The Father’s love for the lost sheep

A light to the Gentiles

Strategy and structure (Part 2)

The nations are clay in the Potter’s hands.

The importance of staying close to the Lord.

The most important book you’ve never heard of…

The Didache (pronounced did-ah-kay) has been described as the most important book you’ve never heard of. So what exactly is it and does it deserve this accolade?

Its full title, ‘The Teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles through the Twelve Apostles’, explains its purpose and content. It is an early Church manual: the teaching of the early Jewish followers of Jesus to the new Gentile believers.

The Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 agreed that God had indeed “opened the door of faith to the Gentiles” (Acts 14:27). But after the Council’s ruling of four initial prohibitions (Acts 15:29), what else was required of Gentiles if they were to progress in the faith? If they were not expected to keep Torah as fully as their Jewish brethren, what did they need in order to walk in the same Way?

Here in the Didache we find compiled the necessary instruction to prepare them for immersion and membership in the Body of Christ. As such, this special document fulfilled a key role in the Great Commission to make disciples (not just converts) of all nations.

Walking in the Way

The Didache can be seen as a kind of apostolic Mishnah for new Gentile believers. Certainly there is a Jewish quality inherent in the text. The opening is particularly Jewish, and the language and prayers in later chapters have direct parallels and counterparts in the Judaism of the time. All the early believers in Messiah were still within the fold of Judaism, so this is hardly surprising.

Another similarity with the Mishnah is that the Didache is likely to have been passed on orally before being written down, as evidenced by certain mnemonic devices within the text. Most scholars believe its style places it in the mid-1^st Century, though some dispute this. If it is this early then it falls within the oral tradition of the time. The long title, quoted above, would have been added later when it was written down (incidentally, shorter versions of the title do exist, namely ‘The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles’, and just ‘The Teaching’, or ‘Didache’).

The Didache is an early Church instruction manual setting out teaching for helping new Gentile converts to become disciples.

The Didache is an anonymous document. Although the 12 apostles are mentioned in the title, they are not referred to in the text. Some see similarities with the Epistle of Barnabas and so suggest a link with him and hence with Paul. However, we cannot be sure if any of the apostles were directly involved in its production or transmission, although there is no doubt that the essential thrust of the Didache follows the same path and breathes the same spirit.

The Didache has been described as having an archaic simplicity (which fits its early dating). Its expressions are primitive. It contains no detailed creed, no exalted titles of Jesus, no lofty theology or doctrine. Rather it is a simple work of everyday living, reflecting the Jewish concept of ‘halakhah’, or walking with God. Its aim is to pass on the Way of Life as taught by Jesus (rather than provide a description of him and his works), directing Gentile converts in the step-by-step transformation necessary for full participation in their new faith.

Before the ‘Parting of the Ways’

The Didache clearly represents a time before Christianity became separated from Judaism. Nothing in it indicates the later ‘parting of the ways’. It has been described as one of the last voices of authentic apostolic faith: the final flowering of Judeo-Christianity before Greek influence and theology took charge. This alone makes it a fascinating and worthwhile document to study.

The Didache was popular among early believers and enjoyed wide circulation. Numerous early Church writers mentioned it and quoted from it frequently, for instance Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Eusebius and Athanasius. It is mentioned as being read in churches, but was not considered canonical or to be used to confirm doctrine. However, it could be seen as being “appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness.”¹

This is recorded as continuing until the 4^th Century, but by the 5^th Century the Didache fell out of popularity and was referenced much less. It does get an occasional mention in later times, but for centuries it was assumed that copies no longer existed. Then came a surprise discovery in 1873.

The Didache has been described as one of the last voices of authentic apostolic faith.

An Astonishing Find

A Greek Orthodox Archbishop, Philotheos Bryennios, was browsing in the library of the Greek Convent of the Holy Sepulchre in Constantinople and found a text lodged between two longer works in a single bound volume of Christian manuscripts. Somehow it had escaped the notice of previous cataloguers. Was this find too good to be true? Might it be a modern forgery? After a few years it was judged authentic and dated as a copy from 1056. It was finally published in 1883. When the first English translation was released in 1884, it sold 5,000 copies on the first day.

Although older fragments have been found since, this remains the only complete manuscript. Known as Codex Hierosolymitanus 54, it now resides in the library of the Greek Orthodox patriarchate in Jerusalem. In 1922 two Greek fragments were found in Egypt which were textually very close to that found in Istanbul, thus verifying its accuracy. In addition, a Coptic fragment from Cairo, dating back to the 5^th Century, was published in 1924, and another nearly complete Gregorian version was found in Constantinople in 1923, though never published. The 1873 manuscript remains the most reliable and complete.

