Part Two...
Yet even Heschel — the most ecumenically generous of modern Jewish thinkers, the man who called Pope Paul VI his "dear friend" — never pretended that the ground between Christianity and Judaism was morally level. He knew what had been done to his people. His family had died in the Holocaust. He wrote in The Insecurity of Freedom (1966) that Christian-Jewish dialogue required Christians to begin with honesty about their own tradition's violence before presuming to offer theological arguments to Jews. The foundation had to be laid in repentance before it could be built upon in conversation.
V. What the Church Owes — Repentance Before Proclamation
The Second Vatican Council's Nostra Aetate (1965) formally repudiated the charge of collective Jewish guilt for the death of Jesus — a charge that had fuelled Christian antisemitism for nineteen centuries. It stated explicitly: "what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today." It was a necessary and long-overdue declaration. It was also, in historical terms, remarkably late.
Pope John Paul II became the first pope to visit the Great Synagogue of Rome (1986), where he called the Jewish people "our elder brothers in faith" — a phrase drawn directly from Paul's theology in Romans 11. He visited Yad Vashem, Israel's Holocaust memorial, in 2000 and left a written prayer in the Western Wall: "We are deeply saddened by the behaviour of those who in the course of history have caused these children of yours to suffer, and asking your forgiveness we wish to commit ourselves to genuine brotherhood."
These gestures matter. They are not sufficient. The historian James Carroll, in Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews (2001), argued that institutional Catholic repentance required not only formal declarations but a complete reckoning with how anti-Jewish theology had been systematically embedded in liturgy, preaching, art, and law across twenty centuries — and that such a reckoning would take generations and require structural changes to how Christianity teaches itself.
The Protestant tradition has been slower and less consistent in its reckoning. The Evangelical world, in particular, has produced both its most philo-Semitic voices — Christian Zionists who support Israel with genuine theological conviction — and some of its most theologically antisemitic, in the form of replacement theology, which holds that the church has permanently superseded Israel in God's covenant purposes, rendering the Jewish people spiritually obsolete.
Replacement theology — also called supersessionism — is directly refuted by Romans 11:29 ("the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable") and by the entire argument of Romans 9–11. The theologian R. Kendall Soulen, in The God of Israel and Christian Theology (1996), argued that supersessionism represents a fundamental distortion of Christian theology, not merely an error in biblical interpretation — that a Christianity which has excised the ongoing covenant with Israel from its theological DNA has misunderstood its own foundations.
VI. The Deepest Irony
The Jews who rejected the Christianity that persecuted them were, in a very real sense, closer to the spirit of Jesus than the Christians who perpetrated it.
A tradition that says "love your enemies, do good to those who hate you" (Luke 6:27) and then burns the synagogues of people who have done it no harm is not following Jesus. It is using his name as a flag of conquest. A tradition that says "blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy" (Matthew 5:7) and then runs an inquisition is not following Jesus. It is desecrating his teaching in the very act of invoking it.
The Jewish communities that maintained their covenant faithfulness under the pressure of that tradition — who died with the Shema on their lips rather than abandon the God of their fathers — were exhibiting precisely the kind of faithfulness that Jesus himself embodied. "Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life" (Revelation 2:10). He said that to Jewish followers of his own movement, in a letter to a persecuted community. The irony that those words later described the Jewish people dying at the hands of a church that claimed his name is not subtle.
The Jesus of the Gospels — the one who healed on the Sabbath and argued Torah with Pharisees and wept over Jerusalem and touched lepers and ate with sinners — would not have been unrecognisable in a first-century synagogue. He would have been deeply unrecognisable in a medieval Crusade. He would have been horrified in an Inquisition chamber. He would have stood outside the walls of a burning ghetto and wept — and his tears would have been indistinguishable from those of the people inside it.
That is the Christianity that the Jewish people never saw. And the Christianity that presumed to judge them for not accepting it had, in the meantime, shown them something else entirely.
