positive conclusion emerges from the fact that the data we have reviewed are the essential evidence, slim on any standard, on which large and influential theories regarding the sharp separation of Judaism and Christianity up to 135 C.E. have been built. If on closer examination this material turns out not to be the legitimate basis for such theorizing then the case for the obverse conclusion(s) is considerably, if not completely, vindicated. That is, there was no official anti-Christian policy at Yavneh or elsewhere before the Bar Kochba revolt and no total separation between Jews and Christians before (if immediately after?) the Bar Kochba revolt." (p. 76)

(3) This is because of the late redaction, after 200 C.E., of the rabbinic corpus.
———. 2008. "The Rabbinic response to Christianity." In The Cambridge History of Judaism: Volume IV: The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period, edited by Katz, Steven T., 259–298. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

"I. Introduction

No full accounting of the separation of Christianity from Judaism can be provided because of the paucity and ambiguity of the existing evidence.

The rabbinic sources of the mishnaic era provide very little information on the subject and what information is supplied is almost always subject to dispute as to its exact meaning and historical value, while the Christian evidence is often suspect because of its polemical theological agenda.

Given what we do know, it is fair to assume that the situation was complex and that the separation took place over a number of decades and was due to a variety of factors, social, theological, and political." (p. 259)

(...)

"During and after the Bar Kochba Revolt the situation almost certainly changed for the worse. In contrast to the situation before 135, the actions of both Jewish Christians and Bar Kochba during the revolt of 132–5 exacerbated tensions between the two communities. The Jewish Christians did not share in the enthusiasm for the revolt, not least because they did not concur with Bar Kochba’s messianic claims; while he saw their noncommitment as both theological and national betrayal.(121) This sense of betrayal may well have grown after Rome’s suppression of the revolt in 135, and if it did this would have led to a deeper schism between the Jewish and Christian (now increasingly Gentile) communities.(122) But even with regard to the period between 135 and the end of the tannaitic period, caution is required in characterizing rabbinic attitudes and policy towards Jewish Christians and Christianity in the absence of sufficient meaningful evidence on this matter." (p. 295, two notes omitted)
Kim, Doosuk. 2021. "The Parting of the Way: A Survey of the Relationship between Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries CE." Themelios no. 46:79–98.

Abstract: "People today clearly view Judaism and Christianity as different religions.

Undisputedly, however, Jesus and his followers were Jews in the first century. When did the parting of the way between Jews and Christians take place? What are the decisive factors that made the two ended up so far from each other? This essay examines this relationship in its social, theological, historical, and political context. !e evidence. The evidence suggests that though the exact time and impetus for the parting remain elusive, the parting of the way began in the first century and gradually became clearer in the second century."
Kinzig, Wolfram. 1991. "'Non-Separation': Closeness and Co-operation between Jews and Christians in the Fourth Century." Vigiliae Christianae no. 45:27–53.

"It is the aim of my paper to show that the Jewish-Christians and the Judaizing Christians indeed did not fit the definitions of Church and Synagogue which the historically prevailing strands in both Rabbinic Judaism and Pauline Christianity handed down to us and which scholars in Rabbinic and patristic studies have for a long time taken for granted.(1) Yet at the same time there is no need for premature despair, but rather for a renewed and conscientious search for descriptions and definitions which help us better to understand this middle ground. In what follows I should like to show in which directions one should search when looking for these new definitions."

(1) Visotzky 1989, p. 47.

References

Visotzky, Burton L., 'Prolegomenon to the Study of Jewish-Christianities in Rabbinic Literature', AJS Review 14 (1989), pp. 47-70
Kok, Michael. 2009. "Did the Ways Part? New Models in Judaean/Christian Relations." Axis Mundi no. 5:1–24.

"Two major religious traditions emerged out of the complex matrix of Second Temple Judaisms: Rabbinic Judaism and centrist Christianity. Traditionally, scholarship on the relationship of early Judaism and Christianity has posited an official break in the late first century CE, especially due to the supposed imposition of an excommunication formula (B. Ber 28b-29a) at Yavneh that effectively excluded Christians from the synagogue. Statements in the Gospel of John and Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho, and later Epiphanius and Jerome, appeared to confirm this thesis. The Adversus Ioudaios literature, which defines the Christian community as a people (genos) or nation (ethnos) in direct continuity with the legacy of Israel, but with Judaism positioned as the adversarial foil, is taken as another datum in support of a decisive “Parting of the Ways.”

In contrast, I intend to show why this model is not the best picture of Judaean(1) and Christian interactions in the first few centuries. Rather than view this period through the later lens of Rabbinic Judaism and Nicaean Christianity, many diverse groups on the Judaeo-Christian spectrum were just beginning to formulate their own distinctiveness in the second century. Certain religious elites attempted to establish a normative identity and discursively construct sharp differences between Christians and Judaeans." (p. 1)

(1) I have become convinced that Ioudaios should be rendered as “Judaean” rather than “Jew” because ethnicity and religion were intertwined in the ancient world and, like other ethnic groups, Judaeans would have been identified with their place of origin. See further, Steve Mason, “Jews, Judaeans, Judaizing, Judaism: Problems of Categorization in Ancient History,” JSJ [Journal for the Study of Judaism] 38 (2007): 457-512.
Konradt, Matthias. 2021. "Matthew within or outside of Judaism? From the ‘Parting of the Ways’ Model to a Multifaceted Approach." In Jews and Christians – Parting Ways in the First Two Centuries CE? Reflections on the Gains and Losses of a Model, edited by Schröter, Jens, Edsall, Benjamin A. and Verheyden, Joseph, 121–150. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Abstract: "In the “new perspective on Matthew,” the much-discussed question of whether the Matthean communities belong within or outside of Judaism is answered decisively in favor of the former. While the Jewish character of the Gospel of Matthew is rightly emphasized, there is, on the other hand, a significant neglect not only of the importance of the mission to the Gentiles for understanding the Matthean groups, but also of their networking within the Christian movement and, finally, their integration into broader social contexts.

Last but not least, the alternative of locating the Matthean groups either within or outside of Judaism, with its binary logic, which also characterizes the “Parting of the Ways” model, is hardly suitable for capturing the complex coexistence of facets of profound integration into Judaism with moments of organizational and theological autonomy with the necessary differentiation, and for classifying and weighing the aspects of mutual influence and productive competition within the broader network of relationships of the Matthean communities, which in particular includes the connection to other Christian groups (in other places)."
———. 2024. "Matthew’s Ethics and the Complex Processes of Differentiation and Separation of the Matthean Communities from Judaism." In Parting of the Ways: The Variegated Ways of Separations between Jews and Christians, edited by Tiwald, Markus and Öhler, Markus, 163–181. Paderborn: Brill Schöningh.

Abstract: "In the last decades, the thesis that Matthew and his communities have to be located within Judaism has developed into a major new perspective on Matthew. There are strong reasons for this approach. The evidence, however, is more complex, since, e.g., the connections to other Christ-believing groups have to be considered as a significant part of the Matthean communities’ social relations as well. At first sight, Matthew’s ethics appears to be one of the most important features that closely connect the Matthean communities with their Jewish parent body, because the Torah is a main pillar of Matthew’s ethical orientation. Matthew, however, interprets the Torah in a manner that paves the way for the admission of Gentiles as Gentiles to the Christ-believing community. Moreover, a second main pillar of Matthean Ethics, the imitation of Jesus, has to be given due weight."
Kraft, Robert A. 2007. "The Weighing of the Parts: Pivots and Pitfalls in the Study of Early Judaisms and their Early Christian Offspring." In The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, edited by Becker, Adam H. and Reed, Annette Yoshiko, 87–94. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

"Our most basic definitions and assumptions tell us that at a most obvious level ("the big picture"), the ways did part, although perhaps at different times and under different circumstances in different locations in the course of history. But by weighing the parts that is, by recognizing the immense diversity that existed (and to some extent still exists) within and between the targeted traditions and

attempting to understand how the representatives interacted, or perhaps refused to do so - we may be able to begin to understand more fully, if not more clearly, what was involved in the various processes out of which classical Judaism and classical Christianity shaped themselves and gradually became dominant (at least from the perspective of traditional Western history) and definitionally mutually exclusive from the fourth century onward."
Kraft, Robert A., and Luijendijk, AnneMarie. 2013. "Christianity’s Rise After Judaism's Demise in Early Egypt." In Partings: How Judaism and Christianity Became Two, edited by Shanks, Hershel, 179–185. Washington, DC: Biblical Archaeology Society.

"Conclusions and suspicions

There is no evidence that in Alexandria or in Egypt generally, “Christianity” gradually or suddenly emerged from a “Jewish” matrix at a particular time and established itself as separate and distinct, alongside a contemporaneous Jewish population. Indeed, the argument has been made that for all practical purposes, Judaism as a public, recognized feature disappeared from the Egyptian scene in the wake of the tensions with Rome that climaxed in the decimation of the Egyptian Jewish community in 117 C.E. While at the individual level such a total purging (through annihilation, enslavement, exile, immigration, assimilation or whatever) may be unlikely, especially outside the urban centers, it could certainly be true as a feature of public life and official Roman-Egyptian policy. By the time “Jews” re-emerge as a recognized group on the public scene in Egypt in the late third century and beyond there would seem to be no confusion of Jews with Christians. The “ways” have certainly “parted” by then, but without the more gradual separation processes that seem to have been present in some other locations." (p. 185)
Landgren, Martin. 2025. The Episcopate and the Parting of the Ways: A Social Identity Perspective on the Emergence of Christian Identity. Stockholm: Enskilda Högskolan.