Inevitably, a find such as this created a lot of controversy - especially where its contents didn’t agree with then-current Church traditions! The Catholic Church appreciated some bits of the Didache but was dismayed that some of its liturgy wasn’t there. Similarly, Protestants, pleased to see these omissions, did not like the emphasis on what they saw as ‘works of righteousness’, such as fasting twice a week. Both sides inevitably attempted various interpretations to place it more comfortably within their own traditions.

Intended for Study

The Didache is a short work, approximately one third of the length of Mark’s Gospel. It is composed of 16 short chapters (some very short), containing just 2,190 words in total. The vocabulary and grammar reflect the popular koine Greek of the 1^st Century. Its style is simple and terse. It uses only 552 different words, of which 504 are found in the New Testament. All this again points to an early date.

The Didache is a short work, approximately one third of the length of Mark’s Gospel.

The material of the Didache was probably intended to be studied in pairs, in a one-to-one format, as the entire text uses the second person singular. This is similar to the rabbinic concept of chavruta, where the novice studies at times with a partner of the same level, but at other times with someone more mature in the faith acting as a mentor. Indeed ‘The Training’ is a better title than ‘The Teaching’, as the Didache represents a form of apprenticeship! Crucially, the mentor was not offering his thoughts on these matters, but passing on instructions that he had previously received and was also living out.

The Didache also seems to be for both male and female disciples. Specifically female issues are addressed, and the novice is addressed as ‘my child’, not ‘my son’.

Flow of Topics

Some believe the Didache was composed in stages, with the first section, called ‘The Two Ways’, existing in some form before being incorporated into the Didache. Nevertheless, as a whole it displays a unity across its structure, with a flow of topics which may indicate a comprehensive step-by-step programme for Gentile converts to become full disciples. The layout allows the recipient to progress slowly from introductory material to more complex rituals of daily living and community.

Though there are no separate headings, the content clearly divides into sections or tractates. Phrases or topic sentences are repeated to signal the beginning of new portions and summary statements are used to bring blocks of material to a close. These linguistic clues suggest the following four sections (though some split the third into two parts, making five in total):

Section 1 refers to two ‘ways’: the Way of Life and the Way of Death. These two paths would have already been well-known from Scripture (e.g. Psalm 1) and the teaching of Jesus. The Way of Life concerns one’s relationship with God as well as one’s relationships with other people.

Much of this reflects the Torah and the Decalogue, but the Didache contains a noticeable emphasis on how Gentile believers needed to live within the Roman world. In particular, it contains new prohibitions pertaining to what they would encounter in Roman society. Overall, the Didache represents an interesting adaptation of the Torah to take into account the circumstances that these converts would face.

The Didache represents an interesting adaptation of the Torah to take into account the circumstances that new Gentile converts would face in the Roman world.

Section 2 provides regulations for eating, baptising, fasting and praying. The chapter on food is very short and simple, and covers meat offered to idols. The next chapter, on baptism, shows a preference for baptising in flowing water, although exceptions are allowed if this is not available. Baptism is to be done in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and was to mark a clear turning-point in life, including the breaking of previous social bonds (even those within a family if necessary), as through baptism the convert was now joining a new family.

Fasting was to be undertaken before baptism and the next chapter indicates that in general a fast should be made twice a week, as within the Jewish tradition, though on different days from the Jews! This chapter also contains short injunctions on prayer, including use of the Lord’s Prayer.

The next two chapters contain the blessings to be made before and after a meal, especially the eucharist which was a full meal within the context of a family. Again, Jewish traditions are preserved here.

Warnings and Hope

Section three contains regulations for hospitality and for testing various kinds of visitors, especially itinerant prophets. They are to be welcomed and even honoured, but their time spent in any one community must be limited. Warnings are given against those who seek money or extended hospitality, and of course their words had to be tested and match their conduct, which must have already made a favourable impression upon the community before their words are heard.

The Didache contains a lot of cautionary advice regarding prophets - something still needed today. It seems the new Christian communities had much to fear from abusive and wayward prophets. However, ample provision is also made for welcoming true prophets, who could even be rewarded – provided they didn’t ask (interestingly, there is no mention of the communities creating and sending out their own prophets to other places. However, they were to appoint their own local overseer, or episkopos, which at that time was an entirely secular word meaning someone charged with oversight. These men were not themselves teachers or prophets, but also had to be of good conduct and then similarly honoured)!

