a christian day of reflection: the role of christian theology in the history of anti-jewish thought

7/29/2019 A Christian Day of Reflection: The Role of Christian Theology in the History of Anti-Jewish Thought

1/30

A Christian Dayof Reflection:

The Role of Christian Theology

in the

History of Anti-Jewish Thought

John August Schumacher


2/30

Copyright 2013 John August SchumacherAll rights reserved.

www.johnaugustschumacher.com

www.facebook.com/johnaugustschumacherwww.amazon.com/author/johnaugustschumacher
http://www.johnaugustschumacher.com/http://www.johnaugustschumacher.com/http://www.facebook.com/johnaugustschumacherhttp://www.facebook.com/johnaugustschumacherhttp://www.johnaugustschumacher.com/


3/30

CONTENTS

INSPIRATION: YOM KIPPUR ......................................................................... 6

INITIAL THOUGHTS ....................................................................................... 8

CHRISTIANS AND JEWS ................................................................................ 8

THE TEMPLE DESTROYED:AJEWISH PERSPECTIVE................................................... 8THE TEMPLE DESTROYED:ACHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVE .............................................. 9

THE TIDE TURNS:ACHRISTIANIZED EMPIRE........................................................... 9

RELIGION AND ETHNICITY:THE BLEND OF ANTI-JEWISH RHETORIC ........................... 10

PROPHECY AND CHRISTIAN SUPERSESSIONISM...................................................... 10

DEFINITIONS:ANTI-SEMITISM,ANTI-JUDAISM,ANTI-JEWISH.................................. 12

JUSTINS BACKGROUND ............................................................................. 13

JUSTINS PRESUPPOSITIONS ....................................................................... 15

PRESUPPOSITION #1:THE LOGOS AS DIVINE AGENT.............................................. 15

THE LOGOS AS HERMENEUTICAL PRINCIPLE.......................................................... 17

PRESUPPOSITION #2:THE MOSAIC LAW AS PROSCRIPTION FOR JEWISH SIN............... 19

Justin on the Mosaic Law (Dial. 11) ....................................................... 19

Justin on Jewish Obstinacy (Dial. 12) ..................................................... 19

Circumcision as a Mark for Divine Punishment (Dial. 16) ...................... 20

Justin on Gradual Increase of the Law In Response to Increasing JewishSin (Dial. 92) .......................................................................................... 21

Justin on Jewish Obstinacy (Dial. 93) ..................................................... 21


4/30

Justin on Jewish persecution of Christians (Dial. 17), quoting Isaiah 52:5

(LXX) ....................................................................................................... 22

Justin on Roman Persecution| As Jewish Conspiracy (Dial. 96) .......... 22PRESUPPOSITION #3:JUDAISM AND THE NEW ISRAEL ......................................... 23

Justin on Jewish Conversions (Dial. 39) .................................................. 24

FINAL THOUGHTS ...................................................................................... 25

THEOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE HISTORICAL ARGUMENT .................................. 25

FROM ANTIOCH TO AUSCHWITZ......................................................................... 25

ABIBLICAL ANSWER TO THE JEWISH QUESTION ................................................. 28


5/30

5

FORWARD

The material contained herein is a synopsis of research done onthe role Christian theology has played in the history of anti-Jewishthought. The accompanying PowerPoint slides were used as partof a presentation in 2003 entitled A Christian Day of Reflection.The date chosen was the eve of Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of

Atonement.Much has been written over the years about the link betweenChristian animosity toward Jews (so-called anti-Judaism, or atheological dispute) and anti-Semitism, a racial prejudice againstJews. My contention is that these terms should be conflated;details of this argument are included later.

The main thesis of my work involves a Christian philosopher ofthe 2nd century named Justin. (Martyr is often appended to

Justins name, but is not a surname. Rather, it is indicative of theviolent manner of his death.) Justins belief in Biblical prophecycaused him to write extensively on the subject. Among his works isthe Dialogue with Trypho, purporting to record conversationsbetween Justin and a Jew (perhaps a rabbi) named Trypho. Justinsproclamation includes an interpretation of Genesis 49:10 wherebyScripture itself foretold that the Jewish people would be rejected byGod in favor of the Christian church, because the Jews refused to

accept that Jesus of Nazareth was Messiah.


6/30

6

INSPIRATION: YOM KIPPUR

Monday, October 6, 2003 marks the Jewish holy day of YomKippur, meaning Day of Atonement. On this day, Jews aroundthe world cease all work. Observance of Yom Kippur actuallybegins at sundown the evening before, and is marked by fasting(abstaining even from water); much of the day is spent at the

synagogue, where prayers are offered in an elaborate liturgy thatdates back centuries.As instituted by Leviticus 23:26ff, Yom Kippur as a last

chance for repentance and atonement for sins against God. Sinscommitted against ones neighbors are not counted; reconciliationfor these sins is to be sought prior to Yom Kippur.

