Anti-Semitic Or Anti-Judean Connotations In The Gospel Of John
The articles I will be analyzing and comparing are both speaking on the subject of anti-Semitic or anti-Judean connotations in the Gospel of John, and questioning if theologians have misinterpreted the Gospel of John and New Testament Scriptures to suit their own opinion Or, are there anti-Semitism / anti-Judaism in the works of John and subsequently in the theology of Christianity? The animosity due to misunderstanding and misrepresentation and the direct and indirect consequences this has had on the relationship between modern day Christians and Jews.
I will be doing a small summary of each article and extracting the authors point and purpose, what it teaches and how it can help readers better understand this controversial topic. With a conclusion …show more content…
of the importance of research and an attempt to understand scriptures from a time related perspective.
Article 1
“Is The New Testament Anti-Semitic? By Robert L. Vasholz
Vasholz wrote this article for the purpose of expanding on the manner in which John described the Jews in John 8:12-59
In this chapter of John we read the accounts according to John when the Jews disputed the validity of Jesus and his testimony. The gospel of John has been frequently labeled as anti-Semitic due to its strong wording towards the Judeans and their persecution of Jesus and his death. By reading this article and passage together we get a different understanding of what is meant by “Jew” in the Gospel of John and if there are any truths to the anti-Semitic accusations.
The name “Jews” and how it is used was not necessarily meant to speak on them as a nation or singular beings but to speak on the leaders in power of that time. We must first understand the times in which they lived and how life was for these people, the significance of wording and purpose of the Author of the Gospel and taking into account that the translations of the scriptures do not sound or feel that same to the modern reader as they would to a person of this era.
In this article Vasholz uses the term (hoi Ioudaioi) a term to describe the Judeans or Jews as per the writings of John. So who were the (hoi Ioudaioi)?
“The term "the Jews," (hoi Ioudaioi) is used five times in
Matthew, the first Gospel, five times in the Gospel of Luke, and six times in
Mark's gospel. Altogether, the first three gospels of the New Testament use this term 16 times. The Gospel of John, in contrast, uses the term "the
Jews" 70 times. Many of these usages occur in hostile and confrontational settings.” (Vasholz, p1)
Due to its hostile and confrontational settings these writings have been taken as anti-Semitic by reader’s the world over, due in part for its use of over 70 times in John, as opposed to the Synoptic Gospels with fewer use. The Jews or Judeans are seen as being of or on the side of Satan and “The World” as it often stated in the scriptures to denote the living outside of God’s commandments or doctrine. So then let us look at who these “Jews” of the time where?
In the writings of the apostles the Jews are the governing power or leaders of the Jewish sect at this time, the teachings of the Torah by the Pharisees, scribes, elders, chief priests, and Sadducee were the law of these times and governed the Judean people.
These are the Jews John speaks of in his gospel. Vasholz is unpacking the term in order to help us understand that John’s words or statements of the Jews where not to condemn but to show their stubbornness and disbelief in Jesus as messiah and leader. There is also mention of Jews that did believe in Jesus but where overpowered by the Jews in power and therefor too week to make change or say anything. Therefore the writings in the Gospel of John should not be seen and a taken as anti-Semitic but as the point of view of an apostle whose sole purpose and intent laid in the belief of Jesus, his teachings and his title of Messiah. The simple fact that Jesus chose to include the Gentiles in to the covenant caused disturbances and division amongst the Jews of the time, as this opposed all previous teachings from Moses which had established the laws following the Torah and belief of the Jews as the chosen ones and sole holders of a covenant with God. Not wanting to share the spotlight or be dethroned from their positions in power created this conflict between the Jews and the “Christian Jews” the author also questions whether John makes so many references to the conflict between Jesus and Jews to show the intra-Jewish struggle at the time of theses occurrences, he also gives examples of how the Jewish people where spoken of by previous prophets in the Torah only to show their stubbornness and disbelieve of their own god even after the miracles and signs God had showed
them.