The Didache contains a lot of cautionary advice regarding prophets - something still needed today.

The final section is on the end times! What a refreshing change from the complexities and confusion we find today. Here is a short synopsis of apocalyptic warnings and a message of hope. The emphasis is upon the ‘not yet’ aspect of the Kingdom, the need for holiness in preparation for Jesus’ return, and warnings of false prophets and deceivers.

Finally, three signs of truth are mentioned that will appear at the end: the unfurling or opening of the sky, the sound of the trumpet and the resurrection of the just. Then the world will see the Lord coming upon the clouds. Perhaps this is all we need to know in advance!

Now you’ve heard of this important book, click here to read our reviews of three editions currently available to purchase.

Paul Luckraft reviews ‘Plan A’ by Paul Parkhouse (ICEJ, 2017).

Subtitled ‘What modern Israel reveals about the original and unchanging purposes of God’, this short book aims to unpack the reasons behind “an event unparalleled in human history” when “one of the world’s most famous ancient nations suddenly reappeared on the map” (p6, 7). This was not just any nation, but God’s original covenant nation – which makes this event well worth exploring.

Parkhouse’s key concern is to unpack why God’s salvation plan for the world still needs Israel (this may be baffling to some, but for others it is equally puzzling that the common Christian understanding of God’s plans includes no present or future need for Israel).

The author sets out to refute those theologians such as Karl Barth who claim that “The first Israel, constituted on the basis of physical descent from Abraham, has fulfilled its mission now that the Saviour of the world has sprung from it and its Messiah has appeared…Its mission as a natural community has now run its course and cannot be continued or repeated” (p21, quoting Barth’s Church Dogmatics).

This common view is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of covenant, which Parkhouse explores. Jesus initiated the New Covenant in his own body and blood, but not in isolation from the other covenant promises which God had previously made.¹ It is also important to realise that the New Covenant was originally promised to the Jewish people (see Jeremiah 31 and Ezekiel 36). God has to be faithful to all he has covenanted to do if his plan is to reach fulfilment.

‘Divine Delay’

Using the biblical Feasts as a roadmap to guide us through the details of God’s overarching salvation plan, Parkhouse points out that it was always God’s intention that there should be “a long pause between the new covenant being established in Israel and Israel being established in the new covenant” (p68). This ‘divine delay’ comes with a certain amount of irony. Its primary purpose is to allow the Gentiles to come in fully – but it has become one of the main reasons Gentile Christians use to demonstrate that God must have replaced Israel with the Church.

It was always God’s intention that there should be “a long pause between the new covenant being established in Israel and Israel being established in the new covenant.”

Parkhouse makes it very clear that there is no alternative to ‘Plan A’ and that Satan has never been able to derail it, nor will he be able to stop its future fulfilment. It is secure within the purposes of God and we can remain confident that God will see it through.

Invitation to Investigate

The re-emergence of Israel is a sign for our times, and one that must be investigated just as Moses needed to take a closer look at the bush that burned but was not consumed. When he did examine the phenomenon in more detail, Moses discovered that at the centre of the bush was God himself. We are invited to make a similar discovery concerning Israel today.

Overall, the author provides plenty of scriptures and uses them well to bolster his arguments. The book is well written and is of a size and style that makes it useful to give away.

‘Plan A: What Modern Israel Reveals about the Original and Unchanging Purposes of God’ (94pp, paperback) is available on Amazon for £4.99 or from ICEJ. Also on Amazon Kindle for £1.99.

Notes

1 Only one of these (the Mosaic covenant) was superseded by the New Covenant – for further reading on this see for example ‘By God, I will: The Biblical Covenants’ by David Pawson (Anchor, 2013).

Paul Luckraft reviews 'When the Cross Became a Sword' by Merrill Bolender (2011, 80 pages)

This book is described as a primer on the origin and consequences of Replacement Theology and as such it is slight in terms of pages and inexpensive. Its value is that its size makes it a simple reference guide and it has large print for easy reading.

The author admits his intention is not to provide a comprehensive treatment but "to paint a clear picture with 'broad brush strokes'" (p11). He adds that he is not trying to demean or judge others, but to help people to "learn and move ahead so that we can avoid repeating similar mistakes in the future" (p12).

