Appendix P: An Annotated Bibliography on Israel in Church History

Appendix P

AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

ON

ISRAEL IN CHURCH HISTORY

NFORTUNATELY , a high proportion of conservative, protestant evangelical Christians, including those of a Calvinist persuasion, are unaware of the historic roots underlying eschatological concept of the Christian church, as the new people of God, that has superceded th nation of Israel, and ethnic Jews in particular. This concept of dismissal, in which God ha supposedly forever disenfranchised national Israel, indeed Judaism as a whole, is better known a replacement or supercessionist theology. The revelation from church history of the outworking o this doctrine is one which Gentile Christians will find painful to digest, notwithstanding it undeniable truth. Unless they are prepared to read of this shameful legacy, the agony of these centuries, it will be difficult for headway to be made in dealing with doctrinal anti-Semitism as it manifests itself today amongst Christians who profess a serious biblical faith.

This writer has encountered some Christians who simply do not want to face the historic record. They retreat to the claim that Scripture only is the basis of their eschatology; they are willing to contend strictly according to the biblical text. Now this we will gladly do, but only provided it is agreed that our derived doctrine is expected to manifest a godly Christian lifestyle. And how then shall we discover the effect of our doctrine? By going to Church history since here is the real outworking of Christian truth and behavior. We might delight to consider the fruit of the eighteenth century evangelical awakening in England and America, and rightly so. He authentic gospel doctrine was productive of gospel righteousness in the lives of multitudes on a national scale. However this being so, we cannot then ignore the historic fruit of replace theology while at the same time maintaining loyalty to that teaching. Good doctrine produc good fruit, not bad fruit; bad doctrine produces bad fruit, not good fruit. Hence the history of replacement theology cannot be swept aside, as distasteful as confrontation with this rea would seem, especially since the overwhelming testimony will inevitably lead one to question the viability of the underlying eschatology.

Thus the following annotated biography is offered as an introduction for those who will not retreat from the truth, concerning resultant Christian behavior, for the purpose of retaining their doctrinal system. Time and time again this writer has met sincere Christians who simply were ignorant of the following testimony. It matters not whether these historic accounts are Jewish, Protestant, Roman Catholic, or secular. The conclusions in general are consistently in agreement notwithstanding a variety of backgrounds and distinctive perspectives.

U

Baron, David. The Shepherd Of Israel and His Scattered Flock. London: Morgan and Sco 1910. This author, born in a strict orthodox Jewish home in Russia, converted to Christianity and founded the Hebrew Christian Testimony to Israel, based in Londo England. His commentary on Zechariah is acknowledged as a classic. Here is an expositio of Psalm 80, of which vs. 4-7 are seen as a summary description of Jewish travail during t Christian dispensation. Thus pp. 25-79 present a parallel and discerning panorama of this same period according to the actual events of Jewish history

Brown, Michael L. Our Hands are Stained with Blood: The Tragic Story of the “Church” and the Jewish People. Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image Publishers, 1992. While written in a popular and animated style, this Hebrew Christian provides extensive documentatio including a most comprehensive Bibliographical Supplement, that demands consulta Consider:

It is a fundamental tenet of the Koran that both Israel and the Church failed. Moses prophet. Jesus was a prophet. But Muhammad was the seal of the prophets, the messenger of the final revelation. The Jews are not the people of God—they failed! The Christians are not th people of God—they failed! It is the Muslims who are the people of God. Of course t preposterous. But, in the event that you are still uncertain about the calling of Israel, consider this simple truth: If God could forsake Israel, in spite of His unconditional, everlasting promises, then He could forsake the Church! If God could replace Israel, in spite of Hi unconditional, everlasting promises, then He could replace the Church! So, if you hold theology that says, “God has forsaken physical Israel,” or “The Church has replaced Israel,” you had better be extremely careful. Maybe the Koran is right! Pages 125-26.

Also refer to this author’s three volumes on Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, recommended by Moishe Rosen of Jews for Jesus. Volume One deals with general historical objections. Volume Two deals with theological objections. Volume Three d with objections to Messianic prophecy.

Callan, Terrance. Forgetting the Root, the Emergence of Christianity from Judai New Jersey: Paulist Press, 1986. As the title suggests, Romans 11:13, 17-24 describes the birth of Gentile Christianity and the Apostle Paul’s warning that this engrafting of wild oliv branches into the rich root of the olive tree should not lead to arrogance. Thus the author proposes:

(a) that Jesus did not separate himself from Judaism, but addressed the Judaism of his day in a prophetic manner;

(b) that the earliest church, in its belief that Jesus was the Messiah, was a sect within Judaism but not separate from it;

(c) that the adoption of a liberal policy toward Gentile converts by the greater part of the earl church was the decisive factor which separated it from Judaism;

(d) that those who had a more conservative policy toward Gentile converts remained closely connected with Judaism until developments within Judaism separated them;

(e) that the liberal branch of the church was composed of Jewish Christians who reta positive view of Judaism despite holding that Gentile Christians were not bound by the law; and

(f) that eventually the liberal branch of the church was composed entirely of Gentiles developed a negative view of Jewish Christianity; at this point the separation of Christ from Judaism was complete and Christianity became anti-Jewish. Pages 2-3.

