Clifford Denton begins to draw his series to a close, looking at the fruit that is born when our heritage in relation to Israel and the Jews is properly understood, and our relationship with them repaired.

Since April, through this series on Christianity, Israel and the Jews we have surveyed extensively the many factors that have led to the Christian Church distancing itself from its heritage in relation to Israel and the Jewish people. By studying these issues, we begin to understand how to repair what has been lost. It is like digging the weeds and stones from around the roots of a plant, so that the roots will go down deeper, feed on the nourishing soil and thereby produce better fruit. This is one metaphor.

Another, and the most appropriate, is the Olive Tree of Romans 11. It could be that some branches of Christianity were never grafted into the Olive Tree. As such they will produce a form of religion that lacks life. Other branches that were grafted in bear better fruit through drawing on what Paul calls "the nourishing sap".

In summary:

• God made a Covenant with Abraham.
• Israel, the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were chosen as the heirs of the Covenant.
• The Covenant is fulfilled in and through faith in Yeshua HaMashiach - Jesus the Messiah.
• All who have faith in him, and live in fellowship with the Father through this faith, are members of the one covenant family.
• Even though some of the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were cut off through unbelief, many have been (and will still be) grafted into the Olive Tree.
• Believers from the Gentile world were also grafted into this existing family of faith, coming to share in its heritage and history.
• By understanding the Covenant and how to use the Bible as one united Book, we can draw deeper into spiritual wells of salvation.
• By understanding who we are as the Covenant People of God we can develop a biblical, balanced understanding of Israel – past, present and future.

Together with those from the Nation of Israel who live by faith in the One True God and his Son, Yeshua HaMashiach, we learn how to live a fruitful life in an increasingly alien world, emphasising those things that strengthen our faith, our families and our communities. These include:

• Bible study from foundations to fulfilment, using all appropriate tools of language, history, geography, culture and personal testimony
• Prayer
• Care of the poor and isolated
• Strengthening the home and thereby our community of faith, through the principles of community life passed on through our entire biblical heritage
• Demonstrating to the world around us, through our living testimony, how the Covenant given to Abraham is manifested in the life of faith in Yeshua, Jesus our Messiah
• A balanced understanding of God's purposes in Israel
• An understanding of the prophetic purposes of God - past, present and future

Renewing Our Minds

This series has argued that the major key to the future fruit of our lives and ministries lies in renewing of our mind-sets, or ways of thinking, towards Israel and our covenant and biblical history.

We need not compromise with forms of Judaism that do not recognise Jesus as Messiah and are thereby lacking the full life of our New Covenant faith. But we can still maintain a healthy and respectful relationship with Jewish communities - indeed, our scriptural injunction is to pray for Israel.

This series has argued that the major key to the future fruit of our lives and ministries lies in renewing our mindsets towards Israel and our covenant history.

What we will gain, through right and balanced relationships, is a fresh perspective on the Church's heritage from Israel and the Jewish people, helping us to walk out biblical truth into biblical lifestyle, not according to ritual but according to the life of the Holy Spirit. Some of these areas where the life and heritage of Israel can help are:

• Hebrew thought
• Love and marriage
• Principles of prayer and worship
• The place of the home
• Sabbath
• Feasts including the centrality of Passover, as fulfilled in the communion celebration
• Generational harmony and stages of life
• Blessings
• Teaching our children
• Discipleship including baptism
• Social action
• Ethics

As we explore our heritage in these areas, we will enter into the fulfilled covenant family in a new and living way. This is more important than ever as the world goes forward into its last phases of history.

For Reflection and Comment

Would it be an exaggeration to suggest that the Christian Church could be both renewed and revived by putting right what has been lost over the centuries because of unfortunate rifts between Jews and Christians? How does this relate to the one new man of Ephesians 2:15?

Next time - series penultimate: Note on the Hebrew Basis of Scripture

This study is part of a series on Christianity, Israel and the Jews.

Clifford Denton surveys the tragic abuse of Jews in Europe through the Dark Ages and the Middle Ages, by Church and State. What responsibility did Christians bear then - and what should our response be now?

In previous instalments our focus has been on the separation that occurred between Church and Synagogue, from the early centuries of the Common Era through to the 'Early Church Fathers'. Alongside this we have mentioned the parallel growth of anti-Semitism.

This, in turn, added further impetus to the separation, both as a fruit of, and as a contribution to, the gulf between the two communities.

This week we will look at the Middle Ages, where the fruit of anti-Semitism was coming to maturity.

Treatment of Jews by Christians

Marvin Wilson introduces this topic (Our Father Abraham, p98) as follows:

In the Middle Ages, Christian culture largely excluded Jews. Jews sought to avoid social, economic, and ecclesiastical pressures by living in secluded quarters of cities. They were considered useful primarily for one purpose, money-lending. This isolation from the larger society led Christians to accuse Jews of being a pariah people. Stripped of many personal liberties and victimized by an elitist "Christian" culture, Jews were required to wear a distinctive hat or patch sewn on their clothing. The very idea of "Hebraic" was commonly equated with "satanic".

Jews experienced a barrage of accusations. They were said to have had a peculiar smell, in contrast to the "odor of sanctity." Jews were also said to be sucklers of sows. They were held responsible for many evils, the "Christ-killer" charge still prominent. Jews were also called desecraters of the Host, allegedly entering churches secretly and piercing the holy wafer out of which "real blood" of Jesus flowed. They were accused of murdering Christian infants in order to use their blood (instead of wine) at the Passover Seder. During the Black Plague, which killed one-third of Europe's population, Jews were blamed for causing the plague by poisoning wells. [emphases added]

Such was the fruit of the early separation of Christianity from its Hebraic roots. We might have expected the world to persecute the scattered tribes of Israel. The Church should have mourned for them and comforted them, recognising their place in the Olive Tree of Romans 11.

The Middle Ages

And so we come to the Middle Ages, the years around 1000 AD. Theological differences between Christians and Jews had emerged even in the second century, strengthened by the philosophical ideas of the 'Church Fathers' that re-interpreted Scripture through the mindset of Plato and Aristotle. These things separated Christians from Jews so much that they would appear to have grown from the roots of two different trees. The next step was the persecution of Jews by 'Christians'.

By the Middle Ages, Christians and Jews had become so separated that they would appear to have grown from the roots of two different trees.

A prominent survey of anti-Semitism over 23 centuries is The Anguish of the Jews by Edward H Flannery (Paulist Press, 2004). We will consider some more of the details of anti-Semitism in the Middle Ages by reviewing chapters 4 to 6 of this book.

The Dark Ages

Flannery begins his survey by assessing the treatment of Jews in the Dark Ages, the centuries which preceded the Middle Ages (p66):

The Middle Ages meant one thing to the Christian, another to the Jew. For the latter, they not only began earlier and ended later but assumed a direction opposite to the general current of history. The earlier period, often called the Dark Ages, was for Jews a time of shifting fortunes but, as a whole, was relatively bearable. As the medieval period reached its culmination – the golden age of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries – the dark night of Judaism began.

The Dark Ages – from the fifth to the eleventh century – witnessed a world in travail...A great Empire in decline, ceaseless barbarian invasions, Persian wars and Moslem encirclement – such were the elements of disarray from which the Church, sole unifying force extant, was to forge the unity that would be Christian Europe...It was a period in which the mantle of temporal as well as spiritual governance was often thrust upon the Church, but one, conversely, in which its spiritual authority often suffered encroachment.

Judaism's situation presented a picture as chaotic as that of the times. Little can be said that applies to all Jewry or to the whole period. Hence the necessity of following the vagaries of Jewish fortunes from East to West, from Gaul to Spain, Persia to Arabia where their prosperity or degradation depended as much on the will of pope, king, bishop, council, caliph, noble, or mob as it did on law. Recalcitrant to the emerging unification, Jews received special attention almost everywhere. Jewish-Gentile altercations were not the infrequent result, but by and large, on the popular and often ecclesiastical and political level, Jews fared well. [emphases added]

Conflicts and Restricted Rights

Roman law imposed itself on the Jewish world as on other people groups. In the Eastern Empire Jews were often resentful of restrictive measures. In addition to this, at times Christians ignored statutes that protected Jewish rights. This led to conflicts, including those at Antioch. There were massacres and burnings of synagogues in the reign of Zeno (474-91). This continued into the following century, one recorded incident being when, "a monk of Amida, named Sergius, incited a mob and burned down a synagogue, in the wake of which a veritable contest of church and synagogue burning and rebuilding ensued" (quoted by Flannery, p68).

The Emperor Justinian (483-565) enforced new legislation which was far more restrictive on Jews than before. Among the restrictions was a narrowing of property rights, a barring from public functions and the inability to testify against a Christian. Jews could not celebrate Passover before Christian Easter. The Bible could not be read in Hebrew, and the Mishnah was banned. Those who did not believe in the resurrection, the last judgment or the existence of angels were to be excommunicated and put to death.

These were among the measures intended to bring Judaism under some sort of control, but it instead brought exasperation and later in the century resulted in violence, including the killing of many Christians in Antioch at the turn of the century. Many Jews joined the Persians in 614 in the conquering of Jerusalem where 30,000 Christians were killed.

In the fifth and sixth centuries, measures introduced to bring Judaism under control instead brought exasperation and outbreaks of violence.

There was retaliatory action from Christians later and many Jews were killed when Jerusalem was retaken under Heraclius in 628. Once more Jews were barred from the city. Heraclius, like some others, attempted to bring unity by forced baptisms of Jews.

Judaism a Crime

Judaism became a sort of crime against the state for several centuries. The Second Council of Nicaea (787) prohibited Jews who practised Judaism in secret to be admitted to the Church or sacraments. It also insisted on their practising aspects of Judaism openly once they were baptised but, as Flannery points out:

The Church's prohibition, reiterated many times during the next millennium, seemed powerless against the medieval urge to enforce religious and cultural unity. The history of forced conversion would be long, heartrending, and bloodstained before it reached its high point centuries later in the Spain of Ferdinand and Isabella. (p71)

Though there was more acceptance of Judaism in the Western Empire at this time, the same tensions caused by the exaltation of Christianity over Judaism still existed. In the reign of Pope Gregory I (590-604), there was a zeal to convert Jews and to suppress Judaizing. However, Jews were given legal right to attend their synagogues.

Forced Conversions

Persecution did break out in Spain in the reign of King Sisebut (612-21). The Jews were given the ultimatum to be baptised or go into exile. Approximately 90,000 were converted while many thousands fled the country.

Later it was observed that forced conversions were not really effective and tensions remained. Baptised children of un-baptised Jewish parents were taken from them for a Christian education, a practice that occurred in later centuries too. We read that later:

The summit of oppression was reached under King Erwig (680-87), who enacted twenty-eight laws designed to make the existence of Jews and Judaizers intolerable: Jews were ordered to accept baptism; Jewish converts must obtain a permit from a priest to undertake a journey; they were forced to listen to Christian sermons and forbidden to make distinctions among meats; evasions and bribes by Jews and lax enforcement by authorities were prohibited; and, finally, blasphemies against the Christian faith were made punishable. The twelfth council of Toledo (681) confirmed these measures.