Abstract: "In this dissertation, the use of the term ἐπίσκοπος and its cognates in Christ-group literature between 60 and 180 CE is analysed. Categories from Social Identity theory relating to leadership – such as prototypicality, identity entrepreneurship, identity impresarioship, and identity advancement – indicate that the emerging episcopal office in the Christ groups played a significant role in the development of a distinct Christian identity. Important Christ-group texts from the New Testament (Philippians, Acts, 1 Peter, and the Pastoral Epistles) and non-canonical writings (Didache, The Shepherd of Hermas, 1 Clement, the Ignatian letters, and Irenaeus’s Against Heresies, book three) are examined. All these texts highlight the need for prototypical leadership, meaning leadership that exemplifies ingroup norms. The ἐπίσκοπος embodies a developing specific Christian identity. The texts also develop the ingroup prototype as an act of entrepreneurship, in ways that exclude certain traits, such as halakah adherence (except for the Didache). Additionally, the ἐπίσκοπος is viewed as a continuation of the mission of Jesus and the apostles from Acts to Irenaeus, and as a representation of the heavenly realm (Ignatius), so that Christian identity is embedded within the episcopal structure (an example of impresarioship). This suggests that the emerging episcopal office widened the gap between Christ groups and synagogues, with only the rare exception of the episcopal role in the composite text of Didache."
Lange, Armin. 2017. "Inner- and Extra-Jewish Polemics: The Parting of the Way Once Again." In Sibyls, Scriptures, and Scrolls: John Collins at Seventy. Volume 2, edited by Baden, Joel, Najman, Hindy and Tigchelaar, Eibert, 727–746. Leiden: Brill.

"It is therefore a pleasure for me to honor John’s scholarship by way of this small comparison of Essene anti-Pharisaic polemics with the anti-Jewish polemics of early Christians. For this purpose I will

discuss one Essene text, 4QpNah 3–4 iii 1–8, and one passage from the letters of Paul, 1 Thess 2:13–15.

In comparing these two polemical texts, I am not interested in whether and how far earlier Jewish literature might have influenced early Christian thought.

Instead, I hope to gain new insights into the Judeo-Christian schism." (p. 727)

(...)

"In my opinion, the comparison of Essene anti-Pharisaic polemics with Pauline polemics against Judaism sheds new light on this question. The comparison demonstrates, in my opinion, that Christianity began to separate itself from Judaism as early as the middle of the first century CE. To argue my case, I will first analyze the anti-Pharisaic polemics in Essene texts from Qumran by way of the example of 4QpNah 3–4 iii 1–8. Afterwards I will discuss Paul’s harsh criticism of Jews and Judaism in 1 Thess 2:13–15." (p. 728)
Levine, David. 2018. "70 CE or 135 CE – Where was the Watershed? Ancient and Modern Perspectives." In Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries: The Interbellum 70–132 CE, edited by Schwartz, Joshua and Tomson, Peter J., 161–175. Leiden: Brill.

"The present essay will suggest that evaluations of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 found within rabbinic literature differed not only by religious ideology, social position, and political persuasion

but from a chronological vantage point as well. The impact and consequences of 70 were viewed more moderately by the responses – in action or writing – between the wars, but gained a different, harsher perspective after the failure of Bar Kokhba. 70 is perceived as epoch-making after 135. In the decades immediately after 70, continuities were stressed and the destruction of Jerusalem was regarded as temporary. After 135, two complementary developments can be identified – the destruction of the Temple had come to be seen as defining a new, more permanent reality, and the failures and fallout of the Jewish revolts during these decades (70, 117, 135) are taken as a sequence inaugurating this post-Temple consciousness." (p. 163)
Lieu, Judith M. 1994. "'The Parting of the Ways': Theological Construct or Historical Reality?" Journal for the Study of the New Testament:101–119.

Reprinted in J. M. Lieu, Neither Jew nor Greek? Constructing Early Christianity. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark 2003 (second edition 2016), pp. 31-49.

Abstract: "The 'parting of the ways' has in recent years become a standard model for describing the split between Judaism and Christianity, with debate focusing on its causes and date. Yet although the model is considerably more eirenic than its predecessors (supersessionism; a 'take over'), it is equally driven by a theological need to maintain the unity between Israel and the church; neither is it a model which would have been understood at the time, by the Christian, Jewish or pagan participants. A more nuanced approach needs to recognize that the relationship between Judaism and Christianity would have been differently perceived by the different participants, and in different contexts. Evidence of Jews, Christians and pagans interacting on a social and popular religious level also indicates that the distancing rhetoric of the 'theologians' frequently failed to be matched by the experience of many people. Specific and local analyses, and a more flexible 'map' are required, and the functions of different models to answer different questions or maintain different interpretations need to be recognized."
———. 2003. "The Synagogue and the Separation of the Christians." In The Ancient Synagogue From Its Origins until 200 C.E: Papers Presented at an International Conference at Lund University, October 14-17, 2001, edited by Olsson, Birger and Zetterholm, Magnus, 190–195. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.

"To speak of "the parting of the ways" has, then, offered new opportunities for dialogue between the heirs of those two routes, something that claims to replacement or charges of apostasy never

allowed. Yet there are still problems. The parting of the ways may imply more-or-less cohesive systems, -isms, Judaism and "Christianism", but without organising authorities and agreed patterns of allegiance and control, there can be no systems to seamlessly draw apart – and these did not exist in the early period. And so we have to speak of partings of the ways, or to take particular texts or situations and plot them on a bigger map. John"s Gospel belongs somewhere different from the Letter to the Hebrews, 1 Clement from Revelation, just to take four early Christian texts of the late first century, perhaps more or less contemporary with each other. If these differences are not of time, are they differences of place, or of people involved, of personal inclination, of the pressure of external circumstances? Moreover, what do we mean by "parting"? Is it when groups expressed beliefs that others found unacceptable, or when people no longer met together, or were no longer willing to eat together, or used different languages or patterns of ideas, or refused to allow their sons and daughters to marry one another? Yet such separations happen within as well as between groups. Was "the parting" in effect when people thought that they themselves were somehow different, did not belong, or was it when they thought that someone else did not belong? – which may not be the same thing at all." (p. 190)
———. 2022. "The Parting of the Ways": Reflections on the Journey. Ancient Jew Review: 1–8.

"In my own recent research, I have become attracted to the utility of network theory for exploring the patterns of spread and of connectivity between individuals and groups of Christ-followers; [27]

one advantage of such a theory (or model), although an advantage some forget, is that individuals belong simultaneously to multiple networks, and that they are able to leverage different networks as opportunity demands. In perhaps a similar manner, the fascination with individual and social identity-making which has figured so largely in our discipline over the last 15-20 years, and in which I have participated, and which has often tended towards emphasizing the processes of othering and alterity, has had to reckon with the de facto multiple, and sometimes fluid, identities of which all of us are possessed, and which can likewise be exercised as circumstances demand. [28]

“Networks” and “ways” belong to different semantic and imaginary domains and so they cannot be combined; [29] yet they can be equally pertinent, reminding us that our language is always exploratory and never the final word." (p. 6)

(27) Again, there is a substantial bibliography both on the model (or metaphor: see n.24), both in antiquity and increasingly with reference to early Christianity.

(28) On these debates see most recently David G. Horrell, Ethnicity and Inclusion: Religion, Race, and Whiteness in Constructions of Jewish and Christian Identities, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2020). For my initial work, Judith M. Lieu, Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004).

(29) In the same way I would now suggest that poachers’ paths (or the multi-lane highways suggested by others) are further different metaphors and not a ‘more accurate’ variation of the first.
———. 2025. "'The ‘Parting of the Ways’: Heuristic Model and/or Metaphor?" In Explorations in the Second Christian Century: Texts, Groups, Ideas, Voices 174–185. Leiden: Brill.

First published in Marida Nicolaci, (ed.), Oltre la ‘separazione delle vie’: Nuovi modelli interpretativi delle origini Cristiane (Oi christianoi—Nuovi Studi sul cristianesimo nella storia 43; Trapani: Il Pozzo di Giacobbe, 2024) 27–39.

"The goal of the present paper has been to sketch alternative current metaphorical expressions that are being explored in adjacent historical disciplines.

The intention is not to replace the ‘parting of the ways’ with any one or with all of them. The ‘parting of the ways’ has value, but only if it is recognised what it is—one among a number of possible metaphors—and what it cannot be or do—act as a historical description and evaluation. It follows that rather than engaging in games of scholarly ping-pong or table tennis with the ‘parting of the ways’—‘yes it was, no it wasn’t’—a more creative discussion is to be had by sharing different preferred metaphorical expressions, trying them out, experimenting, but remembering that none are the thing itself, the ultimate yet elusive object of our fascination." (p. 185)
Lupieri, Edmondo. 2012. "What Parting of Which Ways? The Gospel of Matthew as a Study Case." In La croisée des chemins revisitée : Quand l'"Eglise" et la "Synagogue" se sont-elles distinguées ?, edited by Mimouni, Simon Claude and Pouderon, Bernard, 107–124. Paris: Cerf.

