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.