“the Torah, records Moses calling his people "stiffnecked" and "rebellious."” (Vasholz, p3)
“Moses is the first in a succession of Jewish prophets (including Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
Hosea and Amos) who call Israel to task for the profanation of her holy calling. And yet, I am not aware that the Torah or Hebrew Scriptures have ever been labeled "anti-Jewish." Why? We recognize these struggles as an intra-Jewish religious tension in an attempt to aid Israel toward the goal of her high calling; not as attempts to condemn Israel as the worst people on earth.” (1Vasholz)
The times of the ministry of Jesus where tense times in which a new era was being brought in along with what we now call Christianity, the rift between Christians and Jews was mainly due to fear of being overthrow by these new teachings of Jesus, because although Jesus was solely based on the Torah and taught in the synagogues the changeover of introducing the scriptures and opening the covenant of Abraham and his people on to the Gentiles is what the Judeans feared. The thought or realization of no longer being the chosen ones and losing control over the people was the true problem. The gospel of john is in no way trying to belittle the Jewish people but John’s point of view as a devout apostle to Jesus, witnessing the turmoil and intra religious battle amidst the people who Jesus was trying to include and teach.
Vasholz is clear in his point to show the meaning of the term “Jew” as the leaders and powers of the time. He is strongly against the accusations of anti-Semitism towards the Gospel of John and is great at pointing out the many other sections of the scriptures where the Jews have been shown in a negative form by their own scriptures and prophets.
Article 2
The article “Children of Abraham or of the Devil?” By Richard A. Bondi, is an expanded view on the anti-Semitic terms in the Gospel of John?
When we hear the question is there “anti-Judaism” in the New Testament? Surely the ideas that come to mind are what many consider to be the most blatantly “anti-Jewish” book, the Gospel of John the conflict between Jesus and the “Jews” is both common and astonishing but can a convincing case be made that this conflict reveals an “anti-Jewish” purpose on the part Jesus or John? Does this constitute the theory of how this has helped fuel the anti-Semitic movement?
John 8; 39-47
In this portion of the chapter of John we read of John and Jesus speaking harshly on the Judeans, giving grounds for many Jewish scholars to have an opinion of the anti-Semitic connotations in the fourth gospel. In reading this article we come to see how theses scriptures have been misconstrued and used for the blame and downgrading of a people.
In this article we see the author use modern analysis and works by scholars to show the misrepresentation and demonization felt by many in the Jewish communities.
(John 8:44) Here is the origin of the Christian tendency to demonize the Jews, the source of all mediaeval and much modern religious anti-
Judaism, which directly or indirectly led to the Holocaust. Tragically, it took six million lives to persuade the largest of the Christian churches to annul the charge of deicide leveled for so long against the people of Jesus.1
(P.2 Bondi) (1 Geza Vermes, The Religion of Jesus the Jew P.251)
This misunderstanding of the scriptures has led scholars to suggest that Johns Gospel has influenced the hate of the Jewish people leading up to the holocaust. These accounts have been said to have lead into modern day conflict between Christians and the Jewish people.
Bondi attempts to breakdown the Gospel of John in order to separate the blame on John as writer of these harsh words. These authors 10 presuppositions are to help understand the meanings or underlying purpose of the gospel, these are; involving more than one author, outside influences, translations, belief of Jesus as Christ, travel or change of location, dualism, over interpretation, support and defense and division. (P.3-5 Bondi)
John could have been writing to a predominantly Hellenistic, non-Christian audience as a sort of missionary tactic, he could have been writing for Christians who were confronting problems of eschatology as they expanded into new environments, he could have written his Gospel as retaliation against the Jewish leaders whose intent was the defaming the Christian Messiah in order to hold their position as the law, the audience and purpose of the Gospel are crucial in order to better understand the factors behind the wording.
All of these factors are used in the article’s explanation for the many conflicts occurring during the time when Jesus was with the disciples and later when the gospel was written. Conflict in belief of who to follow was great at this time as the people were accustomed to the Jewish leaders teaching and giving out the rules of conduct for their everyday life. According to the author when Jesus began his ministry amongst the Jewish people involving all people into the teachings this caused conflict within the Jewish community, due to jealousy and fear on the part of the Jewish leaders of being overthrown by this new self-proclaimed messiah.
The Gospel of john is explained by the author as John’s push for the belief in Jesus and the supporting elements needed at the time in order to push the people to let go of preconceived ideas and way of living. The inclusion of Gentiles hearing the scriptures is the true conflict shown in the gospel, as Jesus claimed the differences in Jew and seed of Abraham and the seed of Abraham by way of moral decent. This caused insult and the eventual death of Jesus as the leaders refused to accept him as their messiah and leader because of his radical teachings and blame for the Jewish corruption and hardheadedness. This is the reason for the harsh passage in John 8:38 as Jesus wants them to look at their actions against him and how willing they are to throw accusations and critique against his teachings.
