The Cross And How Jews Perceive It: Sharing Messiah With The Jewish People

[LindaR]

The Cross and How Jews Perceive It

By Geri Ungurean

Through the years, I’ve shared by testimony of becoming a Jewish Christian. Upon telling my testimony to people in church, I have seen two reactions:

 

1. People are SO excited that a Jewish person has been born-again from above!

 

2. People give me the deer in the headlights look, nod and move on.

I have come to a conclusion based on these two distinct reactions:

The people who are happy and excited about my testimony belong to Jesus and really adore Him.

The deer in the headlights folks just might be lukewarm, and we know what Jesus says about them:

 

“So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." (Revelation 3:16)

 

I am SO blessed that the couple who shared the message of salvation did not pass me by because they knew that I am a Jew. They were OBedient to God and His Word, and shared truth with me that night. They knew that everyone must come to the Father through Jesus Christ. Praise God, I came into His family that night.

 

Everyone knows about the Holocaust. But in this article, I will be taking my brothers and sisters in Christ back in time, to give you a better understanding of why the Jewish people are so offended by the Cross of our Lord Jesus.

 

The Early Church

Here is an account of the anti-Semitic view of Replacement Theology, which surprisingly started with the early church.

 

Justin Martyr (A.D. 100-165) who was a Christian apologist, defended Christianity against its enemies.In his work titled, Justin Martyr With Trypho a Jew. He said that the seed of JacOB now referred to Christians and not the Jews. So began the infamous teaching of Replacement Theology.

 

Tertullian (A.D. 160-220) a church theologian from North Africa, wrote a derogatory and very anti-Semitic book titled, An Answer to the Jews around A.D. 200. This man twisted Scripture to fit his errant theology by claiming that the statement made to Rebekah about the twins (Esau and JacOB) within her (Genesis 25:23) was actually a reference to Jews and Christians.

 

He said that the older brother, Esau, represented the Jewish people. JacOB, the younger brother represented Christians. His premise was that the Christians would overtake the Jewish people. He said that the Jews would serve the Christians.

 

Origen (A.D. 185-254) was president of the school of theology in Alexandria, Egypt. He had a profound effect upon the church, by preaching that much of what is written about Israel in the Word, should be seen as allegorical - spiritualizing his interpretations. We know that the promises made to Israel are not open to interpretation. They should be taught and understood to be literal.

 

Origen took such liberties with the Word, claiming that the word Israel can mean the church. Not seeing and preaching God’s Word correctly (rightly dividing) becomes a slippery slope into myriad of heretical teachings. He was a Christian Universalist, believing in universal salvation for all people, and for the fallen angels.

 

Cyprian (A.D. 195-258) was a bishop of Carthage. He wrote, Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews. He maintained that the Jews departed from the God who loved them, and that because they had departed from God, they lost His favor. He taught that God sought out a people who would OBey him, and all promises were taken from Israel and bestowed upon the Christians.

 

John Chrysostom (A.D. 347-407) known as the greatest preacher of the gospel in the Eastern church, preached messages titled, Against the Jews in Antioch of Syria.Many preachers followed suit, and preached anti-Semitism from their pulpits.

 

An influential bishop of Milan, Ambrose, considered the Jews to be infidels, wholly perverse, and incapable of thinking any good thought. He said that the burning of synagogues was no crime and encouraged it.

 

Augustine (A.D. 354-430) was known as the most influential person since the apostle Paul. He wrote, Tract Against the Jews and influenced the church so dramatically against Jews, that derogatory comments about Jews during the Middle Ages were usually called “Augustinian.”

 

Augustine decreed a new eschatological view called Amillennialism, which actually means no Millennium. In doing this, the prophecies in Scripture could be spiritualized, and taught that these were all referring to the church.

 

The Roman Catholic church adopted and adhered to all teachings of Augustine. [1]

 

Martin Luther in his later years turned on the Jews and wrote: “On the Jews and their Lies.” This sermon caused in one night the burning down of synagogues, and the slaughter of over 2000 Jews.

Adolph Hitler used Luther’s teachings on the Jews, to justify slaughtering Jews and finally ridding the world of them.

 

John Calvin, another father of the Great Reformation said:

“Their [the Jews] rotten and unbending stiffneckedness deserves that they be oppressed unendingly and without measure or end and that they die in their misery without the pity of anyone.” (Ad Quaelstiones et OBjecta Juaei Cuiusdam Responsio, John Calvin)

 

As you can see, Replacement Theology is NOT a new teaching in the history of the church.

 

Endnotes
[1] A historical account of anti-Semitism in the church and accounts of persecution of the Jews taken from: The Coming Apocalypse: A Study of Replacement Theology vs. God’s Faithfulness in the End-Times, Dr. Renald E. Showers

 

https://www.raptureready.com/soap2/ungurean13.html

Edited December 20, 2014 by LindaR

[Covenanter]

I've read the linked article, Linda. It is very distressing that the Jews have been so mistreated by people claiming to be Christian.

