¹ A bibliography of his scholarly works, covering the years 1933-76, is published at the conclusion of Benoit, Andrd, Philonenko, Marc, and Vogel, Cyrille, eds., Paganisme, judaisme, christianisme, Melanges offerts a Marcel Simon (Paris: de Boccard, 1978) 371–87Google Scholar.

² Simon, Marcel, Verus Israel (2d ed.; Paris: de Boccard, 1964).Google Scholar

³ Simon, Marcel, Verus Israel (English translation; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986).Google Scholar For some reason, the preface of the French version, written in January 1947, was not translated into English. Perhaps a statement of the context in which the book was first written no longer seemed appropriate at the time of the English translation (1986), or risked restricting the relevance of a book that had achieved near classic status to a particular historical moment. In any case, with the exception of the preface, cited in nn. 5 and 6 below, all references to Verus Israel in this article will be to the English version.

⁴ The dialectical nature of the relationship between past and present in historiography is one of the principal arguments of Carr, Edward H., What Is History? (2d ed.; Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1987).Google Scholar The connection between past and present in historical research is also one of the recurring themes in the studies of Christopher Hill. Note, for example, his comment in Hill, Christopher, Change and Continuity in Seventeenth-Century England (2d ed.; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991) 284Google Scholar : “That is why history has to be rewritten in each generation: each new act in the human drama necessarily shifts our attitude towards the earlier acts… We ourselves are shaped by the past; but from our vantage point in the present we are continually reshaping the past which shapes us.”

⁵ Verus Israel, 5.

⁶ Ibid.

⁷ Perhaps the first of these Jews was Abraham Geiger (1810-1874), regarding whom see Heschel, Susannah, Abraham Geiger and the Jewish Jesus (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998)Google Scholar.

⁸ Verus Israel (ET, 1986) ix.

⁹ The discussion below owes a substantial debt to Sanders, E. P., Paul and Palestinian Judaism (London: SCM, 1977) 33–59Google Scholar.

¹⁰ See especially Moore, George Foot, “Christian Writers on Judaism,” HTR 14 (1921) 197–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹¹ Ibid., 222.

¹² Ibid., 239. Legalism, in the eyes of Protestant scholars of the New Testament, is the worst of all possible religious defects. It is not the fulfilling of the commandments of the law (nomism), but an abuse of the law. It describes a situation in which there is no prior grace and no benefit from membership in the community of the covenant. God is an accountant who keeps score of each individual's performance, judging whether he or she has more good than bad deeds. Repentance is not an act that can change the significance of a whole life; rather, it is one (and only one) meritorious act, which can offset one bad deed. Legalism thus makes its adherents either anxious (have they passed the minimum of 51 % good deeds necessary to be saved?) or arrogant (in the certainty that they have achieved the minimum). It also induces bad behavior, either in the form of piling up trivial good deeds in order to pass the minimum, or hypocrisy–showing off minor external actions, while ignoring the most important religious principles. I would like to thank Professor E. P. Sanders for sharing with me these insights into the meaning of legalism for Protestant New Testament scholarship. See further Himmelfarb, Martha, “Elias Bickerman on Judaism and Hellenism,” in Myers, David N. and Ruderman, David B., eds., The Jewish Past Revisited: Reflections on Modern Jewish Historians (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998) 208–9 n. 6Google Scholar.

¹³ , Moore, “Christian Writers,” 240.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Ibid., 242.

¹⁵ Ibid., 242-50.

¹⁶ Moore, George Foot, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim (3 vols.; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927-1930).CrossRefGoogle Scholar In presenting his synthesis of Judaism, Moore drew on written sources as well as on “living repositories of this learning” (1. x), principal among whom was Professor Louis Ginzberg. For an important and balanced assessment of Moore's contribution to the study of ancient Judaism, see Smith, Morton, “The Work of George Foot Moore,” Harvard Library Bulletin 15 (1967) 169–79Google Scholar , reprinted in idem, Studies in the Cult ofYahweh (2 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1996) 1. 211-26. Compare Neusner, Jacob, “‘Judaism’ after Moore: A Programmatic Statement,” JJS 31 (1980) 141–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁷ , Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 56.Google Scholar My friend, Professor Richard Landes, has suggested—only partially in jest—that the academy create a G. F. Moore award, to be bestowed regularly on an outstanding scholar whose work has nevertheless been systematically misunderstood and abused by colleagues.

¹⁸ Simon, Marcel and Benoit, André, Le judal'sme et le christianisme antique d'Antiochus Epiphane a Constantin (2d ed.; Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1985).Google Scholar

¹⁹ , Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 56 n. 78.Google Scholar

²⁰ Ibid.