As part of the lengthy liturgy, a communal confessions areoffered to God, along with petitions for forgiveness. Perhaps the

most serious sin to be confessed on Yom Kippur is the lashon hara,or evil tonguethat is, abusive speech or slander against onesneighbor. The traditional notion of bearing false witness is onlypart of what this commandment prohibits. All forms of tale-bearing are forbidden, whether these are positive or negative,regardless of whether the information is accurate, and even if thestory is only implied or suggested, rather than explicitly repeated.

One might note that this day is to be called a day ofreflection, not

atonement. Christians believe that atonement for all sins has alreadybeen made by the death and resurrection of Jesus the Christ. Butthis also means that we have no excuse. To borrow a phrase from


7/30

A Christian Day of Reflection

7

Martin Luther, who spoke of the freedom of a Christian, becauseweare already by Gods grace, we are freed to do good works on the

behalf of the neighbor. Furthermore, the fact that Christ hasatoned for our sins against God means that we are freedandobligatedto seek reconciliation from those whom we havewronged.

It is an historical irony that for centuries, Christianswho claimto esteem the Ten Commandments, even though they do notfollow the tenets of Jewish Lawhave been in serious violation ofGods prohibition of false witness against ones neighbor. I call

this an irony not because it is humorous, but rather because it is soseriously out of touch with what is supposed to be the tenets ofChristianity. After all, it was Jesus who said that what comes out ofthe heart, and out of the mouth, defiles, For out ofthe heart comeevil intentions, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness,slander (Matthew 15:10-20).


8/30

INITIAL THOUGHTS

Christians and Jews

The initial conflict between those who believed that Jesus ofNazareth was the Messiah, and those who did not, was an intra-

Jewish affair. The so-called Jesus movement began as a sectwithin Judaism, and it was not until the end of the first century thatJews and Christians became distinct religious groups. The firstcentury also witnessed a pivotal event that was to have lastingimpact on Jewish-Christian relations for centuries to come. Theyear was 70 CE, and the event was the destruction of the secondTemple in Jerusalem.

The Temple Destroyed:

A Jewish Perspective

For Jews, the loss of the Temple meant the end of the Jewishreligion as it had been known. Moreover, by imperial decree, Jewswere ordered out of Jerusalem, to be scattered further into theDiaspora among the Gentiles. Over the succeeding centuries, so-called second-temple Judaism gave way to the rabbinical traditionknown today, but this was a long and difficult process. Through it


9/30


9

all, Jewish identity was kept alive by the belief that no matter theirfate in the world, they were Gods Chosen People, entrusted with

Gods covenant.

The Temple Destroyed:

A Christian Perspective

For Christians, the Temples destruction was seen in a fardifferent light. They interpreted this event as Gods retributionagainst the blind and obstinate Jews, who had refused to acceptJesus as the Messiah. This was but one argument that would beleveled against the Jews, but its long-term implications are still felttoday. At some point, the idea spread among Christians thatJudaism had been rejectedand replacedby the Church, the so-calledNew Israel. All the while, Jews and Christians remained minoritygroups in the Roman Empire. As is well known, Christianssuffered various periods of persecution at the hands of theRomansa fate that was, in part, due to their separation fromJudaism. Roman religious tolerance was based, in part, upon arespect for antiquity. This provided a certain advantage for theJews, whose tradition was already millennia old. While Romanpolytheists did not understand the monotheistic beliefs of theirJewish subjects, they could nonetheless respect this ancientheritage. Christians, however, could claim no such heritage, nopractices handed down through countless generations. And so itwas that for a variety of reasons, Christians became the target forRoman persecution.

The Tide Turns:

A Christianized Empire

This situation changed, quickly and amazingly, with the

conversion of Roman Emperor Constantine in the fourth century.With the subsequent ascension of Christianity from persecutedminority to official religion of the Empire, Christians soon enjoyed


10/30

the power and privilege of the Holy Roman Empire. But otherfactors also affected the state of Jewish-Christian animosities.

Alongside the religious differences was a prejudice based uponethnicity. The Jews, always as a people set apart, now became thequintessential minority within a Gentile Christian majority. Moreand more, Jews were seen as aliens: outcasts of Christian society,and the heretical burr in the saddle of a Christianized empire.

Religion and Ethnicity:

The Blend of Anti-Jewish Rhetoric

By the Middle Ages, this melding of the religion and ethnicityfound new and darker forms of expression. The alien Jew wasseen as a monstersome quasi-demonic figure forever lurking inthe shadows, waiting to strike. Rumor had it that Jews were inleague with the Devil, practiced black magic, and were responsiblefor the plague known as the Black Death. Jews, it was said, hadpoisoned wells, and uttered curses against Christians in theirsynagogues. The so-called Blood Libel held that Jews sufferedfrom a skin disease that could only be treated by the blood of un-baptized Christian infants. The ritual murder charge taught thatJews would kidnap and murder a Christian child as part of a secretritual tied to Satanic worship. Jews were also accused of stealing aEucharistic host, which was desecrated in a hateful ritual designedto mock Christianitys most hallowed sacrament. Based on thebelief that the wafer had become the literal body of Christ, storieseven circulated that the wafer bled. Such a claim might berejected as pure legend, but modern science has shown that acertain fungus, known to be reddish in color, may have beengrowing on the bread. To the casual observer, the host wouldappear to be soaked in blood.