Toward the end of the century, with Islam menacing his kingdom from North Africa where many Jews had fled, King Egica (d. 702), after first attempting to soften their lot, decreed conjointly with the sixteenth council (693) that the Jews must abandon commerce and surrender all property acquired from Christians. The seventeenth council (694), again in conjunction with the king, accused the Jews of conspiracy with their king in North Africa, reduced them to perpetual slavery, banned all Jewish rites, and ordered all Jewish children above the age of seven to be taken and reared as Christians. (Flannery, p77)

During the seventh century persecution broke out in Spain, with forced conversions, exile, enslavement and the confiscation of Jewish children.

The Visigoth Kingdom

The Muslims conquered Spain by 711 and the lot of Jews improved – indeed, a new 'golden era' began where Jewish scholarship was allowed to take on new life. The Visigoth kingdom, which had covered much of south-western Europe for the 5th–8th centuries, was removed. It is considered that the maltreatment of Jews in the Visigoth kingdom of Spain had been a direct result of the union of Church and State, however, the effect of this union was not uniform. For example, Jews fared much better in France in the same period that they were persecuted heavily in Spain.

Nevertheless, wherever there were Jews in the Christianised world there was constant debate in the church councils and resulting tensions to one degree or another, as well as some restrictions associated, for example, with the Feasts and dietary laws.

Wherever there were Jews in the Christianised world there was constant debate in the church councils and, as a result, tensions to one degree or another.

What Kind of Anti-Semitism?

As a general comment on the phase of anti-Semitism up to the turn of the first Millennium, we see it as having greater intensity in the East than in the West and, in the West, greater in pre-Muslim Spain than in France. Flannery writes about the character of this anti-Semitism:

...there was in this era no popular or economic anti-Semitism. Yet there was a juridical or legislative anti-Judaism. Jews were not opposed as persons or as a people, and indeed heretics still fared worse than they. The Church still had reason to worry about Jewish influence in social and religious life. The Talmudic withdrawal of Judaism was never complete. Many Jews, especially those who reached posts of influence in civic or economic spheres kept the doors to and from the Christian world open.

The legislation of church and state must, in effect, be seen, above all, as a defense against Jewish proselytism. The perennial laws against employment of Christian slaves, holding government office, and Jewish-Christian intimacies were motivated by religious scruples rather than political or social considerations. (pp88-89)

Flannery writes that this period was characterised less by anti-Semitism and bad feeling against the Jews themselves, than by a legal anti-Judaism enforced by both church and state.

After 1000 AD

The intensity of anti-Semitism increased after the year 1000 and grew to terrifying proportions. Flannery writes (p90-91):

During the first half of the second Christian millennium, the history of anti-Semitism and the history of Judaism so converged as almost to coincide. It is a scandal of Christian history that, while the Church and the Christian State were at the zenith of their power and influence, the sons of Israel reached the nadir of their unending oppression. This was the age of Innocent III and Henry II, Gregory VII and Henry VI, of the Crusades, of Aquinas and Dante, of St. Francis, of Notre Dame and Rheims Cathedral; but it was no less the age of anti-Jewish hecatombs, expulsions, calumnious myths, autos-da-fe, of the badge, the ghetto, and many other hardships visited upon the Jews...

The year 1000 found Jews in conditions reasonably stable for the time. Two centuries later they were almost pariahs; in three, they were terrorized. What occurred in this span to effect such a change? Some observers speak of the Church's "teaching of contempt" finally taking hold and suddenly seeping down to the populace. True, but the matter appears more complex. The eleventh century – as a period of incubation – contained certain events that foreshadowed the future. When Hakim destroyed the Holy Sepulchre in 1009, the Jews of Orleans were accused of collusion – an improbable charge since Jews as well as Christians were persecuted by that mad caliph. Nonetheless, widespread persecution of Jews resulted.

Again in 1012, when Jews were expelled from Mainz by Henry II, the expulsion was a repercussion of the earlier charge of treason, and doubtless also a reaction to the conversion to Judaism of Wecelinus, chaplain of Duke Conrad in 1006. In the "Crusade of Spain" against the Saracens in 1063, the Jews were disqualified for armed service and were attacked by the soldiers on the march. In short, renewed suspicions of Jewish complicity with Islam heightened the sense of the Jews' alien and infidel character, thus readying the atmosphere for the storm about to break over Judaism at the close of the eleventh century. [emphases added]

From this brief overview of the first part of the second millennium we perceive that widespread and multi-faceted persecution of Jews grew across the nations that had been 'Christianised' through Roman influence at the time of Constantine. To explore this fully is a task beyond the scope of this series. However, it is essential for students of Scripture to be informed about this era, so we will illustrate the extent of this persecution through some of the key events.

The Crusades

It is considered that the First Crusade of 1096 was a tragedy for the Jewish world measurable against the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the Holocaust of the Second World War under Hitler. In Flannery's words:

Great, illorganised hordes of nobles, knights, monks, and peasants – "God wills it" on their lips as they set off to free the Holy Land from the Muslim infidel – suddenly turned on the Jews.

Along the route to the Holy Land taken by the crusaders, Jews were offered the choice of baptism or death. Massacres took place in Rouen, along the Rhine and Danube, at Worms and at Mainz, in Treves, Neuss, Ratisbon, in Bohemia and in Prague. Some Jews preferred suicide to baptism. From January to July of 1096 it is estimated that up to 10,000 died, probably one third of the Jewish population of Germany and Northern France at the time.

The Jewish world was stunned and the rift between Judaism and Christianity was magnified. Christians were viewed by some as capricious assassins, ever ready to strike. But out of the suffering, a new heroism was born. A cult and tradition of martyrdom was instituted whereby Jews who gave their lives "to sanctify the Name" (Kiddush ha Shem) were greatly revered; their remembrance became part of the synagogue service. (pp91-3)

The Second Crusade of 1146, while not so intense as the first, brought further outbreaks of violence against the Jews. This time there were moderating influences from some Christian leaders, including Emperor Conrad II, King Louis VII of France and Bernard of Clairvaux. Another issue entered in, however, to divide Christians from Jews and contribute in some places in Europe to the violence associated with this Crusade:

Since the First Crusade, Christians had become more active in commercial affairs and so now resented their Jewish competitors. Moreover, Jews were more deeply involved in money-lending, a practice which drew upon them the hostility of both the clergy and the people. Pope Eugenius III (1145-53), who called up the new Crusade, suggested to the princes, as an inducement to enlistment, crusaders be absolved of their debts to Jews. (p94, emphasis added)

Peter of Cluny exhorted Louis VII that Jews, "like Cain, the fratricide, they should be made to suffer fearful torments and prepared for greater ignominy, for an existence worse than death" (quoted in Flannery, p95).

The First Crusade of 1096 was a tragedy for the Jews that has been since likened to the Holocaust of WW2. 10,000 were massacred or committed suicide in the space of six months.

Bought and Sold

A result of a certain amount of protection that Jews sought and acquired from Emperors Henry IV and Conrad III during the period of the Crusades led them to being considered as 'Servants of the Royal Chamber'. Their freedom was curtailed through legislation at various times: "The attachment to the imperial chamber reduced Jews to the status of pieces of property that could be – and were – bought, loaned, and sold as any other merchandise. Kings paid off barons and barons paid off creditors with Jews" (quoted in Flannery, p95).

In addition, the message of Paul in his letters (Rom 9:13, Gal 4:22-31, wrongly applied) was used to imply that Jews were inferior to Christians. This perpetuated, from a theological standpoint, the servitude of the Jews and their barring from public office.

Forced out of many areas of social and commercial life, by the 12th and 13th centuries money-lending became the means by which many Jews survived: "At every turn, he was faced with special taxes, confiscations, cancellations of credit, expulsions, and threats of death. He had literally to buy not only his rights but his very existence. Money became to him as precious as the air he breathed, the bread he ate." (p97) The caricature that later became Shakespeare's Shylock began in these days of Jewish survival.

Forced out of many areas of social and commercial life, by the 12^th and 13^th centuries money-lending became the means by which many Jews survived – and so developed the caricature.

Myths and Rumours

Another significant attack on Jews came from the so-called 'ritual murder' or 'blood' libel. This occurred in a number of places. The first incident was in Norwich, England in 1141 where the body of a dead boy was discovered on Good Friday. Jews were believed to be the culprits following a story that they planned to carry out a murder once a year in derision of the death of Christ.

This same accusation occurred in other towns of England and on the Continent where additions were often made to the story, such the drawing of blood for magical purposes by Jews and the taking of Passover communion with the heart of a murdered child.

Hundreds of incidences of this kind occurred and many Jews were slaughtered following rigged trials. In 1171 in Blois, 40 Jews were burned, for example. Excused by this blood libel, King Philip Augustus, on a single day in 1182, had all Jews arrested, freed for a ransom and expelled from his realm, only to recall them sixteen years later, and appoint them as money lenders to be taxed heavily. All this was for the purpose of acquiring money from the Jews.

Cheating and Humiliation

At the time of the Third Crusade of 1189 his persecution continued with the canceling of all debts to Jews. These are examples of the trend that continued in relation to the financial persecution of the Jews, including those enacted by the Popes, such as the measures adopted by Innocent III in the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215.

Out of this Church Council also came the tradition of a Jew having to wear a distinctive badge of identification. The justification was to help curtail intermarriage between Christians and non-Christians. Later, in France, the badge was a yellow sphere, and in Poland a pointed hat, with different symbols elsewhere.

In the 13^th century, Jews were made to suffer financially and were also forced to wear humiliating badges of identification.

A further result of the hate of Jews began in 1240 following an accusation to Gregory IX by a Dominican by the name of Nicholas Donin. He produced 35 theses to propose that the Talmud was the chief cause of Jewish unbelief and an offence to Christians. The Talmud was put on trial and eventually the case against it, which was quite complex, assumed proven and 24 cartloads of the Talmud were burned in Paris.

The Black Death

These brief examples serve to illustrate the immensity and the multifaceted nature of unrelenting aggression that was leveled against the Jews in these centuries. We finish the survey with one more example. In Europe, between 1347 and 1350 an epidemic called the Black Death killed one third of the population. The Jews were blamed – and then attacked:

For Jews it was a tragedy to which, after the fall of Jerusalem, only the horrors of 1096 and 1939 were comparable. For three hellish years (1348-50) Jewish communities all over Europe were torn to pieces by a populace crazed by the plague which, before it ended, carried off one third the population. Bewildered by the plague's ravages people looked for a cause. Before long the inevitable scapegoat was found. Who else but the archconspirator and poisoner, the Jew?

This time, too, the weird formula for the well poisonings – elicited by torture – was disclosed: a concoction of lizards, spiders, frogs, human hearts, and, to be sure, sacred hosts. The story that Jews in Spain had circulated the death-killing drug to poison the wells of all Christendom spread like wildfire. It was first believed in Southern France, where the entire Jewish population of a town was burned.