²¹ See further, Baumgarten, Albert I., “Josephus and Hippolytus on the Pharisees,” HUCA 55 (1984) 1–25, esp. 8–17.Google Scholar For Simon's more extended treatment of the Pharisees, which is characterized by many of the same attitudes toward the group as the remarks from Verus Israel summarized above, see Simon, Marcel, Jewish Sects at the Time of Jesus (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967) 27–43Google Scholar.

²² VerusIsrael (ET, 1986), 12-14.

²³ Ibid., 14.

² See Ps.-Clem. Horn. 11.29.1 (GCS 42. 168). Compare idem Rec. 6.11.2 (GCS 51. 194).

²⁵ Verus Israel (ET, 1986), 14.

²⁶ Ibid., 28.

²⁷ Ibid., 16.

²⁸ Ibid., 17.

²⁹ Ibid., 374.

³⁰ Ibid., 379.

³¹ Ibid., 378.

³² Sanders, Compare, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 59–233.Google Scholar

³³ Harnack, Adolf von, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten (2d ed.; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1924).Google Scholar

³⁴ In social scientific literature, conflict theory is based on the seminal work of Simmel, Georg, Conflict: The Web of Group Affiliations (Glencoe: Free Press, 1955)Google Scholar , a German philosopher who lived at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century. Lewis Coser was the principal disseminator and elaborator of these ideas in English. His most accessible treatment of the subject is Coser, Lewis, The Functions of Social Conflict (New York: Free Press, 1956).Google Scholar

A major part in bringing these ideas to the explicit attention of scholars of Judaism and Christianity in antiquity was played by Gager, John, Kingdom and Community (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1975)Google Scholar , and idem, The Origins of Anti-Semitism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983).

To the best of my knowledge, Simon does not cite Simmel as the source of his ideas on the nature of the conflict between Judaism and Christianity. This omission may not be significant, since Simmel was an outstanding figure on the European intellectual scene. Whether at first hand or indirectly, his ideas were widely known in learned circles.

³⁵ Verus Israel (ET, 1986) x-xi.

³⁶ Ibid., 271.

³⁷ Ibid., 272. Consider the history of legislation forbidding the use of specific chemical substances (defined as drugs; compare tobacco, caffeine, or alcohol) over the past century. Within this contemporary cultural context, it is generally recognized that one ought not use these laws as evidence for concluding that drug dealers earn a precarious and meager living.

³⁸ Verus Israel (ET, 1986) 273.

³⁹ Ibid., 274-78.

⁴⁰ Ibid., 278-88.

⁴¹ See the summary of scholarly views offered by Taylor, Miriam S., Anti-Judaism and Early Christian Identity: A Critique of the Scholarly Consensus (Leiden: Brill, 1995) 7–8Google Scholar.

⁴² Will, Edouard and Orrieux, Claude, “Proselytisme juif”? Histoire d'une erreur (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1992)Google Scholar ; Goodman, Martin, Mission and Conversion: Proselytizing in the Religious History of the Roman Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).Google Scholar For the contrary view see Feldman, Louis H., Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993).Google Scholar Feldman explicitly considers the possibility that large-scale Jewish proselytizing may be an illusion, but devotes the volume to arguing that Jews of the land of Israel not only successfully resisted the attractions of Hellenism, but were able to counterattack through a mission to the non-Jewish world that won many full-fledged converts and sympathizers (the Godfearers).

³ See Reynolds, Joyce Marie and Tannenbaum, Robert, Jews and God-Fearers at Aphrodisias (Cambridge Philological Society Suppl. 12; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987).Google Scholar Even before the discovery of this inscription, traces of the role of the Godfearers were found by Bickerman, E. J., “The Altars of the Gentiles,” Studies in Jewish and Christian History, Part Two (Leiden: Brill, 1980) 324–16.Google Scholar See also below, n. 46.