"I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father" (John 8:38)
Verse 44 gives us the most damning statement about the Jews to be found in all of John's Gospel. Here, Jesus boldly asserts, "huméis ek tou pairos tou diabolou este" ("you are of your father the devil’) (P.10 Bondi)
The purpose of this elaboration is to show the rejection and renege of the Jewish people against a messiah sent by their God to the decedents of Abraham and to accomplish the covenant between God and man. Their outright refusal and denial of Jesus caused the conflict and writing of these harsh words to separate the disbelievers and accusers of Jesus.
Both articles unpack the Gospels meanings of “Jews” in order to better clarify the accusations of anti-Semitism/anti-Judaism.
Vasholz showing that in the Gospel of John, Jesus is defining Himself as the very embodiment of the Temple, this was simply a call to Jews to follow and worship Him. And Just as Stephen, in the spirit of a Jewish Old Testament prophet, bluntly condemns the Jews for their sins in Acts, this is equal to when Jesus says “the Jews” in the Gospel of John. He is not coming as an outsider, He is Jewish prophet calling on the people of God to repent and have faith in him as son of God and messiah. So, to accuse the Gospel of John of “anti-Semitism” while ignoring the many “pro-Jewish” passages and “pro-Jewish” concepts is unfair. The message that Jesus was relaying to “the Jews” was that he was the messiah.
Bondi points out the weighty consequences of anti-Semitism which Jews believe to have its origins in the gospel of John. He shows how Christian scholars in the second century developed anti-Semitic opinions that where inspired by the gospel of John. These theologies created a climate of hatred which they believe fueled the First Crusades directed against Jews, leading to the massacre of thousands of Jews and eventually the holocaust. The point Bondi makes about the holocaust is to show how the misunderstanding of these scriptures have influenced people’s minds and how for twentieth century Jews the anti-Semitism originated in John created a climate of hatred and oppression making the holocaust possible.
Unfortunately, the history of Christianity is riddled with varying accusations of anti-Semitism but we cannot force our post-Holocaust sensitivities upon these ancient texts. The solution to this dilemma is reading John’s Gospel through twenty-first century eyes but understanding them with first century minds.
.
I will be doing a small summary of each article and extracting the authors point and purpose, what it teaches and how it can help readers better understand this controversial topic. With a conclusion …show more content…
of the importance of research and an attempt to understand scriptures from a time related perspective.
Article 1
“Is The New Testament Anti-Semitic? By Robert L. Vasholz
Vasholz wrote this article for the purpose of expanding on the manner in which John described the Jews in John 8:12-59
In this chapter of John we read the accounts according to John when the Jews disputed the validity of Jesus and his testimony. The gospel of John has been frequently labeled as anti-Semitic due to its strong wording towards the Judeans and their persecution of Jesus and his death. By reading this article and passage together we get a different understanding of what is meant by “Jew” in the Gospel of John and if there are any truths to the anti-Semitic accusations.
The name “Jews” and how it is used was not necessarily meant to speak on them as a nation or singular beings but to speak on the leaders in power of that time. We must first understand the times in which they lived and how life was for these people, the significance of wording and purpose of the Author of the Gospel and taking into account that the translations of the scriptures do not sound or feel that same to the modern reader as they would to a person of this era.
In this article Vasholz uses the term (hoi Ioudaioi) a term to describe the Judeans or Jews as per the writings of John. So who were the (hoi Ioudaioi)?
“The term "the Jews," (hoi Ioudaioi) is used five times in
Matthew, the first Gospel, five times in the Gospel of Luke, and six times in
Mark's gospel. Altogether, the first three gospels of the New Testament use this term 16 times. The Gospel of John, in contrast, uses the term "the
Jews" 70 times. Many of these usages occur in hostile and confrontational settings.” (Vasholz, p1)
Due to its hostile and confrontational settings these writings have been taken as anti-Semitic by reader’s the world over, due in part for its use of over 70 times in John, as opposed to the Synoptic Gospels with fewer use. The Jews or Judeans are seen as being of or on the side of Satan and “The World” as it often stated in the scriptures to denote the living outside of God’s commandments or doctrine. So then let us look at who these “Jews” of the time where?
