The God of the Jews is different from the Christians. Difference between Christianity and Judaism - religious trends

Judaism and Christianity

The relationship between these two religions was not easy from the very beginning. There is indeed an external similarity between Christianity and Judaism, but it is rather apparent, because the differences are extremely deep. Before talking about them, let's try to make a short excursion into history.

Christian tradition points to the cradle of Christ as the source of the Christian religion. But from the point of view of historical science, everything is not so simple. First of all, the historical reliability of the main points of the biography of Christ is questionable. Although the whole world uses the Christian chronology, according to which we now live in 1996 from the birth of Christ, the facts contradict this. On the basis of the gospel narratives themselves, one has to conclude that the baby was born four years before the new era. Most scientists think so. However, if we turn to the Talmud, it turns out that the time of Christ's life falls on the middle of the II century. BC NS. This raises doubts even more about the historical reliability of the image captured in the Gospels. In addition, a comparative analysis of Jewish and Christian sources of that period reveals a number of significant discrepancies. True, in Josephus we find the story of the birth of Christ, but modern scholars recognize it as a later insertion, made in the eighth or ninth century. We will not find anywhere direct evidence of the historical accuracy of the Gospels, and there are few indirect evidences of this. Moreover, the synoptic gospels differ in coverage of the same events, and this increases doubts about their reliability.

Christ's Hebrew name, Yeshu, was by no means rare at that time. This is an abbreviation of the biblical name Yehoshua, the etymology of which is associated with the root yod, shin, ain - yesha - "salvation". According to the gospels, Yeshu was born in Beit Lehem, near Jerusalem, and his birth was accompanied by miraculous omens. The name of his mother is known, as for the father. the Christian version needs no comment on this score. However, I will not be afraid to say that when a child is born, it is always clear who his mother is, although doubts about the father are not excluded. In this case, there were probably special grounds for such doubts. The baby grew up and was brought up in a family; he had a younger brother named Yaakov.

From the Gospel stories, one gets the impression that Yeshu studied with the wise men of Israel. He himself never attained the position of a rabbi, did not merit to become a sage, but he belonged to the circle of educated disciples. During this time, the Jewish community was riven by deep internal divisions. The sages who belonged to the camp of the scribes, Sophrim, the Gospels are called "Pharisees" (derived from perusim, "separated", avoiding uncleanness). In addition to the destruction, at that time, as now, there lived a lot of Amey Haaretz - ordinary people who were not well versed in the law. However, unlike today, the ancient Amey haaretz were very God-fearing and carefully observed the commandments of the Torah. So the differences between them and perishim did not relate to the worldview and were mainly determined by the level of knowledge. Yeshu's family was not distinguished by learning, but he himself belonged to the group of peruchim and, according to the Gospel testimonies, behaved in accordance with their customs. At that time, the constant wearing of tefillin was a testament to the deep fear of God among the perushim. Indeed, early Christian iconography up to the 4th century AD. NS. depicts Christ in the head phylacteria. The character of Yeshu, a disciple of the sages, was eccentric. His words and deeds were regarded by many as defiant. Perushim, contemporaries of Yeshu, were not delighted with what he said and did, but they did not deny that he belonged to their camp. Stories about Yeshu's eccentric antics were passed from mouth to mouth, rumors about his healing abilities were multiplied - today the owner of such abilities would be called a psychic. According to the Talmud (this testimony finds a kind of confirmation in the Gospels) Yeshu had a weakness for the female sex.

Did Jesus of Nazareth, Yeshu Ha-Nozri, claim to be the messiah? This remains unclear, but it appears that Yeshu really believed he was the messiah, a belief shared by his enthusiastic group. The followers of Yeshu were people inexperienced in the law, and therefore gullible and greedy for miracles. Indeed, from the point of view of Judaism, the Messiah is not required to have supernatural powers. He should come from the royal dynasty of David and bring the Jewish people liberation from the foreign yoke. It is not at all the business of the messiah to take care of the salvation of the souls of his flock. The very word "messiah" means "anointed one" in Hebrew. one who is anointed with olive oil, oil, to the kingdom. Anointing with oil meant elevation to the highest dignity - high priest or king. In that era, the words "king messiah" simply meant "king of the line of David" - as opposed to the reigning dynasty of Herod. Herod was a protege of Rome and openly served the interests of the oppressors. He was distinguished by cruelty, shed rivers of blood, and the people dreamed of an anointed king from the clan of David, who would deliver him from the bloodthirsty tyrant. The name "Christ" is a literal translation of the Hebrew word mashiach "messiah", "anointed one" into ancient Greek.