From there the deathly trail led into Northern Spain, then to Switzerland, into Bavaria, up the Rhine, into East Germany, and to Belgium, Poland, and Austria...In all, over 200 Jewish communities, large or small, were destroyed...the massacres were greatest in Germany where every sizeable city was affected...Well over 10,000 were killed in Erfurt, Mainz, and Breslau alone. [emphasis added. Flannery, p109]

Summary

Here we have an indication of the depths reached as a result of the division between Church and Synagogue which began in relatively small ways in the second and third centuries. Theological division was perhaps the major root cause (along with theological misinterpretation) of the divergence of the two religions, led by the dominant Christian majority when Christianity became politicised.

The catalogue of disasters is immense and what we have described can be added to with many other examples, such as the conquering Crusaders herding the Jews of Jerusalem into their synagogue and singing hymns while they burned them to death "in the name of Jesus"; or the Spanish Inquisitor Torquemada holding the Spanish Jews in a state of terror in the late 1400s, resulting finally in their expulsion from Spain on 30 July 1492, through the edict by Ferdinand and Isabella.

Then on and on, from peak to trough through the Holocaust and Pogroms, to the present day. Here in the depth of anti-Semitism we see the consequences of the separation of the Christian Church from its Hebraic foundations.

For Reflection and Comment

• How can Christians respond to this terrible history of anti-Semitic violence and persecution?
• What can Christians do to ensure that anti-Semitism is no longer evident in the Church?

Next time: Emergence of anti-Jewish Christian Theologies.

Clifford Denton discusses the writings of Justin Martyr and Origen, two early Christian theologians who contributed to the development of 'Replacement Theology'.

In the previous study we drew attention to the way Scripture can be misread to support Replacement Theology. In the early centuries after the coming of Jesus the Messiah, so ingrained had this become in the thinking of prominent church theologians that they cemented the idea into the developing church theologies. We will consider this next.

Greek Philosophy and the Early Church

In last week's study on the first part of this topic, it was mentioned briefly that Greek philosophy has impacted Christian theology. Greek philosophy is a major contributor to humanism, the exalting of the human intellect and its patterns of logic. This results in a diversion from a walk with God through the wisdom of the Holy Spirit. Humanism is self-contained and leads to the sort of wisdom that James uncompromisingly described as demonic (James 3:13-18).

Zechariah's insight that God will set the sons of Zion against the sons of Greece (Zech 9:13) is also relevant to consider. Greek philosophy asks for a logical answer to every question, while Hebraic thinking causes us to reach in faith to God to lead us through our journey on this earth - which raises issues that cannot be fully understood through human logic.

However, the 'early Church Fathers' liked the idea that God had prepared the Gentile world for the Gospel through the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, and so Christian theology became tainted by these Greek philosophies, contributing to the parting of the ways between Christians and Jews, and to Replacement Theology.

Dialogue with Trypho

Because of the importance of finding the root cause of Replacement Theology, we will quote widely from our first source, Justin Martyr. In Our Father Abraham (p83), Marvin Wilson writes:

Although a few Jewish Christians apparently attended synagogue in Jerome's day (ca. A.D. 400), the parting of the way seems to have been largely finalized by around the middle of the second century. By the time of Justin Martyr (ca. A.D. 160) a new attitude prevailed in the Church, evidenced by its appropriating the title "Israel" for itself.

Until this time the Church had defined itself more in terms of continuity with the Jewish people; that is, it was an extension of Israel. There was a growing awareness, however, that the Synagogue was firm in its stance that Jesus was not the Messiah of Israel, and that on this point the Synagogue was not going to change its mind. The realization of this impasse gradually drew the Church to define itself in terms of discontinuity with – indeed, as the replacement of – Israel. [emphases added]

Wilson writes that because of the impasse between Christians and Jews over the Messiahship of Jesus, the Church began to define itself in terms of discontinuity with Israel – even as its replacement.

On p93 of Our Father Abraham we read:

Justin Martyr was a converted gentile philosopher who died a martyr in Rome. Justin's second-century Dialogue with Trypho, A Jew represents "the prototypical contrast of the Christian protagonist triumphant and the nervous Jew on the defensive."

Justin argues his case with Trypho by stating that Jews are separated from other nations and "justly suffer." Justin specifically hammers home the point by focusing on the fact that Jewish cities are "burned with fire" and Jews are "desolate," forbidden to go up to Jerusalem, "for you have slain the Just One and His prophets before Him; and now you reject those who hope in Him."

A useful source of Dialogue with Trypho is The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Vol 1, T&T Clark/Eerdmans 1993). We review here the whole of the dialogue and quote brief sections to give a flavour of how leaders of the Roman Church were thinking even in the Second Century.

In his introduction, Justin recalls his background as a philosopher among the Greeks and then how he met Trypho while walking in Xystus, a suburb of Ephesus:

When I was going about my business one morning in the walks of Xystus a certain man, with others in his company, having met me, and said, "Hail, O philosopher!"..."But who are you, most excellent man?" So I replied to him in jest. [Note: Justin here is quoting from Homer]

Then he replied and told me frankly both his name and his family. "Trypho," says he, "I am called; and I am a Hebrew of the circumcision, and having escaped from the war lately carried on there, I am spending my days in Greece, and chiefly at Corinth.

"And in what," said I, "would you be profited by philosophy so much as by your own lawgiver and the prophets?" "Why not?" he replied. "Do not the philosophers turn every discourse on God? And do not questions continually arise to them about His unity and providence? Is not this truly the duty of philosophy, to investigate the Deity?"

Justin then relates his looking into all Greek philosophies one by one. He says all philosophers draw from one source; for example, regarding Plato he says:

And the perception of immaterial things quite overpowered me, and the contemplation of ideas furnished my mind with wings, so that in a little while I supposed that I had become wise; and such was my stupidity, I expected forthwith to look upon God, for this is the end of Plato's philosophy. [emphasis added]

Justin then speaks of his conversion with Trypho. He discusses how philosophers can know an unseen God:

"But, father," said I, "The Deity cannot be seen merely by the eyes, as other living beings can, but is discernible to the mind alone, as Plato says; and I believe him."

Trypho then discusses whether or not the soul is immortal and whether God can give it life or not as he pleases - something unknown to Plato. Justin responds to this with interest. His friends mock the idea of Christ and affirm Plato, saying he must take on the forms of Judaism if he will go this way. Justin desires a more middle ground, interpreting the Bible whilst acknowledging his Platonic foundations.

Justin builds a middle ground between Greek philosophy and the Bible, interpreting Scripture whilst acknowledging his Platonic foundations.

On the Law

They continue to dialogue, remembering the recent war in Judaea. Trypho accuses Christians of not obeying the biblical festivals and Sabbaths, circumcision etc. and so causing the war. Justin then gives his ideas on Christianity's relationship with Judaism. He says that the Law has been repealed and that the New Testament replaces the Old.

There will be no other God, O Trypho, nor was there from eternity any other existing, but He who made and disposed of the universe. Nor do we think that there is one God for us, another for you, but that He alone is God who led your fathers out from Egypt with a strong hand and a high arm. Nor have we trusted in any other (for there is no other), but in Him in whom you also have trusted, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob.

But we do not trust through Moses or through the law; for then we would do the same as yourselves. But now – (for I have read that there shall be a final law, and a covenant, the chiefest of all, which it is now incumbent on all men to observe, as many as are seeking the inheritance of God. For the law promulgated on Horeb is now old, and belongs to yourselves alone; but this is for all universally. Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law – namely, Christ – has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy, after which there shall be no law, no commandments, no ordinance... [emphasis added]

Justin refers to Isaiah and Jeremiah 31 to justify this. He accuses Jews of violating this new law now revealed, and not accepting atonement in the blood of Christ. He interprets the true fasting of Isaiah 58 as a replacement of the old forms of fasting, and says that outward circumcision of the Jews is so that they will be recognised in the world as those who killed Christ:

For the circumcision according to the flesh, which is from Abraham, was given for a sign; that you may be separated from other nations, and from us; and that you alone may suffer that which you now justly suffer; and that your land may be desolate, and your cities burned with fire; and that strangers may eat your fruit in your presence, and not one of you may go up to Jerusalem. For you are not recognized among the rest of men by any other mark than your fleshly circumcision.

For none of you, I suppose, will venture to say that God neither did nor does foresee the events, which are future, nor foreordained his deserts for each one. Accordingly, these things have happened to you in fairness and justice, for you have slain the Just One, and His prophets before Him; and now you reject those who hope in Him, and in Him who sent Him – God the Almighty and Maker of all things – cursing in your synagogues those who believe in Christ. [emphasis added]

Justin then takes aspects of the Torah, Feasts, Sabbaths, Circumcision etc. and says that Jews were prescribed these things on account of their sin. He contrasts this with the fulfilment of these things in Christians through the circumcision of the heart. Speaking of the eighth day, which has replaced the seventh day Sabbath, says there is no salvation outside of Christ and that the works of the Law are useless. Now, he says, it is Christians who possess the true righteousness.

Justin argues that Christ repeals and replaces the Law, and that Christians fulfil the signs and symbols previously given to the Jews – such as the feasts, Sabbaths and circumcision.

Trypho says that the prophets did not point to Christ, who himself died under a curse out of dishonour. Justin then speaks of the two advents of the Messiah. There follows a discussion of what Jesus fulfilled, then discussion of the Law. Justin says the Law contributes nothing to righteousness. Trypho asks for proof without metaphor in the Messiahship of Jesus. Justin seeks to show this from the prophets.

On Greek Literature

Justin then speaks of the devil's lies in Greek literature and stories of gods like Jupiter, Bacchuus, Mithras. But, nevertheless, he says that Greek literature contains parallels to the truths of God in the lives of the prophets and of Jesus, suggesting that the Greek philosophers have prepared the way for belief in Jesus for the Gentile world.

Justin also says that now the prophetic gift has been taken from the Jews and given to Christians:

For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to the present time. And hence you ought to understand that the gifts formerly among your nation have been transferred to us.

Justin describes Greek literature and mythology as the lies of the devil, yet also argues that it contains parallels to the truths of God, and that it prepares the way for Gentile belief in Christ.

More discussion follows on types and shadows of the cross and of Jesus, and on Justin's view that the prophecies point to Christians (eg Zech 2:10-13). He says that Malachi 1:10-12 is rejection of Jewish sacrifices to point to acceptance of Christian sacrifice. Christians are now the Holy People promised to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Judah. Christians are the true Israel:

"What, then?" Says Trypho; "are you Israel? And speaks He such things of you?"...[Justin] "As therefore from the one man Jacob, who was surnamed Israel, all your nation has been called Jacob and Israel; so we from Christ, who begat us to God, like Jacob, and Israel and Judah, and Joseph, and David, are called and are the true sons of God, and keep the commandments of Christ."

Justin says that Christians are now the sons of God and Gentiles converted to Christ are more faithful to God than the Jews. Christ is the King of Israel, and Christians are the Israelitic race:

And when the Scripture says, "I am the Lord God, the Holy one of Israel your King," will you not understand that truly Christ is the everlasting King? For you are aware that Jacob the son of Isaac was never a king. And therefore Scripture again, explaining to us, says what king is meant by Jacob and Israel: "Jacob is my Servant, I will uphold Him; and Israel is mine Elect, my soul shall receive Him. I have given Him my Spirit; and He shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles..."

