Page History

...

There are indications that, for a time, at least, there was some uncertainity uncertainty about whether the early Christian movement would remain a Jewish sect or whether, on the contrary, it would become a new and independent religion. But while there may have indeed been some uncertainty about this, I incline to think that there was much greater uncertainty about something else, and that not only for a time, but permanently – -- namely, whether the early Christian movement would develop primarily into a religion of law like Judaism or whether, on the contrary, it would become a new and different type of religion based on grace.

...

But what did remain uncertain even after Jesus had been assigned such decisive significance was exactly how it would be understood. Is Jesus thus significant – -- as he clearly is, for example, for the evangelist Matthew – -- because he is the divinely authorized/vindicated teacher of a new law and a better righteousness (than that of the scribes and Pharisees), and so ; in effect, a "second Moses"? Or is he of decisive significance, as he clearly is for Paul, precisely because he is the liberating judgment of God upon Jews as well as gentiles and therefore "the end of the law," new and old, as the way of salvation?

The fact that Matthew's gospel and Paul's letters both found and have continued to have a place within the Christian canon attests not only to this other, much greater uncertainty, but also to its permanence throughout the church's history – -- as do any number of other things, such as the real differences between Pauline and deuteropauline theology and ethics and the "two missions" of, or the continuing conflict between, "Petrines" and "Paulines."

...