Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

FROM THE GOSPELS TO JESUS §9.5
strict laws of clean and unclean at the meal table, as both Lev. 20.24-26 and Acts
10.10-16, 28 remind us. The 'separation' of the Pharisees ('separated ones') and
the Essenes within Second Temple Judaism was only an exaggerated expression
of a conviction close to the heart of Israel's concept of election (to be separate
from the [other] nations). This foundation pillar was thus closely linked to the
others, since it expressed itself in fear of contamination by Gentile idolatry, and
in the conviction that the holiness of Israel (land and people) was dependent on
the holiness of the Temple (hence the prohibition which prevented Gentiles from
passing beyond the court of the Gentiles in the Temple area). 151
As already noted earlier, 'Judaism' was itself coined as an expression of
ethnic and religious identity defined by opposition to the corruptive influences of
the wider world. Thus the very term expresses, we may say, an understanding of
Israel's election which in itself encouraged suspicion and exclusiveness. This is
the attitude which came to the surface in the sectarian tendency of so many of the
Judaisms reviewed above; the more thoroughgoing the definition and practice of
the 'righteousness' by which Israel should be distinguished, the more 'the righteous'
are required to distance themselves from and condemn others, not least
other Jews, who fail to honour and observe that righteousness. 152 Ironically,
however, it is the insider term 'Israel' itself which proves to be the more comprehensive,
since, unlike 'Judaism', it does not begin as a term of opposition, is defined
precisely not by race or status but only by electing grace (Deut. 7.6-8), and
includes the task of bringing salvation to the end of the earth (Isa. 49.6). As we
shall see later, this was a point on which Paul attempted to maintain his own understanding
of himself as an 'Israelite' and of his mission as continuous with Israel's
(Romans 9-11), though without much success.
and the Golan (see, e.g., Crossan and Reed, Excavating Jesus 168-70). There is some dispute as
to whether all the stepped pools should be identified as miqwaoth (H. Eshel, 'A Note on
"Miqvaot" at Sepphoris', in D. R. Edwards and C. T. McCollough, eds., Archaeology and the
Galilee [University of South Florida; Atlanta: Scholars, 1997] 131-33; B. G. Wright, 'Jewish
Ritual Baths — Interpreting the Digs and the Texts: Some Issues in the Social History of Second
Temple Judaism', in N. A. Silberman and D. Small, eds., The Archaeology of Israel: Constructing
the Past, Interpreting the Present [JSOTS 237; Sheffield: JSOT, 1997] 190-214 [lam
grateful to Kathleen Corley for the latter reference]). But the objections would be valid only if
mishnaic practice was already standard, something which cannot be assumed; and it is likely
that the practice of tebul yom (immersion before sunset to reduce impurity) was already being
enacted by this time, as is implied by the allusions in 4QMMT B15 and 4Q514, which would
also suggest greater need for and use of miqwaoth (Kazen, Jesus and Purity Halakhah 76-81).
That there were miqwaoth in Galilee, which testify to a concern to maintain purity even when
attendance at the Temple was not immediately in view, is hardly to be disputed; see also my 'Jesus
and Purity: An Ongoing Debate', NTS 48 (2002) 449-67 (§lc).
151. See, e.g., my Partings 38-42.
152. But see again the second half of §9.4.
290