Justin concludes that the Jews rejected Christ and so must now be converted.

Justin's dialogue with Trypho contains many arguments that are typical of those that go on even today. They have come to be known as 'Replacement Theology', and represent a continuation of interpreting the Scriptures through Greek philosophical eyes.

Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho contains many arguments that have become central to Replacement Theology, and which continue to be used today.

Against Celsus

We now turn briefly to a second source: Origen, a 3rd Century theologian from Alexandria. Origen is regarded as a 'Church Father', and the father of Greek monasticism, but has been traditionally rejected as a saint due to his many controversial teachings. Marvin Wilson writes (Our Father Abraham, p93):

In the third century Origen wrote similarly, "And these calamities they (the Jews) have suffered, because they were a most wicked nation, which, although guilty of many sins, yet has been punished so severely for none, as for those that were committed against our Jesus". Again, in clear terms, the suffering of the Jewish people is directly related to their "sin" of rejecting Jesus. [emphasis added]

We will quote more fully from Origen's Against Celsus:

Let this Jew of Celsus then show us, not many persons, nor even a few, but a single individual, such as Jesus was, introducing among the human race, with the power that was manifested in Him, a system of doctrine and opinions beneficial to human life, and which converts men from the practice of wickedness...

Therefore we may see, that after the advent of Jesus the Jews were altogether abandoned, and possess now none of what they considered their ancient glories, so that there is no indication of any Divinity abiding amongst them. For they have no longer prophets nor miracles, traces of which to a considerable extent are still found among Christians, and some of them more remarkable than any that existed among the Jews; and these we ourselves have witnessed, if our testimony may be received.

But the Jew of Celsus exclaims: "Why did we treat him, whom we announced beforehand, with dishonour? Was it that we might be chastised by others?" To which we have to answer, that on account of their unbelief, and the other insults which they heaped upon Jesus, the Jews will not only suffer more than others in that judgment which is believed to impend over the world, but have even already endured such sufferings.

For what nation is in exile from their own metropolis, and from the place sacred to the worship of their fathers, save the Jews alone? And these calamities they have suffered, because they were a most wicked nation, which, although guilty of many other sins, yet has been punished so severely for none, as for those that were committed against our Jesus. [emphases added] Section 2.8, Vol 4 of Anti-Nicene Fathers.

By quoting from Justin Martyr and Origen, both among the founders of much Christian thought and both from the early centuries after Jesus, we see that the phenomenon of Replacement Theology had early beginnings. Through their influence, it began to become accepted that God abandoned his plan for Israel to continue as the heirs of his covenant after the crucifixion of Jesus, and that there is now a new body, the Church, who have inherited the promises once given to Israel.

Summary

We know that the Gospel did go out to the Gentile world and that Gentile believers became the majority in the Church for many centuries. But this is not a reason to misunderstand God's continuing purpose for Israel, or for the separation of the Church from its Jewish/Hebraic roots.

The continuity of the covenant God made with Abraham and fulfilled in Jesus is a subtle one that deserves to be considered with maturity and balance, and without compromise. Replacement Theology not only enhances the division between Church and Synagogue but also leaves the Church's theology shallow and unbalanced, creating a great vulnerability to many forms of deception in this present age and also encouraging a misunderstanding of the covenant purposes of God.

Replacement Theology not only encourages division between Christians and Jews, but also leaves the Church's theology shallow and unbalanced.

By twists and turns and often strange interpretations, Scripture can be re-interpreted to accommodate a mindset that the Christian Church became 'Spiritual Israel'. As a result, Wilson suggests, "the Church argued that Jews were a people eternally cursed by God. The Church now designated itself all blessings in Scripture earlier ascribed to Israel. All curses, however, it left for the Jews" (Our Father Abraham, p94, emphasis added).

For Reflection and Comment

Pause and assess the gradual process of Christianity distancing itself from Israel, beginning with the emergence of what would have been seen as a branch of the Jewish community and ending with a community completely re-defined.

Next time: The Early Fathers of the Christian Church.

Clifford Denton discusses the origins of 'Replacement Theology' and its impacts on Christian thinking.

So far in this series, we have seen how Christianity's Hebraic heritage came under attack right from the first years after Jesus and his apostles, and we have considered how this attack developed up to the fall of Israel under Rome. By this point, the ground had been prepared for the Christian Church to move away from its roots even further as time went on, and as theological ideas developed that denied its links with Israel and the Jews.

Blessings but no Curses

This eventually led many Christians to consider that God had now finished with Israel and replaced it with a new body called the Church, which would receive all the covenant blessings promised to Israel but without fear of the curses. In this study we will review the ideas behind this 'Replacement Theology' and consider its origins.

Christians and Jews eventually became so separated that many Christians began to consider themselves Israel's replacement in God's eyes.

70 AD: Judgment Day?

When Israel fell under the Romans, it became possible for Christians in the Gentile world to declare this as the final judgment of God on the Jewish nation. They could argue that Jesus had offered the gift of salvation to all of Israel and, following this, the early Apostles had witnessed to his sacrificial death and resurrection for sufficient time to give the nation its full opportunity for repentance.

To witness the terrible fate of Israel under Rome and then the dispersion of Jews to foreign lands would seem adequate evidence for this view. Add to this the Greek philosophical mindset prevalent among Gentile communities (more on this next week), and the scriptures themselves could be re-interpreted as if God had turned his attention to a people who had long been neglected and whose time had now come.

'Natural Israel' becomes 'Spiritual Israel'

Thus the idea that Israel was now to be replaced by a new body was established. The idea of 'Spiritual Israel' replacing 'natural Israel' began to take hold, so that even Old Testament mentions of Israel were re-interpreted by some Christian theologians in terms of the Church in the Gentile world, except that Jesus had now taken away the curse of the law, leaving only blessings for 'the Church'.

When Israel fell under the Romans, Gentile Christians declared this the final judgment of God on the Jewish nation. The idea that 'natural' Israel was now to be replaced by 'spiritual' Israel took hold.

With this view, Galatians 3:10-14 can be taken out of context:

Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree'), that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. (Gal 3:13-14)

Also, taking a single verse out of context, Matthew 21:43 could be (wrongly) interpreted as saying that now the 'nation' that was to replace Israel was this new body of people drawn from the Gentile world and known as 'the Church':

Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. (Matt 21:43)

With this mindset, even Romans 11 (where Paul speaks of a remnant of Israel being saved) can be re-interpreted as fulfilled by the early disciples and so no longer relevant. Paul speaks of himself as being of the tribe of Israel, seemingly confirming his point that God had not forgotten individuals from Israel - providing they become 'Christians' (and of course there were many other Jews who did believe in Jesus at the time of Paul). Thus a view can be formed that God did not forget his people in confirmation of Romans 11:1-5, but fulfilled it in Paul's day.

For those who see a new body ('the Church') as replacing Israel, the grafting of Romans 11 becomes about grafting into the new, predominantly Gentile Church, rather than into the covenant family that existed before the call to the Gentiles.

Christ the End of the Law

Romans 10:4 can also be read in terms of Replacement Theology, seeing 'end' as 'put an end to':

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

However, this verse means that those who look forward to the coming Messiah (as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob did) perceive him as fulfilling the purposes of the Covenant given to Israel. He is in view as through a telescope. He is the end purpose of the Torah, its fulfilment, within the continuity of biblical history.

Christ is the end of the law not because he finishes it, but because he fulfils it.

Those who have adopted the mindset that a new body has replaced Israel read this Scripture as meaning that Jesus Christ put an end to the promise to Israel in order to begin a new thing, rather than to enable, through his sacrificial death, the promise to Abraham. If, again, the 'New Covenant' is seen as a complete replacement of the 'Old Covenant', in every way, then this also adds to the theory that Israel has been replaced by a new thing: 'the Church'.

Already-existing Body

The truth is that Gentiles were called into an already-existing body, by the same faith that Abraham and all his children have.

However, errors emerge when Scripture is read through biased mindsets and false pre-conceptions that have formed in the Christian Church. It is all too easy to take this position, especially if we do not develop a balanced view from the whole of Scripture. In turn, Replacement Theology fuels anti-Semitism if it is thought that God's will is to punish the Jews.

Replacement Theology is rampant and widely accepted in the Church today but its traditions, thought patterns and logics began long ago. We will consider this in the next study, quoting briefly from the writings of two of the 'Church Fathers', Justin Martyr and Origen, to illustrate the point.

Gentiles are called into an already-existing body, by the same faith that Abraham had.

For Reflection and Comment

Read the scriptures referenced in this study, with the mindset of inclusion of believing Gentiles into the Israel of God, rather than a rejection of Israel and total replacement of Israel with an entirely new community of faith. Note the wording of Jeremiah 31:27-37.

Can you find scriptures to correct the error of Replacement Theology that the Church inherits all Israel's blessings and none of its curses?

Next time: Replacement Theology Part 2.

Clifford Denton looks at the growing distinction between Jewish and Christian communities in the first century AD, and the Roman persecution which propelled it.

In the last few studies we have reviewed the initial factors that disturbed the unity of the early Christian Church from its Hebraic heritage. This week we will consider how the parting of the ways was effected by the middle of the second century.

Recap

In Our Father Abraham, Dr Marvin Wilson summarises the factors that led to the early separation of the Christian Church from its Jewish roots:

• There was inevitable tension over the proclamation that Jesus was the expected Messiah, both in terms of Messianic expectation and of theological interpretation.
• Though one has to deal carefully with the reaction of the Synagogue, it seems wise to conclude that at first, there was only general resistance to Christians from this quarter, rather than total exclusion.
• The rising alternative Messianic expectations in the Jewish Revolts brought another element to separation. Followers of Jesus did not form an alliance with those in revolt against Rome, and so were further alienated from the general Jewish community.
• Meanwhile, the failure of the revolts brought catastrophe to the Jewish nation, the fall of the Temple and of the city of Jerusalem, the Diaspora, the rise of the Synagogues and the move to codify the Oral traditions and consolidate Judaism. Both Church and Synagogue were contributing to their parting of ways.

Understanding this early divergence and the separation which followed is not just a useful history lesson. It helps us to understand even the current situation relating to Christianity and Judaism - not so much to allocate blame, but to better appreciate what needs to be repaired in their relationship.

1st Century Jews and Christians differed because of their theologies, their Messianic expectations and the fallout from the Jewish revolts.

Growing Diversion

Clues to the degree of separation between the Christian Church and the Synagogue can be pieced together from available historical evidence. For example, a comment is made by the Roman historian Suetonius concerning a dispute between Jews and Jewish Christians in Rome in 49 AD. Claudius expelled both groups as if there were no distinction between them:

He banished from Rome all the Jews, who were continually making disturbances at the instigation of one Christus. (From Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Suetonias. Available as a Wordsworth Classic, 1997)

However, by the time of Nero in 64 AD, there was a distinction between Christians and Jews - and it was the Christians who were blamed by Nero for the burning of Rome. The Emperor NeroRoman historian Tacitus discusses this in his Annals of Imperial Rome. Following a description of a night of debauchery involving Nero we read:

Disaster followed. Whether it was accidental or caused by criminal act on the part of the emperor is uncertain – both versions have supporters. Now started the most terrible and destructive fire which Rome has ever experienced. It began in the Circus, where it adjoins the Palentine and Caelian hills. Breaking out in shops selling inflammable goods, and fanned by the wind, the conflagration instantly grew and swept the whole length of the Circus...First, the fire swept violently over the level spaces. Then it climbed the hills...