Prophecy and Christian Supersessionism


11/30


11

Such stories merely built upon the original conspiracy: Jewswere Christ-killers, who by collusion and abject evil had

murdered the innocent man, Jesus. And so, we return again to thearguments based on religious differences. One such argument wasbased upon the allegorical interpretation of a passage from Genesis49:10, a prophecy given by the dying patriarch, Jacob, to his sonJudah:

The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's stafffrom between his feet, until tribute comes to him; and the

obedience of the peoples is his.

I have dubbed this interpretation, and the tradition that wasbuilt around it, the Historical Argument. The implication of thisprophecy is clear: Jewish-self-rule would continue until the comingof the Messiah, who is the expectation of the nation. Christiansbelieved that Jesus of Nazareth was this promised Messiah; Jewsdid not. In the light of the temples destruction, Christians began

to teach that because the Jews rejected Jesus of Nazareth as theMessiah, they had been rejected by God. In short, they were nolongerthe Chosen People.

On the basis of Genesis 49:10, such figures as Justin Martyr,Augustine of Hippo, and Martin Luther proclaimed the whole-scalereplacementof the Jews by the Christian church, the so-called NewIsrael. The Historical Argument plays a central role in JustinsDialogue with Trypho in the 2nd century and appears also in

Augustines City of God in the 5

th

century. Its most virulentexposition is Martin Luthers infamous tract On the Jews and TheirLies, written in 1543, three years before Luthers death.

The exact history of the Historical Argument may never beknown, but its influence is reflected in the theologicalconclusionsspoken and unspokenmade throughout Christianhistory, beliefs that have only recently been officially refuted. Forexample, a 1965 statement, produced as a result of Vatican II,

refuted the notion that the Jews are wholly and singularlyresponsible for Jesus death. Nonetheless, the Christ-killermoniker is still in use by anti-Semites (and even some Christian


12/30

churches) today. More recently, the Evangelical Lutheran Churchin America issued a statement concerning Martin Luthers views on

the Jewish people.

Definitions:

Anti-Semitism, Anti-Judaism, Anti-Jewish

Hatred of Jews is often called anti-semitism. The term wascoined in the 19th century by German writer Wilhelm Marr. In thecontext of 19th-century scientific racism, Marrhimself aracistwas concerned to find a suitable term for explaining hatredof Jews. In the twentieth century, some scholars began to use theterm anti-Judaism to describe sentiments against Jews basedreligious or theological differences. This was to be distinguishedfrom anti-semitism, which was based not on religion, but onethnicity.

History, however, does not make so clear a distinction. In placeof these terms, I therefore prefer to use the term anti-Jewishcombining the facets of anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism. Suchan approach takes seriously the fact that for much of history, theline between religious disagreement and ethnic bigotry was oftenblurred. At the same time, however, we must acknowledge the factthat modern anti-Semitism (that is, hatred based on ethnicity orrace) was built on the foundation of earlier, religiousanimosity. Itis this religious aspect that is our focus here. Specifically, we willfocus on the so-called historical argument as a theologicalconstruct. To further limit the scope, we will examine thehistorical argument as found in the writings of Justin Martyr inthe 2nd centuryspecifically, his Dialogue with Trypho, whichpurports to be a record of a conversation between Justin andseveral Jews, only one of whom, Trypho, is mentioned by name.In the Dialogue, Justin repeatedly and emphatically declares Jesus ofNazareth to be the Messiah; as a result, he calls upon his Jewishlisteners to embrace the truth of Christianity, which he believes canbe proven by reference to the Hebrew Bible.


13/30

JUSTINS BACKGROUND

Little is known about Justin, who was born into a paganhousehold sometime at the beginning of second century CE, in thetown of Flavia Neopolis, in modern-day Syria. Schooled inphilosophy, Justin was apparently well-versed in the variousschools of Greek thought. By his own account, he had contact

with Stoic, Pythagorean and Neo-Platonist teachers, and it was withthe Neo-Platonists that he affiliated himself, before his conversionto Christianity around 130 CE. Thereafter, he wrote in defense ofhis new faith, seeking to show both his pagan and Jewishcontemporaries that the Christian philosophy was superior toeither Greco-Roman or Jewish alternatives. Justin was martyredaround 165 CE.