In the first decades of the first century A.D. NS. Judea enjoyed internal autonomy, but the real power remained in the hands of the Romans. From their point of view, anyone who proclaimed himself "the king of the messiah," thereby openly declared his claims to the throne, that is, called for a revolt against the Roman government, which had arrogated to itself the right to appoint the rulers of Judea. In the eyes of this government, the "king messiah" was primarily a dangerous impostor, an illegal claimant to the throne. This is how the Roman governor perceived Yesha. Following his logic, the self-styled "king of the Jews" was to be seized without delay - while the number of his followers remained relatively small - to bring him to justice and punish him as a rebel.

During the interrogation of Christ by Pontius Pilate, as is evident from the Gospels, the procurator of Judea was primarily interested in the legal aspect: will the accused plead guilty? Yeshu may have been naive, but you cannot call him mad. He tried with all his might to avoid admitting guilt, because he understood what this was fraught with for him. However, the evidence against him turned out to be irrefutable, and the death sentence to the ill-fated "rebel" could not be avoided ...

This story, like many others, not the first and not the last in the chronicle of the sufferings and sacrifices of the Jewish people, has acquired special significance over the years. Christian theology has reinterpreted it, filling every detail with deep symbolic meaning.

While the Roman judge was administering his cruel justice to Yeshu, a dispute broke out among the Jewish community about what kind of treatment the "king messiah" deserves from co-religionists. From the Gospels it is impossible to conclude unequivocally who judged Yesha - the Romans or the Jews. Let's try to accept the statement that Yeshu really appeared before the rabbinical court, Beit Din. What charges could have been brought against him? A strange young man, talking unintelligible nonsense ... This is how the Jewish judges could see Yesha. The only trouble was associated with the country's dependent position. Yeshu, like a thorn, stuck out in the eyes of the Roman authorities. The Romans want to capture him, deal with a dangerous eccentric and dreamer? Well ... The invaders are strong.

There is, however, every reason to believe that it was the Roman court that sentenced Yesha to death. After all, crucifixion is a specifically Roman form of the death penalty. It is unknown to the Jewish courts. Even for the worst crime, the Jewish court could not sentence the culprit to a slow death on the cross. The Romans crucified not only Jewish rioters. Crucifixion can be likened to public hanging today. In this shameful way, slaves and people of the lower classes were executed; aristocrats were sentenced to more "honorable" types of execution. It is not surprising, therefore, that during the first centuries of Christianity, the cross did not at all serve as a symbol of the new religion. On the contrary, the early Christians were ashamed of him. The symbol of the church at the dawn of its existence was the image of a fish. The word ichsios. "fish" is an abbreviation for "Jesus Christ ..." and so on.

Roman world in the first century AD NS. was experiencing an acute spiritual crisis. Paganism remained the official religion. The pantheon of gods, led by Jupiter, was given due honors; however, few believed in these gods. All kinds of mystical cults penetrated into Rome from all sides, and especially from the east. The Egyptian influence increased: the cult of Isis became fashionable, evidence of which can be found in Apuleius's Golden Donkey. The mysterious cult of the Iranian god Mithra gained popularity. Judaism also had an undeniable influence on the Romans. Greco-Roman culture of the first century A.D. NS. was distinguished by syncretism. In the worldview of its speakers, heterogeneous and often contradictory ideas easily coexisted. Judaism attracted many, not as a set of laws and commandments to be followed, but as food for thought, as an interesting "doctrine" worthy of closer acquaintance.

In addition to the Jews, faithful to the law, Judaism as a worldview was in one way or another adhered to by tens of thousands of pagans. There were also many non-Jews who approached the Jewish religion even closer - the so-called "God-fearing". These people could not cross the line separating them from Judaism for fear of Roman law, which, under the threat of the death penalty, prohibited castration (this definition also included circumcision, which was only allowed to be performed by Jews). Among the "God-fearing" there were people very close to Judaism, and there were others who partly gravitated towards paganism.

