Had Jerusalem not been crushed in 70 A.D. it is very possible Jewish Christianity would have survived. However we are left with this Christianity created by what some would call a rebel in the Christian movement, baptizing gentiles, etc.
There are a number of issues, both factual and theological in your post. I’d like to address all of them eventually, but will focus on two in this reply.
The above is a factual error based upon the mistaken belief that Jewish Christians were all killed off in the destruction of Jerusalem. That is simply untrue. The accurate historical narrative shows that the Jewish Christians all left Jerusalem during the campaign leading to the siege and sack of Jerusalem. They followed Jesus’ prophecy and advice in Matthew 24:16 and had fled from Judea to Pella and other places. (Reported by Josephus, Eusebius and a number of ancient sources.) James, the leader of the Jerusalem church had already been martyred in 64 AD. The growing persecution and impending destruction which was understood to be certain based upon Jesus’ prophecy led Christians to leave well before it happened. In fact, Antioch in Syria became the de facto centre of Christianity as is clear from the Book of Acts.
In fact in the Acts he has an argument with James about this aspect, thus who really says Paul was right when he never even was around for Christ’s teachings, nor did he believe it until his “conversion”.
Who says Paul was right?
Peter and James. They both agreed with Paul, and Peter actually had had a dream to the same effect and had already baptized Gentiles into the community. The question was whether those Gentiles had to fulfill every requirement of the Mosaic Law - including circumcision.
Recall that Peter was the one on whom Jesus had conferred authority, the rock (Petra) upon whom he would build his a Church. Peter was at the Council of Jerusalem and had the final word on what the Church would do.
This takes us to the question of the Mosaic Laws and what they signified.
The Law of Moses was not the Law given to Moses, but rather Moses’ (and the people’s) responses or pledge to God regarding what they would do to fulfill their end of the covenant agreement. It wasn’t God ordained, it was man ordained. Moses wrote them, not God. Recall that a covenant is an agreement, contract or covenant between two parties that essentially makes them “one body” and unites them in every possible way.
When the covenant on Mt. Sinai, between God and the people of Israel, was in the process of being ratified, God gave to Moses the Ten Commandments (God’s definitive word on what he expected as part of the covenant with Israel.) While Moses was receiving these, the people were off making the golden calf and showing they would have difficulty abiding by any promise they would make. Moses threw the tablet of the commandments down and broke them AND replaced them with the “Second Law” (Deuteronomy) which would take the place of the original terms of the covenant given by God. In essence, that was Moses and the people saying to God, “We will have trouble living up to the ‘spirit’ of the Law as embodied in the Ten Commandments, but we promise to live by the ‘letter’ of it which Moses will write on our behalf. Moses will write up the contract and we’ll agree to do everything stipulated in it.”
God agreed to the compromised bargain but would have preferred that the Israelites could “embody” or “incarnate” the principles contained in the Ten Commandments rather than in the extensive set of minutiae detailed by Moses. Jesus was God’s answer to this crippled covenant. He would embody the Law (the original Law as written by the finger of God in the tablets) perfectly, and by his sacrifice on the cross provide the means (Holy Spirit and grace) by which every human being could fulfill THAT Law.
The old covenant based upon the human precepts was set aside as insufficient because someone could do everything contained in those minute details (every dot and tittle) yet completely fail to live up to the whole point of them (the Pharisees were prime examples of this.)
So the new covenant founded on the original Law God gave to Moses would be fulfilled. This is why the niggly details of the Mosaic Law would be abandoned by the Church because it would be founded on the original intent and God-ordained Law (very dot and tittle of that) written on tablets (hearts) of stone by the blood and Word of God himself (Jesus.) “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.” (Luke 22:20)
Paul, as Pharisee, understood the events of the Old Testament better than anyone. Read his Epistles and his speeches in Acts. He knew what the significance of Jesus to the Jews was because he knew Jesus in Spirit and in Truth; not physically perhaps, but personally.
God is spirit, [not a set of principles, no matter how extensive] and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” (John 4:24)