Justin lived at a time before the books of the Christian Bible had

been collected and officially accepted by the Church as its canon.From their Jewish roots, however, Christians had accepted andadopted the Hebrew Bible, which they labeled the OldTestament, in contrast to the New Testament of Jesus. As aresult, when Justin spoke of Scripture, he was referring to theHebrew Bible, the Scriptures that Christians continue to share withJews.

Like other Christians of his day, Justin did not read the Hebrew

Bible in the same way that Jews would understand them. Rather,based on certain theological presuppositions which will be outlinedbelow, Justin interpreted the Hebrew Bible with a Christian


14/30

hermeneutic, which placed Christ at the center of the Scripures. Inthe process, his interpretations of prophecies led him to conclude

that the Jews had been rejected by God, for they had failed toaccept Jesus as the promised Messiah. In their place, the Christianshad become the new Israel. Among the verses that led to thisconclusion was Genesis 49:10, the passage upon which thehistorical argument would be built.

In his Dialogue with Trypho, written around 150 CE, Justinsrelates his conversation with a group of Jews. The historicity of theDialogue is debated among scholars, especially with reference to the

figure of Trypho. My own suspicion is that the Dialoguereflects notone conversation, but rather a series of conversations betweenJustin and various Jewish intellectuals. As a result, Trypho mayrepresent not a single person, but rather a type of person that Justinencounteredthat is, a Jewish intellectual, well-versed in Judaismand the customs of his people, who was nonetheless willing todebate with a Christian on the basis of their shared Scriptures.

As one reads the Dialogue, it becomes clear that debate for

Justin went only so far. In Chapter 52, and with Genesis 49:10clearly in mind, Justin addresses his Jewish listeners:

[For] neither a prophet nor a ruler failed among yourrace, until this Jesus Christ both was born and suffered, nordo you dare to shamelessly say [that], nor do you haveproof! For nevertheless among your race there was onecalled high priest, so that then there was someone offeringsacrifices for you according to the law of Moses, andnevertheless ruling lawfully and prophesying in succession,until John was bornas also when your people were carriedcaptive into Babylon, when there was warring on the landand the sacred vessels were carried off, a prophet did notcease among you, as lord and leader and ruler of yourpeople. For the Spirit that was in the prophets bothanointed and appointed kings for you. But after themanifestation and death of Jesus our Christ among your

race, there has by no means been a prophet, nor is there[now]. But you also ceased to be under your own king, and


15/30


15

your land was laid waste, and it has been left behind like acrop-watchers hut.1

This attitude would be repeated in the centuries that followed,and became, in effect, the theological justification for Christianusurpation of the title Israel. Behind Justins use of theHistorical Argument stood a number of presuppositions, to whichwe now turn.

JUSTINS PRESUPPOSITIONS

Presupposition #1:

The Logos as Divine Agent

Thesis: Justins understanding doctrines of God and ofChrist were grounded in ancient Greek philosophy.

It has been said that the aim of the early Greek Philosopherswas to find some central principle in the confused multiplicity ofexistence.2 For Justin, that central principle was the figure of

1Dialogue with Trypho 52.2 Edwin R. Goodenough, The Theology of Justin Martyr: An Investigation

into the Conceptions of Early Christian Literature and Its Hellenistic and JudaisticInfluences, (First printing, Jena, 1923; reprint, Amsterdam: Philo Press,1968), 1.


16/30

Christ, whom he understood in relation to the Greek concept ofthe logos.

Justins view of God was heavily influenced by his backgroundin Greek philosophy. Chief among his inheritance from paganphilosophy was a belief in the logos, a Greek concept thatincorporated both Reason and Order. The ancient Greekphilosophers taught that the God who created the world was farremoved from creation. The Stoics contended that interaction withthe divine was possible only through an intermediary, the logos.This Logos was a divine principle, through which the world had

come into being, and by which it continued to exist. The logoswasthe culmination of divine Reason or purpose, as well as theinstrument by which the divinity had brought order to Chaos. Inshort, the logoswas the the glue that held the universe together.

The Stoics also taught that through the process of creation, aspark of divinity had been placed into every human being.Through seed of the logos, it was possible for the human tocommune with the divine. This took place through Reason, the

acting out of the human potential for rational thought, but it waspossible only because of the seed of the logos, the spark of divineReason. Because one had this spark of reason, one couldparticipate in the universal Reason, or divine purpose for all ofcreation. And so we see that because of the spark of divinitypresent in humankind, it was possible for a rational person to findthe central principle of creation, and tap into the divine Reasonthat had created and ordered all that exists.

As we have said, the Greeks believed that God was far removedfrom creation, and that interaction between the divine and theworld was possible only through an intermediary. Justin adoptedthis idea and applied it to the person of Christ. The Greeks held toa strict separation between matter and spirit, but JustinChristianized the Logos, declaring that because Jesus had becomea human being, the divine logoshad come into the world in a veryreal and special way. (This teaching is not original to Justin, of

course; the Gospel of John proclaimed the same thing a generationor more before Justins time. Whether of not Justin was familiar


17/30


17

with the Gospel itself, he certainly subscribed to the teaching itimparted.)