The surrounding people perceived the first Christians as a Jewish sect. Indeed, during the first one hundred and twenty years of its existence, the Christian religion gradually branched off from Judaism, and its speakers could still, with some reservations, be called Jews. The early Christians adhered to Jewish laws, and although they believed that Yeshu was the messiah and expected his resurrection, this was not enough to break with Jewry. Yeshu's teachings were inconsistent, but he did not claim that you can be a Jew without keeping the commandments. The early Christians did nothing that could be considered a gross violation of the law. We can say that if Yeshu was resurrected, he would rather go to the synagogue than to the church, which he would mistake for a pagan temple.

Christianity did not become widespread in the Jewish environment, but it turned out to be very attractive to neophytes. The number of newly converted pagans grew, and a controversy arose among Christians: are the neophytes obliged to fulfill the commandments entrusted to the Jews by the law of Moses? Opinions were divided. The community of Jerusalem Christians, formed around one of the brothers Yeshu, adhered to the point of view that a Christian should be primarily a Jew, and therefore observance of the commandments is mandatory for him. However, other communities were inclined to believe that the commandments were assigned by law only to Jewish Christians, while non-Jewish Christians were free from them.

Judaism struggled with the new teaching. The sages supplemented the main prayer of the Jewish liturgy - "Eighteen Blessings" - with a curse condemning "apostates and informers" who were to be driven out of the Jewish environment. And then a man appeared on the historical arena, whom many researchers consider the true father of Christianity - the Apostle Paul. It is to him and his followers that Christian theology owes its origin. This theology was based on the projection of Judaism onto pagan consciousness. In other words, the way in which the pagans read and understood the Jewish sacred texts led to the emergence of a proper Christian doctrine and to its isolation from Judaism.

A Jew could say that he is a "son of God" based on the Torah. For example, in the book of Shemot it is written "My firstborn son Israel", and in the book of the prophet Goshea. "You will be called the sons of the living God." These words are interpreted as an expression of the fatherly love of the Most High for the children of Israel and their filial closeness to Him. It never occurred to a single Jew to understand them in the literal, "genealogical" or "genetic" sense. But when these words reached the ears of the pagan, the question immediately arose: who was the father known, and who was the mother? Under what circumstances did she get pregnant? A person brought up in Greek culture cannot be surprised by the love affairs between ordinary mortals and the inhabitants of Olympus. He also took for granted that from the romantic adventures of the deities, children were born, endowed with amazing talents. Almighty Zeus himself appeared to mortal women more than once - either in a golden rain, or in the guise of a beautiful swan or a mighty bull. From such connections, both heroes and monsters, like the Minotaur, were born. The surviving drawings indicate that the Greeks were very interested in the details of such "mixed marriages".

This is how the "holy family" was born - father, mother and baby. The Christian trinity arose in a similar way. The pagan consciousness, assimilating the Jewish tests, reinterpreted them in its own way. In the case of projection of geometric bodies at a different angle, the correlation between the source and the display remains, however, the shape of the source is distorted beyond recognition. So it happened with Christianity. The breeding ground for the emergence of the new religion was the numerous groups of "God-fearing" mentioned above. Their perception of Jewish sources was superimposed on Greek culture. Against the background of the crisis experienced by the pagan consciousness, the ideas of monotheism, wrapped in the usual mythological shell, were guaranteed success.

An illustration of this success is the story of Josephus Flavius ​​about the wife of the emperor Nero. Caesar, as you know, was not righteous. His girlfriend also did not shine with marital fidelity. Nevertheless, the chronicler calls the august adventurer "Poppaea Albina". "righteous woman". Josephus Flavius ​​was personally acquainted with the empress, who had a sympathy for Judaism. This interest was given to her by the chronicler. Christianity removed from the path of non-Jews, who wanted to join the faith of Moses, such an important "obstacle" as the need to keep the commandments, including the commandment of circumcision.

The development of Christian theology began with the Apostle Paul. Syncretic at its core, this theology was nourished both from Jewish sources and from mythological ideas preserved in the minds of the peoples of the eastern Mediterranean. The cultural atmosphere of the largest Hellenistic cities of that era - Alexandria, Antioch, Ashkelon - greatly contributed to the spread of the new doctrine.