This author concludes that:

The liberal Gentile Christians forgot that they had been grafter into the root of Judaism. This forgetfulness is strikingly illustrated by a comment made by Clement of Alexandria (di 215). . . . [He] interprets Romans 11:17 as a reference to the grafting of converts to Christianity into the Word. . . . Clement’s interpretation of the cultivated olive tree as the Word, and the wild olive tree as including Jews who need to be grafted into the Word, reverses Paul’s use of the metaphor and shows to what extent the Jewish roots of Christianity have been forgotten. This is precisely what Paul was trying to prevent by using the image. . . . To have retained this positive appreciation of Israel might have prevented much Christian anti-Semitism in the past; to retrieve it for our time might put relations between Christians and Jews on a much better foundation than otherwise supports them. Pages 107-108.

Carroll, James. Constantine’s Sword. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2001. A former Roman Catholic priest of the Paulist order, Carroll’s traumatic discovery of the substantial an Semitic legacy of the Roman Catholic Church led him to delve into this matter with great thoroughness while employing a style that constantly interacts with the churnings of soul. Although many of his biblical comments stem from liberal presuppositions, yet revelation of the unending mistreatment of the Jews over the centuries by professing Christians is a tragic yet necessary monument. Consider the significance of the follow comment: “If the death camps [of Nazi Europe] are causally linked through two millennia to mistakes made by the first generation of Christians—and I believe they are—can they still not be acknowledged as mistakes? What difference does it make whether two years passed or two thousand if the causal link can be made?” Page 103. “Paul knew nothing of supercessionism. He remained a Jew. Indeed, his faith in Jesus was, to him, a way of being more Jewish than ever.” Page 142.

For Christians, the dramatic and unexpected conversion of Constantine was a proof of th Church’s proclamation, but the change of fortune it led to was proof of even more. “The creation of the Christian state,” Neusner says, “claiming to carry forward the ancient Israelite state, and to appeal to its precedents, brought to a critical stage the long-term Christian claim that Christians formed the new Israel.”

1 . . . The gradual closing of the imperial vice on Judaism—from Constantine’s edict in 315 making it a crime for Jews to proselytize to the edict almost a century later making it a crime punishable by death—was driven by the real problem that Jewish dissent from Christian claims made overcoming paganism far more difficult. Pages 176-77.

“The basis of Luther’s anti-Judaism, as the historian Heiko Oberman sums it up [see this volume referenced below], was the conviction that ever since Christ’s appearance on earth, the Jews have had no more future as Jews.” Page 368.

Cohn-Sherbok, Dan. The Crucified Jew: Twenty Centuries of Christian Ant-Semitism. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1997. A professor of Jewish theology at the University Kent, Canterbury, England, this author provides a readable yet scholarly account of Judaism suffering under centuries of Christian despite.

For twenty centuries, then, Jews have suffered at the hands of anti-Semites. The injustices and pogroms inflicted on the Jewish community have been to a large degree the result of Christian contempt. Anti-Jewish attitudes in the history of the Church were not accidental—rather they

1 Jacob Neusner, Judaism and Christianity, p.58. Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones makes a significant and related comment concerning the Puritans: “[W]ere they not too much influenced by the analogy of the Old Testament and of Israel? Here, it seems to me, was the source of the trouble, that they would persist in taking the analogy of Israel in the Old Testament and applying it to England. Was not that the real error? In the Old Testament and under that Dispensation of the State (of Israel) was the church (Acts 7:38), but the State of England in the sixteenth was not the church. In the Old Testament the two were one and identical. But surely in the New Testament we have the exact opposite. The church consists of the ‘called out’ ones, not the total State.” The Puritans: Their Origins And Successors,” pp. 64-65. were the direct consequence of Christian teaching about Judaism and the Jewish nation. . . . Anti-Semitism has thus been a constant feature of the history of Christendom. As we reach th end of the second millennium of this era, it is vital that both Christians and Jews affirm that they are heirs of a fearful tradition. . . . [O]nly then will Christians and Jews fully appreciate th promise in the Psalmist’s words: [Psalm 133:1-3]. Pages 240-41.

Also refer to this author’s Holocaust Theology: A Reader, New York: New York University Press, 2002. The contributions to this volume include the writings of authors Stephen Dav Edward Flannery, Graham Keith, Franklin Littell, Jacon Neusner, and David Rausch that are referenced in this annotated bibliography. More recently has been published AntiSemitism: A History, Stroud, Gloucestershire: Sutton Publishing, 2002, concerning which Cohn-Sherbock writes: “In an earlier study, The Crucified Jew, I focused on th Christian roots of anti-Semitism. The aim of this volume is to answer this questio surveying the history of anti-Semitism from a more global perspective.” Page vii.