By claiming that Christ was the incarnate logos, Justin madeseveral important claims. First, he affirmed the traditionalChristian belief that the God of Israel was the God of theChristians. However, his view of God was shaped by Greekphilosophy; Justin still did not believe that the God revealed in theHebrew Bible had communicated directly with humanity. Rather,Gods logos had filled this function. And so Justin would explainthat the theophanies, such as voice that spoke to Moses from the

burning bush, was not God the Father and Creator, but rather theLogos.

Secondly, Justin did not equate this Logos with God. Justinrepeatedly and emphatically taught that the Logos was a secondGod, a being of divine nature, but not of the same kind or type asGod the Father/Creator. It was this Logos that became incarnatein the man, Jesus of Nazareth. And here we see the finalimplication of Justins teaching: like the Stoics, Justin believed that

humankind had been imbued with a spark or seed of theLogos. However, only in Christ was the whole of the Logos tobe found. As we shall see, this teaching had important implicationsfor his interpretation of prophecy, and for his attitude toward theJews.

The Logos as Hermeneutical Principle

Thesis: Justin believed that the Jews did not understandtheir own Scriptures. Conversely, he insisted that onlyChristians could properly interpret the Hebrew Bible, foronly they had the power (given by God) to discernprophecy.

Justin believed that every word of Scripture was important when

read correctly, i.e., through Christological allegory. This wasfurther divided into two categories. First was the message itself;second was the vessel by which that message was delivered. The


18/30

message was the Logos himself who had become man and he wascalled Jesus Christ (I Apol. 5). The vessel was the Hebrew Bible as

a book of prophecy, foretelling the coming of Jesus.Justin believed that the Logos was the key to unlocking the

meaning of Scripture. Every person has a seed of the Logos, butonly Christians have access to the whole Logosthat is, Christhimself. As a result, true understanding of the Scriptures isavailable only to Christians. The whole of the Logos brings thegift of understanding and discernment. But this requires faith onthe part of the readerthat is, faith in Jesus as the Messiah of God.

This means that the Jews, who reject Christ, lack the faith necessaryto gain the key (the Logos) to unlock the meaning of their ownScriptures! Conversely, by faith, Christians are given the whole ofthe Logos, and are therefore able to read and understand theScriptures.

As to why Jews lacked the faith necessary to gain knowledge ofthe Scriptures, Justin posited several hypotheses. The first wasignorance: Jews insist upon the literal, rather than the spiritual

(allegorical) reading. The second was blindness: Jews are misled bytheir rabbis, who misinterpret Scripture. Third was obstinacy: Jewsdo understand that Jesus is the Messiah, but steadfastly refuse toaccept this as truth. Justin also spoke in terms of jealousy. Thetruth, Justin declared, was hidden from the Jews by God; the Jewsknow this; as a result, Jews hate Christians for knowing the truthabout Jewish obstinacy:

And it is therefore no surpriseif you also hate those whoknow these things and convict you with knowledge of yourendless hardness of heart. (Dial. 39)

Elsewhere, Justin also claimed that the rabbis had excisedcertain messianic texts from the Hebrew Bible. Such texts,according to Justin, would have proven the Christians case. Givenhis reading of Genesis 49:10, Justin may have believed that had

Jews seen this as a prophetic or messianic text, it too would havebeen removed. This is admittedly speculative, but it fits with hisgeneral argument.


19/30


19

Presupposition #2:The Mosaic Law as Proscription for Jewish Sin

Thesis: Christians do not follow the Mosaic Law becauseit was given to the Jews alone.

According to Justin, the Law of Moses was temporary, limited,and ultimately inadequate. In short, the Law had but one purpose:

to curb Jewish sin. With the coming of Christ, the problem onlybecame worse: Jews rejected Christ, all the while continuing toplace hope in righteousness under the Law.

Justin on the Mosaic Law (Dial. 11)

[since] there will be also a final law, and a covenant ruling

over all, it was now necessary for every human being towatch, as many as were seeking the inheritance of God. Forthe Law given on Horeb is already old, and yours alone; butthis [Law of Christ] is simply for all. A law placed alongsideanother law overrides the one before it. And a covenantplaced afterwards nullifies the first. And an eternal and finallaw, and the covenant of faithwhich is Christhas beengiven to us, after which there is no law, nor order, norcommandment.

Justin on Jewish Obstinacy (Dial. 12)

This very law [of Christ] you have treated shamefully, andyou have done evil to his new holy Covenant, and now youneither acknowledge nor repent for your evil deeds. TheLawgiver is present, and you do not see. There is alreadya need of a second circumcision, but you think greatly upon

the circumcision of the flesh. The new Law wills you tocontinually observe the Sabbath, and you think not working


20/30

for one day to be pious, not considering why it is prescribedfor you.

