Paul Foster, «Is Q a 'Jewish Christian' Document?», Vol. 94 (2013) 368-394
Recent research has generated different hypotheses concerning the social location of Q. This discussion commences with an examination of scholarship on the phenomenon of 'Jewish Christianity' and theories concerning the social location of Q. Next, meta-level questions are addressed, concerning how social location is determined from a text. The discussion then considers four areas mentioned in Q that might be of potential significance for determining social location. These are references to synagogues, the law, Gentiles, and unbelieving Israel. In conclusion, the inclusive perspectives may suggest that the document had a more positive attitude toward Gentiles than is often stated.
03_Biblica_Foster_Layout 1 08/07/13 12:56 Pagina 381
381
IS Q A “JEWISH CHRISTIAN†DOCUMENT?
from the Jewish Christians†45. Therefore, for Skarsaune “Christian Jew-
ish†represents ethnic Jews who are no longer Torah observant as a con-
sequence of their faith in Jesus. Thus for him “Christian Jewish†would
be placed to the right of “Jewish Christian†on the constructed axis. Fur-
thermore, the term “Christian Jews†means precisely the opposite ac-
cording to Tuckett’s more typical definition 46. From these differing
understandings of the term “Christian Jewish†it is apparent that not only
is there is no commonly agreed definition, but the various definitions
that have been suggested are radically opposed 47.
Because of this confusion it is perhaps best to drop labels such as
“Jewish Christian†or “Christian Jews†entirely, and to offer more de-
scriptive definitions of the categories on the continuum. Yet the abid-
ing problem is that groups or individuals rarely fall into hermetically
isolated conceptual categories. Instead, real communities and individ-
uals often hold together what may be seen as theoretically incompat-
ible positions, and groups often encompass individuals with a range
of beliefs. This may mean that only a few broad categories should be
defined, but variation from such theoretical descriptions is to be ex-
pected. For this reason, a three point axis is proposed as an aid to clas-
sification, but there needs to be a recognition that no two groups or
individuals are likely to share exactly the same belief system.
Jewish —— Jewish Christian —— Gentile Christian
Here Jewish believers are seen to be those who were still fully in-
tegrated into Jewish religious and social institutions although there
may be tensions with fellow Jews who do not share the conviction
that Jesus is the Messiah, or a prophetic figure, or a divinely com-
missioned teacher. Such adherents to Jesus probably maintained a
form of Torah observance that was indistinguishable from members
of wider Judaism. Historically, such a position may have only been
SKARSAUNE, “Jewish Believers in Jesus in Antiquityâ€, 9.
45
TUCKETT, Q and the History of Early Christianity, 435, n. 37.
46
This point is made with great clarity by Edwin Broadhead. He states
47
that “[i]t is also invalid to define Jewish Christianity by what it is not ― nei-
ther Jewish nor Christian. Similarly, a definition should not be shaped by per-
ceptions of orthodoxy or heresy, either from the Christian or Jewish sideâ€.
E.K. BROADHEAD, Jewish Ways of Following Jesus (Tübingen 2010) 28-58,
here 58.
© Gregorian Biblical Press 2013 - Tutti i diritti riservati