Abstract: "In its final pages, the Gospel of Matthew accentuates its aspect of a « manifesto » defining the identity of the communities the members oj which were accepting — or going to accept - Matthew’s teachings. Apparently, the counterposition against the Jewish authorities and, more in general, the non believing Jews, is at its apex. This paper will try to identify first of all what the real object of confrontation is (the conversion and salvation of the Gentiles is at stake, given the competition of different proselytistic activities) and secondly how important the conflict with external adversaries was for the intramural contentions."
Maccoby, Hyam. 1980. "Cardinal Bea Memorial Lecture (March 9, 1980) The Parting of the Ways: on Galatians 4:3-4 " European Judaism: A Journal for the New Europe no. 14:17–21.

"I want to enquire about the situation in which Paul made his attack on those people who were trying to persuade the Galatian Christians to adopt the Jewish rite of circumcision and to observe the Jewish sabbaths and festivals. I also want to enquire who exactly these people were. Who were Paul's opponents? What was their point of view? We know what Paul thought about them, but we don't know what they would have replied to his criticisms. My own view is that Paul's opponents in Galatia were none other than emissaries from the Jerusalem Christian community under James and Peter: they had been sent to Galatia, indeed by James and Peter themselves. This may seem a very strange view to many of you, who are accustomed to think of James and Peter as being basically of the same mind as Paul. But I am going to suggest that this was not so. We have much evidence that the Jerusalem Church were keen observers of the Jewish Law. James the brother of Jesus was described by Hegesippus (Eus. HE ii.23) as a meticulously orthodox Jew, who even took the Jewish vows of the Nazarite, which went beyond what even strictly orthodox Jews were required to do. The first fifteen bishops of Jerusalem, as Gibbon pointed out, were circumcised Jews presiding over a strictly observant congregation." (p. 17)

(...)

"If this is so, then Galatians is very important indeed for the understanding of the Parting of the Ways: for it shows that the followers of Jesus were at this time split between Jewish Christians and Pauline Christians. Paul had introduced a new definition of Christianity which nullified the Law, and thus first split the Christians and then (as Pauline Christianity gradually succeeded in becoming official Christianity) produced a split between Jews and Christians. If Jewish Christianity had succeeded in this controversy, no split need have taken place between Christianity and the main body of Judaism. For the Jewish Christians of Jerusalem had no doctrine that was irreconcilable with normative Judaism." (p. 17)
Manns, Frédéric. 2005. "Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho." In The Beginnings of Christianity: A Collection of Articles, edited by Pastor, Jack and Mir, Menachem, 359–378. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi Press.

"Relations between Jews and Christians in the early centuries of Christianity can not be ignored by historians.(1) A significant figure in the second-century dialogue between synagogue and Church is without doubt Justin of Nablus.(2)

The focal point of this dialogue is the covenant between God and Israel, and its validity after the rise of Christianity.(3) ° (p. 359)

(...)

"The purpose of this article is to examine Justin’s hermeneutic principles and his ideas about Israel’s covenant and the Church, and finally to observe the Jewish reactions to his affirmations. A brief prolegomenon examines two preliminary problems: the place where Justin wrote his Dialogue and the scripture’s version he knew." (p. 360)

(...)

"In conclusion to this historical study, we must remember that a text has to be read in context, and the historical context of Justin was difficult. The relationship between Christians and Jews worsened after the persecution of the Christians by Bar Kokhba. The religious context is no less important: after the Bar Kokhba war the Church in Palestine opened itself increasingly to pagans, since Aelia Capitolina was closed to Jews and Judaeo-Christians.

In the polemics between Jews and Gentiles, animosities continued in another form." (p. 378)

(1) J. Gager, Origins of Anti-Semitism: Attitudes toward Judaism in Pagan and Christian Antiquity, Oxford 1985; S.G. Wilson (ed.), Anti-Judaism in Early Christianity, vol. 2: Separation and Polemic, Waterloo 1986; A.F. Segal, Rebecca’s Children: Judaism and Christianity in the Roman World, Cambridge 1986.

(2) Strecker, “On the Problem of Jewish Christianity,” Appendix 1 to the English translation of Walter Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity, R.A. Kraft and G. Krodel (eds.), Philadelphia 1971, pp. 275-279.

(3) E. Klein, A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language, Jerusalem 1987, p. 85; M. Weinfeld, “Berith,” GJ. Botterweck and H. Ringgren (eds), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, vol. 2, Grand Rapids 1975, pp. 253-279.
Markschles, Christoph. 2021. "From “Wide and Narrow Way” to “The Ways that Never Parted”? Road Metaphors in Models of Jewish-Christian Relations in Antiquity." In Jews and Christians – Parting Ways in the First Two Centuries CE? Reflections on the Gains and Losses of a Model, edited by Schröter, Jens, Edsall, Benjamin A. and Verheyden, Joseph, 11–32. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Abstract: "This article is divided into two parts: The first part deals with the prehistory of the metaphor "Parting of the Ways" and the problematic theoretical implications of the model. According to all available evidence, it was first used in England in the first half of the twentieth century.[*] Like all models, it radically simplifies historical findings. In order to contribute to a more appropriate view of historical conditions—beyond the alternatives of separate and never-separated paths—the homilies against the Jews that John Chrysostom delivered in Antioch at the end of the fourth century are analyzed, and in particular, the tensions between rhetoric, the construction of reality, and the realities thus addressed are examined."

[*] In the book The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue. A Study in the Origins of Antisemitism, by James Parkes (1934), the Third Chapter is titled: The Partig of the Ways.
Martin, Vincent. 1995. A House Divided: The Parting of the Ways Between Synagogue and Church. New York: Paulist Press.

"The following essays will investigate the mutual adversarial character of Jewish-Christian relations at its source, i.e., in the progressive and painful parting of the ways between Rabbinic Judaism and Apostolic Christianity during the first century. A perusal of Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho inclines one to think that the Synagogue and the Church were already completely estranged from each other by the middle of the second century. The progressive differentiation in belief, ritual and organization was an important factor in this complete estrangement. However, the crucial factor that will mark and, to a great extent, condition Jewish-Christian relations in subsequent centuries was the early crystallization of deeply felt antagonistic feelings which arose during the bitter separation between the two communities.

The ordinary tools of a social scientist are not available for the study of religious attitudes in the first century. The only source of information available is the remaining literature analyzed by exegetes and historians. However, so much has been analyzed and even discovered during the last hundred years that a minimal effort at reconstruction may provide a sketch of the origin, the structure and the processes of change of these religious attitudes.

The approach in these essays accordingly will not be exegetical, theological, or even historical, but rather broadly sociological. It is not a story of events, but an effort at entering into the experience of the actors of a great religious drama, trying to understand how and why they acted as they did.

There is no doubt that God's Spirit was actively present in this religious drama, but his mysterious activity is never revealed to the social scientist." (Introduction, p. 3)
Maston, Jason. 2019. "The Parting of the Ways: Early Christianity." In A Handbook on the Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith, edited by Evans, Craig A. and Mishkin, David, 281–288. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers.

"As the Acts of the Apostles narrates the expansion of “the Way” (cf. 9:2; 24:14) in its initial years, it repeatedly highlights conflicts between non-Jesus-following Jews and Jesus-following Jews. Acts itself does not describe a hard division between “the Way” and Judaism. In fact, one of the descriptors for Christianity was “the sect of the Nazarenes” (24:5; cf. 24:14; 28:22). The word “sect” is the same that Josephus used to distinguish the different Jewish groups at this time (J.W. 2.119–166; Ant. 18.11–15), and this may suggest that the author of Acts viewed “Christianity” as one group among many that formed Judaism (so Dunn 2015, 600). Nevertheless, Acts testifies to rising tensions between “the Christians” (cf. Acts 11:26; 26:28) and other Jews.

At the outset it is important to remember that while Christianity and Judaism are today independent religions, this was not always the case. Christianity arose out of Judaism. The parting of ways that was firmly underway in the second century represented an attempt by Christians to explain and justify their existence. Moreover, even a cursory survey of the texts shows that the parting of the ways between Judaism and Christianity is very complex (cf. the discussions in Dunn 1999; 2006; Becker and Reed 2007). There was no single event that caused the split nor was the split universal and consistent. Relationships among individual Christians and Jews were remarkably diverse. While the literature moved toward a position of clearer distinction, this did not always translate into clear differences on the ground. My aim in this essay is to highlight key features in the parting of the ways from the early Christian perspective.

A comprehensive account of the issues and of the texts is not possible here, so the following discussion is necessarily selective." (pp. 281-282)

References

Becker, Adam H., and Annette Yoshiko Reed, eds. 2007. The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. Minneapolis: Fortress.

Dunn, James D. G. 2006. The Parting of the Ways: Between Christianity and Judaism and Their Significance for the Character of Christianity. Rev. ed. London: SCM.

______. 2015. Neither Jew nor Greek. Vol. 3 of Christianity in the Making. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

______, ed. 1999. Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways, A.D. 70 to 135. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
McHugh, John. 1992. ""In Him was Life": John's Gospel and the Parting of the Ways." In Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways A.D. 70 to 135, edited by Dunn, James D., 123–158. Grand Rapids (MI): Eerdmans.

"V. Conclusion

In the Fourth Gospel, "the Jews" are for the most part spoken of, and addressed, without any reference to their diversity. Nowhere is there any mention of the Sadducees; the nearest approach is a reference to the high priests, but they again are mentioned only twice, in 7:32 and 45, until the action of the Passion opens. From this point onwards (11:47), they naturally

play a part, but it is a purely political part, and does not involve any Sadducean doctrine. In chapter 7-9, the debating opponents in Jerusalem are often Pharisees, but one cannot overlook the fact that Nicodemus (7:50) was ready and able to speak up in favour of Jesus. No other Jewish group is mentioned. From this it would seem that by the time the gospel was published, the Johannine community at least had put behind it debates with the Judaism of long ago, and, insofar is it was engaged in debate or dialogue with the synagogue, was interested only in the surviving form, Pharisaism.