Terrified, shrieking women, helpless old and young, people intent on their own safety, people unselfishly supporting invalids or waiting for them, fugitives and lingerers alike – all heightened the confusion. When people looked back, menacing flames sprang up before them or outflanked them. When they escaped to a neighbouring quarter, the fire followed – even districts believed to be remote proved to be involved...

The fire raged for several days and only four of Rome's fourteen districts remained intact. Nero looked for a scapegoat. Tacitus describes this clearly:

...neither human resources, nor imperial munificence, nor appeasement of the gods, eliminated sinister suspicions that the fire had been instigated. To suppress rumour, Nero fabricated scapegoats – and punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved Christians (as they were popularly called). Their originator, Christ, had been executed in Tiberius' reign by the governor of Judaea, Pontius Pilatus. But in spite of this temporary setback the deadly superstition had broken out afresh, not only in Judaea (where the mischief had started) but even in Rome. All degraded and shameful practices collect and flourish in the capital.

First, Nero had self-acknowledged Christians arrested. Then, on their information, large numbers of others were condemned – not so much for incendiarism as for their anti-social tendencies. Their deaths were made farcical. Dressed in wild animals' skins, they were torn to pieces by dogs, or crucified, or made into torches to be ignited after dark as substitutes for daylight. Nero provided his Gardens for the spectacle, and exhibited displays in the Circus, at which he mingled with the crowd – or stood in a chariot, dressed as a charioteer. Despite their guilt as Christians, and the ruthless punishment it deserved, the victims were pitied. For it was felt that they were being sacrificed to one man's brutality rather than to the national interest. [emphases added]

Thus, from descriptions of the flow of history we find that observers have given us evidence as to the timing of the separation between Jewish and Christian communities. Between the middle and end of the first century, this separation was becoming more noticeable – Jews and Christians were treated as two distinct groups. We now turn to another clue which will help us understand their growing divergence.

By the end of the first century AD, Jews and Christians were being treated as two separate communities.

From Sabbath to Sunday

In his extensive analysis, From Sabbath to Sunday (Pontifical Gregorian University Press, Rome, 1977), Samuele Bacchiocchi traces the details of when Christian celebrations of the Sabbath became Sunday meetings. This is a major clue to how far the Church had become separated from the Jewish community. His analysis confirms the view given by Wilson in Our Father Abraham that by the time of Justin Martyr (around 160 AD), "the parting of the way seems to be largely finalized" (p83).

Bacchiocchi notes that early Christians celebrated the Sabbath in the tradition of Judaism:

...analysis of the New Testament sources regarding the Jerusalem Church has firmly established that the primitive Christian community there was composed primarily of and administered by converted Jews who retained a deep attachment to Jewish religious customs such as Sabbath-keeping. It is therefore impossible to assume that a new day of worship was introduced by the Jerusalem Church prior to the destruction of the city in A.D. 70. We might add that in view of the enormous influence exerted on the Church at large by the Jewish Christian leadership and membership, it would have been practically impossible for any Church anywhere to introduce Sunday observance prior to A.D. 70. W.D. Davies, a well-recognized specialist on early Christianity, concisely and sagaciously summarizes the religious situation at the time:

'Everywhere, especially in the East of the Roman Empire, there would be Jewish Christians whose outward way of life would not be markedly different from that of the Jews. They took it for granted that the gospel was continuous with Judaism; for them the new covenant, which Jesus had set up at the Last Supper with his disciples and sealed by his death, did not mean that the covenant made between God and Israel was no longer in force. They still observed the feasts of Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacles; they also continued to be circumcised, to keep the weekly Sabbath and the Mosaic regulations concerning food. According to some scholars, they must have been so strong that right up to the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 they were the dominant element in the Christian movement.' (p151, with a quote from WD Davies, Paul and Jewish Christianity, 1972. Emphases added)

Even up to 135 AD, despite the flight to Pella by Christians after the fall of Jerusalem, there is evidence of continued observance of the Jewish traditions among those in the Jerusalem congregations. Yet, various other factors gradually eroded this adherence to biblical custom. This seems particularly to be the case when Gentiles came to be the majority in the Christian Church and when congregations developed outside of the Land of Israel.

Bacchiocchi identifies trends in this way with the Church in Rome. We have rehearsed some of the historical factors regarding Christians and Jews in both Israel and Rome and the various pressures that were evident on these communities. Bacchiocchi concludes:

The introduction of Sunday worship in place of "Jewish" Sabbath-keeping- the latter being particularly derided by several Roman writers of the time – could well represent a measure taken by the leaders of the Church of Rome to evidence their severance from Judaism and thereby also avoid the payment of a discriminatory tax. (p173)

Christian Anti-Judaism

Bacchiocchi also identifies a broad range of Christian writers who wrote against the Jews in the second century:

...how different at that time was the attitude of many Christian writers towards the Jews! A whole body of anti-Judaic literature was produced in the second century condemning the Jews socially and theologically...

...The following list of significant authors and/or writings which defamed the Jews to a lesser or greater degree may serve to make the reader aware of the existence and intensity of the problem: 'The Preaching of Peter', 'The Epistle of Barnabus', Quadratus' lost 'Apology', Aristides' 'Apology', 'The Disputation between Jason and Papiscus concerning Christ', Justin's 'Dialogue with Trypho', Miltiades' 'Against the Jews' (unfortunately lost), Apollinarius' 'Against the Jews' (also perished), Melito's 'On the Passover', 'The Epistle to Diognetus', 'The Gospel of Peter', Tertullian's 'Against the Jews', Origen's 'Against Celsus'. (p179)

Justin, in particular, is singled out to demonstrate the issue:

The Sabbath to Justin is a temporary ordinance, derived from Moses, which God did not intend to be kept literally, for He Himself "does not stop controlling the movement of the universe on that day." He imposed it solely on the Jews as "a mark to single them out for punishment they so well deserved for their infidelities." The acceptance of this thesis makes God guilty, to say the least, of discriminatory practices, inasmuch as He would have given ordinances for the sole negative purpose of singling out the Jews for punishment.

Thus we can trace the general trend of Church leaders in the Gentile world, particularly in Rome, to react against their Jewish roots and to demonstrate this through ignoring the Sabbath day. This in turn led to Christians distinguishing themselves by meeting on the first day of the week instead. This was very clear by the middle of the second century.

The general trend amongst Church leaders in the Gentile world, and particularly in Rome, was to react against their Jewish roots.

Summary

In the years in which we now live, distant from the beginning of the new movement in the world of Judaism that came to be called Christianity, both Jews and Christians are looking back to discover how their ways parted. David Flusser, an eminent scholar of Judaism and the origins of Christianity, confirms the view that we have considered in this study:

The Jewish origin of Christianity is an historical fact. It is also clear that Christianity constituted a new community, distinct from Judaism. Thus, Christianity is in the peculiar position of being a religion which, because of its Jewish roots, is obliged to be occupied with Judaism, while a Jew can live his Jewish religious life without wrestling with the problems of Christianity.

From its very beginnings, Christianity understood itself more or less as the heir of Judaism and as its true expression, at the same time that it knew itself to have come into existence through the special grace of Christ. As the vast majority of Jews did not agree with their Christian brethren in this claim, Christianity became a religion of Gentiles to whom, from the second century on, it was forbidden to fulfill the commandments of the Law of Moses – a book which was, at the same time, a part of their Holy Scriptures.

Already then the majority of Christians thought that the Jewish way of life was forbidden even to those Jews who had embraced Christianity, an attitude which later became official in the Church. While anti-Semitism existed before Christianity, Christian anti-Judaism was far more virulent and dangerous. The latter rejected most of the motifs of Greco-Roman anti-Semitism, as these were used also against Christians, but invented new arguments. Most of these existed as early as the first century – some of them have their own roots already in the New Testament – and by the second century we can recognize more or less clearly the whole direction of Christian anti-Judaism. (pp617-618, Origins of Christianity, Magnes Press, 1988, emphases added)

The consequences of Christianity's severance from its roots are apparent not just in differences in community lifestyle but also in the bad fruit of anti-Semitism and anti-Judaism. This can be tracked back to the early days of the Christian Church in Jerusalem, gradually strengthening to a parting of the ways by the mid-second century. Wilson puts it this way in Our Father Abraham:

Although a few Jewish Christians apparently still attended synagogue in Jerome's day (ca. A.D. 400), the parting of the way seems to have been finalized by around the middle of the second century. By the time of Justin Martyr (ca. A.D. 160) a new attitude prevailed in the Church, evidenced by it appropriating the title "Israel" for itself. Until that time the Church had defined itself more in terms of continuity with the Jewish people; that is, it was an extension of Israel. (p83)

For Reflection and Comment

What can Christians do, without compromising the Gospel message, to restore the perception that disciples of Jesus are joined to the Israel of God?

Next time: Replacement Theology.

Clifford Denton looks at the second Jewish Revolt, in 132 AD, and the impact it had on local Christians and Jews.

In the previous study we summarised the events leading up to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Many of Jesus' disciples were living in Jerusalem at the time, and their relationship with the Jewish community was influenced to some extent by the events of the day, especially according to the way the disciples responded to the growing emergency, which many would have seen as fulfillment of prophecy. Let us now consider the period of history that followed.

Between the Revolts

The period between the First and Second Jewish Revolts, 74-132 AD, was a period that saw several changes in Roman Emperors. Vespasian ruled for ten years until 79 AD. His son Titus succeeded him until 81, followed by Domitian until 96, Nerva until 98, Trajan to 117 and Hadrian until 138. These Emperors had different characters. For example, while Domitian was somewhat despotic, Nerva carried more of a social concern. Rome under Trajan and Hadrian was prosperous and well organised. The character of Rome under the different emperors would have its effects on the Jews in the Diaspora and in Judaea.

The period between the First and Second Jewish Revolts saw a succession of different Roman Emperors, each of which governed with a different character.

In the time of Trajan there was something of an uprising among (mainly) the Jews in the Diaspora, called the Quietus War of 115-117. This uprising was so called because it was quelled in Mesopotamia by Lucius Quietus, who cruelly slaughtered thousands of Jews. He was then named procurator of the province of Judaea. It appears that Judaea became a consulate rather than a praetorian province, and it was at this time that it acquired the name Palestine and was policed by two legions rather than one.

Judaea under Quietus

During these years Judaea went through social and economic changes. Jews were expelled from some cities and others were built. After its destruction, the Diaspora Jews were no longer able to come to the Temple for festivals, though pilgrimages were still made by some.