Endorsing a Hebraic Mindset

He upholds the view of those who insist that Replacement Theology is nowhere to be found in the Bible being based on nothing more than presupposition, but he is aware that its impact can be highly destructive. He shows how small errors made early in its history has thrown the Church off course and has led over time to greater and greater divergence from biblical truth.

Bolender starts with an examination of Romans 11 and exhorts a Hebrew mindset which enables us to interpret Scripture in a plain and literal way, without always having to resort to an allegorical or spiritualising approach. He shows how the early Church Fathers abandoned their Hebraic roots and embraced Greek thinking, in particular a 'Christianised' form of Plato's philosophy.

Bolender's book is a short and inexpensive primer on the origin and consequences of Replacement Theology – ideal for giving away to those new to the topic.

From Cross to Sword

As he works his way historically from Constantine through the atrocities of the Middle Ages to the Crusades there are plenty of examples and quotes which back up his main thesis that indeed the Cross became a sword. A particularly telling comment is that "the early apostles would not have recognised the Church in her new form" (p37).

In keeping with the overall aim of providing a brief introduction, Bolender provides short chapters (in some cases just two or three pages) on the Inquisition, examples from Russian history, the Reformation and Luther, and inevitably the Holocaust. Much of this material is found elsewhere in much more detail (see, for instance, other books previously reviewed in Prophecy Today, those by Gordon Pettie and Joel Richardson) but this book is perhaps the one that is the easiest to give away to those who need their eyes opening to this important topic. There is a good four-page glossary at the end to help those coming to this for the first time, and a useful two-page bibliography to enable further reading.

The author wants Gentiles to see how blessed they are by being grafted in to all the wonderful advantages of a rich Jewish heritage.

Above all, the author wants Gentiles to see how blessed they are by being grafted in to all the wonderful advantages of a rich Jewish heritage, and he strongly advocates that although we cannot correct past wrongs, we can certainly can do something about the present and, in so doing, we can help change the future.

'When the Cross Became a Sword' is available as an e-book for £3.07 via Amazon Kindle. Available elsewhere in paperback.

Clifford Denton surveys the many prominent leaders of the early Church who contributed to the development of anti-Jewish attitudes and beliefs amongst Christians.

Over the last few instalments of this study we have been considering carefully the gradual separation of the Christian Church from its Hebraic foundations, and its detachment from Israel and the Jewish people. We have also noted the parallel emergence of anti-Semitism.

In this section we move on to reflect on the position of some of the more prominent 'Fathers' of the Christian Church and to demonstrate how Replacement Theology became entrenched in the Gentile branch of the Church in the early centuries of the Common Era.

Fathers of the Church

By the 'Church Fathers', we generally mean the prominent Christian leaders who framed the early theology of the Church and whose influence has continued to this day. Of course, the true 'father of the Church' in human terms is Abraham (Rom 4:16). As Dr Wilson writes in the preface of Our Father Abraham:

...Our Father Abraham, is a biblical expression (see Luke 1:73; John 8:53; Acts 7:2; etc.) that epitomizes the deep spiritual link every Christian has with the Jewish people...gentile Christians are grafted by faith into Israel (Romans 11:17-24), and through this faith commitment come to know Israel's father as their father too. Elsewhere Paul says that "those who believe are children of Abraham" (Gal. 3:7); indeed, through faith, "Abraham is the father of us all" (Rom. 4:16). (pxvi)

The Apostle Paul, in another application of the idea of fatherhood, talks of being a father to those in his care. He referred to Timothy as "my own son in the faith" (1 Tim 1:2) and in writing to the Corinthians, said:

For though you might have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you do not have many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. (1 Cor 4:15)

So, in the foundational sense Abraham is seen as the father of the faithful, and in a general sense Paul and the apostles saw themselves in a fatherly role to those who became believers.

Biblical Fatherhood

Fatherhood is a biblical principle. After the time of Paul and the apostles there arose a number of new leaders from the Gentile world, from the second century on, who approached the Bible with a Greek philosophical viewpoint and who wrote about and debated the scriptures in this context. Along with a considerable amount of truth, these men also introduced errors which were passed on to later generations, and so they were not fathers in the purer sense of the word as applied to Abraham and Paul.

As the Church developed in the Gentile world, later leaders drew much reference from these men and so they came to be called the 'Early Church Fathers'. Even today there is much study of and respect for what was written by these philosophers. However, if we study their contribution to the thinking of the Church we detect a further step in the separation of the Church from its Hebraic foundations.