In the writings of the apostles the Jews are the governing power or leaders of the Jewish sect at this time, the teachings of the Torah by the Pharisees, scribes, elders, chief priests, and Sadducee were the law of these times and governed the Judean people.
These are the Jews John speaks of in his gospel. Vasholz is unpacking the term in order to help us understand that John’s words or statements of the Jews where not to condemn but to show their stubbornness and disbelief in Jesus as messiah and leader. There is also mention of Jews that did believe in Jesus but where overpowered by the Jews in power and therefor too week to make change or say anything. Therefore the writings in the Gospel of John should not be seen and a taken as anti-Semitic but as the point of view of an apostle whose sole purpose and intent laid in the belief of Jesus, his teachings and his title of Messiah. The simple fact that Jesus chose to include the Gentiles in to the covenant caused disturbances and division amongst the Jews of the time, as this opposed all previous teachings from Moses which had established the laws following the Torah and belief of the Jews as the chosen ones and sole holders of a covenant with God. Not wanting to share the spotlight or be dethroned from their positions in power created this conflict between the Jews and the “Christian Jews” the author also questions whether John makes so many references to the conflict between Jesus and Jews to show the intra-Jewish struggle at the time of theses occurrences, he also gives examples of how the Jewish people where spoken of by previous prophets in the Torah only to show their stubbornness and disbelieve of their own god even after the miracles and signs God had showed
them.
“the Torah, records Moses calling his people "stiffnecked" and "rebellious."” (Vasholz, p3)
“Moses is the first in a succession of Jewish prophets (including Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
Hosea and Amos) who call Israel to task for the profanation of her holy calling. And yet, I am not aware that the Torah or Hebrew Scriptures have ever been labeled "anti-Jewish." Why? We recognize these struggles as an intra-Jewish religious tension in an attempt to aid Israel toward the goal of her high calling; not as attempts to condemn Israel as the worst people on earth.” (1Vasholz)
The times of the ministry of Jesus where tense times in which a new era was being brought in along with what we now call Christianity, the rift between Christians and Jews was mainly due to fear of being overthrow by these new teachings of Jesus, because although Jesus was solely based on the Torah and taught in the synagogues the changeover of introducing the scriptures and opening the covenant of Abraham and his people on to the Gentiles is what the Judeans feared. The thought or realization of no longer being the chosen ones and losing control over the people was the true problem. The gospel of john is in no way trying to belittle the Jewish people but John’s point of view as a devout apostle to Jesus, witnessing the turmoil and intra religious battle amidst the people who Jesus was trying to include and teach.
Vasholz is clear in his point to show the meaning of the term “Jew” as the leaders and powers of the time. He is strongly against the accusations of anti-Semitism towards the Gospel of John and is great at pointing out the many other sections of the scriptures where the Jews have been shown in a negative form by their own scriptures and prophets.
Article 2
The article “Children of Abraham or of the Devil?” By Richard A. Bondi, is an expanded view on the anti-Semitic terms in the Gospel of John?
When we hear the question is there “anti-Judaism” in the New Testament? Surely the ideas that come to mind are what many consider to be the most blatantly “anti-Jewish” book, the Gospel of John the conflict between Jesus and the “Jews” is both common and astonishing but can a convincing case be made that this conflict reveals an “anti-Jewish” purpose on the part Jesus or John? Does this constitute the theory of how this has helped fuel the anti-Semitic movement?
John 8; 39-47
In this portion of the chapter of John we read of John and Jesus speaking harshly on the Judeans, giving grounds for many Jewish scholars to have an opinion of the anti-Semitic connotations in the fourth gospel. In reading this article we come to see how theses scriptures have been misconstrued and used for the blame and downgrading of a people.
In this article we see the author use modern analysis and works by scholars to show the misrepresentation and demonization felt by many in the Jewish communities.
(John 8:44) Here is the origin of the Christian tendency to demonize the Jews, the source of all mediaeval and much modern religious anti-
Judaism, which directly or indirectly led to the Holocaust. Tragically, it took six million lives to persuade the largest of the Christian churches to annul the charge of deicide leveled for so long against the people of Jesus.1
(P.2 Bondi) (1 Geza Vermes, The Religion of Jesus the Jew P.251)
This misunderstanding of the scriptures has led scholars to suggest that Johns Gospel has influenced the hate of the Jewish people leading up to the holocaust. These accounts have been said to have lead into modern day conflict between Christians and the Jewish people.
