You're not getting what I said. Jesus was teaching total Torah observance. The initial Christians were a Jewish sect. Any history of Christianity will tell you this. It's the Gentile Christians who often want to play revisionism with the actual history.
I suspect every religious group plays a bit of revisionism. I don't see a reason to assume any exceptions.
Now this is just silly if I understand what you're saying, there was indeed a united Umbrella "Jewish" people, otherwise you wouldn't have had the Jewish revolt against the Romans. Whether or not there were several sects, they all had the Torah as their basis. Now if you're talking about the ETHNICITY of the Jews, that's another story of which you have no proof against the idea of Ethnic homogonity.
Jewish people as in American people? There were many people living in the from a variety of ethnicity. Just because someone was born in America is an American citizen it says nothing about their ethnicity. A number of Southern States revolted against the Northern states in the US. So what what? Does that prove anything about ethnicity? However is there anything beside conjecture which support a ethic homogeneity in in the province of Judea at the time of Jesus. Assuming you mean a common ancestry.
There were indeed Hellenized Jews in the Christian movement. But this is more of a rant about who had the true version of Judaism than what I actually said. Jesus was teaching another sect of Torah obedience, claiming to be the correct one, away from the artificial arbitritations of groups like the Pharisees and Sadducees. He was likely a member of the "Nazarene" groups like the Essenes and became a leader of a breakaway sect of them.
Fair enough. Jesus held respect for the Torah.
Yes it is a rant as I get a little frustrated by various religions claiming authority.
However I don't see ancestry whether real or not as having any bearing on the question of authority. So sorry if I thought you implied otherwise.
This has absolutely nothing to do with what I said, the point being that what Jesus was teaching was in fact what he considered a "Pure" form of Torah obedience and "Old school" Jewish religion.
Ok, but then that doesn't really say anything since Old school Jewish religion is just conjecture.
It doesn't matter because what Jesus was clearly teaching was a reaction against Pharisaic and Sadducee versions of "Judaism".
So then we take Jesus as the authority, ignoring any claims made by modern Christianity, Judaism or Islam?
Right, but Jesus was still teaching his portrayal of obedience to the Torah of his day, that's the concept.
So do you see Jesus as having authority from God? Or is this just a historical perspective?
I may agree that the OT today has seen its revisions just like the NT, but that doesn't mean the whole thing should be thrown out.
I don't see Judean priests having any authority over the Torah any more then Christians having authority over the OT. Although I'll admit to being impressed by some of the prophets of the OT. It seems arbitrary as to what one accepts of the OT at that point though.