Nicodemus (3:1-9; 7:50; 19:39) is undoubtedly meant to represent those Pharisees who came to believe.

Consequently, when we come to the Passion narrative proper, in John 18-19, we find not a kerygma directed to Jew or Gentile or honest inquirer from outside, with some measure of apologetic motif, but a finely wrought treatise of Christian didache, in which the author gives a profound interpretation of the great events. In the nature of the case, this can only be given post factum, and this is why the evangelist places on Jesus' lips so many promises that the disciples' view of the cross will be transformed "when the Paraclete comes" (14:26; 15:26; 16:7). " (p. 157)
Meeks, Wayne A. 1985. "Breaking Away: Three New Testament Pictures of Christianity’s Separation from the Jewish Communities." In "To See Ourselves as Others See Us": Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity, edited by Neusner, Jacob and S., Frerichs Ernest, 93–115. Chico, CA: Scholars Press.

"In order to take account of some of the diversity of viewpoint present in the early Christian literature while still keeping the inquiry within reasonable bounds, I propose to examine three sets of documents: the Fourth Gospel, the letters of Paul and his disciples, and the Gospel of Matthew. All these are most likely earlier than Acts, and, of the Christian writings of the first century, they are the ones most intensively concerned with the question of Christianity’s relationship to Israel. Each of them gives some reason for affirming that Christianity indeed had been a sect of Judaism, but we shall find that each looks back at that connection from a point just after a decisive break has occurred. The following questions may help to focus our inquiry: (1) With what kind of Judaism was each of these writers or groups of writers concerned? (2) What was the relation between the author's Christian community and that variety of Judaism? (3) In what social context was this interaction taking place?" (pp. 93-94)

(...)

"The living Judaism that survived, which we see taking shape as a “utopian” vision in the Mishnah and more practically in the two talmuds,”(50)seems rather to have been a rural and small-town phenomenon.

Thus the massive confrontation between “apostolic Christianity” and “normative Judaism,” which even now haunts the imaginationof students of Christian origins, never happened." (p. 115)

(50) Jacob Neusner, Judaism: The Evidence of the Mishnah (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1981; Judaism in Society: The Evidence of the Yerushalmi (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago, 1983).
Mene, Florenc. 2021. "Diognetus and the Parting of the Ways." Themelios no. 36:354–365.

Abstract: "Is it possible to speak of a real separation between Jewish and Christian communities in the first two centuries of the Christian era? A major strand of scholarship denies the tenability of the traditional Parting of Ways position, which has argued for a separation between Christians and Jews at some point in the second century. The purpose of this article is to explore what the second-century Letter to Diognetus reveals about its author’s attitude regarding the Jew-Christian relationship at that time and from that community’s perspective. After exploring four of the document’s features, which reveal the author’s attitude regarding the Jew-Christian relations, this article concludes that Diognetus seems to reflect a historical situation where Jews and Christians were viewed as separate entities, at least for its locality."
Meyers, Eric M. 2013. "Living Side by Side in Galilee." In Partings: How Judaism and Christianity Became Two, edited by Shanks, Hershel, 133–150. Washington, DC: Biblical Archaeology Society.

Conclusions

The parting of the ways between Jews and Christians in the Holy Land, and in particular in Galilee, is unfortunately a very complicated affair.

While archaeology can tell us something about the pace of Christianization, it cannot tell us how Jews and Christians were getting along during the period under consideration. Before Constantine, we have very little material evidence for the existence of Christianity in the Holy Land.

Demographics and literature of the rabbis and church fathers suggest, however, that a significant group of Christian believers, many of whomwere gentile Christians, stayed in the land and were attracted to the liturgy of the synagogue.

(..)

Given the sort of churches and synagogues these two communities left behind, with beautiful mosaics, chandeliers, pottery and great literatures, we would be making a great mistake if we were to think of Jews and Christians only as enemies. Insofar as they each participated in a common material culture imbued with a love of Greco-Roman culture that is preserved for all to see and lived alongside one another for nearly a millennium, and despite the rhetoric of much of the literature, I believe we must view the parting of the ways pretty much as a family affair. The gap between “the rhetoric of separation and the reality of fluid boundaries and intercredal interactions” pointed out by Annette Yoshiko Reed is surely supported by the evidence of material culture.s° There is no doubt that the two religions went in different directions from an early time, but separation between Jews and Christians was more fluid, even in the Byzantine period. The unfortunate end of Jewish-Christian relations in the Holy Land must be associated more with the Crusades and events in modern history than with what we find in the Holy Land in late antiquity." (pp. 149-150)

(56) **Reed, “Parting of the Ways” in The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism, eds. John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2010), pp. 1029-1031.
Mishkin, David. 2019. "The Parting of the Ways: Early Judaism." In A Handbook on the Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith, edited by Evans, Craig A. and Mishkin, David, 275–281. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers.

"The word “rabbi” is commonly used to mean “teacher” (see John 1:38) although it stems from the Aramaic for “my great one” or “master.” Jewish teachers in the first century CE commonly had disciples (talmidim) who would become part of their lives in almost every way. Jesus was called rabbi numerous times in the Gospels (Matt 26:25, 49; Mark 9:5; 11:21; 14:45; John 1:49; 3:2; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8) and the designation was used of John the Baptist at least once (John 3:26). The term would take on a more formal and institutional meaning in the years following the destruction of the Second Temple. This history must be pieced together based on the later rabbinic literature itself, which was written over the course of several centuries. What would become known as Rabbinic Judaism would emerge from a combination of factors." (p. 275)
Moraff, Jason F. 2020. "Recent Trends in the Study of Jews and Judaism in Luke-Acts." Currents in Biblical Research no. 19:64–87.

Abstract: "This article surveys and assesses recent developments in the study of the depiction of Jews and Judaism in Luke-Acts since 2010. Studies are grouped into three general, often overlapping approaches. First, identity construction proves to be a productive avenue of research for understanding Luke’s portrait of ‘the Jews’. Second, scholars have begun to investigate the place of Luke-Acts in the ‘parting(s) of the ways’. Third, others continue to evaluate the relationship between the Jewish people, the covenant, and Luke’s future hope for Israel. The final section outlines some common issues and potential areas for further study, highlighting how these studies have reinvigorated a stagnant debate."
Nicklas, Tobias. 2014. Jews and Christians? Second-Century 'Christian' Perspectives on the »Parting of the Ways« (Annual Deichmann Lectures 2013). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Summary: "When exactly did the »Parting of the Ways« between Jews and Christians take place? Was it already Jesus who separated himself and his followers from »the Jews?« Or did Paul make the decisive step with his mission of pagans? Or do we have to wait longer - until after 70 CE, when the Jerusalem Temple was destroyed, and different Jewish groups had to define their identities anew? Is the overall question perhaps formulated inadequately? In his new book, which goes back to the 2013 Deichmann lectures at Ben Gurion University, Beersheva, Tobias Nicklas shows that at least for the second and third centuries CE the overall idea of a parting of the ways between Jews and Christians is a misconception.

Instead, one has to distinguish between the situations of different groups at different places and in different historical circumstances. Even concrete individuals could behave differently in different contexts of their lives. That's why, now, much more dynamic images have to be found to describe ancient realities more adequately. Focussing on so-called »Christian« perspectives on the matter, Nicklas discusses images of »Jews« in early Christian writings, concepts of God and his Covenant with Israel, problems of »Christological« and »Ecclesiological« hermeneutics of Israel's Scriptures, and, finally, the questions how different »Christian« groups treated matters of Halakha for believers in Christ."
Niehoff, Maren R. 2019. "A Jew for Roman Tastes: The Parting of the Ways in Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho from a Post-Colonial Perspective." Journal of Early Christian Studies no. 27:549–578.

Abstract: "This article offers a new and distinctly Roman perspective on Trypho the Jew in Justin’s Dialogue. While generations of scholars have debated whether Trypho was a historical Jew, who engaged in a real dialogue with Justin, or rather a literary construct invented by the author for Christian readers, I apply post-colonial theory and argue that Justin constructed Trypho for a Roman audience, whether “pagan” or Christian. Trypho highlights by his Otherness the Roman character of Christianity and thus helps to position the new religion firmly at the center of the empire. The article offers a close reading of Trypho’s prominent features, namely 1) his circumcision, which is analyzed in the context of Antonius Pius’s new legislation on this Jewish rite following the Bar Kokhba Revolt, 2) Trypho’s insistence on ethnicity and exclusivism, which is evaluated in view of Roman stereotypes concerning Jewish xenophobia, and 3) his recourse to detailed Bible exegesis, which is interpreted in view of Roman philosophers’ disdain for exegesis as a spiritually sterile activity. On all these accounts Trypho the Jew emerges as deviant and rather more Greek than Roman. He and Marcion the “Gnostic” are relegated to the eastern provinces of the empire and serve as mirror images of what Justin considers as authentic, authoritative, and distinctly Roman Christianity."
———. 2024. "Jews and the Emergence of Christianity." In The Routledge Handbook of Jews and Judaism in Late Antiquity, edited by Hezser, Catherine, 95–110. New York: Routledge.