Aspects of religious study continued among new groups, as some of the religious leaders had been careful in their relationship with Rome. The Pharisees gradually disappeared after 70 AD. New groups of Rabbis emerged stressing the importance of study of Torah, there being a need to adjust to the fall of the Temple in Jerusalem. There was also a renewed study of the Oral Traditions. The Rabbis taught a Torah lifestyle and generally worked to earn their own living.

Under leading Rabbis, including Johanan ben Zakkai, Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, Ishmael ben Elisha, Gamaliel II, Akiba and Tarfon began a new wave of consolidation of Judaism. One school of Rabbis worked out of Tiberias. Johanan ben Zakkai had obtained permission to work in Jabneh. He and Gamaliel II set up a Bet Din as a continuation of the Sanhedrin. Some steps were made towards the canonisation of the Tanach (Old Testament) by 100 AD and progress was made with the codification of the Oral Traditions into the Mishnah, which was completed around 200 AD. It was also during this period that synagogues sprung up as local centres for meeting, study and prayer.

After the destruction of the Temple, aspects of religious study still continued in Judaea and the Diaspora, with new schools of Rabbis beginning a wave of consolidation of Judaism.

The Second Jewish Revolt

There were a number of contributing factors to the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome, which started in 132 AD. Under Hadrian there was a political consolidation of the Empire, rather than an extension. In Israel (at this time called Palestine), Hadrian sought to keep Greek and Jewish inhabitants apart, since there was an inherent tension between the communities. Economically there was deterioration and this especially affected the lives of those who were leaseholders of land.

Historians have discussed other more direct causes. It is considered that a contributing factor was that Hadrian planned to rebuild Jerusalem as a Graeco-Roman city called Aelia Capitolina. He is also, at some stage, thought to have forbidden circumcision (however, some historians see the prohibition of circumcision as a consequence rather than a cause of the revolt). It is quite likely that the re-modeling of Jerusalem was a consequence of Hadrian's visit to the land in 130 AD and so this more likely to have fuelled the revolt under Bar Kokhba in 132 AD than the issue of circumcision. Most of the Rabbis also distanced themselves from the revolutionaries (an exception was Akiba who was later listed among the martyrs).

Guerrilla Warfare

The revolt under Simon Bar Kokhba, considered by some of his followers to be the Messiah, was concentrated mainly in Judaea, and began in the early part of 132. Herodium was captured (among other fortresses) and guerrilla warfare was waged from hideouts including caves. The Roman troops were mainly in Galilee at the outbreak of the revolt and, in the early days in the south, care was taken to avoid an open confrontation with Bar Kokhba. It is likely that the rebels took and held Jerusalem for a period.

Hadrian appointed Julius Severus to put down the revolt and he pursued the rebels so that they were trapped in their hideouts, gradually forcing surrender through lack of food. Some horrendous slaughter took place. One of the last strongholds was Bethar, which was hard to take because of its natural protection by three ravines and a fortified ditch. When it was finally taken, the rebellion had proceeded for three years up to 135.

Bar Kokhba and Rabbi Akiba were among the dead and the tradition is that the final slaughter took place on 9th Av, the date of the fall of both the first and the second Temple. During the revolt, Bar Kokhba and his followers had sought to re-establish the community of Israel and had minted their own coins, but this second major Jewish Revolt was quelled by the Romans just like the first, 60 years earlier.

The rebellion was final put down in 135 AD, and the tradition is that the final slaughter took place on 9th Av, the date of the fall of both the first and the second Temple.

Lasting Consequences

In A History of Israel to Bar Kochba (SCM, 2009) Jagersma writes about the tragic consequences of this conflict (p160):

The Roman victory over Bar Kokhba and his followers must have cost them dearly. This is to be concluded from the fact that in his account of this event to the Roman senate, Hadrian left out the customary formula, 'all is well with me and my legions' (Dio Cassius LXIX 14,3). Moreover, Judaea had suffered so much from the revolt that to all intents and purposes an important province was lost to Rome.

Even more serious were the consequences for the Judaeans themselves. Countless of them were killed in battle, while after the revolt many were sold as slaves. The story even goes that the number of Judaean slaves was so great that in the market in Hebron a Jewish slave did not cost more than a horse.

Jerusalem was now a completely Gentile city under the name of Aelia Capitolina. Judaeans were forbidden to enter the city on pain of death. According to Dio Cassius (LXIX 2,1), a shrine to Jupiter was built on the site of the ruined temple, but this seems far from certain.

In various rabbinic sources it is suggested that during and above all after the revolt there was a religious persecution in Palestine. Circumcision, the observance of the Sabbath and the teaching of the Torah are said to have been forbidden. All we can demonstrate with any certainty is a prohibition of circumcision, since later under Antonius Pius (138-161) the rescinding of such a prohibition is recorded.

After this revolt an extremely hard and difficult time dawned for the Jewish people. Deprived of their political homeland, the Torah was the only bond that held them together. History has shown just how strong this bond has been over the course of time. [emphases added]

Jagersma writes that the Revolt cost both Rome and the Judaeans dearly. Jerusalem was re-built as a Gentile city and Jewish religious practices were banned.

But where were Jewish Christians in this uprising? In Our Father Abraham (p82-83) Marvin Wilson elaborates on the response of Christians to the two Revolts, and the impact this had on Jewish-Christian relations:

As they had in the First Jewish Revolt, the Jewish Christians refused to fight. Failure to assist their countrymen in this final ill-fated drive for national independence alienated them even further from the Jewish community. It also left them more vulnerable to persecution. A second factor which created a significant wedge between the two groups centered on Bar Kokhba. The Jewish Christians had but one Messiah, the risen Jesus of Nazareth, who could command their allegiance. Their loyalty could not be directed to both Yeshua (Jesus) and Simon. Thus commitment to the cause of Bar Kokhba may have "virtually meant a denial of the Messiahship of Jesus." [here quoting from The Jewish People and Jesus Christ, by Jacob Jocz, Baker Book House, 1979]

But in parallel vein, the Jewish community made its own statement to the Jewish Christians by supporting Bar Kokhba's cause. Its allegiance to its own messianic movement, spawned by its own charismatic leader, signaled clearly its final rejection of Jesus as Messiah. Henceforth, this would result in a marked change in missionary activity...Until this point, the pressure for separation of the two communities had come from the Jewish side. But those Jews who believed in Jesus sought to remain within the synagogue, or at the very least, under the religious umbrella of Judaism...But the Second Jewish Revolt forced Jewish Christians to separate themselves from those associated with Bar Kokhba's cause. The impetus for dissociation and detachment came from them and no longer from the other side. [emphases added]

For Reflection and Comment

Can we learn any lessons from the Christian reaction to the Jewish revolts that will help us respond to current conflicts in the Middle East?

How important is it for Christians to study the history of Israel and the Jews?

Next time: The Parting of the Ways.

Clifford Denton looks at how early Christians were increasingly excluded from Jewish community and religious life.

The early distancing of Christians from the Jewish community was eventually to lead to a complete separation. It was, however, a process more than a single event. It began with theological differences within the Jewish community - next came exclusion from the synagogues.

The Process

When the early followers of Jesus boldly proclaimed the Gospel message, and the community of believers in Jesus the Messiah was growing in number, there were inevitable reactions in the Jewish community. One of the reactions was that believers were not welcomed in the Synagogues, being considered heretics. In this study we will consider the degree to which this contributed to the parting of the ways between Church and Synagogue in the early days of Christianity. We propose that though the separation began in the first century AD, it was the beginning of a gradual process rather than of that of a sudden break.

Last week, we reviewed how theological differences emerged when the Gospel message was preached in Jerusalem and then moved progressively outwards to the whole world. The writings of the New Testament contain the foundational beliefs that drew attention to the fact that a notable new movement was beginning. This new movement brought an interpretation of the Tanakh (Old Testament) that was founded on the belief that Yeshua (Jesus) is the expected Messiah. In addition, other writings indicate that a summary of the beliefs of the early Christian Church was in circulation in the first century AD. This, as well as the witness of the growing community of believers in Jesus, provoked reaction from the Jewish community.

However, in the eyes of the leaders of the Synagogues, this was not going to be a theological debate alone, but the emergence of a new branch of Judaism. In their eyes, an heretical movement was beginning that had to be stopped, so the Synagogues themselves took steps to separate from the new movement. There is no doubt about this. The subject for discussion, however, is the rate at which the action of the Synagogues, in cutting themselves off from the perceived heresy, took place.

In the eyes of Synagogue leaders, Christianity was an heretical movement that had to be stopped. So they took steps to separate themselves from it.

Synagogue Traditions

The root meaning of Synagogue is 'meeting place'. Israel, from its earliest days, was a community of families with communal practices of studying, worshipping, sharing meals and meeting together in various ways, interpreting Torah for the good of the community. Each person was a member of the community and there were also rules for exclusion. Indeed, exclusion for certain reasons was a Biblical principle. In Deuteronomy 23 we have some of the conditions:

He who is emasculated by crushing or mutilation shall not enter the assembly of the Lord. One of illegitimate birth shall not enter the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the Lord. An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the Lord forever... (Deut 23:1-3ff)

Biblical Injunctions

The strongest reason for exclusion from the community was idolatry and the worship of false gods:

And I will set your bounds from the Red Sea to the sea, Philistia, and from the desert to the River. For I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand, and you shall drive them out before you. You shall make no covenant with them, nor with their gods. They shall not dwell in your land, lest they make you sin against Me. For if you serve their gods, it will surely be a snare to you. (Ex 23:31-33)

The level of exclusion ranged from a lower degree ban (nidduy) to a complete excommunication (herem). In its severest form the life of a person could be taken for bringing uncleanness or guilt into the community, such as with the sin of Achan:

Then Joshua, and all Israel with him, took Achan the son of Zerah, the silver, the garment, the wedge of gold, his sons, his daughters, his oxen, his donkeys, his sheep, his tent, and all that he had, and they brought them to the Valley of Achor. And Joshua said, "Why have you troubled us? The Lord will trouble you this day." So all Israel stoned him with stones; and they burned them with fire after they had stoned them with stones. Then they raised over him a great heap of stones, still there to this day. So the Lord turned from the fierceness of His anger. Therefore the name of that place has been called the Valley of Achor to this day. (Josh 7:24-26)

Later Interpretation

As the community of Israel formed its traditions from its early days, and later, when the community meeting place was centred on a building called the Synagogue, the rules for inclusion and exclusion from the community were developed (the timescale of this development has been a matter of interpretation of the evidence - not an easy matter as much of the traditions were oral traditions and their codification and development was gradual).

Nevertheless, it is clear that the leaders of Israel sought to interpret the injunctions of Torah to keep its community free of sin and, particularly, free of false gods. The history of Israel in the days of the Kings and of the Prophets shows the immensity of this task, as the nation declined and rose again depending on their ability to remain devoted to the One True God.

John's Gospel

John's Gospel gives evidence that the followers of Jesus were watched carefully and, in the context of tradition, judgments were made as to whether a movement was arising that was heretical and which should result in the ban or excommunication from the Synagogues.

There is the example of the man who was born blind.