The Law, given to keep order among a rebellious people, alsoserves as divine punishment upon them, for rejecting Jesus as theMessiah. Circumcision, the sign of the covenant with Abraham,became in Justins eyes a mark of Cane, identifying the Jews fordivine wrath.

Circumcision as a Mark for Divine Punishment (Dial. 16)

For the circumcision according to the flesh was given byAbraham to be a sign, in order that you might be separatedfrom all nations and from us, so you alone might suffer that

which you now are justly sufferingyour lands laid wasteand your cities destroyed with firethat others eat yourfruits before you, and no one of you goes up into Jerusalem.For you are not known among other people from anything

other than the circumcision of your flesh, and none of you,I think, will dare to say that God does not haveforeknowledge of the things which were about to happenand are happening, and he is preparing what is deserving forthe end. And these things happened well and justly for you,for you killed the Just One and his prophets before him,and now you reject those who hope in him, and the onehaving sent him, God the Father and maker of all things,and heap insults as much as you can upon him, cursing inyour synagogues those who believe in Christ. For you donot have authority to put your hands on us, because ofthose who now rule over you, but as often as you were able,you did this also.

In other words, Justin contended that Christians do not observeMosaic Law because they understand why it was given. Gods lawswere given in direct proportional to the increasing sin of the Jews,

but these laws were never intended to apply to any other people.Furthermore, these laws now serve to punish the Jews for theirblindness and obstinacy.


21/30


21

Justin on Gradual Increase of the LawIn Response to Increasing Jewish Sin (Dial. 92)

For if someone should wish to inquire of yousinceEnoch and Noah together with their children and otherslike them were acceptable to God, while neither beingcircumcised nor observing Sabbathsfor what reason Godappointed through other guardians and lawgivers, after somany generations, that those from Abraham until Moses

were to be justified on account of circumcision, but thatthose from Moses and afterwards would be justified onaccount of circumcision and other commandments, that is,Sabbaths and feasts and offerings and sacrifices, [God willbe slandered] unless you show that on account of Godhaving foreknowledge, he knew your nation would be

worthy to be expelled from Jerusalem, and no one would bepermitted to enter into there.

According to Justin, Jewish rejection of Christ and theircommitment to the Mosaic Law (which is tantamount to idolatry)stand as proof of their blindness and obstinacy. Moses and theother prophets foretold that the Logos would become flesh. TheJews should have known by this that Christ was the Messiah, ifonly they would accept the words of their own Scriptures.

Justin on Jewish Obstinacy (Dial. 93)

But you [Jews] have not shown friendship or love towardGod or the prophets, or toward yourselves, but as has beenshown, you were found to always be worshippers of idolsand murderers of the just, as also until you laid hands evenon Christ himself. For having the ability to understand thatthis [man] is the Christ, from the signs existing throughMoses, you refuse to do so


22/30

Justin on Jewish persecution of Christians (Dial. 17),

quoting Isaiah 52:5 (LXX)

The other nations have not treated Christ and us, hisfollowers, as unjustly as have you Jews, who, indeed, are the

very instigators of that evil opinion they [the Gentiles] haveof the Just One and of us, his disciples. After you hadcrucified the only sinless and just Man . . . and after yourealized that he had risen from the dead and had ascendedinto heaven . . . you not only failed to feel remorse for yourevil deed, but you even dispatched certain chosen men from

Jerusalem to every land, to report the outbreak of thegodless heresy of the Christians, and to spread those uglyrumors against us which are repeated by those who do notknow us. As a result, you are to blame not only for yourown wickedness, but also for that of all others. With goodreason, therefore, does Isaiah cry out: Because of you myname is blasphemed among the Gentiles.

For the other nations have not had such a grudge in thisunjust way against us and against Christ, as far as you, thevery ones who are the cause of the preconceived evil which[the Gentiles] have both against us and that one [Christ].For after you crucified that unblemished and just man [and] when you knew he had risen from the dead andascended into heaven, as the prophets had foretold, you notonly did not repent from your evil deeds, but after choosingselect men from Jerusalem, you sent them out into all the

land, saying that the godless Christians rose up. And thosewho do not know us were saying all these things against us.

Here, Justin ties obstinacy to the first Jewish conspiracy theory:Roman persecution of Christians was the carrying-out of Jewishanimosity. In Dial. 60, this is also tied to the workings of demons:

Justin on Roman Persecution|

As Jewish Conspiracy (Dial. 96)


23/30


23

but it was foretold ofGod that all of you, and those likeyou, would not believe that this one who existed from the

beginning, and was an eternal priest of God, and a king, andthe Christ, was about to come. For you curse in yoursynagogues all those who have become Christians, and theother nations are also carrying out your curse by their deed,killing those who are only confessing themselves to beChristians.