VII. Why Jews Cannot Accept Christ — The Theological Reasons
With the historical record established, the theological objections can now be stated — and they deserve to be stated with full respect, because they are not the objections of ignorance. They are the objections of a tradition that has read its scriptures with extraordinary care for three thousand years.
The Absolute Unity of God
The Shema — "Hear O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is One" (Deuteronomy 6:4) — is not merely a theological proposition. It is the foundational utterance of Jewish existence. It is recited twice daily, taught to children as their first prayer, and spoken as the last words of the dying. It was whispered in the gas chambers of Auschwitz.
The Oneness of God in Jewish theology is absolute and indivisible. The Torah is explicit: "God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should change His mind" (Numbers 23:19). Isaiah records God declaring: "To whom will you compare me, or who is my equal?" (Isaiah 40:25). "I am the LORD, and there is no other" (Isaiah 45:6).
Maimonides (Rambam, 1138–1204), in his Mishneh Torah and his Thirteen Principles of Faith, made absolute divine incorporeality and unity the foundational principles of Jewish theology. God has no body, no physical form, no plurality of persons, and cannot become any of these things without ceasing to be God. This was not invented as a polemic against Christianity. It was drawn from the deepest grammar of Torah itself. The Christian doctrine of the Incarnation — that the infinite, incorporeal God became finite, embodied, mortal flesh — is, in Jewish theological grammar, not a mystery to embrace but a categorical impossibility.
Vicarious Atonement
Ezekiel 18:20 states without qualification: "The soul that sins, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son." Deuteronomy 24:16 echoes: "Each will die for their own sin."
Jewish atonement theology is built on teshuvah — turning, returning, repairing, direct repentance before God. The Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, requires no mediator, no substitutionary sacrifice, no blood payment. God forgives the genuinely repentant heart directly. The Hebrew prophets show this repeatedly: God forgives Israel after the Golden Calf (Exodus 32:14), after David's adultery and murder (2 Samuel 12:13), after national apostasy (Hosea 14:4). In none of these cases is a substitutionary death required. The Psalms testify: "He forgives all your sins" (Psalm 103:3). Directly. Without mediation.
The notion that God's justice required a blood sacrifice before forgiveness could operate is, from a Jewish reading of their own scriptures, not a deepening of divine mercy but a limitation of divine sovereignty. Why would an omnipotent God be bound by a legal mechanism? As the prophet Micah asked: "What does the LORD require of you but to do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with your God?" (Micah 6:8). No blood. No sacrifice. Justice, kindness, and humility.
The Messianic Checklist
The Hebrew prophets gave concrete, historical, verifiable criteria for the Messiah. He was not primarily a spiritual saviour. He was a historical transformer:
He will rebuild the Temple (Ezekiel 37:26–28; Micah 4:1). He will gather all Jews from exile back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5–6; Jeremiah 23:8). He will bring universal peace — "they shall beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore" (Isaiah 2:4). He will bring all nations to knowledge of the one God (Zechariah 14:9). He will be a son of David ruling as righteous king (Jeremiah 23:5; Isaiah 11:1–5). And "the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea" (Isaiah 11:9).
None of this happened in the first century. The Temple was destroyed in 70 CE, forty years after the crucifixion. The Jewish people were scattered more completely than before. Wars multiplied. The world did not come to universal knowledge of the one God. The Christian response — the doctrine of the Second Coming, that Jesus will complete these things on his return — is, from a Jewish reader's perspective, a significant theological innovation not present in the prophetic texts themselves. The prophets described one Messiah, one coming, one visible transformation of history. The "two-visit" model does not appear in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, or Micah.
The Suffering Servant
Isaiah 52–53 is one of the most contested passages in the history of biblical interpretation. Christians have read it as a prophecy of the crucifixion. Jews have read it for centuries as a portrait of Israel itself — the nation that suffers among the nations, despised and rejected, bearing the weight of others' hostility, ultimately vindicated by God.