Ellison, Stanley A. Who Owns The Land? Portland: Multnomah, 1991. From a conserva evangelical perspective, here is one of the best assessments of the biblical, histor political issues that arise from the ongoing tensions which are endemic concerning Middle East. Reference is made to the frequently cited admonition of the psalmist: “Pray the peace of Jerusalem” (Ps. 122:6). Ellison comments:

This exhortation to pray for Jerusalem’s peace, however, is so broad and general it seems to lend support for any friendly gesture toward the Jewish people. The early British and American Friends of Zionism, for instance, often saw it as encouraging that movement. . . . To pray this prayer intelligently in the will of God, it is important to discern more specifically what “peace” the Psalmist had in mind. Was he speaking of military triumph for the nation? Are we to pray for modern Israel’s political dominance over the Arabs? Should we encourage her annexation the West Bank and Gaza Strip? How about praying that the Muslim Dome of the Roc replaced by a new Jewish temple? Or should we simply pray for Israel’s international prominence and peaceful relations with her neighbours in the Middle East?

The context of this Psalm appears to have a very different emphasis. David’s concern was for the house of the Lord, that is, the tabernacle in Jerusalem. As Hebrew pilgrims ascended the rugged hills to the city, they especially anticipated a time of fellowship with their cov Lord, bringing with them various offerings. They came “To give thanks to the name o Lord,” as the psalmist expresses it. Warfare would restrict or deny this privilege, but that was not his main concern. The peace of which he speaks is not primarily outer, but inner peace— not political, but spiritual. “May peace be within you,” is his emphasis. His concern throughou the Psalm is “the house of the Lord” and the spiritual peace that comes through a r relationship with God.” Pages 184-185.

Flannery, Edward H. The Anguish of the Jews. New York: Macmillan, 1965. Another Roman Catholic priest, Flannery’s loyalty to the Church of Rome notwithstanding, provides helpful overview of the relationship between Christianity and Judaism over the centuries. commences:

This book received its first impetus from a personal experience. One evening several years ag walked north on Park Avenue in New York City in the company of a young Jewish couple. Behind us shone the huge illuminated cross the Grand Central Building displays each year at Christmas time. Glancing over her shoulder, the young lady—ordinarily well disposed toward Christians—declared: “That cross makes me shudder. It is like an evil presence.” This disturbing comment evoked many questions in me, not least of which was: How did the cross the supreme symbol of universal love, become a sign of fear, or evil for this young Jewess? It soon became clear that her fearful reaction to it was the fruit of a knowledge which she, but n I, had—a knowledge of the immense suffering undergone by her people at the hands

Christians for many centuries. It was my first introduction to the problem of anti-Semitism Later discussions of the incident with both Jewish and Christian friends led me to a furth discovery. Jews generally are acutely aware of the history of anti-Semitism, simply because it comprises so large a portion of Jewish history. Christians, on the contrary, even highly educated ones, are all but totally ignorant of it—except for contemporary developments. They are ignorant of it for the simple reason that anti-Semitism does not appear in their history books. Histories of the Middle Ages—and even of the Crusades—can be found in which the word “Jew” does not appear, and there are Catholic dictionaries and encyclopedias in which the term “anti-Semitism” is not listed. There seems to be only one conclusion: The pages Jews ha memorized have been torn from our histories of the Christian era. In a sense, this book is a contribution toward the reinsertion of those pages.

Page xi.

Gager, John G. The Origins Of Anti-Semitism. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983. This scholarly work proposes that anti-Semitism surged following the birth of Christianity, principally because of conflict amongst Christians with the result that the opponents Judaism triumphed. Thus modern anti-Semitism is not a uniquely modern phenomenon; it is not paganism in a modern dress or that pagan anti-Semitism which influenced early Christianity. Further Paul was totally outside the mainstream of early Christian anti- Judaism. He viewed Christ as the fulfillment of God’s promise to redeem the Gentiles. In Paul’s thinking, Christ represents neither an abrogation of God’s covenant with Israel nor the replacement of Jews by Christians as the chosen people of God.

Goldhagen, Daniel Jonah. Hitler’s Willing Executioners. New York: Random House, 1997. Th Harvard University professor brings to the public the fruits of his acclaimed doctoral dissertation. In simple terms, with regard to responsibility for the Holocaust, Germans in general were culpable, especially in the light of exposed myths such as supposed ignorance and reluctance. However while German nationalism, that mushroomed from the nineteenth century onward, was the distinctive incubator for “eliminationist antisemitism” of the twentieth century, the antecedents of this historic atrocity streamed forward from the early centuries of Christianity.