"In the present chapter I will focus on Jewish reactions to the emergence of Christianity rather than treating the broader implications of this encounter, such as the ensuing competition between rabbis and Christians, which is discussed in a separate section of the present volume. Initially, I will discuss the nature of our sources, distinguishing between direct and indirect evidence, and then focus on several key moments and key texts that highlight the diversity of reactions among the different Jewish communities. I hope to show that there was not one Jewish approach to the emergence of Christianity, either altogether ignoring it or overwhelmingly engaging with it, but a variety of positions and complex negotiations of views. Given my focus on the emergence of Christianity, the Mediterranean area rather than Babylonia will be at the center of my discussion.

Metropolitan cities in the Mediterranean such as Rome, Alexandria, and Caesarea Maritima played a key role as platforms of encounters and spaces in which religious identity was constructed (on the role of cities, see also Rüpke 2020). Each city had its characteristic issues around which the debates revolved. Hellenistic Jews played a special, yet hitherto overlooked role in the encounter with Christianity and will thus be given special attention here." (p.96)

References

Rüpke, J. (2020). Urban Religion. A Historical Approach to Urban Growth and Religious Change. Berlin: De Gruyter
Öhler, Markus. 2024. "Judaism and Christianity in the Epistles of Ignatius. Reflections on Contextualisation in the 2nd Century CE." In Parting of the Ways: The Variegated Ways of Separations between Jews and Christians, edited by Tiwald, Markus and Öhler, Markus, 269–285. Paderborn: Brill Schöningh.

Abstract: "The contribution is dedicated to the question of how the statements in Ignatius’ letters can be placed in the context of theological developments in the second century.

First, the relevant passages from the letters to the communities in Magnesia (8:1–10:3) and Philadelphia (5:2–6:1 and 8:2–9:2) are discussed in more detail. In a second step, the use of central terms from the Ignatius letters such as Christianismos, Iudaismos, iudaizein and sabbatizein is examined. The result shows that the texts attributed to Ignatius are for the most part very early evidence for the use of these terms and that the closest parallels can be dated to the middle of the second century (Martyrium Polycarpi, Marcion, Justin), but that some of them are only encountered at the turn to the third (Clement, Tertullian). This points to a dating of the letters in the middle of the 2nd century."
Oliver, Isaac W. 2013. Torah Praxis after 70 CE: Reading Matthew and Luke-Acts as Jewish Texts. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

"The experiment throughout this monograph involves reading three texts from the New Testament, the Gospel of Matthew along with the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles “simply” as Jewish texts. This experiment, though rather novel in the case of Luke, is not unprecedented in the history of research.(10) Moving beyond the widespread, by now, almost superfluous recognition of the Jewishness of the historical Jesus, Paul, or even Matthew, the latter so often perceived as the most “Jewish” of all gospels, I am wondering how far the boundaries of Jewishness can be pushed in order to include texts that have normally and normatively been considered to be “Gentile Christian” documents. Do the bounds of pluriform Early Judaism even need to be stretched so far to accommodate writings ascribed to an author such as Luke, the Gentile Christian par excellence in Christian imagination and tradition, into a Jewish environment?

Or have terminological epithets and conceptual presuppositions created an artificial embryo that enables Luke’s works to subsist continually as the single non-Jewish documents in the Jewish hall of fame of New Testament writings, coloring and governing the interpretation of themes such as Torah observance in Luke-Acts? What would happen if we would temporarily suspend ascribing terms such as “Gentile Christian” to Luke-Acts and begin with the assumption that these two works are just as Jewish as the gospel of Matthew?" (pp. 4-5)

(10) As I revised this work, a stimulating session on Acts and the Parting of the Ways in light of Second Temple Judaism was held at the Society of Biblical Literature on November 18, 2012.
———. 2014. "Jewish Followers of Jesus and the Bar Kokhba Revolt: Reexamining the Christian Sources." In Winning Revolutions: The Psychosocial Dynamics of Revolts for Freedom, Fairness, and Rights: Volume I: Religious Revolts, edited by Ellens, J. Arold, 109–127. Santa Barabra, CA: Praeger.

"This chapter explores the relationship of “Jewish followers of Jesus” to Bar Kokhba and the Second Jewish Revolt by examining several ancient Christian sources on this topic.(1) By employing the phrase “Jewish followers of Jesus,” I am following the lead of Boyarin (2009), who urges abandoning the use of the problematic term “Jewish Christians.” With this rather pedantic nomenclature I am referring primarily to individuals of ancestral Jewish heritage (the ethnic criterion), still residing in Palestine, who observe the Torah in its so-called ritual dimension (the criterion of praxis), like many of their contemporary Jewish compatriots. In this chapter I am more interested in addressing the issue of Jewish (rather than Gentile) followers of Jesus and their responses to the Bar Kokhba Revolt, because the patristic sources (assessed below) assume the existence of an ethnically Jewish and Torah observant ekklesia (church) established in Palestine up until the Bar Kokhba Revolt. Evidence for the presence of Jewish followers of Jesus in Galilee also appears in the rabbinic sources (e.g., t. Hull. [Tosefta Hullin] 2:24). I prefer using the term “follower” rather than “believer.” Skarsaune (2007a, 3–21) currently employs the latter label, but its use risks overlooking other important factors for assessing the Jewish identity of followers of Jesus, particularly the significance of Torah observance." (p. 109)

(1) This chapter is based on a paper written for a seminar on the Bar Kokhba Revolt presented by Aharon Oppenheimer during his stay in 2008–2009 as a fellow at the Frankel Institute for Advanced Judaic Studies, University of Michigan. I would like to thank my friend Jonathan Bourgel, a former doctoral student of Oppenheimer, for sharing the chapter from his dissertation entitled, “The Jewish Christians in the Storm of the Bar Kokhba Revolt” (2009). We are both delighted to have independently reached similar conclusions, namely, that the Bar Kokhba Revolt (at least during and in its immediate aftermath) should not be interpreted as a watershed in the so-called process of the “parting of the ways,” and that some Jewish followers of Jesus may have even participated in or at least supported the revolt. My research, more than Bourgel’s, tries to highlight the patristic refraction and reification of the Bar Kokhba event in the formation of Jewish and Christian identities.

References

Boyarin, D. (2009). “Rethinking Jewish Christianity: An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category (To Which Is Appended a Correction of My Borderlines).” Jewish Quarterly Review 99: 7–36.

Skarsaune, O. (2007a). “Jewish Believers in Jesus in Antiquity—Problems of Definition, Method, and Sources.” In Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries, edited by O. Skarsaune and R. Hvalvik, 3–21. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
———. 2021. "The Parting of the Ways: When and How Did the Ekklēsia Split from the Synagogue?" In Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity: Biblical, Theological, and Historical Essays on the Relationship between Christianity and Judaism, edited by McDermott, Gerald R., 104–127. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

"Beginning already in the second century CE, St. Ignatius of Antioch roundly contrasted “Christianity” (Christianismos) with “Judaism” (Ioudaismos).(3) Christianity was not Judaism. This antithetical position eventually gained acceptance among the majority of Christians and Jews. Socially, the separation is reflected by the two institutions that have traditionally represented each group, church and synagogue. But when and how did this social reality come to be? The Second Annual Anglican Theology Conference at Beeson Divinity School formulated this question for me to address in a particular way: When and how did the ekklēsia split from the synagogue? I would slightly rephrase this question to avoid the assumption that this split occurred unilaterally in one direction, that is, the ekklēsia splitting from the synagogue, by asking, “When and how did the ekklēsia and the synagogue split?” As I will show, there may have been just as much of a desire from Jewish synagogues to disassociate themselves from Jesus’ followers. But before discussing the when and how of an extremely complex historical process that involved both ideological and social-political factors, it is necessary to understand the very meaning of ekklēsia and “synagogue” in antiquity." (p. 105)

(3) Ignatius, Phld. 6.1; Magn. 10.3. Ignatius, however, applied the term Ioudaismos primarily to what he deemed to be heretical views held by Christians. His statements therefore do not concern Judaism proper, even though they proved consequential for Christian-Jewish relations. For a recent discussion, see Daniel Boyarin, “Why Ignatius Invented Judaism,” in The Ways That Often Parted: Essays in Honor of Joel Marcus, ed. Lori Baron, Jill Hicks-Keeton, and Matthew Thiessen (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2018), 309–24.
Parker, Barry F. 2006. "Romans 7 and th split between Judaism and Chrstianity." Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism no. 3:110–133.

"One issue that clearly emerges from both the historical evidence and text of Paul’s epistle is the issue of Jewish Christian and Gentile Christian coexistence. Though it would be stretching the point to suggest that there was any animosity, or even any fundamental disagreement in their common bond of faith, historical circumstance and questions about the proper expression of that faith conspired together to create a breach that, while evident in later history, was certainly foreshadowed in events leading to Paul’s writing of Romans. This split then, between Judaism and Christianity, or rather the nascent elements of an impending split, places the epistle and the chapter on relatively steady historical grounds. Indeed, the pertinent question directing the historical research becomes, as Stanley Porter and Brook Pearson pose it, not ‘“Why did Jews and Christians split?”, but rather, “Whatever happened to Jewish Christianity?"(1)," (pp. 110-111)

(1) S.E. Porter and B.W.R. Pearson, ‘Why the Split? Christians and Jews by the Fourth Century’, Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism 1 (2000), pp. 82-119 (114).
Pastor, Jack, and Mir, Menachem, eds. 2005. The Beginnings of Christianity: A Collection of Articles. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi Press.