The surrounding context supports the Jewish reading. Isaiah 41:8 explicitly identifies Israel as God's servant: "But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen." Isaiah 44:1 repeats it. Isaiah 49:3 does so again: "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified." Reading chapter 53 in the context of the entire Servant Song tradition, the Jewish interpretation is not a desperate evasion. It is a contextually coherent reading by scholars who read their own scriptures in their own language.
The point is not to adjudicate between the interpretations. The point is that a Jewish scholar reading Isaiah 53 in Hebrew, in context, within the tradition of his own people, and arriving at a different conclusion than the Christian reader, is not being stubborn or blind. He is doing serious exegesis.
Conclusion: What the Church Owes, and What It Must Finally Show
The argument of this essay, stated plainly, is this:
Jewish rejection of Christianity is not a failure of spiritual perception. It is a rational, morally coherent response to two thousand years of evidence about what "accepting Christianity" has cost the Jewish people. It is the testimony of a people who were shown not the Jesus of the Gospels but the cross of the Crusades, the rack of the Inquisition, the fire of the pogrom, and the cattle car. They rejected that. They were right to reject it.
The correct Christian response to Jewish non-belief is not judgement. It is, first, repentance — thorough, specific, costly, generational repentance that begins by naming what was done and does not rush past the naming toward the comfort of absolution. It is, second, demonstration before proclamation — showing the actual Jesus, the one who wept, the one who healed, the one who said "blessed are the merciful" and meant it, in deeds, before presuming to speak his name to people whose ancestors died because of it. It is, third, the humility Paul demanded: "it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you" (Romans 11:18). Gentile Christians owe the Jewish people everything — their scriptures, their covenant, their patriarchs, their prophets, their apostles, and the Jewish carpenter from Nazareth in whose name, to their enduring shame, so much of this was done.
And it is, finally, the worship with which Paul ended: "Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgements and how inscrutable His ways!" (Romans 11:33). The mystery of Israel's journey does not resolve into a tidy theological conclusion. It ends in awe. In that awe, at least, the church might finally become recognisable as something its founder would not disown.
"The gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable."
— Romans 11:29
Selected References
Carroll, James. Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews. Houghton Mifflin, 2001.
Chazan, Robert. European Jewry and the First Crusade. University of California Press, 1987.
Fackenheim, Emil. To Mend the World: Foundations of Post-Holocaust Jewish Thought. Schocken Books, 1982.
Heschel, Abraham Joshua. God in Search of Man: A Philosophy of Judaism. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1955.
Heschel, Abraham Joshua. The Insecurity of Freedom. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1966.
Hilberg, Raul. The Destruction of the European Jews. Quadrangle Books, 1961.
Klier, John D. Russians, Jews, and the Pogroms of 1881–1882. Cambridge University Press, 2011.
Lea, Henry Charles. A History of the Inquisition of Spain. 4 vols. Macmillan, 1906–1907.
Luther, Martin. Von den Jüden und iren Lügen (On the Jews and Their Lies). 1543.
Oberman, Heiko. Luther: Man Between God and the Devil. Yale University Press, 1989.
Phayer, Michael. The Catholic Church and the Holocaust, 1930–1965. Indiana University Press, 2000.
Rosenzweig, Franz. The Star of Redemption. Trans. William Hallo. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971.
Roth, Cecil. A History of the Jews in England. Oxford University Press, 1941.
Soulen, R. Kendall. The God of Israel and Christian Theology. Fortress Press, 1996.
Vatican II. Nostra Aetate. Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions. October 28, 1965.
Wallmann, Johannes. The Reception of Luther's Writings on the Jews from the Reformation to the End of the 19th Century. Lutheran Quarterly, 1987.
Wyschogrod, Michael. The Body of Faith: God in the People Israel. Harper & Row, 1983.
No comments:
Post a Comment