Presupposition #3:

Judaism and the New IsraelThesis: Genesis 49:10 prophesied the eventual end ofJewish self-rule, and the replacement of the Jewish peopleas the Chosen People of God. In their place, Christianshave become the New Israel.

In Dialogue120, Justin wrote that after Jacob, the descendantswere split between his sons. Justin took this to be a prophesy thatsome Jews would believe in Christ, while others would not, withunbelievers constituting the majority. What Jews fail to understand(ignorance/blindness), or actively rejected (obstinacy), Gentileshave acceptedthat is, that Christ is Messiah. In short, Jewishignorance, blindness, and obstinacy are the fulfillment of Genesis49:10. For their rejection of Christ, they have been rejected, andreplaced by the Christians as the Chosen People of God. TheChurch is the New Israel, while the Jews have been abandoned,defeated, driven from their homeland, banished from Jerusalem,and left to wander in the exile of the dispersion among the nations.

Justin parsed the word Israel into Isra, meaning a manwho overcomes and el, meaning power. The name Israelwas therefore tied to Christ, and to the Christians, the New Israel.Conversely, jealousy was tied to the remnant spoken of in theprophets. In the Bible, a remnant is a certain number of peoplewhom God watched over, and who did not submit to the idolatryor apostasy of the greater number of Israelites. In this way, a core


24/30

of the Chosen People was held back, who would continue the lineafter all others had fallen away or been punished.

For Justin, however, remnant had a somewhat differentmeaning: he believed that God was withholding final judgment ofthe Jewish people out of knowledge that someJews would convert.In the process, of course, Justin changed the definition ofremnant to mean those who would become Christians, notcontinuing the line of Israel as such, but rather joining those whohad replaced the Jewish people as the New Israel.

Justin on Jewish Conversions (Dial. 39)

day by day, some are becoming disciples in the name ofChrist, and leaving behind the way of deception. They alsoreceive good gifts, each as he is worthy, being enlightenedthrough the name of this same Christ.

In Dial. 21, Justin contended that Jews are punished, but notdestroyed, so that Gods name will not be profaned among thenations/Gentiles. As a result, the Jews only hope is conversion toChristianity. Justins hope for Jewish conversion was apparentlygenuine. Again and again, Justin called upon Trypho and theothers to reject the teachings of the rabbis and embrace the truthsof Christianity. Yet through it all, Justins animosity toward theJews as a whole is also apparent, and this animosity seems to have

been the result of frustration with continued refusals by the Jews toaccept Christ as the Messiah.


25/30

FINAL THOUGHTS

Theological Implications of the Historical Argument

It seems to me that the historical argumentif truemeansthat God breaks promises. If, after all, God can reject the Jewishpeople in favor of the Christian church, what is to keep God from

finding yet another group, with which to replace the Christians? Insuch a context, the claims the Mormons or Jehovahs Witnesses tobe the only authentic Christian assembly can hardly be refuted insimplistic terms. For by teaching that God breaks promises, wehave opened the way for our own potential rejection, should Godfind us lacking.

From Antioch to Auschwitz

The Latin theologian, Tertullian, once asked: What has Athensto do with Jerusalem?3 His point was that Greek philosophyought to have no sway over Christian teaching, and that in fact, theteachings of those whom he labeled heretics were based not onScripture, but on the Greek preoccupation with speculativecosmology, and with fables and endless genealogies.

3De praescriptione haereticorum7.9


26/30

According to Acts 11:26, it was in Antioch that the believers inJesus were first called Christians. And so today, we might

change the question to: What has Antioch to do withAuschwitz? All Christians are inheritors of the anti-Jewishrhetoric that has been part of our tradition for centuries. As 21stcentury Americans, we live in a pluralistic society, where exclusivistclaims are met with resentment, and where the memory of thesemany centuries of religious animosity are still fresh in our minds;indeed, such animosity continues even to this day in certainquarters, perhaps even in our own congregations. In the light of

what has been discussed today, then, what are we to do asChristians?

The Christian mission to the Gentiles was begun because Jewsignored, dismissed or outright rejected the claim that Jesus was theMessiah. The complex theological reasons for this rejection lieoutside the scope of our discussion, but its long-term consequencewas that as the Christian movement experienced rapid expansion,the majority of believers in Jesus were Gentiles, rather than Jewish

converts. Primarily on the basis of Pauls teachings, Gentiles werenot required to adopt Jewish customs such as circumcision anddietary restrictions. Over time, this had the effect of removingChristians from their Jewish roots.

Somewhere along the way, a shift in viewpoint occurred, andChristians began to see themselves as the New Israel. Since Jewshad rejected Jesus as the Messiah, it was probably a relatively shortleap for Christians to conclude that their message about Jesus

trumped Judaism. The animosity that existed would only havebeen exacerbated by the events of 70 CE., which became, from aChristian perspective, de facto evidence that God was punishingJewish sin.

