The Evangelion as a Call from Judaism to the Nations
Introduction
The doctrine of Apostolic Succession, as traditionally understood, asserts that ecclesiastical authority is transmitted in an unbroken chain from the apostles to the bishops of the Church. This concept undergirds Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and some Protestant traditions that claim historical legitimacy through a lineage of ordained leadership. However, when examined in light of the Jewish origins of the Evangelion, this view collapses under historical scrutiny.
The Evangelion (Gospel) was not intended to establish a hierarchical church system with an exclusive priestly class but was rather a Besorah (Good News) that called the nations to alignment with the covenantal faith of Israel. The concept of Apostolic Succession as a centralized institution fails to recognize the Jewish impulse behind the Gospel, which was never about institutional authority but about drawing the nations (goyim) into the wisdom of Israel under the guidance of the Torah. The historical evidence from early Jewish-Christian interactions, Rabbinic engagement with Christianity, and the strategic nature of the Pauline mission suggests that Apostolic Succession is a later Roman invention that distorts the original Jewish function of the Evangelion.
Apostolic Succession: A Roman Construct, Not a Jewish Reality
The early Notzrim (Nazarenes)—the original followers of Yeshua—did not envision a centralized priesthood akin to the Sadducean hierarchy in the Temple. Instead, their model was that of Jewish chavurah communities, where authority was based on Torah wisdom, teaching, and divine appointment, not institutional lineage.
A) The Jewish Apostolic Model
The apostles (שליחים, Shlichim) were akin to rabbinic emissaries (shluchei beit din), individuals sent to represent the ruling body of Jewish leadership in specific missions.
Authority in Jewish thought is not genealogical but charismatic—based on one’s mastery of Torah, faithfulness to the covenant, and divine appointment (Deuteronomy 18:15, Jeremiah 1:5).Even within Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai, rabbinic succession was based on discipleship and learning, not ceremonial ordination.
B) The Romanization of the Apostolic Concept
The transformation of the Jewish Shaliach (apostle) into the Roman bishop was a theological hijacking that served imperial power:
The transformation of the Jewish Shaliach (apostle) into the Roman bishop was a theological hijacking that served imperial power:
The early bishops of Rome retroactively imposed the idea of an unbroken chain from Peter to justify their authority.However, Jewish sources—such as Rashi and the Teliya Ye.Sh.U.—suggest that figures like Peter (Shimon Kippah) and Paul (Shaul haTarsi) were acting as mediators between Israel and the nations, not as hierarchical founders of a separate institution.The notion of an “apostolic chair” is absent in early Jewish-Christian writings, as apostles were itinerant teachers, not bureaucratic officeholders.
The Evangelion: A Call from Judaism to the Nations, Not a New Priesthood
If Apostolic Succession were truly the foundation of the Evangelion, we would expect to find an emphasis on ecclesiastical lineage in the New Testament itself. Instead, what we find is a repeated insistence that leadership is based on divine calling, Torah faithfulness, and service—not an office passed down through human ordination.
A) The Evangelion as Torat Edom
The Evangelion was always meant as Torat Edom, a means by which the nations could engage with the wisdom of Israel without replacing Israel’s covenantal role:
The Evangelion was always meant as Torat Edom, a means by which the nations could engage with the wisdom of Israel without replacing Israel’s covenantal role:
Acts 15:21 clarifies that Gentile believers were expected to remain instructed by the synagogues, not to break away into an independent religious hierarchy.Paul’s letters emphasize discipleship and teaching, not institutional succession (2 Timothy 2:2).The Evangelion, as recorded by Jewish tradition, was intended to be a winnowing instrument, separating righteous Gentiles from Amalek.
B) The Role of the Shlichim (Apostles) as Rabbinic Agents
The apostles functioned much like later Jewish emissaries (shluchim), charged with guiding the nations without severing them from Judaism:
Paul refers to himself as a “Shaliach” (Apostle) to the Gentiles (Romans 11:13), using a Jewish term for a rabbinic emissary.Peter (Shimon Kippah), according to Jewish sources, maintained Torah observance while strategically guiding the Notzriminto a separate, non-oppositional path.If Apostolic Succession were a historical reality, we would expect to see clear, uncontested lists of successors—but early Christian sources wildly contradict each other on who succeeded whom.
The Jewish Oversight of Christianity and the Myth of a Roman Hierarchy
A) Rabbinic Management of Christianity
Rashi and Jacob Emden both acknowledged that figures like Peter and Paul operated with Jewish oversight, ensuring Christianity did not become a full-fledged Torah movement.The Jewish fast of 9th Tevet commemorated Shimon Kippah—not as the “First Pope” but as a Jewish agent working among the nations.Acts 15 reflects the Jerusalem Council’s oversight, demonstrating that early Gentile believers were not creating an autonomous church but operating under Jewish direction.
B) Why Rome Needed Apostolic Succession
The doctrine of Apostolic Succession arose to legitimize imperial Christianity:
The doctrine of Apostolic Succession arose to legitimize imperial Christianity:
The Roman Church needed continuity to justify its authority against rival Christian sects.By claiming Peter as the “first bishop,” Rome erased the Jewish origins of Christian leadership.The later development of Papal Infallibility (19th century) was merely an extension of this fraudulent claim.
Miaphysite Judaism and the Failure of Apostolic Authority
The Miaphysite movements, which sought to maintain a Jewish-rooted Christology, were violently suppressed by Rome and Constantinople:
Figures like Ceiphas, Kalpus, and Cippah tried to preserve Jewish elements within the Christian movement.The Abbasids later crushed these communities, further severing Christianity from Jewish oversight.If Apostolic Succession were legitimate, these movements—closer to the Jewish original—would have been recognized, not persecuted.
Conclusion: Reclaiming the True Evangelion
Apostolic Succession, as traditionally taught, is a post hoc justification for imperial religious authority. The Evangelion was never meant to establish an independent ecclesiastical hierarchy but was a Jewish call to the nations, inviting them to participate in God’s covenantal wisdom without replacing Israel.
To restore the true faith:
Gentile believers must recognize their place as attached to Israel, not as a separate “Church.”Apostolic authority must be understood as Jewish emissary leadership, not a Roman institutional lineage.The Evangelion must be seen as a Torah-based call to righteousness, not a charter for hierarchical domination.
By reclaiming the Jewish intent behind the New Testament, we dismantle the myth of Apostolic Succession and restore the proper order—one where Israel remains the source of divine wisdom for the nations, and the Gospel remains Besorah rather than bureaucracy.