But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind and received his sight, until they called the parents of him who had received his sight. And they asked them, saying, "Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then does he now see?" His parents answered them and said, "We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind; but by what means he now sees we do not know, or who opened his eyes we do not know. He is of age; ask him. He will speak for himself. His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had agreed already that if anyone confessed that He was Christ, he would be put out of the synagogue. (John 19:18-23)

Jesus himself came under scrutiny, as could be expected of a new Rabbi.

But although He had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him, that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: "Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?" Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again: "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them." These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him. Nevertheless even among the rulers many believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue. (John 12:37-42)

And Jesus warned that his followers would find opposition from the other sects of the Jewish community.

These things I have spoken to you, that you should not be made to stumble. They will put you out of the synagogues; yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he offers God service. And these things they will do to you because they have not known the Father nor Me. But these things I have told you, that when the time comes, you may remember that I told you of them. And these things I did not say to you at the beginning, because I was with you. (John 16:1-4)

Exclusion from the Synagogue was based on the desire to keep heresy out of the community and preserve the purity of the people, as God himself had commanded. The dramatic ministry of Jesus was bound to cause response from the Jewish leaders, as also was the ministry of the Apostles. The context was a nation that expected to judge new movements arising from within its community. We can understand that this was inevitable whilst also mourning the fact that error was made when the disciples of Jesus were misjudged.

Israel was a nation that expected to judge new movements arising within it, according to a desire to keep heresy out of the community and preserve the purity of the people, as God himself had commanded.

The Prayer Book

One of the traditions of the Synagogue was the set patterns of worship. Today we have the fully codified Prayer Book, and this is the result of many years of development. The Prayer Book is a useful resource for Christians to use in studying the background considered here.

One of the most significant points of codification was at Javneh, in the north of Israel, around AD 90, when Rabbi Gamaliel II and his colleagues gathered together to work to preserve the purity of Torah. It is possible that the Amidah was modified at this time. The Amidah is the 'standing prayer' that contained 18 benedictions (Shemoneh-Esreh). These benedictions were blessings for Israel. A 19th addition was made to this at some time, possibly at Javneh. It became the twelth in the sequence and became known as the Birkat ha-Minim – the Benediction concerning the heretics. Though this was included in the Benedictions – blessings - it was in fact a curse. It was a curse on heretics so that Israel might retain its blessings from God.

Around AD 90, the Amidah benedictions – blessings for Israel – were modified to include a curse on heretics, that Israel might retain its blessings from God.

The Curse against Heretics

Thus the prescribed daily benedictions, at some point (probably at Javneh), contained this curse on heretics. Links can be found with the Gospel of John and, at some point in the development of the curse, specific mention of the Notzrim (Nazarenes, ie Christians) was made. When Christians were considered to be an heretical sect, the curse would be directed at them. The question is, how soon did this happen?

In the section on Amidah in Volume 2 of Encyclopedia Judaica, it says of the 12th Benediction that it:

...asks God to destroy the malshinim ("slanderers" or "informers"), all His enemies, and to shatter the "kingdom of arrogance". The text of this benediction, called in the Talmud Birkat ha-Minim ("Benediction Concerning Heretics"), underwent many changes. It concludes with Barukh..shover oyeyim u-makhni'a zedim ("Blessed...Who breakest the enemies and humblest the arrogant")

On the development of Amidah we read (p839):

Fixed community prayers gradually came into being in the Second Temple period. People would meet for joint prayers and, in the course of time, "orders of prayer" developed. At first, these differed widely from group to group. There is, however, no reason to assume that the orders of prayer were instituted at any given time by a central authority. It is almost certain that by the end of the Temple period the 18 benedictions of the weekly Amidah had become the general custom. However, their exact sequence and the content of the individual benedictions probably still varied...

There is explicit testimony that the seven benedictions for Sabbaths and the festivals and the nine for Rosh Ha-Shanah were accepted as the norm by the schools of Hillel and Shammai (Tosef. Ber 3:13). Soon after the destruction of the Temple, the Amidah was "edited" finally in Jabneh, by Rabban Gamaliel II and his colleagues. Even then, only the order, general content, and benediction formula were standardized; the actual wording was left to be formulated by the individual worshipper or reader. Attempts to reconstruct the "original" text of the Amidah or to ascertain the date when each section was "composed" are pointless, especially in view of the ruling that benedictions were not to be written down (Tosef., Shab. 13:4...)

Summary of a Complex Issue

In order to understand our present position, it is important to note the details of this significant contribution to the separation of Jesus' disciples from the Synagogue. It was no small thing and could be justified on biblical grounds.

In summary, a curse against heretics was added to the daily prayers of the Synagogues, in the tradition of the Jewish community always being vigilant to keep itself from following false teaching and false gods. This curse has been directed at Christians, but it is also directed at other supposed heretics.

The question still remains as to whether this antagonism, strongly emanating from the Synagogues, was so strong against Christians as to cause a separation with Judaism. Did it spark a dramatic split, or contribute to a gradual one? This is an important question in relation to the separation of the Christian Church from its Jewish roots. We would be wise to see their separation as gradual rather than sudden – if we are to understand that other factors were at work too. The blame is not all at the door of the Synagogue.

Overview

If we start with the premise that the exclusion of early Christians from the Jewish community was engineered mainly by the Synagogue leaders, then it would have been hard for a follower of Jesus to belong to the Jewish community. When we read the Gospel accounts in the light of this view, we may deduce that the Jewish leaders had already established a strong principle of exclusion, even at the time of Jesus. If one also assumes that the 12th Benediction of the Amidah was specifically directed at the Christians, then the idea may be cultivated that Christianity had no hope of remaining a branch of Judaism, and the fault lay mainly with the Jews.

If, on the other hand, one considers that the 12th Benediction was of a more general nature and against all forms of heresy, and that some Synagogues (not all), perhaps much later, chose to include Christians as a specific example of what they saw as heretics, then the picture at the time of Jesus and the Apostles is much different. In this case we would picture the Jewish leaders, as was usual, investigating a new Rabbinic movement with the possibility of exclusion but not yet a certainty. This is the view taken by Dr Wilson in Our Father Abraham, seeking to put the Jewish response to the growth of Christianity in its proper perspective, seeing the exclusion principle as contributing gradually, but alongside other factors, to separating the Christian Church from its roots. In his conclusion he writes (p72):

It appears that the expression "to put out of the synagogue" must be taken in an informal rather than a formal sense. Perhaps Jesus alluded to this action when he warned that his disciples would be "beaten in synagogues" (Mark 13:9; cf. Acts 5:40). In any case, since there is little collaborative textual evidence that formal excommunication was practiced during this formative period of the Church, aposynagogos may have reference to a kind of informal ostracism.

Hare may be correct in suggesting that this form of pressure by public censure was likely "directed not so much against faith in Christ per se as against those activities of Christians which were regarded as objectionable by the synagogue-community involved (cf. Acts 18:5-7, 13)". Thus, we conclude tentatively that the Fourth Gospel may refer to a kind of ad hoc, spontaneous community disapproval to the preaching that "Jesus was the Christ." This action would amount to removing someone from the synagogue more by group outrage than by formal ban. It is probable that only later, when Synagogue and Church had come close to the brink of final separation, were any formal bans imposed. [emphasis added]

For Reflection and Comment

How might the Christian Church, without compromising the Gospel, demonstrate that followers of Jesus are not an heretical sect, and heal the rift with Israel and the Jews?

Next time: The fall of Israel under Rome.

Clifford Denton continues to examine the early separation between Christianity and Judaism, looking at their theological conflicts.

One of the main factors contributing to the early rift between the Christian Church and the Jewish community was a theological conflict that emerged as biblical prophecies were interpreted through the revelation of Jesus as the expected Messiah. We will consider here the beginnings of this theological separation.

Parting of the Ways

In Chapter 4 of Our Father Abraham, Marvin Wilson considers the parting of the Church from the Synagogue. This parting of the ways was a gradual process over many centuries, but the beginnings are found in the biblical account. In Acts 5:40 we read, "They called the apostles in and had them flogged. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go." Wilson writes:

The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15)...was an alpine event. Its decision would have profound implications for both Church and Synagogue in the years to come. By calling this council, the Church took a clear stand on the issue of gentile circumcision (Acts 15:5, 28-29). This most ancient of all covenant rites would not be a prerequisite to join the still fledgling messianic community which had rapidly expanded into the gentile world. (p52)

In later years, Christian theology would be the subject of many councils, and the creeds of the Christian Church would be crafted. New divisions would begin to occur in the Christian Church itself as various denominations and sects emerged. It was inevitable, however, that the separation of Christians from the sects of Judaism would occur in the early days of the Apostles.

Dr Wilson continues:

The picture of the Church which we are able to draw at this mid-century juncture is composite. It comprised essentially three main groups. One segment was made up of traditionalists from the circumcision party. They were conservative Jewish believers, most likely from the sect of the Pharisees, and were closely tied to Temple worship and Jewish Law...the Ebionite sect probably represented the remnants of this movement, a group which did not die out until the fourth century. A second distinguishable group was the free-thinking Hellenistic party. The Hellenists had one foot planted in the turf of Judaism.

But the other, more firmly set in Greek soil, caused this group to lean to the West. A third segment held to a middle or mainstream position. It reflected the thinking of the council and presumably also the majority of the Jerusalem church (see Acts 15:22). Some of its leading voices were James, Peter ("an apostle to the Jews"), and Paul ("an apostle to the Gentiles" cf. Gal. 2:8). Through the guidance of the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:28), this influential group sought to be open to Gentiles and yet sensitive to the Jews. (emphasis added)

The Christian movement began so powerfully, and the zeal of the early believers was so great, that it could not avoid drawing attention to itself. It was recognised as a heretical sect of Judaism and so caused response from the leaders of the Jewish community who foresaw coming division. The followers of Jesus were seen as emerging from the background of Jewish life, interpreting their message from the Hebrew Scriptures, continuing to visit the Temple, preaching their message among the Jews and interpreting their faith out of Jewish symbols and traditions.

Thus the first points of division can be seen in the Bible itself, before ever a Church Council emerged in later generations.

Theological Issues

Church creeds and doctrines crystallised over the centuries as a response to many issues of contending for the faith, but this began with the Apostles. We have already mentioned the meeting in Jerusalem (Acts 15) that has come to be known as the Council of Jerusalem. As further issues came up, so discussions took place and positions were taken. The New Testament writings introduced many statements of faith, even before systematic creeds were drawn up. Paul highlighted issues of doctrine that had to be made clear as congregations in the Gentile world faced various questions. Paul's writings, in themselves, marked a separation point from other forms of Judaism.

The New Testament writings introduced many statements of faith before systematic Christian creeds were ever drawn up.

In the Introduction to the Mishnah (translated by Danby, OUP, 1933) is an interesting confirmation of this separation based on the writings of the New Testament. The sects of Judaism codified the oral traditions while the Christian Church received the New Testament, signifying the theological parting of the ways. The Mishnah became the foundation of the Talmud and the New Testament became the basis of future creeds of the Christian Church:

The Mishnah may be defined as a deposit of four centuries of Jewish religious and cultural activity in Palestine, beginning at some uncertain date (possibly during the earlier half of the second century B.C.) and ending with the close of the second century A.D. The object of this activity was the preservation, cultivation, and application to life of 'the Law' (Torah), in the form in which many generations of like-minded Jewish religious leaders had learned to understand this Law. These leaders were known in turn by the names Soferim ('Scribes') and Tannaim (lit. 'repeaters', teachers of the Oral Law).

