The Origins of Christian Anti-Semitism

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs ^ | May 5, 2009 | Prof. Pieter van der Horst

[Vlad0]

• Christian anti-Semitism began much later than Jesus’ life. In the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which are the historically more reliable ones, Jesus views himself as a messenger of God to the Jews and as a member of the Jewish people.

• The New Testament has several anti-Semitic elements in its chronologically latest documents. The Gospel of John has Jesus call the Jews “sons of the devil.” There is also a case of an anti-Jewish outburst by the Apostle Paul.

• The split between Jewish and gentile Christians brought with it the beginning of Christian anti-Jewish sentiments. In creating a new identity for itself, Christianity attacked the old religion as fiercely as it could, including demonization.

• Toward the end of the fourth century, much-publicized sermons of the church father John Chrysostom combined Christian anti-Jewish elements derived from the New Testament with earlier pagan ones. These themes were gradually integrated into the anti-Jewish discourse of the church.

Prof. Pieter van der Horst studied classical philology and literature. In 1978, he received his PhD in theology from Utrecht University. After his studies, he taught the literature and history of early Christianity and Judaism. Prof. Van der Horst is a member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.

He remarks: “In the three more historically based earlier Gospels, one sees Jesus in fierce dispute with leaders of the various Jewish groups, such as the Pharisees and the Sadducees. It is clear from these texts that this is an internal Jewish debate. When, according to the Gospels, the Pharisees attacked Jesus because of his behavior, there followed a dispute of a halachic [Jewish law] nature. Jesus reasons in this context, remaining within the fold of Judaism. The debate, however fierce it may be, is less so than, for instance, the internal Jewish dispute between the Qumran sect and the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”

Non-Jews Become Christians Van der Horst says it is difficult to determine where to place the beginning of Christian anti-Semitism. “It varied from location to location. In the Jerusalem Christian community it started much later than in the communities in Asia Minor, Greece, or Rome, or wherever else Christian communities came into being.

“The earliest Christian generation in Jerusalem consisted almost entirely of Jews. These people believed in Jesus as the Messiah, but saw themselves as true Jews. The book of Acts of the Apostles makes it clear that the first Jewish Christians went to the Temple in Jerusalem, attended synagogue services, and wanted to remain Jews.[1] There were tensions with mainstream Jews, who looked askance at the belief that a crucified person was the Messiah. There was, however, no breaking point or even a discussion of excommunicating the Jewish Christians.

“The situation changed slowly in the second generation of Christians. This was directly related to the missionary activities of people like the Apostle Paul and his collaborators. Their vision was that ‘salvation,’ as they called it, was intended by God not only for the Jewish people but also for others. They began to preach their message to non-Jews outside the Land of Israel as well.

“These earliest missionaries wanted to facilitate the entrance of non-Jews into the growing Christian community. They therefore began to downgrade the Torah (the Pentateuch) and its commandments. Later they started to toy with the idea that, if God wanted non-Jews to be part of the community as well, the commandments of the Torah should be solely for the Jewish members. That gave rise to the first tensions between Jewish and gentile Christians.”

[daniel1212]

Given the events going on in the USA these days, with these campus protests, it seems like it might be valuable to look at the historic roots of anti-Semitism.

Given the events going on in the USA these days, with these campus protests, it seems like it might be valuable to look at the historic roots of anti-Christianism, including this contrived hit piece against Biblical Christians.

The Gospel of John has Jesus call the Jews “sons of the devil.”

Wrong, not "the Jews" inclusively as a race but most specifically "the Pharisees" (John 8:13) which are the vocal spokesmen respondents referred to afterward as "the Jews" in John 8, who with the "scribes and chief priests...sought how they might destroy him" (Mark 11:18) "The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God," (John 19:7) and who also lied saying and were never in bondage to any man in John 8:33, resulting in the Lord's statement which is at issue:

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. (John 8:44)

While John often referred to "the Jews" collectively yet this was not inclusive of all the Jews or of them as a race, for as John states, "There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings," (John 10:19) "Because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus." (John 12:11) "Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him. But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done." (John 11:45-46)

As in life, context is king in interpretation, and it is the Jewish leadership that are representative of those who sought to murder the Christ:

But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. (Matthew 27:20) Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. (Matthew 27:25)

There is also a case of an anti-Jewish outburst by the Apostle Paul.

Meaning that a class Jews, under murderous leadership, warranted the indictment of the apostle, stating:

For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost. (1 Thessalonians 2:14-16)

Yet the same apostle exampled the attitude Christians should have in stating,

That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. (Romans 9:2-5)

“The earliest Christian generation in Jerusalem consisted almost entirely of Jews. These people believed in Jesus as the Messiah, but saw themselves as true Jews. The book of Acts of the Apostles makes it clear that the first Jewish Christians went to the Temple in Jerusalem, attended synagogue services, and wanted to remain Jews.[1] There were tensions with mainstream Jews, who looked askance at the belief that a crucified person was the Messiah. There was, however, no breaking point or even a discussion of excommunicating the Jewish Christians.

Oh really? You mean after deacon Stephens early indictment of Jewish leadership for their hard-hearted rejection of their Messiah then there was no breaking point?

And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people. (Acts 6:8)....And....the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council, (Acts 6:12) And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,... (Acts 7:2)

Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it. (Acts 7:51-53)

And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judæa and Samaria, except the apostles. (Acts 8:1)

“The situation changed slowly in the second generation of Christians....They began to preach their message to non-Jews outside the Land of Israel as well.

Really? Peter and Paul and the persecuted (by Jews overall) Jewish Christians were "second generation of Christians?"

Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word. Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did. (Acts 8:4-6)

Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only. And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord. (Acts 11:19-21)

Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. (Acts 10:34-36) To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. (Acts 10:43)

“Later on, as is also made quite clear in the New Testament, gentile Christians began to claim that their communities were the true Israel.[2] They asserted that in neglecting many of the Torah’s commandments, they-and not the Jews-knew what God wanted from His people

Meaning that Pharisee Paul and the church came to realize specifically which ways the promised New Covenant was "Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers.."

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: (Jeremiah 31:31-32)

Under which only the literal observance of temple ordinances, dietary laws and liturgical days — (which the New Testament categorizes →) are abrogated. The reason being that unlike basic universal laws (which the New Testament affirms), these were typological laws, shadows of Christ who would come, precursors of what would be fulfilled by and under Christ. Such as regarding “meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath, Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ," (Colossians 2:16,17) Once the body is come, we need not look at the shadow. Likewise the writer of Hebrews tell us in further revealing that temple ordinances, dietary and the liturgical calendar constituted the abrogated ceremonial law, that "carnal ordinances" regulating “meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation,” (Heb. 9:10) were part of the Old covenant which was to cease, for “that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away” (likely written before the Temple destruction in AD 70).

Meanwhile, those who most strongly esteem Scripture as the sure supreme accurate authority overall usually support Israel more than others:

White evangelical Protestants also are more likely than Jews to favor stronger U.S. support of Israel. Among Jews, 54% say American support of the Jewish state is “about right,” while 31% say the U.S. is not supportive enough. By contrast, more white evangelical Protestants say the U.S. is not supportive enough of Israel (46%) than say support is about right (31%). October 3, 2013 https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2013/10/03/more-white-evangelicals-than-american-jews-say-god-gave-israel-to-the-jewish-people/

Majorities of Protestants (63%) and Catholics (58%) had favorable views of Israel, compared with around four-in-ten religiously unaffiliated Americans (42%). Among Protestants, White evangelicals (80%) had more positive views of Israel than White nonevangelicals (61%) or Black Protestants (43% - August 21, 2023 https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/21/how-americans-view-israel-netanyahu-and-u-s-israel-relations-in-5-charts/

White evangelical Protestants are much more likely than members of any other major Christian tradition to say the best outcome would be a single state with an Israeli government; 28% say this, compared with 6% each of Catholics, White non-evangelical Protestants and Black Protestants.

White evangelicals also are the group most likely to say God gave the land that is now Israel to the Jewish people. Fully 70% of White evangelicals take that position, more than twice the share of U.S. Jews who answered a similar (but not identical) question in a 2020 survey by saying God gave the land of Israel to the Jewish people (32%). 

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2022/05/05.26.22_Israel.report_0.3.png
- May 26, 2022 https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/05/26/modest-warming-in-u-s-views-on-israel-and-palestinians/

[Jaysin]

“Rabbis could even impose the death penalty on Jews who broke their religious laws, and sometimes did so”

ummmmm. no. the death penalty in Talmudic law can only be decided by a sanhedrin of 71 judges. There hasn’t been a sanhedrin since our temple was destroyed almost 2000 years ago. And if you study talmudic law, then you would know that the conditions to secure a death penalty are next to impossible to achieve.

[Angelino97]

Rabbis have always found Talmudic workarounds. For instance, Jews are forbidden to lend money at interest, at least to a fellow Jew. Which means, no banking.

Yet rabbis in Israel found a workaround. It's forbidden to lend money at interest, but acceptable for a person to "invest" in a bank. So when you deposit money in an Israeli bank, it's called an "investment," and the interest you get is a "return on investment."

This is why Israeli banks post a public notice inside to clarify that you're not getting or paying interest, it's all a "return on investment." That public notice is rabbinical mandatory.

Of course Jewish community leaders, rabbis, imposed the death penalty on their wrongdoers throughout the past two millennia. Why wouldn't they? Every community imposed the death penalty on certain miscreants. Why would Jews be an exception? Are they the sole people on earth who don't bend the law to their needs?

FWIW, I get all the above info from Israel Shahak's book, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years.

You can also find it for free on Archive.org.

[Jaysin]

if you havent figured out by now, I live in Israel and what you are saying below is 100% pure nonsense.

you can rest assured that other then marriage and burial and a few other little areas, the rabbinic authorities in the very secular state of Israel have virtually no real power.

“FWIW, I get all the above info from Israel Shahak’s book”

lol. I get my information straight from the Talmud itself. I'm on my third cycle of Daf Yomi (you can google it and find the wiki page) and I am still nothing more then a layman.

yes, I’ve seen enough of your posts to know you don't like us kike Jews. thats okay—I don't take it personally.
I just hope you can differentiate between the orthodox Jews like me who do our best to follow G-d’s commandments and the secular heathens who most Americans identify as “them Jews” — unfortunately, we have no shortage of Epsteins, Weinsteins, Howard Sterns, Noam Chomsky's, Andrew Wisemans, Adam Schiffs, Jerry Nadlers, Babs, Diane Fianesteins and the countless other Lear's and Kissingers who have utilized their talents and skills for all the wrong things.

you may have your issues with “the jew lobby” and the commercialization of the holocaust amongst other complaints (have to throw in the obligatory USS Liberty mention), but I do genuinely hope you are on Israels side against the Jihadist enemy. Just remember, those same “palistinians” were the same ones dancing in the streets after 9/11 and you can pretty much say that Yassar Arafat is the undisputed king of modern Islamic terrorism. He made airplane hijacking an art form and was obviously the seed of 9/11. It's the same people and the same ideology. If Israel loses this battle, then you can let me know which size hijab to order for your wife, because the once great USA and all of western civilization is next on their list.