European antisemitism is a corollary of Christianity. From the earliest days of Christianity consolidation of its hold over the Roman Empire, its leaders preached against the Jews, employing explicit, powerfully worded, emotionally charged condemnations. . . . From the time of John Chrysostom until the modern period, the attitudes and treatment of Jews in the Christian world underwent frequent adjustment, as did Christian doctrine and practice. Yet while all the changes in Christians’ theology and practice were taking place, the underlyi belief in the divinity of Jesus remained firm. So too was anti-Semitism. . . . The medieva European hatred of Jews was so intense and so divorced from reality that all calamities society could be and were attributed to the Jews’ malfeasance. The Jews stood for everything that was awry, so that the reflexive reaction to a natural or social ill was to look to its supposed Jewish sources. Martin Luther’s anti-Semitism was ferocious and influential enough to have earned him a place in the pantheon of antisemites. This did not matter to the Church th Luther was fighting, for the Church denounced him and his followers as heretics and Jews. . . . The ubiquitous anti-Semitism that existed in 1800 and in 1850 became, if anything, more intense and certainly more deadly as the century was drawing to a close, as Germany became more economically and technologically advanced. . . . By the end of the nineteenth century, the view that the Jews posed extreme danger to Germany and that the source of their perniciousness was immutable, namely their race, and the consequential belief that the Jews had to be eliminated from Germany were extremely widespread in German society. The tendency to consider and propose the most radical form of elimination—that is, extermination—was already strong and had been given much voice. . . . The fact was that as the 1920s and then the Nazi takeover approached, the German people were more dangerously oriented towards Jews than they had been during any other time since the dawn of modernity. Pages 49, 51, 53, 72, 74, 79.

Gorday, Peter. Principles Of Patristic Exegesis: Romans 9-11 in Origen, John Chrysostom, and Augustine. New York: E. Mellen Press, c1983. How did these three influential churc fathers understand the most important passage in the New Testament concerning relationship between Christianity and Judaism? Insofar as disregard for national Israel in t Christian dispensation is concerned, there was unanimity of opinion.

Concerning Origen we read:

Origen’s summary statement [in his exegesis of Romans] is “. . . through the whole text of the epistle . . . the Apostle has taught how the highest religion has been transferred from the Jews the Gentiles, from circumcision to faith, from the letter to the spirit, from shadow to from carnal observance to spiritual observance.” . . . The “letter” of the Old Testament text is always for Origen pointing in some way to its “spirit,” ie. The specifically Christian transformation of the Old Testament content. This may take the form of a Christologic application or of a refining in some way of the ethical and inner-spiritual horizon of the text by means of a New Testament reference. Along the way a fair amount of anti-Jewish polemic tak place as Origen reflects on the relation of the church and the synagogue. Pages 91, 100.

Concerning Chrysostom we read:

The event of Christ and the New Covenant for the Gentiles have divested the Jews as a people of any special standing before God. But finally it is the unbelief of the Jews and their rejection of Christ that constitute their supreme offense; for these there is no forgiveness, only the hop that God in his providential mercy will one day move their hearts to conversion. Thus Chrysostom finds consistent denunciation of the Jews in chapters 2, 3, 4 and 9-11 of Romans, as he senses in Paul’s polemic a fundamental critique of the privileges and prerogativ Judaism. This perspective on the Jews is held consistently throughout Chrysostom’s writings, and down to the present day has been one of his best known and most ignominious characteristics. He frequently polemicized against “Judaizing” and freely encouraged repressi measures against the synagogues. Pages 129-130.

Concerning Augustine we read:

[In Romans 11] some Jews have believed in Christ, and they are the remnant of the olive and fulfillment of the divine promises to historical Israel. . . . The “Israel” that ultimately be saved are the predestined elect, drawn into a unity out of Jews and Gentiles. . . Judaism is simply relegated to the latter [non-elect] category, and its status in salvation-histo assigned to the pre-Christian past. Pages 171, 333.

Grosser, E and Halperin, Edwin. The Causes And Effects Of Antisemitism: The Dimensions Of Prejudice. Secaucus, NJ: Citadel Press, 1979. This is a systematic accounting of 1900 year of anti-Semitic attitudes and practices, with a preface by Franklin H. Littell. The authors’ declared purpose is to increase awareness and understanding of anti-Semitism’s h magnitude and continuity, and its deep infection of the Western World. The metho involved the concise listing, in chronological order, of anti-Semitic incidents. There is also compilation, analysis and synthesis of the causes and theories of anti-Semitism th apparent from the catalogue.

The extent of anti-Semitism in Western history has never, to say the least, been com knowledge. And today there is a tendency to assume that the problem of Jewish security and the attitudes of Jews toward their survival grow from the experience of the Holocaust alone. The actions of the Nazis and their collaborators are of such a scale and horror as to obscure th long history of anti-Semitism. Often lost in appraisals of anti-Semitism is the fact that enderlying spirit of the Holocaust is almost 2,000 years old. The genocide carried out by civilized and cultured nation in the mid-twentieth century was an extreme manifestation of this spirit, but not an isolated one. Page 3.