The latter taught the religious system of the Pharisees as opposed to that of the Sadducees. Until the destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70 they had counted as one only among the schools of thought which played a part in Jewish national and religious life; after the Destruction they took the position, naturally and almost immediately, of sole and undisputed leaders of such Jewish life as survived. Judaism as it has continued since is, if not their creation, at least a faith and a religious institution largely of their fashioning; and the Mishnah is the authoritative record of their labour. Thus it comes about that while Judaism and Christianity alike venerate the Old Testament as canonical Scripture, the Mishnah marks the passage to Judaism as definitely as the New Testament marks the passage to Christianity. (emphasis added)

First Century: the Separation Begins

The Apostolic Council of Jerusalem was around 49 AD. 1 and 2 Corinthians was written around 54-55 AD, Romans around 55 AD and Hebrews in the 60s. Peter and Paul's martyrdoms were around 64 AD. Matthew was written in the 60s, Revelation in the late 80s or early 90s. Thus the date of the destruction of the Temple (70 AD) is embedded in the dates surrounding the significant writings and formation of the doctrines of the Christian Church.

Already the ministry of Jesus had been pivotal in the Jewish world, his crucifixion being around 30 AD. His followers then became living witnesses to their faith and so the Christian community was noticeable in the world of Judaism, it being inevitable that their beliefs would be scrutinised by the leaders of the Jewish community.

The destruction of the Temple in 70 AD is embedded in the dates surrounding the New Testament writings, and followed the pivotal ministry of Jesus, so the Christian community was already well-known in the world of Judaism.

Other early Christian writings give indications of the way theological ideas began to form among believers. For example, around 95 AD Clement, secretary of the Roman Church, wrote to the Corinthian congregation. He viewed this congregation as what we might consider to be on a par with the Essene community of Qumran, fulfilling what was prefigured in the Old Testament. Later, in his second letter, we see him treat Paul's writings on an equal footing to the Scriptures of the Old Testament. Others such as Ignatius of Antioch have left letters which build up clues to the early theology of the Christian Church.

Statement of Faith

What emerged is called the kerygma. It is a Greek word meaning, 'proclamation, announcement, preaching'. CH Dodd (The Apostolic Preaching, 1936), and others, examined early Christian writings to discover the core of Christian preaching in the early days of the Apostles. The ancient kerygma as summarised by Dodd from Peter's speeches in Acts was:

1. The Age of Fulfillment has dawned, the 'latter days' foretold by the prophets.
2. This has taken place through the birth, life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
3. By virtue of his resurrection Jesus has been exalted at the right hand of God as Messianic head of the new Israel.
4. The Holy Spirit in the church is the sign of Christ's present power and glory.
5. The Messianic Age will reach its consummation in the return of Christ.
6. An appeal is made for repentance with the offer of forgiveness, the Holy Spirit, and salvation.

Jesus Christ, of course, was the center of this ancient kerygma. The cross and resurrection are crucial to the kerygmatic preaching of Jesus. Another useful summary is found in Chronological Charts of the New Testament (Zondervan, 1981, p120) by H Wayne House:

1. The promises by God made in the Old Testament have now been fulfilled with the coming of Jesus the Messiah (Acts 2:30; 3:19,24; 10:43; 26:6-7, 22; Rom 1:2-4; 1 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1-2; 1 Pet 1:10-12, 2 Pet 1:18-19).
2. Jesus was anointed by God at his baptism as Messiah (Acts 10:38).
3. Jesus began his ministry in Galilee after his baptism (Acts 10:37).
4. He conducted a beneficent ministry, doing good and performing mighty works by the power of God (Mark 10:45; Acts 2:22; 10:38).
5. The Messiah was crucified according to the purpose of God (Mark 10:45; John 3:16; Acts 2:23; 3:13-15, 18; 4:11; 10:39; 26:23; Rom 8:34; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:3; Gal 1:4; Heb 1:3; 1 Pet 1:2, 19; 3:18; 1 John 4:10).
6. He was raised from the dead and appeared to his disciples (Acts 2:24, 31-32; 3:15,26; 10:40-41; 17:31; 26:23; Rom 8:34; 10:9; 1 Cor 15:4-7, 12ff.; 1 Thess 1:10; 1 Tim 3:16; 1 Pet 1:2, 21; 3:18, 21).
7. Jesus was exalted by God and given the name 'Lord' (Acts 2:25-29, 33-36; 3:13; 10:36; Rom 8:34; 10:9; 1 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:3; 1 Pet 3:22).
8. He gave the Holy Spirit to form the new community of God (Acts 1:8; 2:14-18, 33, 38-39; 10:44-47; 1 Pet 1:12).
9. He will come again for judgment and the restoration of all things (Acts 3:20-21; 10:42; 17:31; 1 Cor 15:20-28; 1 Thess 1:10).
10. All who hear the message should repent and be baptised (Acts 2:21, 38; 3:19; 10:43, 47-48; 17:30; 26:20; Rom 1:17; 10:9; 1 Pet 3:21).

It was impossible for the differences in theology to go unnoticed as being a divergence from orthodox Judaism. Christianity, nevertheless, grew out of the Jewish background with common roots in the Tanakh, not as a new religion in the Gentile world, where it might have gone unnoticed. The centrality of Jesus the Messiah made it impossible for the Apostles to be silent and the fact that the oral traditions of Judaism (later codified as the Mishnah) made different emphasis, made it impossible for theological conflicts to be avoided.

It was impossible for Christianity to be ignored as a simple divergence from orthodox Judaism. The centrality of Jesus the Messiah made it impossible for the Apostles to be silent, and the difference between Christian doctrine and the Jewish oral traditions made theological conflict unavoidable.

Jewish Symbols

It was for the very reason that Christianity emerged from the background of Judaism that conflict occurred. On the one hand these are two branches of the same tree and, on the other hand, they are conflicting interpretations of the same Scriptures. On page 55 of Our Father Abraham, Dr Wilson presents Christianity as a radical reinterpretation of Jewish symbols and therefore ready to spark off reaction and potential parting of the ways:

The two Testaments exhibit strong continuity, but also a discontinuity. Many Old Testament institutions and themes are radically reinterpreted in the New Testament, often in ways – despite their foreshadowing – that the majority in New Testament times was unable to discern. In addition, the embodiment of the Torah in Jesus created a major tension. Jesus subordinated many of the central symbols of Judaism to himself, and the New Testament writers continued that subordination.

Thus, Jesus became the Temple (John 2:19-21) and the atoning sacrifice ("the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world" – John 1:29). At Passover the matzah, "unleavened bread," represented his body (Mark 14:22); likewise, the lamb sacrificed at Passover symbolized Jesus' sacrificial death (1 Corinthians 5:7). In addition, Jesus declared himself Lord of the Sabbath (Mark 2:27-28). He also distinguished the ritually clean from unclean (Mark 7:1-23). In sum, in early Jewish Christianity the "Sabbath, Temple, Law, sacrifices are christologically reinterpreted by the One who is greater than them all." (quoted from P. Richardson, Israel in the Apostolic Church, CUP, 1969). The overall effect was that the first-century Jewish community largely considered these teachings strange and antiritualistic, a threat to established religious beliefs of the day.

On the one hand, Christianity and Judaism are two branches of the same tree. On the other, they are radically conflicting interpretations of the same Scriptures.

For Reflection and Comment

How might the Christian Church, without compromising the Gospel, restore theological balance and heal the rift with Israel and the Jews?

Next time: Exclusion from the Synagogue.

'Older Younger Brother: The Tragic Treatment by Christians of the Jews', by Canon Andrew White (self-published, 2014, 48 pages)

This short account of Jewish-Christian relations over the centuries contains a concise summary of the main historical events that feature in other books of this kind, but also adds some fascinating extra details not usually found elsewhere.

Andrew White, Vicar of St George's Anglican Church, Baghdad (known affectionately as the 'Vicar of Baghdad') is able to bring a clear personal perspective to this sorry tale of how Christians have mistreated the Jewish people. His background and training included studying at a Rabbinic seminary in Israel, which provided him with a spiritual passion for the Jewish people and a love for their Scriptures and other writings. This, together with his current role in the Middle East (especially in reconciliation projects), means he is well aware of the innate bond between Christians and Jews, how this has been shattered and what can be done about it.

Andrew traces how the Christian Church divided itself from its Jewish roots and examines the theological prejudices behind this. His brief survey of the Church Fathers is followed by an examination of key moments in the Middle Ages and the Reformation, leading to more recent events such as the Holocaust. All this may well be familiar to many, but he then adds an account of two important conferences aiming to combat the prejudices which had produce these catastrophes.

Andrew White is well aware of the innate bond between Christians and Jews, how this has been shattered and what can be done about it."

He quotes in full the 10 point statement produced by the International Council of Christians and Jews (ICCJ) held at Seelisburg in 1947, a statement which the author says "remained the most significant document on the issue of the relationship between Jews and Christians for over 60 years" (p25).

He then reproduces, also in full, the more extensive and updated statement published by the ICCJ following their 2009 conference in Berlin. This deals not just with Christian-Jewish matters but also considers two other important issues – relationships with Islam and the establishment of the state of Israel. His conclusion is that this is "a truly amazing document" which although "accepted by many academics and those concerned with Christian-Jewish relations" has sadly been ignored by many other Christians and whose precepts have not been followed by all churches (p30).

He then examines why this unhappy state of affairs still exists, mainly from a theological rather than political point of view. In this section he outlines the 3 R's of Christian theology towards the Jews. He explains the role of Replacement theology and its dangers and evils. He also compares this to Remnant theology (basically Christian Zionism which has become popular over the past hundred years) and the less well known Recognition theology, whose core belief is found in the Seelisburg Conference pronouncement mentioned earlier and which was largely formulated via the ICCJ.

The author allows us to make up our own minds on the latter two, as recent re-assessments of Christian attitudes towards the Jews, but he is certainly clear that "the evil of Replacement Theology is now once again poisoning Christian minds" (p30).

He doesn't leave it there, but explains how this resurgence of Replacement Theology is now centred upon the nation of Israel and its relationship with the Palestinian people. This is producing a new crisis between Jews and Christians, especially those who wish to show compassion towards the Palestinians.

Andrew's experience in the Middle East gives him valuable insights"

The author's experience of the Middle East (he is President of the Foundation for Relief and Reconciliation in the Middle East) gives him valuable insights, but he is also aware that "the great fissure within the church over Israel and the Jews is of enormous importance, with ramifications spreading far beyond the troubled region of the Middle East" (p44).

Overall this is a very useful contribution to the information and arguments usually expressed within the whole area of Christian-Jewish relations. How the Younger Brother turned against the Elder is a lesson of which we all need to take note. An awareness of where this has left us today, politically and theologically, is vital for all thoughtful and caring Christians.