PSA
I know it’s been said a dozen times before, but it always bears repeating … I’m not the sort of person to tell you categorically Do Not Use This Or That Word. So I’m just going to tell you to be Very Very Careful if you’re thinking about using “Judeo-Christian.” You have better odds of winning the lottery than of using “Judeo-Christian” in a meaningful way. Seriously. It does not mean what you think it means.
The term was first used in 1821 to mean “Jewish converts to Christianity,” and was next used in 1829 to describe a kind of church that would appropriate Jewish rituals in order to convert Jews. So there’s a bang-up start to the concept right there. After the Holocaust was when people really started slinging it around, largely out of the “standing by and letting the Most Civilized Nation On The Face Of The Earth™ murder six million people was not a good look for us” brand of guilt. In this sense, it’s been used for decades to imply either that Judaism and Christianity are really the same thing (hint: they’re not), or that Judaism kind of inevitably melts into being Christianity, so there’s no more sense in thinking about Judaism on its own than there is of thinking about the little bits of stuff in the pot that haven’t melted away and become soup yet (hint: we’re still here). More recently, I’ve noticed that some of my more woke academic colleagues have started to use “Judeo-Christian” as a fancy way of saying “white people.”
Just don’t. Please, don’t. If you’re using “Judeo-Christian” the traditional way, the odds are overwhelming that you’re just gussying up the word “Christian,” because most of what is described as “Judeo-Christian” actually doesn’t have much “Judeo” in it at all, because, and follow me closely here, Judaism and Christianity are two different things. If you’re using “Judeo-Christian” in the woke way, know that you are intentionally shutting out a minority group that, although it comes in many shades of skin tone, is still a target of white supremacy, and that you are being an active danger to us. So, if you want to say “Christian,” say “Christian.” If you want to say “white people,” say “white people.” If you’re going to use Jewish people as a prop in your argument, make sure you really mean it.
This PSA brought to you by an otherwise extremely exciting, interesting, and intellectually stimulating conference I attended this past weekend.
Well, I think they are mostly the same.
The old testament is the whole TANAKH (holy book from the Jews) the new testament is the part with Jesus.
Judaism and christianity is deeply linked, Jews scholars don’t want to accept Jesus as the Messiah which is why they are still two separated groups. But christians literally worship the same God and study the whole TANAKH and hold it very dear to their heart.
So, Judeo-Christian is a very useful word which includes the obvious union of both groups since it’s almost the same faith.
Jews still believe in the laws of the Torah, Christians don’t have to follow the laws, they follow what Jesus told them to hold on to (which includes the 10 commandments besides the sabbath because Jesus became the sabbath but many Christians still hold on to the sabbath anyway.)
So I have to go against the first claim of the main post. Judeo-Christian is a very useful word.
While it’s definitely true that Judaism and Christianity share several holy books. They interpret them very differently based on their wider religious contexts and traditions as well as the fact that Jewish beliefs around how best to interpret scripture are culturally specific and therefore provide different opinions than the work of Christians looking at the same passage.
Additionally, if you are talking about just having the books themselves in common then this is not just true of Judaism and Christianity but all Abrahamic religions, notably Islam.
Well, Christians definitely do not interpret the old testament/ tanakh any differently. It’s the base of christianity, if you were talking about the new testament I have to agree with you.
Islam as much influence of Judaism because Muhammed used Judaism as his base. Islam has mostly the same figures in the Quran. But the message of the Quran has a major difference than in Judaism and Christianity.
An example:
In Judaism and Christianity, God is all loving. In Islam Allah is an unknown all power who judge you after you died. Allah can me sensed or no one can talk to him. Many Muslims have no idea about their Allah because it’s not wanted to be close to him. In Islam you must prove yourself. In Judaism and Christianity you must trust and love God first before any other requirements may be asked for.
I think the differences are very interesting but in Judaism and christianity the only difference is Jesus. Nothing more.
When I say that Jews interpret the Tanach differently I am referring to a difference in interpretive traditions.
The idea of interpreting the Tanach through Talmud where alternate meanings are presented through arguments between the Rabbis is a uniquely Jewish idea. The Talmud is a sacred text in Judaism and there is simply no Christian equivalent. In fact Jesus’ condemnation of the Pharisees (who were involved in writing the Talmud) can be seen as a rejection of this form of interpretation.
Furthermore, Christian interpretation of the Old Testament is influenced by the gospels and beliefs about Jesus. This often reflects in the ways in which Christian translations of the Old Testament place different emphasis than copies of the Jewish Tanach.
Additionally, the idea that it is up to humans rather than G-d to interpret religious texts and traditions is a key tenant of Judaism. Which obviously impacts interpretation of the Tanach.
I think we agree that both religions have the same ground to please God and to be near him. Christians faith is very near the new and old testament. In my opinion, I as a Christian want to live the new testament which has many laws inside it as they are inside the old testament.
The most important law is to love God and that’s what Christians do.
And the old testament isn’t influenced by the Gospels and no one says that. The old testament influenced the new testament and foreshadows it.
And I guess interpretations are always the key. Sometimes there is no interpretation needed though.
Israel literally means struggling or wrestling with G!D. That’s very different from “to please God and to be near him.” Judaism isn’t a faith, it’s an ethnoreligion.
Also, saying “the old testament…foreshadows [the new testament]” is inherently an interpretation influenced by the Christian Gospels. It presupposes that Judaism and Jews were just waiting around to find completion and not a people with extensive cultural traditions of exegesis through PaRDeS that is independent of and doesn’t necessitate your Jesus.
If you really think the only difference between Christianity and Judaism is Jesus and “nothing more,” that is not only incredibly offensive but abjectly incorrect.
That Jews are and independent ethnic group is clear to me and I totally agree with you. I haven’t ever hear the word ethnoreligion but it does describes the Jews population perfectly.
Aber the “not foreshadowing”, tell that Jesaja 53.
I guess many things differentiates jews from Christians but many Christians do want to live as near to God as possible. We love the God which who love to debate with. So, I really don’t want to be offensive. I admit I really don’t know much about your culture now but it interest me immensely! So learning from you is a true gift!
I don’t know who Jesaja is. Do you mean Isaiah? Who’s a prophet in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam? And means different things in each tradition? Because we all have our own independent interpretations? In Christian exegesis, you all interpret this as talking about Jesus. In Judaism? It’s talking about the Jewish nation in total as “his suffering servant,” not a singular person. Throughout the rabbinic commentaries, this is explicitly stated.
You can’t look at Isaiah 53 without looking at the fifty-two chapters that inform and precede it and the commentaries that explain it. I don’t know enough about Ashiʻyā’ to try to explain what he says or means within Islam.
If you don’t know much about Judaism (or Islam based on your own words), why do you feel it necessary to insert your uneducated and incorrect opinion on both?
I swear every conversation with goyim on this site can be summarized by “I admit I dont know much about Judaism, but let me tell you, a Jewish person, why you are wrong about it”
That’s it. That’s the whole show.