Gruber, Dan. The Church and The Jews: The Biblical Relationship. Hagerstown: Serenity Books, 1997. This is a most significant book that is highly commended as seminal by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. The unveiling from history concerning how the Christian church has mistreated Israel is comprehensive and compelling. Particularly enlightening is the comfortable relationship that existed between the historian Eusebius and the Emperor Constantine means of which state sanctioned anti-Judaism came to the fore. Significant is the proposal that God made the New Covenant with the house of Judah and the house of Israel. Hence the Church does not have its own covenant with God. The Bible does not mention a covenant that God has made with the Church, though, according to Romans 11, the Church is incorporated into the New Covenant that God made with Israel. The author concludes that:

The greatest obstacle to the salvation of the Jewish people is the Church designed by men. The greatest means of bringing salvation to the Jewish people is the church designed by God. Paul warned the Gentile believers not to be arrogant towards the Jewish people, nor ignorant God’s faithfulness to them. Yet it is this very arrogance that generally characterizes the Church’s traditional theology and behavior. Page 324.

Hay, Malcolm. Thy Brother’s Blood. New York: Hart Publishing, 1975. This Catholic historian is especially commended by Walter Kaufmann for his intellectual honesty. This concerns the author’s unveiling of the dishonesty of great religious figures, their disdainful regard for and mistreatment of the Jews over the centuries of church history. For example:

The violence of the language used by St. John Chrysostom in his homilies against the Jews has never been exceeded by any preacher whose sermons have been recorded. Allowances must, no doubt, be made for the custom of the times, for passionate zeal, and for the fear that s tender shoots of Christian faith might be chilled by too much contact with Jews. But no amount of allowance can alter the fact that these homilies filed the minds of Christian congregations with a hatred which was transmitted to their children, and to their children’s children, for many generations. These homilies, moreover, were used for centuries, in schools and in semina where priests were taught to preach, with St. John Chrysostom as their model—where priests were taught to hate, with St. John Chrysostom as their model. Page 27.

Heer, Friedrich. God’s First Love: Christians and Jews over Two Thousand Years. London: Phoenix Giant, 1970. The author, professor at the University of Vienna, explains that this book, “by an Austrian Catholic, is dedicated to the Jewish, Christian and non-Christia victims of the Austrian Catholic, Adolf Hitler.” In raising the question of the positive guilt of Christianity in fostering anti-Semitism throughout its history, he shows that the concepts of Jew-hating and Jew-killing were based on Christian theology, taught by the most eminent fathers of the church.

Katz, Samuel. Battleground: Fact & Fantasy in Palestine. New York: Taylor Productions, 2002. This writer was a member of the clandestine Irgun Zvai Leumi fighting force under Menachem Begin who later became a member of the first Knesset of Israel and subsequently served Prime Minister Begin as an advisor. He has since been employed as a columnist of Ma’ariv and the Jerusalem Post. Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Jean Kirkpatrick comments: “Reading BATTLEGROUND is an eye-opener. It is well written, informative, fast-paced and debunks some carefully cultivated myths concerning Israel and the Middle East.”

Keith, Graham. Hated Without A Cause? A Survey of Anti-Semitism. Carlisle, Cumbria: Paternoster Press, 1997. Here is a serious study of Israel in relation to the Christian Churc written by a conservative evangelical whose outlook has a British touch. Showing animated disturbance than some concerning the fruit of supercessionism, special empha given to Luther, the Reformation and its legacy. Thus “most churches have acknowledged that Christians bear some responsibility for anti-Semitism.” Page 279. Also conside reference to “eminent Christians like John Chrysostom or Martin Luther, whose pie unquestioned and whose opposition to the Jews clearly derived from their piety.” Page 26 Supportive of John Murray’s exegesis on Romans 11, a future national blessing upon Israe is to be expected, though not necessarily on the eve of Jesus Christ’s second coming. The issue of the return to and repossession the land of Israel from a biblical perspect skirted, except when, quite erroneously according to history, it is in the main identified w Zionism, dispensationalism and the uncritical support of Americans. However the concluding comment is most appropriate:

Clearly it is as difficult today as at any time for the Gentile churches to hold in balance the tw elements of Paul’s perspective in Romans 11:28. Yet, they must strive to do so. If they forget that the Jewish people are beloved of God and their election is irrevocable, inevitably they wil slip into anti-Semitic attitudes and practices. On the other side of the coin, to ignore the realit of Jewish unbelief and the fact that it makes them enemies of God means that the Jewish peo will be deprived of the greatest service the Gentile Christians can give them—the testimony t Jesus of Nazareth as the Savior of Israel. Page 283.