Alongside considerable truth, the teaching of the so-called 'Early Church Fathers' also introduced errors and assumptions into the Church which have been passed down the generations.

Whereas Paul would be a father to his own converts and point them back to the faith of Abraham fulfilled in Jesus, looking back on the so-called 'Church Fathers' is to look back on teaching that already has inbuilt assumptions that separate us from the teaching of Paul and the early apostles.

Examples

We can illustrate this point by drawing on examples from the writings of these 'Early Church Fathers'. There is a useful section in Dr Richard Booker's book, No Longer Strangers (Sound of the Trumpet, 2002), from which we quote (pp105-109):

Some of the most influential of the Gentile leaders of the early church had little regard for or understanding of Jews. They were Greek philosophers who attempted to merge Greek philosophy with the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament. Due to the Greek influence in their lives and the lack of a Hebraic perspective of the Bible, many of the new Christian leaders were anti-Semitic. They interpreted the Bible through the eyes of Plato more than through the eyes of Moses and Jesus...

These "Christian Fathers" expressed their hatred of the Jews through their speeches and writings, which laid the foundation for the anti-Semitic policies at the very beginning of the Gentile-led, Christian church...

Booker describes some early Church leaders as 'Greek philosophers' who sought to merge Greek thinking with the scriptures.

Ignatius

Booker continues by referring to Ignatius, second-century bishop of Antioch:

[Ignatius] wrote a letter called the Epistle to the Philippians. He said that anyone who celebrated Passover with the Jews, or received emblems of the Jewish feast, was a partaker with those who killed the Lord and His apostles. This is just the opposite of Paul's instructions to Gentile believers in Corinth to "keep the feast" (1 Corinthians 5:7-8)... (p109)

From the introduction to Ignatius's Epistle to the Philippians we read the following:

Being mindful of your love and of your zeal in Christ, which ye have manifested towards us, we thought it fitting to write to you, who display such a godly and spiritual love to the brethren, to put you in remembrance of your Christian course...

This has the same ring to it as the introductions to some of Paul's letters, giving a sense that this writer, who lived much closer to the time of Paul than we do, may have had a position of authority close to that of Paul. After the introduction he goes on to discuss the revelation of Christ and the works of Satan in an acceptable manner. Yet in his conclusion he writes:

Do not lightly esteem the festivals. Despise not the period of forty days, for it comprises an imitation of the conduct of the Lord. After the week of the passion, do not neglect to fast on the fourth and sixth days, distributing at the same time of thine abundance to the poor. If any one fasts on the Lord's Day or on the Sabbath, except on the paschal Sabbath, he is a murderer of Christ...If any one celebrates the Passover along with the Jews, or receives he emblems of their feast, he is a partaker with those that killed the Lord and His apostles. [emphasis added]

This shows that Ignatius wrote against the Jews and the biblical feasts and referred to new practices that were emerging in the Church even in these early days.

Barnabus

Barnabus is the assumed name of the writer of The Epistle of Barnabus. He must not be mistaken for the Barnabus spoken of in Scripture, who was a friend of Paul the apostle. Dr Booker writes:

An influential letter written in the same time period was the Epistle of Barnabus. The writer said that the Jews no longer had a covenant with God and that it was a sin to say they did. This is totally contradictory to the Bible, which says God's covenant with Abraham is everlasting (Genesis 17:7-8). [emphasis added]

The letter is written in several chapters, from which we will quote briefly. The reference in Chapter 3 (entitled 'The Fasts of the Jews are not true fasts, nor acceptable to God') is to Isaiah 58:

He says then to them concerning these things, "Why do ye fast to Me as on this day, saith the Lord, that your voice shall not be heard with a cry? I have not chosen this fast saith the Lord...To us He saith, "Behold, this is the fast that I have chosen, saith the Lord, not that a man should humble his soul, but that he should loose every band of iniquity...For He revealed these things beforehand, that we should not rush forward as rash acceptors of their laws.

From Chapter 11 – 'The False and True Sabbath':

...He says to them, "Your new moons and your Sabbaths I cannot endure." Ye perceive how He speaks: Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me, but that is which I have made, namely this, when, giving rest to all things, I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world. Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. And when He manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens.

Justin Martyr

From his examples, Dr Booker continues:

Justin Martyr, in the second century, claimed God's covenant with the Jews was no longer valid and that the Church had replaced the Jews in God's redemptive plan. This is contrary to Romans 11.