Bondi attempts to breakdown the Gospel of John in order to separate the blame on John as writer of these harsh words. These authors 10 presuppositions are to help understand the meanings or underlying purpose of the gospel, these are; involving more than one author, outside influences, translations, belief of Jesus as Christ, travel or change of location, dualism, over interpretation, support and defense and division. (P.3-5 Bondi)
John could have been writing to a predominantly Hellenistic, non-Christian audience as a sort of missionary tactic, he could have been writing for Christians who were confronting problems of eschatology as they expanded into new environments, he could have written his Gospel as retaliation against the Jewish leaders whose intent was the defaming the Christian Messiah in order to hold their position as the law, the audience and purpose of the Gospel are crucial in order to better understand the factors behind the wording.
All of these factors are used in the article’s explanation for the many conflicts occurring during the time when Jesus was with the disciples and later when the gospel was written. Conflict in belief of who to follow was great at this time as the people were accustomed to the Jewish leaders teaching and giving out the rules of conduct for their everyday life. According to the author when Jesus began his ministry amongst the Jewish people involving all people into the teachings this caused conflict within the Jewish community, due to jealousy and fear on the part of the Jewish leaders of being overthrown by this new self-proclaimed messiah.
The Gospel of john is explained by the author as John’s push for the belief in Jesus and the supporting elements needed at the time in order to push the people to let go of preconceived ideas and way of living. The inclusion of Gentiles hearing the scriptures is the true conflict shown in the gospel, as Jesus claimed the differences in Jew and seed of Abraham and the seed of Abraham by way of moral decent. This caused insult and the eventual death of Jesus as the leaders refused to accept him as their messiah and leader because of his radical teachings and blame for the Jewish corruption and hardheadedness. This is the reason for the harsh passage in John 8:38 as Jesus wants them to look at their actions against him and how willing they are to throw accusations and critique against his teachings.
"I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father" (John 8:38)
Verse 44 gives us the most damning statement about the Jews to be found in all of John's Gospel. Here, Jesus boldly asserts, "huméis ek tou pairos tou diabolou este" ("you are of your father the devil’) (P.10 Bondi)
The purpose of this elaboration is to show the rejection and renege of the Jewish people against a messiah sent by their God to the decedents of Abraham and to accomplish the covenant between God and man. Their outright refusal and denial of Jesus caused the conflict and writing of these harsh words to separate the disbelievers and accusers of Jesus.
Both articles unpack the Gospels meanings of “Jews” in order to better clarify the accusations of anti-Semitism/anti-Judaism.
Vasholz showing that in the Gospel of John, Jesus is defining Himself as the very embodiment of the Temple, this was simply a call to Jews to follow and worship Him. And Just as Stephen, in the spirit of a Jewish Old Testament prophet, bluntly condemns the Jews for their sins in Acts, this is equal to when Jesus says “the Jews” in the Gospel of John. He is not coming as an outsider, He is Jewish prophet calling on the people of God to repent and have faith in him as son of God and messiah. So, to accuse the Gospel of John of “anti-Semitism” while ignoring the many “pro-Jewish” passages and “pro-Jewish” concepts is unfair. The message that Jesus was relaying to “the Jews” was that he was the messiah.
Bondi points out the weighty consequences of anti-Semitism which Jews believe to have its origins in the gospel of John. He shows how Christian scholars in the second century developed anti-Semitic opinions that where inspired by the gospel of John. These theologies created a climate of hatred which they believe fueled the First Crusades directed against Jews, leading to the massacre of thousands of Jews and eventually the holocaust. The point Bondi makes about the holocaust is to show how the misunderstanding of these scriptures have influenced people’s minds and how for twentieth century Jews the anti-Semitism originated in John created a climate of hatred and oppression making the holocaust possible.
Unfortunately, the history of Christianity is riddled with varying accusations of anti-Semitism but we cannot force our post-Holocaust sensitivities upon these ancient texts. The solution to this dilemma is reading John’s Gospel through twenty-first century eyes but understanding them with first century minds.
.