⁴⁴ , Goodman, Mission and Conversion, 130.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Will and Orrieux, for example, were explicitly aware of the distance between their conclusions and the concensus represented by Simon. See their discussion, Proselytisme juif, 204-5. On the reception of these arguments see, for example, Cohen's, Shaye J. D. review of Will and Orrieux, Proselytisme juif, JQR 86 (1996) 429–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Cohen's favorable assessment of Will and Orrieux is consistent with the conclusions for which he has argued in his own contributions on the topic. See Cohen, Shaye J. D., “Was Judaism in Antiquity a Missionary Religion?” in Mor, Menahem, ed. Jewish Assimilation, Acculturalionand Accommodation (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1992) 14–23Google Scholar ; idem, “Adolf Hamack's “The Mission and Expansion of Judaism’: Christianity Succeeds Where Judaism Failed,” in Pearson, Birger, ed., The Future of Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Helmut Koester (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993) 163–69Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ , Taylor, Anti-Judaism and Early Christian Identity, 52–74.Google Scholar Among studies that appeared after Taylor had completed her research, see especially Bonz, Marianne P., “The Jewish Community of Ancient Sardis: A Reassessment of Its Rise to Prominence,” HSCP 93 (1990) 342–59Google Scholar ; eadem, “Differing Approaches to Religious Benefaction: The Late Third-Century Acquisition of the Sardis Synagogue,” HTR 86 (1993) 139–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarGoodman, Martin, “Jews and Judaism in the Mediterranean Diaspora in the Late Roman Period: The Limitations of the Evidence,” Journal of Mediterranean Studies 4 (1994) 208–24Google Scholar , has suggested the possibility that the so-called synagogue in Sardis was, in fact, a place of worship sacred to Godfearers. For a thoughtful summary of the difficulties facing the scholar in understanding a complex situation such as that of Sardis, see Satran, David, “Anti-Jewish Polemic in the Peri Pascha of Melito of Sardis: The Problem of Social Context,” in , Limor and , Stroumsa, Contra Judaeos, 49–58Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ See , Taylor, Anti-Judaism and Early Christian Identity, 7–21.Google Scholar Taylor's discussion of the history of proselytism depends entirely on Goodman. For a critical evaluation of Taylor's approach, arguing that in her attempt to counter Simon she may have pushed too far in the other direction, see Kinzig, Wolfram, “Review of Anti-Judaism and Early Christian Identity,” JTS 48 (1997) 643–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁸ , Taylor, Anti-Judaism and Early Christian Identity, 190.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Ibid., 192-96.

⁵⁰ One may note the case of Gibbon's classic discussion of the triumph of Christianity. See Edward Gibbon, Vie Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776-1778; reprinted New York: Random House, 1990) 1.382-443. While paying ironic lip service to the primary reason for that result–the truth of its doctrine and the design of its divine author–Gibbon “modestly” asks concerning the “secondary” reasons for this outcome and then devotes the pages that follow to a brilliant analysis of these “secondary” causes.

⁵¹ For an attempt to set Melito's comments on Passover in polemical dialogue with Jewish interpretations in general, available to Melito because he had visited Israel (as opposed to contact based on a specific building in Sardis, which may not have been standing at the time Melito wrote) see Yuval, Israel Y., “The Haggadah of Passover and Easter,” Tarbiz 65 (5756 [Jewish Calendar year]) 1–28, esp. 11-14Google Scholar.

⁵² Meeks, Wayne and Wilken, Robert, Jews and Christians in Antioch in the First Four Centuries of the Common Era (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1978).Google Scholar

⁵³ Wilken, Robert, John Chrysostom and the Jews: Rhetoric and Reality in the Late 4th Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983).Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See Lieu, Judith, “History and Theology in Christian Views of Judaism,” in Lieu, Judith, North, John, and Rajak, Tessa, eds., The Jews among Pagans and Christians in the Roman Empire (London: Routledge, 1992) 79–96, esp. 87-95.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Kimelman, Reuven, “Rabbi Yohanan and Origen on the Song of Songs: A Third-Century Jewish-Christian Debate,” HTR 73 (1980) 567–95.Google Scholar As Kimelman makes clear in his notes, his debt was substantial to others who discussed the topic before him, such as Yitzhak Baer and Ephraim E. Urbach.

⁵⁶ See Levine, Lee I., “R. Abbahu of Caesarea,” in Neusner, Jacob, ed., Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton Smith at Sixty (4 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1975) 4. 57–76.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ See further Levine, Lee I., Caesarea under Roman Rule (Leiden: Brill, 1975).Google Scholar

⁵⁸ This perspective was fundamental to the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada Programme Grant, “The McMaster Project on Judaism and Christianity in the Graeco-Roman Era: The Process of Achieving Normative Self Definition,” 1976–1981, in which I participated. It also underlies the conception of works such as Segal, Alan, Rebecca's Children: Judaism and Christianity in the Roman World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986)Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ See Baumgarten, Albert I., “Euhemerus's Eternal Gods: Or, How Not To Be Embarrassed by Greek Mythology,” in Katzoff, Ranon, with Petroff, Yaakov and Schaps, David, eds., Classical Studies in Honor of David Sohlberg (Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press, 1996) 91–103.Google Scholar