Last week we quoted extensively from The Dialogue with Trypho. We quote again briefly here:

...we do not trust through Moses or through the law; for then we would do the same as yourselves...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...

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...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...

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. [emphasis added]

Irenaeus

Richard Booker continues:

Irenaeus was the bishop of Lyon in the second century He wrote that the Jews were disinherited from the grace of God. But the apostle Paul wrote that the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable (Romans 11:29). [emphasis added]

In Against Heresies, Irenaeus himself writes:

He is therefore one and the same God, who called Abraham and gave him the promise. But He is the Creator, who does also through Christ prepare lights in the world, namely those who believe from among the Gentiles...Therefore have the Jews departed from God, in not receiving His Word, but imagining that they could know the Father by Himself, without the Word, that is, without the Son; they being ignorant of that God who spake in human shape to Abraham, and again to Moses, saying, "I have surely seen the affliction of My people in Egypt, and have come down to deliver them.

John Chrysostom

Of fourth-century Antioch bishop John Chrysostom, Booker writes:

The Christian leader who expressed his hate for the Jews more than any other was John Chrysostom...He said there could never be forgiveness for the Jews and that God had always hated them. He taught it was the "Christian duty" to hate the Jew. He said the Jews were the assassins of Christ and worshippers of the devil.

In one of his murderous sermons, Chrysostom declared, "The synagogue is worse than a brothel...It is the den of scoundrels...the temple of demons devoted to idolatrous cults...a place of meting for the assassins of Christ...a house worse than a drinking shop...a den of thieves; a house of ill fame, a dwelling of iniquity, the refuge of devils, a gulf and abyss of perdition...As for me, I hate the synagogue...I hate the Jews for the same reason." (p107, taken from Malcolm Hay, The Roots of Christian Anti-Semitism, Liberty Press, 1981, pps27-28) [emphases added]

Other Prominent Writers

Continuing, Dr Booker highlights a number of other 'Church Fathers' and their writings.¹ We read from No Longer Strangers:

Clement of Alexandria in the second century emphasized Greek philosophy rather than the Hebrew Scriptures as the means God gave the Gentiles to lead them to Jesus...

Origen, in the second and third centuries accused the Jews of plotting to kill Christians...

Hyppolytus was a bishop in Rome in the second and third centuries. He said that the Jews were condemned to perpetual slavery because they killed the Son of God...

Tertullian was another important Christian teacher and writer in the second and third centuries. He blamed the entire Jewish race for the death of Jesus. This is interesting, since most of the Jews were scattered among the Gentiles when Jesus was crucified. They had not even heard of Jesus. Furthermore, as we earlier learned, many thousands of Jews acknowledged Jesus as Messiah...

Eusebius lived in the third and fourth centuries. He wrote the history of the church for the first three centuries. He taught that the promises of God in the Hebrew Scriptures were for the Christians and the curses were for the Jews. He declared that the Church was the "true Israel of God" that had replaced literal Israel in God's covenants...

Jerome lived in the fourth and fifth centuries. His great contribution was to translate the Scriptures into Latin. He claimed that the Jews were incapable of understanding the Bible and that they should be severely punished unless they confess the "true faith." It is hard to imagine such statements coming from Christian leaders. May God forgive us for such hatred. [emphases added]

Summary

Booker usefully summarises the basic argument being used by these influential writers:

The basic concept behind all these statements was that the Jews as an entire race of people killed Christ. Therefore, they lost their place in God's covenant and have since been replaced by the Church. The Church should persecute the Jews show the superiority of Christianity over Judaism. However, Christendom should not totally destroy the Jews because some need to be left as a witness that they are suffering because they rejected Christ. This is a long way from Jesus' statement on the cross, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do" (Luke 23:34)

For our series, the quotes used in this article illustrate two things.

• The continued break of the Christian Church from its Hebraic foundations even as early as the second century.
• How the respected Gentile 'Fathers of the Christian Church' built a new foundation of Christian theology on which the Church was to build in succeeding generations even until the present day.
  • This theology was tainted with Greek philosophical influence and contributed to both replacement theology and anti-Semitism.
  • It also framed the documenting of Christian history, as the example of early Church historian Eusebius shows.

For Reflection and Comment

What can we do to 'de-Greece the Church' of any remaining wrong theological bias?

Next time: Anti-Semitism in the Middle Ages.

References

1 For reference, many of these quotations can be followed up in the vast series of books, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (T&T Clark/Eerdmans 1993).

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.