From the very beginning, the dogmas of Christianity were the subject of fierce disputes, which were sometimes accompanied by bloody clashes. Particularly heated debates were about the nature of the "consubstantial trinity." Several Christian churches arose. Aramaic became the "sacred language" of the Nestorian church, whose influence spread throughout the entire east. Having survived civil strife and persecution, this church still retains a few supporters. Nestorians don't eat pork or ring bells. Perhaps they have preserved Christianity in its most original form. While the Nestorian Church was establishing itself in the east, in the west, in Europe, Arianism occupied key positions. The Arians denied consubstantial trinities, thereby approaching polytheism. The Coptic, Ethiopian and Armenian churches formed the Monophysite branch of Christianity that still exists today. But the most famous in the history of Christianity is the split of the Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches. The reasons for it are difficult to understand for a person brought up in the Jewish tradition. The various versions of the Thirteen Foundations of Faith of the Rambam differ much more from each other than the Catholic and Orthodox creeds. However, in Judaism, no one pays attention to such discrepancies, let alone wage war over them.

Attempts were made more than once to come to a unification of churches, but as a result of these attempts, the schism only deepened and new churches appeared. Here you can recall the Uniates, Maronites, Greek Catholics, Copts, Copts-Catholics. The reasons for the split were not always rooted in theological differences. For example, the Anglican Church was created by King Henry VIII, who wished to divorce his wife. For this reason, he broke with Catholicism. The king demanded from the Jews that they justify the royal right to divorce with the help of their creed; indeed, there is such a book written by an Italian rabbi. In the 16th century. Protestantism arose, at first glance, in opposition to the papacy and Catholicism. However, not all Protestants are Lutherans. Some of them believe the same as Catholics. There are also various currents within Protestantism. for example, Baptists and Unitarians. The latter reject the idea of ​​the Trinity of God. Among the Unitarians, Seventh-day Adventists are especially interesting, reminiscent of Russian Subbotniks. A Canadian friend of mine once hired a Japanese servant, hoping that he would act as a shabes goy. However, on the very first Saturday, it became clear that the servant observed the holiness of the seventh day no less carefully than the master. The Japanese turned out to be an Adventist.

Having made a short excursion into the history of the emergence of Christianity, let us now try to understand the differences between it and Judaism. This topic is especially important here in Russia. For it is now clear that years of atheistic propaganda have not achieved the slightest success in eradicating religious beliefs. What she really succeeded in was planting religious ignorance. And Judaism and Jews suffered more from this.

The Jewish faith distinguishes a number of steps in the approach to holiness. There are people whom we call Tzaddiks and Hasidim - these are the righteous. There are others. sinners, criminals and villains. However, they are all Jews. But there is a crime that has no equal - those who committed it are called "Meshumadim", "destroyed". These are the ones who betrayed the faith of the fathers. It is much better to be a complete scoundrel, the last scoundrel, than to be baptized. I'm not talking now about the psychology of the apostate, but about his social status in the Jewish environment. The apostate stands at the lowest rung, he is a traitor. Not just a deserter, but a real deserter who has deserted to the camp of the worst enemies of his people.

I do not know what they think in Russia today about the army of General Vlasov. But fighting in the ranks of the Vlasovites meant serving Hitler. A Jew who is baptized commits an even more terrible crime, for his betrayal is aggravated by one and a half millennia of persecution. For 1,500 years, Christians have humiliated and persecuted the Jewish people! I will give just one example: in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in the south of France, in the cities of Montpellier, Carcassonne, and others, there was a custom: on the eve of Christian Easter, the head of the Jewish community was brought to the city square, and the bishop publicly slapped him in the face. Facts of this kind go beyond theological differences. The slap given by the Christian Church to the Jewish people still burns on their cheeks. Christian theologians are discussing the theological question: whether or not the time has come to forgive the Jews for the crucifixion of Christ. Indeed, the basis of the Christian religion, at least in theory, is mercy. But for us Jews, reconciliation with Christianity is not a scholastic theological issue. This is a naked wound, this is human pain. We want to know how Christians are willing to make amends to us. After all, if we turn from theory to facts, it is for us, and not for them, to forgive. And it is not so easy for us to do this after long centuries of bullying, slander and persecution.