Parting of the Ways: Self-definiton and Polemics: Yaron Eliav: A New/Old Reading of the “Lithos Epi Lithon” Prophecy and the Role of the Temple Mount in the Jesus Movement 325; David Flusser: The Antichrist and “The House of Israel Alone" 349; Frédéric Manns: Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho 359; Martin Goodman: The Persecution of Paul by Diaspora Jews 379-387.
Perzynski, Andrzej P. 2019. "Christians and Jews: historical and theological perspectives of their relationship." Studia Oecumenica no. 19:329–348.

Abstract: "The article analyses the subject of Christian-Jewish relations in historical and theological terms. In the historical part, the following periods are briefly discussed: New Testament, patristic, medieval, modern and contemporary. In the theological part, the common elements of Judaism and Christianity are first presented. Herein: Jews and Christians identify their faith and action through the interrelations between justice and love; they base their beliefs on the common “scripture” (the “Old Testament”); they understand each other as the people of God; they profess the one God, the Creator and the Redeemer; they express their faith in worship, in which there are many similarities; Jews and Christians also live in the expectation for the common history of God with His people, whose fulfilment they expect.

Distinctive elements (the divergence of the ways) are: the belief in Jesus, the Christ; the interpretation of the Scriptures; a different understanding of what God’s people are; different developed piety. In conclusion, it is said that the rediscovery of a positive relationship with Judaism facilitates a positive formation of Christian identity and memory."
Petersen, Anders Klostergaard. 2005. "At the End of the Road - Reflections on a Popular Scholarly Metaphor." In The Formation of the Early Church, edited by Ẫdna, Jostein, 45–72. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

"In his book The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue from 1934, in which he [James W. Parkes] attempts to trace the origins of anti-Semitism, he devotes an entire chapter - entitled The Parting of the Ways - to the subject of the separation of Christianity from Judaism." (p- 46)

(...)

"The aim of this essay is to explore the advantages of the road metaphor and to explain its current popularity. Simultaneously, and complementary with recent developments in scholarship, I shall pose some critical questions as to its use, thereby hoping to make way for a more refined and accurate model for understanding the processes that eventually led to the formation of two independent religions. If Parkes is right in maintaining that it is difficult to provide an accurate chronology, one should be hesitant about the continuous attempts to give a precise date for the parting of the ways. But apart from the problem of dating, there are numerous other problems that pertain to the use of the road metaphor." (p. 47)

(...)

"Although initiating in an early period, the processes that eventually led to the separation of Judaism and Christianity into separate religions did not come to the end of the road before the succeeding two centuries - and even after that point one could possibly find examples that contradict the general picture. If it is acknowledged, however, that the parting of the ways occurred at a much later period of time than is traditionally assumed, what does that imply for the continuous use of the metaphor? Not much.

The Parting of the Ways is also inadequate as a metaphor for describing this development not only because there were many partings and numerous ways, but also because the model suffers from a number of theoretical flaws that are caused by the failure to acknowledge the many ways and the numerous partings." (p. 72)
Pierce, Madison N. 2026. "Relapsing, Reverting, or Rejecting? The Purpose of Hebrews and Early Jewish Religion." Journal for the Study of the New Testament no. 48:815–843.

Abstract: "For far too long, many interpreters of Hebrews have held the view that the author wrote to dissuade the audience from a return to Judaism—the so-called ‘relapse theory’. This article demonstrates the ways in which this theory does not cohere with current scholarship on Hebrews or on the New Testament more broadly. The ‘relapse theory’ assumes a clear ‘parting of the ways’ or separation between Judaism and Christianity in the first century as well as a rather negative outlook on Jewish rituals by the author of Hebrews. But as this article shows, evidence that this is the primary concern of the author is scarce, and the interpretations of various passages used to illustrate the author’s supposed supersessionism or replacement ideologies are at best overstated or hyperbolic and at worst misguided caricatures of Judaism in the first century. I begin with brief histories of interpretation regarding both the purpose of Hebrews and then put forward alternative readings for six texts often used to substantiate the idea that the author of Hebrews writes to critique Jewish religion (Heb 3.12; 7.11, 18–19; 8.13; 10.1–10; 9.9–10; 13.9–10)."
Porter, Stanley E., and Pearson, Brook W. R. 2000. "Why the Split? Christian and Jews by the Fourth Century." Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism:82–119.

"1. Introduction

There has been much recent discussion of the split between Judaism and Christianity. As will be seen below, much of the discussion has been concerned with modern categories, and fails to place the separation within the larger context of the ancient world. This is especially true with regard to its bearing upon developments in the ancient world, including the growth of Christianity, up to the fourth century or Late Antique period.(1) However, it seems to us that there are several pertinent questions about the development of this split between Judaism and early Christianity that have a direct bearing on several important elements within this period. Perhaps the most obvious question (and the one to which many have tried to provide an answer) relates to the defining characteristics of the split." (p. 82)

(...)

"5. Conclusion

In conclusion, perhaps we can re-focus our gaze on the beginning of the fourth century once more, just on the cusp of those unprecedented changes within Christianity and the Roman empire itself. Far-reaching changes would take place very quickly post-313, and the relationship between Christianity and Judaism in the latter part of the fourth century would bear only passing resemblance to the pre-313 relationship.

However, we hope we have shown in this essay that, to understand many of the later developments in this relationship, and indeed in the development of individual faiths (although we have focused more on Christianity in this regard), it is imperative that the earlier development of this relationship be not only examined, but considered from multiple perspectives." (p. 119)

(1) 1. For biblical scholars, the post-New Testament period, and the relation of Christianity to this period in Roman history, are not as well known as the earlier period. On the Late Antique period and Christianity, see R. MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire (AD 100–400) (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984), esp. pp. 43-101; cf. W.M. Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire before

AD 170 (Mansfield College Lectures; London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1893), pp. 172-77.
Pritz, Ray. 2019. "The Parting of the Ways: Middle Ages." In A Handbook on the Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith, edited by Evans, Craig A. and Mishkin, David, 288–294. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers.

Part IV: The Branches. Chapter 12: The Parting of the Ways

12.1 David Mishkin: Early Judaism 275; 12.2 Jason Maston: Early Christianity 281; 12.3 Ray Pritz: The Middle Ages 288-294.
Ramelli, Ilaria. 2014. "The Jesus Movement’s flight to Pella and the 'Parting of the Ways'." Augustinianum no. 54:35–51.

Abstract: "After a contextualisation concerning Pella in the Roman Decapolis and the Decapolis itself as the theatre of Jesus’ teaching, this essay analyses the question of the flight of many members of the Jesus movement to Pella during the conflict with the Romans in the Jewish War. I shall evaluate Eusebius’s piece of information and shall endeavour to connect it to the larger issue of the so-called “parting of the ways” between the Jesus movement (what became Christianity) and Judaism – or the construal of this “parting of ways” by early Christian authors. Special attention will be paid to some recent hypotheses and discoveries regarding the “parting of the ways”, which seem to reinforce my argument concerning the overall accuracy of Eusebius’s account of the flight to Pella and the probable role of the Romans in this move and in the “parting of the ways” itself."
———. 2016. "Pella of the Decapolis and the question of its possible role in the "parting of the ways"." Aram Periodical no. 28:199–205.
Reed, Annette Yoshiko. 2005. Fallen Angels and the History of Judaism and Christianity: The Reception of Enochic Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chapter 4: The Parting of the Ways? Enoch and the Fallen Angels in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity, pp 122-159.

"In order to understand the conflicting views that arose in early Rabbinic Judaism and proto-orthodox Christianity, it is best to begin by situating them in the context of their common origin. We will first question whether the earliest Christian use of the Book of the Watchers should be conceived as the Christian “appropriation” of a text from Jews, rather than the ongoing use of this book in groups with an evolving Jewish/Christian identity, or simply the Christian appeal to one of many texts that belonged to their common heritage. Then, we will revisit the thorny issue of the formation of the Jewish biblical canon, asking whether the early Christian use of the Book of the Watchers was predicated on its noncanonicity among other Jews and exploring how the beginning of the canonical process in Rabbinic Judaism relates to the abandonment of the Enochic pseudepigrapha in Rabbinic circles. Only then will we consider how these two groups parted ways with regard to the exegesis of Gen 6:1–4 and the use of Enochic literature." (p. 126)
———. 2007. ""Jewish Christianity" after the "Parting of the Ways": Approaches to Historiography and Self-Definition in the Pseudo-Clementines." In The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, edited by Becker, Adam H. and Reed, Annette Yoshiko, 189–231. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

Reprinted in A. Y. Reed, Jewish-Christianity and the History of Judaism: Collected Essays, Tübingen: Mohr Siebec 2018, pp. 15-56.

"Likewise, our discussion of the history of scholarship has shed doubt on the traditional approach to “Jewish-Christianity” as a self-contained phenomenon, distinct from all varieties of “Gentile Christianity.” As Albertus Frederik Johannes Klijn notes, our term “Jewish-Christian” encompasses all those who combined Judaism and Christianity in ways that differed from the combination(s) that ecclesiarchs in the Roman Empire eventually succeeded in promoting as “Christian.”(116) This, however, may tell us more about the formation of Western Christian orthodoxy than about the phenomenon that we term “Jewish-Christianity.”