Larsen, David. Jews, Gentiles and the Church: A New Perspective on History and Prophe Grand Rapids: Discovery House, 1955. The author, a professor at Trinity Evangelic Divinity School, is unabashedly prosemitic and provides us with a very readable y comprehensive record of the relationship between Israel and Judaism over the pas millennia. As such, it is one of the best introductions to this subject. Larsen comments tha “the ‘displacement theory’ by which Israel is totally and finally replaced by the church in plan and purpose of God . . . may lurch dangerously toward ant-Semitism. Any c implication that the Jews are superfluous or unrelated to the divine scheme of thi dangerous.” Pages 84-85.

Littell, Franklin. The Crucifixion of the Jews. New York: Harper, 1975. This United Methodist Church minister, ecumenicist, former professor at Temple University, Holocaust sch and friend of Israel, could not be ranked as a conservative evangelical. Neverthele volume is a vigorous polemic that calls Gentile Christians to honestly face the sha legacy of theological anti-Semitism which cannot be divorced from the fact of the Holoca Further, he writes that:

The cornerstone of Christian anti-Semitism is the superceding or displacement myth, w already rings with the genocidal note. This is the myth that the mission of the Jewish people was finished with the coming of Jesus Christ, that “the old Israel” was written off wit appearance of “the new Israel.” To teach that a people’s mission in God’s providence finished, that they have been relegated to the limbo of history, has murderous implic which murderers will in time spell out. The murder of six million Jews by baptized Christians, from whom membership in good standing was not (and has not yet been) withdrawn, raises th most insistent question about the credibility of Christianity. The existence of a restored Israel proof positive that the Jewish people is not annihilated, assimilated, or otherwise withe away, is substantial refutation of the traditional myth about their end in the historic process. And this is precisely why Israel is a challenge, a crisis for much contemporary Christi theology. Page 2.

Mussner, Franz. Tractate On The Jews: The Significance of Judaism for Christian Faith. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984. This Roman Catholic New Testament scholar and theologian confesses that, regarding his relationship to Judaism, he was no different from the vast majority of Christian scholars, namely, filled with undisturbed prejudices against Judaism. Then, with Vatican II and its aftermath, he underwent a metanoia [repentance] and ventured forth on the rereading of the Scriptures with new eyes as far as Judaism i concerned.

“Tractates against the Jews” were written in the time of the church fathers, and the anti-Jewish spirit of these tractates has its effect even in our own times; thus, as the churches undertake a comprehensive rethinking of their relationship to Judaism, it is appropriate and timely for us to produce a “tractate for the Jews.” . . . Behind this book lies a learning process of many years, a true changing of the mind, and I would like to invite the reader to enter into this learni process and to think newly and differently about Israel, the elder brother and the “root” of the Church. Page xi.

Concerning the interpretation of Romans 11:26, national Israel will not attain salvation by means of a mass conversion that precedes the parousia [appearing, coming] of Jesus Christ.

The parousia Christ saves all Israel without a preceding “conversion” of the Jews to the gospel. God saves Israel by a “special path” which likewise rests upon the principle of grace (so gratia) and thereby maintains the divinity of God, his “choice,” his “call,” and his promises to the fathers and his “decision” which is independent of all human ways and speculation. It is the victory of the free grace of God which will save all Israel. . . . It is not the Gentile peoples who have been converted to the gospel that will save “all Israel”—an absolutely unbiblical thought—but God alone. The hardening and saving of Israel correspond to one another. Pages 33-34.

Oberman, Heiko. The Roots of Anti-Semitism in the Age of Renaissance and Reformation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, c1984. This recognized work is by a former professor at Harvard University and the University of Tübingen, West Germany. In focusing on the founders of modern Europe, Reuchlin, Erasmus, Luther, and Calvin, he concludes that their achievements, at best ambiguous in contemporary Jewish eyes, did little however, to make the sixteenth century anything more for the Jews than a bleak extension of the dark Middles Ages. Hence, the roots of anti-Semitism were laid long before the Reformation.

[H]atred of the Jews was not an invention of the sixteenth century. It was an inherited assumption. Far from acquitting the age of Renaissance and Reformation, we should recognize that this same age which so consciously scrutinized the medieval traditions simultaneousl passed on, with new strength, whatever withstood the test of inspection. This is what stamps the character of the age and determines its significance for the modern era. Page. xi.