But let's try to get rid of emotions and consider the issue from a theological point of view. What are we arguing with Christianity about, where do we disagree with it? The central point of our disagreement is the Trinity doctrine. The moment Christians mention the trinity, we cannot continue the conversation. After all, even if we allow ourselves to be persuaded by subtle theological reasoning that under certain circumstances a Christian believing in the Trinity is not a polytheist, then a Jew who believes in the Trinity of God undoubtedly is. The reason for this difference is that Judaism does not require from a non-Jew that clarity of concepts, that purity of monotheism, which is obligatory for a Jew. How can this be likened? It happens that a mature, wise person does not accept what the child believes in. However, he does not see anything wrong with the child believing in this. We Jews have been dealing with theological issues and have been interpreting the unity of God for three and a half millennia, while the Russian people first heard of such matters only seven and a half centuries ago. We have the right to perceive Christian reasoning about the Trinity from the standpoint of an elder, because our "experience" is five times longer. But for the same reason, we have no right to demand from Christians what we demand of ourselves, just as we do not demand from a child to discern the subtleties of abstract concepts. Therefore, what is not idolatry for Christians remains idolatry for the Jews. When it comes to the unity of God, we demand from ourselves the utmost purity and clarity of concepts and interpret the slightest ambiguity as "alien service" forbidden for a Jew.

Theological differences between Christianity and Judaism raise a number of other issues, such as the concepts of sin and mercy. Judaism denies original sin. We do not accept the statement that man is born a sinner. This, of course, does not mean that the baby is perfect into the world. Of course, there are innate inclinations to both good and evil, and a person is endowed with both. However, this does not mean that he is sinful from birth. A child is born innocent in the same way as he is born not being able to speak, walk, without knowledge. But it would never occur to anyone to see a vice in this! Even the most evil inclinations are not yet a sin, just as congenital physical disabilities are not a sin.

I am almost convinced that the dualistic concept of original sin was indirectly borrowed by the apostle Paul from Manichaeism. The Manicheans consider the material principle in man - the carnal, sensual - side of human nature - as a source of absolute evil, as something impure, vicious by its very nature. The direct opposite of the flesh is the soul. She is originally endowed with purity, holiness, and by nature is righteous. Therefore, human life in the display of Manichean religion appears as an incessant struggle - a duel between good and evil, soul and body. The dualistic worldview affects the entire value system and affects everyday life. For example, among Christians, one who abstains from marriage is considered closer to holiness. Although, unlike Catholics, the Orthodox Church allows priests to marry, only one who has taken monastic tonsure can become a bishop and other higher hierarch. For the Jews, on the other hand, family and family life, marital relations and the upbringing of children, occupy a central place in life, contribute to spiritual growth and the formation of the individual. The one who avoids marriage is a sinner. None of the manifestations of a person's bodily life is considered a sin - neither food and drink, nor sensual attraction to the opposite sex. For, by its very nature, the body is not a "vessel of sin." Evil is not inherent in him initially. It is clear that such a concept is in contradiction with Christianity, which is afraid of the flesh, sees in the sensual beginning the enemy of the human soul. It is no coincidence that some of the early church fathers - and not only monks - castrated themselves in order to overcome the temptations of the flesh. The eunuch was, for example, the greatest Christian theologian Origen, and many others. Groups of voluntary eunuchs existed among the Bogomils in Bulgaria and France, and among Russian sectarians in the very recent past.

From a different attitude towards the material side of life, not only a different attitude towards sin follows. The ideas of Jews and Christians about final salvation also differ from each other. Christians believe that the guarantee of the soul's salvation is belonging to the "true church", for the soul needs Christian redemption for its salvation. Therefore, the righteous non-Christians will not be worthy of deliverance, while sinful Christians will be saved. On the contrary, Judaism believes that a person is judged not by faith, but by deeds. Until he committed a crime - not only in the criminal, but also in the moral sense of the word - he is innocent. Therefore, a person of any faith, including a Christian or a Muslim, can deserve salvation.

The relationship between Judaism and Christianity goes back over one and a half millennia. Both religions really have a lot in common. But the external similarity, as we now see, hides deep internal contradictions. The world of Judaism and Christianity are completely different worlds. In the past, Jews were well aware of the intellectual and spiritual consequences of abandoning their faith. And therefore our ancestors opposed the adoption of Christianity, even on pain of death. Obviously, they did not attach value to life, from which meaning disappeared along with Jewishness.