Smithwick's Ale got 'em beat by 9 years. (Smithwick is a family name, btw) And I hear that it's now available in some locations in the US (New York, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles).
2nd Century (100 CE): Displacement Theology
J-e-s-u-s, say the Christians, replaced Torah with 'grace' and displaced the Jews as the chosen people with goyim Christians - displacement (or replacement) theology. Christians became the "true Israel" and "true spiritual Jews," the Church claims, logically requiring that "Jews of the flesh" had been rejected by G-o-d. Jews, then, still claiming to serve Alühim, were labelled "wolves in sheep's clothing," impersonating and deceiving (ironically) "true believers." Jews were seen as enemies of G-o-d and the church. Earliest church historians described the Torah-observant and halakhic Netzarim Jews as belonging to "the wicked demon" Note (Satan).
"By the second century [i.e., 100 CE] the controversy over the Law had ceased to play the role which it had played at the earlier period. The Church had become predominantly Gentile in membership and almost exclusively so in leadership. Justin Note refers pityingly to some few [non-Jew geirim] who, from weakness, still observed the [Torah], and as a magnanimous concession on his part admitted that they might be saved, Note but he adds that other Christians would not venture to have any intercourse whatever with such persons. - The compromise arranged in [Ma'avar] and the concessions made by [Keipha] and [Shaul], had absolutely no further validity, Note and the actions of the [Netzarim shelikhim], approved in the 1st century, would, as Jerome Note and Augustine Note later agree, have been the rankest heresy once the Church was properly established. The field of controversy has shifted from the [Torah] to the promises, in other words, to the whole question of the fulfillment of all prophecy in the person of J-e-s-u-s Christ.
"We may at first wonder why the attempt to prove the reality of the Divinity of Christ made it necessary to falsify the whole of Jewish history, as the Gentile Church undoubtedly did, but if we study their approach to the problem we see that they were led on inescapably by the method of their own argumentation from the first legitimate assumption to the last and most extravagant fabrications. Note
"... The [Christian] Fathers insisted on [J-e-s-u-s' ] relation to Jewish prophecy and the divine history of His [sic] people. But ... they were compelled to interpret the whole of the Jewish scriptures in such a way as to support their own view. Note
... "The only alternative was to claim the whole of it for themselves and to antedate the rejection of the Jews and the emergence of the Church to the beginning of revealed history, by emphasizing the position of [Avraham] as the father of many nations, of whom only one, and that themselves, was chosen... Note
"The Messianic question once settled, there was an inevitable deduction to be made by the Christian writers. If J-e-s-u-s was the Messiah promised to Israel, then they were the true Israel. It is here that we see how inevitable was the defamation of the actual history of the Jews, for if the Gentiles were the true Israel, then the Jews had all the time been sailing under false colours. That [the Gentile Christians] were the true Israel they proved by innumerable passages from the prophets, in which G-o-d speaks of His rejection of His own people and His acceptance of the Gentiles. Little by little the Church was read back into the whole of Old Testament history, and Christian history was shown to be older than Jewish history in that [Christian history] dated from the creation, and not from Sinay, or even Avraham. Continual references to Christ were found in the Old Testament, and it was 'the Christ of G-o-d' who 'appeared to Abraham, gave divine instruction to Isaac, and held converse with Moses and the later prophets.
"In order to justify this reading of history, they were compelled to challenge the Jewish conception of the Law..." Note map[ping] out a consistent history of the Church in the Old Testament by contrasting it with every lapse from the ideal, while the sum of these lapses made up the whole of the history of the Jews. This method of rewriting history led later to the conclusion that the Jews were heretics, or apostates." Note
"The [Netzarim] of the [early] second century was no more the [Christian] Church of the fourth than was the Judaism of the second century the complete Judaism of the TalmudNote. . . .
We may correctly date the actual separation [i.e., the conception of Christianity and the Church; ybd] from the end of the 1st and the beginning of the second century. Note
This deliberate and connived denial of Jewish history is called displacement (or replacement) theology, and the Church is still entirely dependent on it today, with no choice but to deny Jewish history - from Jews being the true and spiritual children of Avraham, to the history of Yisrael and Yehudah (as opposed to "Palestine"), and even the Holocaust.
Acknowledging mishpat as the judgment of the Jewish Beit Din contradicted Christian hegemony. Therefore, Christian translators of the New Testament Note arrogated Mishpat as 'judgment', Note and read khuq completely out of the picture - distributing it between 'judgment,' Note righteousness', Note 'justification', Note and 'ordinances'. Note This allowed the goyim to read out the original judgments and statutes documenting the authority of the Jewish Beit Din and read in their own miso-Judaic judgments and statutes in their place. In this way, the Church disconnected the Judaic Scriptures from their Judaic context and opened the door for Roman hegemony - displacement theology. To avoid acknowledging the Beit Din system, KJV Note renders mishpat variously as "lawful," "manner," "ceremony," "fashion," "cause" and "ordinance." Khüqim is rendered as "statutes."
Halakhah, the collection of mishpat and Khüqim, and the beit din system are described in Torah and Tan"kh in terms of shaphat mishpat - lit. "judging the judgment," of the Beit Din. Most people are somewhat aware of this with respect to the Beit Din Ha-Gadol - more popularly known as the 'Great Sanhedrin' - but fail to notice the continuity of the lower batei-din which continues the unbroken chain today.