Parkes, James. The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue: A Study in the Or Antisemitism. New York: Athaneum, 1969. This Doctor of Philosophy thesis submitted to Oxford University by a Church of England clergyman, is an exhaustive study of the i eight centuries of the Christian era with regard to the roots of anti-Semitism. Convinced that the hostility of the Roman world to the Jew offers no explanation of the creation an survival of this scourge, the author became persuaded that it was in the conflict of Church with the Synagogue that the real roots of the problem lay. His conclusions include:

In the passage of the eight centuries reviewed in the previous chapters of this book we have see the laying of the foundations of modern anti-Semitism. At times the ancient legislation itself has an appallingly modern ring in its very phraseology. With Leo and Charlemagne the curtai rings down upon the first act. The second act takes us up to the Reformation: the third act is still upon the stage. But it is an act of the same play, and can be explained only in the light of what has preceded it. Our interpretation of the first act is, therefore, no academic question, b the means by which we can understand what is passing before our eyes. Page 371.

At the end of the [first] century the leadership of the Church was already passing into Gentile hands. Gentile congregations were powerful and numerous. Any compromise on the ceremon law had been completely rejected. . . . The hardening of Judaism is a result, not a cause, of th separation. But whether through the influence of Paul, or, more likely, through the misunderstanding of him by Gentile successors, the issue had gone much deeper, and entirety of the religious conceptions of Judaism as proclaimed in the Old Testament was rejec as superceded by the Church. Page 373.

For a consideration of anti-Semitism as it relates to the past one hundred and fifty years, refer to another book by this author. Antisemitism, Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1969.

Peters, Joan. From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab–Jewish Conflict over Palestine. London: J Kap Publications, 1993. Differing claims amidst conflict between Arabs and Jews call for a definitive response. Historian and journalist Joan Peters has provided such a boo that both the Christian Century and National Review acknowledge as providing unrivaled clarifying thoroughness.

Rausch, David A. Fundamentalist-Evangelicals and Anti-Semitism. Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1993. Here is a conservative evangelical historian whose writings dis numerous fallacies concerning the mischaracterization of fundamentalist-evangelicals, especially in America. In particular, a premillennial eschatology and its sympathy f national Israel and secular Zionism, has frequently come under fire, such as from amillennialists with a tendency for theological anti-Semitism.

In spite of scholarly perceptions to the contrary, the prophetically minded fundamenta evangelical has been (and currently is) a firm supporter of the Jewish state. And, in an age wh anti-Zionism is often indistinguishable from ant-Semitism, this fact is crucial to our study. As we have seen throughout this study, the fundamentalist-evangelical was long a suppor Jewish restoration to the Holy Land and, to this day, has received ridicule and scorn from othe Christians for pro-Israel views. In spite of numerous liberal and conservative Christian cries to the contrary, this Christian Zionism has been a positive factor in combating any ant-Semitism within the fundamentalist-evangelical community. Page 206.

Also refer to this author’s A Legacy Of Hatred: Why Christians Must Nor Forget the Holocaust. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990.

Remaud, Michel. Israel, Servant Of God. London: T & T Clark, 2003. Here is yet anot Catholic, indebted to Franz Mussner, who challenges the established supercessionis centuries while attempting to better reconcile the present reality of elect Israel an Church, especially in the light of the Vatican II declaration, Nostra Aettate. Consider:

[I]t is well known that the Church calls herself the ‘New Israel’, and it is regrettable that Vatican II itself made use of this expression. Now traditional in theology nowhere to be found in the New Testament, it gives the impression that the Church h taken the place of Israel, so that from the theological point of view Israel no longer exists. Such a simplistic position, pushed to extremes, contradicts more balanced tex found in the New Testament (Rom. 9-11; Eph. 2-3).

Of all the theological documents promulgated by the Second Vatican Council, only th text on the Jews [Nostra Aetate] is without a single reference to any of the teachings o the Church, whether patristic, conciliar or pontifical. As is usual for all the declaration of the Magisterium, documents of Vatican II include references to former tradition. . .

The text on the Jews is the sole exception to this rule in that it refers exclusively to Scripture.

To study the horrendous history of anti-Semitism, overwhelming for us, is to perceive that nowhere did the Jews suffer more than within the Christian world. No theology of history can spare itself from deep reflection on this fact. Pages 5-6, 19, 36-37.

Siker, Jeffrey S. Disinheriting The Jews. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, c1991. T revision of a doctoral thesis presented to Princeton Theological Seminary, was origina titled: “Disinheriting the Jews: The Use of Abraham in Early Christian Controversy wit Judaism from Paul Through Justin Martyr.” This is a work of recognized authority. The author’s conclusion is that,

the various uses of Abraham from Paul through Justin Martyr show a shift in focus from Gentile inclusion to Jewish exclusion.” However: “Was this move theologically necessary or defensible? . . . Does Gentile inclusion in God’s promises necessitat Jewish exclusion? Justin Martyr, Marcion, Heracleon, Barnabas, and Ignatius apparently did equate Gentile inclusion with Jewish exclusion. . . . Only Paul see clearly to have had problems with such an equation, in fact rejecting it implicitly Romans 4 and explicitly in Romans 9-11. . . . Paul did not equate Jewish rejection of the gospel with God’s rejection of the Jews. Nor would he allow such an equation to be inferred. Rather, Jewish rejection of the gospel served God’s purpose of Gentile inclusion within the gospel. The Jews became enemies of the gospel so that Genti might be included within the gospel. Thus the Gentiles were saved by their enemies. This situation is the utter paradox and mystery of the gospel for Paul. . . . For Paul, non-Christian Jews continue to be included within God’s promises simply because of God’s covenant faithfulness to Abraham and other patriarchs. . . . Paul would no affirm the theological doctrine that became entrenched among later generations Christians, namely, that Gentile inclusion necessitates Jewish exclusion. Pages 195-97.