By the late first century, the schism between Gentile Christianand Jewish nonbeliever had become permanent. As each groupcontinued in their own way, this isolation only weakened whateverties might still have existed. Jews and Christians continued to

interacta fact demonstrated in Justins own writingsbut, asthey say, history is written by the victors. With the rise ofConstantine, Roman society was eventual Christianized, while the


27/30


27

Jews were pushed to the perimeter. In the process, their perceivedvalue was also questioned. After all, what place was there for a

heretic in Christian society? So began the Jewish Question.One answer was persecution. Pogroms broke out intermittently

in the centuries following the triumph of Christianity and the riseof the HolyRoman Empire. The Crusades, aimed at rescuing theHoly Lands from the Muslims, further enflamed anti-Jewishviolence. Not content to fight the infidel far away, Christiansturned to the heretics nearby. Still another answer was conversion.The Inquisition, aimed at dispelling heresy within the Church, also

became a tool to cleanse Christendom of Judaism, or at least toseek for the conversion of Jews.

Years later, the answer became expulsion. The year 1492 sawColumbus sail the ocean blue, and the Jews forced from Spain byroyal decree. In the late Middle Ages, the answer was suppression:Jews were forced into ghettos. Finally, by Hitlers order, the Jewswere to be subject to most horrific solution ever conceived:extermination. Given the admixture of religious animosity, ethnic

stereotypes, and conspiracy theories of the Jews as devil, it islittle wonder that centuries later, Hitler could find support for hisinfamous Final Solution. And still the question remains,plaguing a world that has never fully integrated the Jewish people.

We noted in the introduction that the medieval period witnessedthe gradual transformation of the Jew from heretic, outsider, andvilest form of sinner to monster, existing on the very edge ofsociety, a radical other. In the process, the Jewish people came

to be seen as active, scheming, prowling monsters, waiting to strike.Such a view had ceased to be wholly about religious differences.The anti-Jewish sentiments of medieval and early modern timeswere tinged with ethnic bigotry, which would eventually give way tothe full-blown racism of the 19th century. Once the Jews wereviewed not merely as religious misfits, but as an active agentsworking against God's very designs, the door was open forsomeone like Hitler to take the final, logical step.

It is not our purpose to lay at the feet of Christianity the entireblame for the Holocaust. However, history does show that certainChristian theological constructs laid a foundation upon which such


28/30

hatred was built. The Nazis were not Christians, nor was their neo-pagan cult of racial purity in any way related to the ideals of the

Christian religion. But the fact that anti-Jewish rhetoric continued,long after the split between Jews and Christians was a fact, speaksto the deep animosity that has existed between the Christian andJewish communities. And so we have the long road, full as it is oftwists and turns, from ancient religious dispute to 20th centurydeath campfrom Antioch to Auschwitz. This is a road that weChristians must also walk, if we are to fully comprehend the hatredfomented by our own religious tradition.

A Biblical Answer to the Jewish Question

All of this leads to the task at hand: how shall we begin toovercome the history of animosity and discord that 20 centurieshave produced? The answer, I believe, is contained in the NewTestament itself. Specifically, I have in mind Chapter 9-11 of

Pauls letter to the Romans. In sharp contrast to Justin, Paul seesIsraels rejection of Christ not as cause for divine punishment, butrather as part of Gods plan to include Gentiles in the plan ofsalvation. In the process, Paul characterizes Israels election asirrevocable. Far from becoming a new root unto themselves, theGentiles are the branches grafted into the rootstock of Israel. ForGod has imprisoned all in disobedience so that he may be mercifulto all (Romans 11:32 NRSV).

Such an answer will not satisfy all, nor am I completelycomfortable with Pauls answer. The fact remains that Christianitymakes a very specific claim about Jesus, and sees salvation throughthe cross of Calvary, to the exclusion of all else. My fellowChristians will no doubt quote to me from Acts 4:12, There issalvation in no one else [than Christ], for there is no other nameunder heaven given among human beings by which we must besaved. Furthermore, my own tradition, the Lutheran Church,

states emphatically that salvation is possible only by grace alone,through faith alone, for the sake of Jesus Christ alone. And yet, myoriginal statement stands, for it seems to me that Pauls exposition


29/30


29

calls upon all Christians to take seriously the mysterious ways ofGod, and does not seek to read Gods mind. Those whom God

chose in ancient times are among us today; let us therefore takeseriouslytheirstatus as Gods People, to the exclusion of all others,while we are but the branches, grafted onto the rootstock of Israel.


30/30

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

John August Schumacher holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree inhistory and religion from Concordia College (Moorhead,Minnesota) and a Masters Degree in history and theology fromWartburg Theological Seminary (Dubuque, Iowa). He now liveswith his wife and two children near Omaha, Nebraska.

a christian day of reflection: the role of christian theology in the history of anti-jewish thought

Documents