judean over-legislation v Roman over-legislation

    It is a truism of Christianity that Judean praxis was bound by rules.  this is contrasted with the claim that Christianity has only one rule:  to love your neighbor as yourself.  Christians fail to note, however, that that rule, which is ascribed to the wisdom of Jesus, appears in Leviticus.  Christians do not present the same argument regarding the Roman empire, which, as we have noted, was so over-legislated that there were legal provisions concerning the age and social status of male intrasexual interaction.

    Why has Christianity focussed on attacking Judean praxis as over-legislated rather than challenging Roman over-legislation?

    Principally, the answer is that the Roman Empire was a dominant force from which early Christians wanted recognition and legitimation from Roman authorities, rather than having any desire to present themselves as an opposing force.  Post bar Cochbah Judeans, on the other hand, were an already demolished force--one that not only did not need to be reckoned with, but which had already been demonized as hostile and rebellious by Roman authorities (most notably Hadrian, who was responsible for the demolition of the Judean populace).

    Christians, both ancient and modern, enjoy representing themselves as oppressed, struggling for justice and recognition against a persecuting majority.  Yet history demonstrates (beginning with Justin Martyr's First Apology) that the early Christians demonized Judeans for the purpose of usurping ownership of Judean texts.  Justin Martyr's First Apology attempts to curry favor with Roman authorities by energetically separating the proto-Christian movement from Judean praxis.