Just as the notion of “heresy” was a product of efforts to construct “orthodoxy” and never remained a static category, so the idea that some Christ-believers were too “Jewish” to be “Christian” arose in the course of discussions about the precise nature of the Jewish heritage of the church and its exact ramifications for Christian practice. As with other modes of heresiology, the critique of “too Jewish” Christian groups has roots in the first and second centuries but appears to reach an apex in the fourth and fifth. Far from evincing the marginalization of “Jewish-Christian” viewpoints after 70 or 135 ce, the

evidence traditionally studied under this rubric may instead help us to illuminate their relevance for a broader discourse about Christianity’s relationship to Judaism, which continued to shape Christian self-definition for centuries after the so-called “Parting of the Ways".” (pp. 55-56)
———. 2010. "Parting of the Ways." In The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism, edited by Collins, John J and Harlow, Daniel C., 1029–1031. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans.

"Most scholars today agree that Judaism played a formative role in the origins and early history of Christianity. What is debated, however, is when, why, and how Christianity emerged as a religion distinct from Judaism. The "Parting of the Ways" is one of the models and metaphors that scholars have used to explore these questions." (p. 1029)

(...)

"On one level, the continued debates about the Parting of the Ways may thus reflect the inherent limitations of a linear and global account (Petersen 2005). From a modern perspective, it makes sense to speak of a clear-cut "Christianity" that separated from a clear-cut "Judaism'' at a specific point in time. The diversity of our ancient evidence, however, resists such reduction. Accordingly, it may not be possible to pinpoint the historical moment that shaped "Christianity'' and "Judaism'' in all their diverse forms and regional expressions - either before the fourth century or after (Becker and Reed 2003). Nevertheless, theories about the Parting of the Ways have served an important function in modern scholarship. They have offered much-needed alternates to older supersessionist models. Debates surrounding the Parting of the Ways have also helped to break down the disciplinary boundaries between the study of the New Testament, rabbinics, patristics, and late antiquity.

Debates about the Parting of the Ways continue to rage today. Some scholars defend the model, albeit in an attenuated form that allows for a longer and more complex process of differentiation (e.g., Dunn 2006). Others call for more sophisticated models for understanding Jewish and Christian self-definition, drawing from the rich body of research on identity formation in other fields (e.g., Boyarin 2004). Only time can tell whether the idea of the Parting of the Ways will continue to hold sway."(p. 1031)

References

A. H. Becker and A. Y. Reed, eds. 2003, The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck.

D. Boyarin 2004, Border Lines: The Partition of Judeo-Christianity, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

D. G. Dunn 2006, The Partings of the Ways, 2d ed., London: S.C.M.

A. K. Petersen 2005, ''At the End of the Road: Reflections on a Popular Scholarly Metaphor:' in The Formation of the Early Church, ed. J. Adna, Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 45-72.
———. 2012. "Parting Ways over Blood and Water? Beyond « Judaism » and « Christianity » in the Roman Near East." In La croisée des chemins revisitée : Quand l'"Eglise" et la "Synagogue" se sont-elles distinguées ?, edited by Mimouni, Simon Claude and Pouderon, Bernard, 227–260. Paris: Cerf.

Abstract: "If the process of « Parting » or « distinction » was as gradual as scholars now suggest, is it possible to glimp seany of the alternatives? Can were cover any of the other ways in which late antique Jews and Christians partitioned their identities? Towards addressing these questions, this essay focuses on the dynamic interaction of local realities globalizing discourses in the Roman Near East. It first considers local cultures in the region contributed to the creation of categories « Judaism » and « Christianity » that came to be exported throughout Roman Empire, eventually shaping imperial ideologies and modern scholarship alike. It then turns to explore the persistence of older approaaches to organizing difference (e.g., Israel/nations, Greek/barbarian) in Roman Syria and Palestine. Attention to discussions of ritual purity, blood, water in the Mishnah, Didascalia Apostolorum, and Pseudo-Clementine Homilies - it is suggested - may help highlight the rich range of perspectives on identity and difference that continued to flourish into Late Antiquity, helping us further to historicize our modern notions of « Judaism » and « Christianity »."
Reed, Annette Yoshiko, and Becker, Adam H. 2007. "Introduction: Traditional Models and New Directions." In The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, edited by Becker, Adam H. and Reed, Annette Yoshiko, 1–33. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

"The present volume seeks to further the discussion and debate about the "Parting of the Ways" by demonstrating what we stand to gain by approaching Judaism and Christianity as "Ways that Never Parted" - or, in other words, as traditions that remained intertwined long after the Second Temple had fallen and the dust had settled from the Jewish revolts against Rome. Whereas most treatments of early Jewish-Christian relations focus on the first and early second centuries CE(10) and/or limit their discussions to the conflicts of later centuries,(11) the articles in this volume consider the points of intersection, sites of interaction, and dynamics of interchange between Jews and Christians in the period between the Bar Kokhba Revolt and the rise of Islam. Rather than approaching Judaism and Christianity as monolithic entities that partook in a single act of separation, we here attempt to illuminate the broad range of regional and cultural variation in the encounters between different biblically-based religious groups - including Jews and Christians, but also those so-called "Jewish Christians" and "Judaizers" who so strain the dichotomous definitions of modern scholarship. In the process, we hope to highlight the value of studying Judaism and Christianity as traditions that continued to impact one another, in constantly changing but consistently meaningful ways, throughout Late Antiquity and into the Middle Ages." (p. 3)

(10) One refreshing exception to this tendency is the volume, Christian-Jewish Relations through the Centuries, ed. Stanley E. Porter and Brook W. R. Pearson (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), in which contributions about Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages bridge the usual gap between discussions of the New Testament and of the modern period.

(11) A recent example: William Horbury, Jews and Christians in Contact and Controversy (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998).
Reed, Annette Yoshiko, and Vuong, Lily. 2013. "Christianity in Antioch: Partings in Roman Syria." In Partings: How Judaism and Christianity Became Two, edited by Shanks, Hershel, 105–132. Washington, DC: Biblical Archaeology Society.

"In what follows, we survey some of the most important sources for understanding the partitioning of Christian identities from Jews and Judaism in Syria in the first four centuries C.E. Perhaps particularly in the case of Syria, the emergence of distinctively Christian identities cannot be understood apart from a sense of inner-Christian resistance to the severing of longstanding social and communal connections. Separatists like Ignatius did not immediately succeed in reshaping local lived realities in the image of their theological ideals.(8) To the degree that one can tell a story about Christians and Jews “parting ways” in Roman Syria, it is the tale of a prolonged process, far more complex and contested than the proclamations of famous separatists convey.

For our purposes, “Roman Syria” can be defined as the region centered on Antioch and stretching from the eastern coast of the Mediterranean to the Roman Empire’ eastern border. As Han Drijvers notes, “Antioch and Edessa are the two poles of Syrian Christianity as it developed during the first centuries A.D. in the Roman province of Syria.(10) Accordingly, we here focus primarily on the area bounded by Antioch on the Orontes River in the west and by Edessa and Nisibis beyond the Euphrates in the east, including other cities along the Orontes, such as Apamea and Emesa, together with the Syrian Desert, stretching southward to Damascus." (pp. 106-107, a note omitted)

(8) On the slow process by which the Christian anti-Jewish rhetoric came to shape social reality in the Roman Empire, see Paula Fredriksen, “What ‘Parting of the Ways’? Jews, Gentiles, and the Ancient Mediterranean City,’ in Ways That Never Parted, pp. 35-64; Fredriksen, “Roman Christianity and the Post-Roman West: The Social Correlates of the Contra Iudaeos Tradition", in Jews, Christians, and the Roman Empire: The Poetics of Power in Late Antiquity, eds. Natalie B. Dohrmann and Annette Yoshiko Reed (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, in press [2023]).

(10) Han J.W. Drijvers, “Syrian Christianity and Judaism? in The Jews Among Pagans and Christians in the Roman Empire, eds. Judith Lieu, John North and Tessa Rajak (London: Routledge, 1992), pp. 124-146 at 125.
Reinhartz, Adele. 2006. "A Fork in the Road or a Multi-Lane Highway? New Perspectives on the »Parting of the Ways« Between Judaism and Christianity." In The Changing Face of Judaism, Christianity, and other Greco-Roman Religions in Antiquity, edited by Henderson, Ian H. and Oegema, Gerbern S., 280–295. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus.
———. 2011. "“Common Judaism”, “The Parting of the Ways”, and “the Johannine Community”." In Orthodoxy, Liberalism, and Adaptation: Essays on Ways of Worldmaking in Times of Change from Biblical, Historical and Systematic Perspectives, edited by Becking, Bob E. J. H., 69–87. Leiden: Brill.

“Common Judaism” refers to the hypothesis that Jews—including the ordinary people and the parties alike—in the Second Temple period adhered to a set of practices and beliefs that they believed to be expressive of and required by the covenantal relationship between God and Israel.(1) “The parting of the ways” refers to the process by which Judaism and Christianity developed identities as separate religious systems and communities.(2) “The Johannine community” refers to the hypothetical group within which and for which the Gospel of John took its present form.(3)" (p. 69)

(...)

"My purpose in these pages therefore is not to deplore the existence of shorthand phrases, nor to argue for or against one particular construction.