Telchin, Stan. Abandoned: What is God’s Will for the Jewish People and the Church? Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, 1997. This Hebrew Christian, in a simple and very readable style, deals with Romans 11, Church history, the Holocaust, and a host of matters that relate to a contemporary appreciation of Jews at a basic level, and especially the need to witne appropriately to them of their Messiah. The concluding chapter is most practical in that it provides specific directions concerning, “What Does the Church Need to Do?”

White, Derek C. Replacement Theology, Its Origin, History, And Theology. Teddington, Middlesex: Christian Friends of Israel, 1997. This booklet of only 30 pages is an excellent introduction to and summary of the nature and role of replacement theology in chur history.

One of the greatest tragedies to befall the Church was the severance from her Jewish roots, a rift which has been a cause of many heresies, of monasticism and departures from Biblical truth and lifestyle. The very descent of the Western Church into the dark middle ages—the period of intellectual and spiritual darkness in Europe from the fifth to the (possibly) fifteenth centuries— was almost certainly the result of this separation, not the least as a divine judgment on Church for the anti-Semitism which was part of this severance. Page 2.

Williamson, Clark M. Has God Rejected His People? Nashville: Abingdon, 1982. Designed as an introduction to the history of the relationship between Judaism and Christianity, this author is an excellent resource even though he evidences little allegiance to conservative evangelic presuppositions. Concerning the roots of anti-Semitism that pervaded Hitler’s Germany, t author concludes:

All the literature one reads on the final solution leaves the clear impression that the pervasiveness of classical Christian anti-Jewish theology was a significant factor in the succes of Hitler’s program. Where it did not directly contribute to support for Hitler’s policies—and it often did—it created an apathy toward Jews that was equally decisive in permitting th Holocaust. The great majority of the German people did not actively support or actively oppos Hitler: they were merely indifferent. Page 134.

Wistrich, Robert S. Antisemitism, The Longest Hatred. New York: Pantheon Books, 1991. This is a companion volume to the excellent Thames Television video production The Longest Hatred, 150 minutes, also released in 1991. With the encouragement of Simon Wiesentha Wistrich has provided a broad, scholarly sweep of anti-Semitism from a Jewish perspectiv that is approvingly referenced in Graham Keith’s Hated Without A Cause? Of particu interest is “Part 1, From the Cross to the Swastika.” Consider the following:

[Augustine was ] the immensely influential North African Church Father who lived at the end of the fourth century AD. His teachings had a dogmatic importance of the first order for the policy of the Popes and secular Christian rulers of the Middles Ages with regard to the Jews. They served to underline that the Church had become the new chosen people, replacing the o Israel which had betrayed the true message of God—which it should, of course, have been the first to acknowledge. St. Augustine even likened the Jewish people to Cain, the first criminal recorded in biblical history, who had murdered his own brother and merited death but instead had been condemned to wander unhappily ever after. The Torah is the mark of Cain o deicide people who have misinterpreted their own Scriptures and continue to live in blindness and error. The Jews might deserve to be eradicated for their crime, but St. Augustine prefers that they be preserved as “witnesses” to Christ-ian truth until the end of time, when they will turn to Christ at the Last Judgment.” Pages 18-19.

The canonical legislation of the Church would fully institutionalize by the thirteenth century th reprobate status of the Jew and the doctrine of Servitus Judaeorum (the ‘perpetual servitude of the Jews’). The Jews had to be subordinate to Christians, they could exercise no posit authority and Christian society had to be rigidly protected from ‘contamination’ through living eating or engaging in sexual relations with them. The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) codified this will to segregate the Jews by requiring them to wear distinguishing dress—a conical hat in the Germanic lands and a ‘Jew badge’ (usually a yellow disc sewn into the clothing, whose col symbolized Judas’ betrayal of Christ for gold pieces) in Latin countries. The effects of the badg were to make Jews more visible and vulnerable to attack, reducing their ability to travel freely Pages 25-26.

The German Reformation under Luther’s guidance, therefore led in a very unfavorable direction for the Jews, when compared with parallel developments in English, Dutch or Swiss Protestantism. The seed of hatred sown by Luther would reach its horrible climax in the Third Reich, when German Protestants showed themselves to be particularly receptive to Nazi anti- Semitism. Page 42.