Rather, I will suggest that these phrases, and the constructions which they denote, are useful, not only as descriptive measures but also, or even more so, when they are brought into relationship with one another. It is obvious that the question of “common Judaism ” and the history of the Johannine community are both relevant for our understanding of “the parting of the ways”. But an issue that has received less attention is the relationship between “common Judaism” and “the Johannine community”. The question that I will therefore address is: can the concept of “common Judaism” help us to discern the situation of “the Johannine community” with regard to a “parting of the ways” with Judaism?" (p. 72)

(1) On the common people (ammei ha’aretz), see A. Oppenheimer, The Am Ha-Aretz: A Study in the Social History of the Jewish People in the Hellenistic-Roman Period (Arbeiten zur Literatur und Geschichte des hellenistischen Judentums 8; Leiden: Brill, 1977). For “common Judaism ”, see E.P. Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief, 63 BCE–66 CE (Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1992).

(2) See, for example, J.D.G. Dunn, Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways, A.D. 70 to 135: The Second Durham-Tübingen Research Symposium on Earliest Christianity and Judaism (Durham, September 1989) (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999).

(3) The term was brought into popular usage by J. Louis Martyn, History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel (3rd ed., New Testament Library; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003), though the idea that the earliest audience constitutes a discrete community was already present in W.A. Meeks, “The Man from Heaven in Johannine Sectarianism,” Journal of Biblical Literature 91 (1972): 44–72.
———. 2018. "How Christianity Parted from Judaism." In Early Judaism: New Insights and Scholarship, edited by Greenspahn, Frederick E., 97–120. New York: New York University Press.

"Conclusion

Christianity began as one of many Jewish groups in the first century of the Common Era. On either scenario outlined above, the development of an autonomous identity on the part of Christianity— the parting of the ways, the eddying of waters, separating the siblings, dismantling of textiles— was not a neat linear or onetime occurrence but the result of a lengthy, messy, difficult-to-describe process that took place over the course of one to three centuries, at different times in different locales.(57)

However we view the process of separation, it is clear that by the early fourth century, Christianity was no longer Judaism. Indeed it positioned itself firmly over and against Judaism, a position that most mainstream branches of Christianity rejected only in the twentieth century. Christianity developed its own ways of understanding monotheism; its own practices, rites, and rituals; and its own life-cycle events and identitymarkers. In many ways, however, Christianity remains Judaism, or, to be more precise, Christianity and Judaism continue to agree on some fundamental points: belief in or, at least, some form of orientation toward a divine being who is concerned about humankind, and a commitment to social justice that requires human beings to strive for the well-being of others. It behooves all of us to strive to understand the other and the other’s history in order to live together productively and peacefully in the modern world." (pp. 115-116)

(57) See especially the essays in Becker and Reed, Ways That Never Parted.
———. 2020. "The Gospel of John and the »Parting of the Ways«." Evangelische Theologie no. 80:465–471.

Abstract: "The question of when and how the Jesus movement became a separate and distinct set of institutions, communities, beliefs, and practices is perhaps the most contentious issue in the study of early Christianity. A key text in this debate is the Gospel of John. This essay argues that, contrary to the views of many scholars, the Gospel does not provide evidence that »the synagogue« expelled Jewish-Christians in the latter part of the first century CE. The Gospel does, however, construct a rhetorical »parting of the ways« through a two-part program that includes a rhetoric of affiliation – strategies that encourage the Gospel’s audience to believe in Jesus as the messiah and son of God and to join with others who so believe – and a rhetoric of disaffiliation – strategies that encourage the Gospel’s audience to separate and stay away from non-believers, whom the Gospel labels ioudaioi. Although it is not possible to conclude that this rhetorical »parting« reflected or corresponded to a historical »parting,« it is noteworthy that by the end of the first century there is at least one Christ-confessing text that envisions a mode of Christian self-identification outside of and separate from Judaism."
———. 2021. "The “Parting of the Ways” and the Criterion of Plausibility." In Paul and Matthew among Jews and Gentiles: Essays in Honor of Terence L. Donaldson, edited by Charles, Ronald, 147–156. London: T & T Clasrk.

Reprinted as Chapter 7 in A. Reinhartz, Jousting with John: Essays on Jews, Gender, and Ethics in the Fourth Gospel, Berlin: De Gruyter 2025, p. 141-152.

Note: An earlier version of this essay appeared in Paul and Matthew Among Jews and Gentiles, ed. Ronald Charles (London: T&T Clark, 2021), 147–56.

"The assumption of mutuality is a welcome antidote to supersessionism and anti-Judaism. I wonder, however, whether scholars’ desire to atone for past sins has also caused them to misconstrue the historical processes that the “parting of the ways” discourse intends to clarify.(2) To begin to probe this issue, I will in these pages consider a few of the sources that are used to construct the Jewish side of the parting of the ways from the New Testament, Josephus, Justin Martyr, and rabbinic literature, and the ways in which they are used in the parting discourse.

I will argue two interconnected points. First, the available evidence for Jewish response to and concern with Christ-confessors can be read in at least two mutually exclusive ways: as evidence for and against Jews’ engagement with Christ-confessors. Second, scholars’ judgments about the historical value of this evidence, while often presented as objective and even self-evident, are often based on an unstated criterion – the criterion of plausibility – that is intuitive and therefore not objective at all." (p. 142 of the reprint)

(2) Others too have tired of it. See, for example, Tobias Nicklas, Jews and Christians? Second-Century “Christian” Perspectives on the “Parting of the Ways” (Annual Deichmann Lectures 2013)

(Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), 221–23.
———. 2022. "Slip-Slidin’ Away: Rethinking the “Parting of the Ways”." In Negotiating Identities: Conflict, Conversion, and Consolidation in Early Judaism and Christianity (200 BCE-600 CE), edited by Zetterholm, Karin Hedner, Runesson, Anders, Wassén, Cecilia and Zetterholm, Magnus, 103–127. Lanham: Lexington Books / Fortress Academic.

"My current thinking about the "parting of the ways " focuses on the role of metaphor in the scholarly discourse on the question of Christian origins. I argue, first, that the metaphors that have been used to describe the beginnings of Christianity have also pushed the discourse in particular directions. Second, these metaphors reflect the changing stances of Christians toward Jews as much as they reflect the facts (such as they are) that we (think we) discern from our sources. Third, the current discourse may overemphasize the role of Jews, Jewish authorities, and Jewish institutions in the process of Christian differentiation. In this chapter I will provide a brief introduction to metaphors in generation; look at briefly at the kinship metaphors that were important in the twentieth century -the mother- daughter metaphor, the siblings metaphor, and the parting of the ways metaphor itself; and finally I will propose a revision to the "parting" metaphor." (pp. 103-104)
———. 2026. "Exemplary Death Narratives and the “Parting of the Ways”." In Tyrants, Heroes, Prophets, and Martyrs: Shifting Images from the Past to the Present. Essays in Honour of Jan Willem van Henten, edited by Vander Stichele, Caroline and Borsje, Jacqueline, 213–226. Leiden: Brill.

"The question that I am posing is very specific: Do the portrayals of Jews in the accounts of exemplary death in the New Testament and early Christian literature contribute to our understanding of the so-called “parting of the ways?”(1). For this purpose I take the metaphor of the parting of the ways to refer to the process by which Christianity developed into a set of institutions, practices, and communities that defined themselves outside of and often over against Jewish institutions, practices, and communities. My focus is on three sets of texts: the passion narratives in the canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the Martyrdom of Polycarp; and the Martyrdom of Pionius. I set aside the questions of historicity and dating of the martyrdom accounts, and I will not argue for the inclusion of the New Testament passion narratives in the genre of martyrdom stories. Rather, I will consider the Gospels as well as the Martyrdoms of Polycarp and Pionius as examples of literary rhetoric shaped by the desire to tell a good story, and, most importantly, to persuade their audiences to agree with their perspectives on the events they describe.(2)" (pp. 113-114)

(1) I use the term “exemplary death” on Jan Willem’s suggestion, as a category that includes martyrdom accounts as well as the passion accounts in the Gospels, which are not martyrdom stories in the strict sense. Regarding the parting of the ways, I am not the only scholar to ask about the relevance of exemplary death narratives for this question. See, for example, D. Boyarin, Dying for God: Martyrdom and the Making of Christianity and Judaism, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2007). Boyarin views the similarities between rabbinic and early Christian martyrdom stories as evidence of social contact between Jews and Christians, and as a basis to challenge the usual narratives pertaining to the separation between Judaism and Christianity. The metaphor of the parting of the ways is highly contested but remains the most convenient shorthand for the process of Christian development in its relationship to Judaism. See, for example, A.H. Becker and A. Yoshiko Reed, eds., The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (Philadelphia: Fortress, 2007); L. Baron et al., eds., The Ways That Often Parted: Essays in Honor of Joel Marcus (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2018).

(2) Although the term rhetoric is often used derogatorily to refer to insincere, meaningless, or bombastic speech, it is fundamentally a neutral term that describes the persuasive function of speech. On the negative perception of rhetoric and its connection to Plato, see R. Toye, Rhetoric: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 1–2.
Rizzi, Marco. 2018. "Jews and Christians under Trajan and the Date of Ignatius’ Martyrdom." In Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries: The Interbellum 70‒132 CE, edited by Joshua, Schwartz and Tomson, Peter J., 119–126. Leiden: Brill.

"This paper aims to shed some light on the so-called ‘parting of the ways’ between Jews and Christians before the last Jewish revolt against Rome in 132-136 AD. It proposes the hypothesis that the otherwise unknown historical events which led to the arrest, the imprisonment and finally the death of Ignatius of Antioch can be explained by placing them against the backdrop of the Jewish Diaspora revolt of the years 115-117 AD." (p. 119, a note omitted)

Skip to the top of page