 

The true church has good news for all mankind, beginning with the Jews, & no authority to persecute anyone. Those Jews who rejected their Messiah, & rejected the Apostolic Gospel did suffer the wrath of God in AD 70.

 

God's blessings are now all in & through our Lord Jesus Christ through the Gospel, & are received individually by repentance & faith. 

 

There is absolutely NO divine mandate for the Jews to suffer the wrath of church or state. Nor for today's Jews to claim a divine mandate for the occupation of the land of Israel & the expulsion of the non-Jewish population. There is a interesting series of notes on Zechariah being posted. We should all note Zec. 1:12-16 Non-one should "help" God administer his wrath. Those who do will suffer his wrath themselves. We are all under God's wrath for our sin, & saved only by his grace in Christ. 

 

No, not "replacement theology." God's covenant promises are being fulfilled to the countless Jews who believe in their Messiah, Jesus, together with believing Gentiles. Sadly, believing Jews are disowned by unbelievers (as indicated in the article) so within a generation or so, with Christian marriage, their Jewishness may be forgotten.

 

I do not think God's plans for the Jews include another great tribulation & slaughter of 2/3. I think that was past in AD 70, & I cannot predict the outcome of events & attitudes concerning the present land & state of Israel, & I don't think Scripture does either. The command to repent will stand to the end of time, as will the Gospel call of the love of God.  

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Covenanter,

We reject your false doctrine of preterism.

What happened in AD 70 was not the wrath of God.  It was man's wrath.  General Titus and his invading army was not God.  Nor did God order him to attack Jerusalem. 

Peddle your false doctrine in your own threads.

[LindaR]

Covenanter,

 

This thread is not a thread on eschatology or prophecy.  It is a thread about sharing Messiah with the Jewish people.  To the Jews, the cross has been  and still is a symbol of persecution.

 

Please keep on the topic of soul winning. 

 

Thanks.

Edited December 20, 2014 by LindaR

[Covenanter]

Strange that you should attack me when I totally support the OP & abhor the persecution of the Jews, particularly by supposed Christians. 

[Standing Firm In Christ]

All the while pushing your false doctrine of preterism.  LoL

[John81]

Covenanter,

We reject your false doctrine of preterism.

What happened in AD 70 was not the wrath of God.  It was man's wrath.  General Titus and his invading army was not God.  Nor did God order him to attack Jerusalem. 

Peddle your false doctrine in your own threads.

While one could argue just what aspect of God's wrath was at hand in AD 70, I do believe what occurred then was indeed a matter of God's wrath.

 

As recorded many times in Scripture prior to that time, God used powerful wicked nations to administer His wrath upon disOBedient Israel. Even back in the books of Moses God warned such would happen.

 

That doesn't mean what happened in AD 70 was the end times wrath of God, or a fulfillment of all end times prophecies on the matter, but it does certainly fit with scriptural precedence and warning Words of Christ in the Gospels as God's wrath upon specific people for a specific reason.

 

I absolutely agree, that like all lost souls, Jews need to hear the Gospel and be born again in Christ, and when the Lord opens doors for such, we should be sharing Christ with lost Jews.

[OLD fashioned preacher]

Okay:

 

I took the time to follow the link and read THE WHOLE article and here's my response.

 

The line from Linda's first post "As you can see, Replacement Theology is NOT a new teaching in the history of the church" WAS in the article and not an inserted comment. Whether it was a calculated move to end the copy and paste there WILL NOT be able to be determined satisfactorily.

 

The article did NOT then rip Replacement Theology but describe its negative impact on Jewish perception of Christians.

 

Perhaps Covenanter's intent was not to "peddle" preterism but to defend a perceived "attack" and "misrepresentation" of his beliefs.

 

HOWEVER:  at the risk of ascribing too much intelligence to the above parties than is warranted -- I believe that either of you could have OBtained the goal aimed at.

 

If this thread is supposed to be Jewish perception of Christianity, witnessing to Jews, hindrances to Jew/Christian interaction, etc KEEP IT THERE!

[Standing Firm In Christ]

OFP, Linda just told me that the intention is to show the hindrance to Jewish/Christian interaction.  That is why she put it in this group instead of the Prophecy Group

[Invicta]

In the London newspaper where I used to work we had a Christian Union group.  At one of our meetings, anew young lady came.  She said she was a Christian and a Jew.  One member shouted "Praise the Lord!"  She replied "I am no different from any other Christian, I heard the Gospel and responded.  

 

Today our preacher was Mike Moore from Christian Witness to Israel.  One thing he said was that there is a meeting in Israel every OctOBer with Jewish Christians who want Israel as a state and Arab Christians who want a Palestinian  state, but they all meet in Jesus' name.

[DaveW]

When I was saved, I did not become any less Australian.
However there are promises made to Israel which are not transferable, and there were covenants made with Israel which are not dependent upon Israel.
To remove these things means that God has not kept his promise - and that can not happen.
And the Bible is clear that these specific promises and covenants are not transferable - they are to the physical people of Israel.

[Invicta]

Jews need the gospel and so do Arabs and other gentiles.

 

Romans 3:23  For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

[Alimantado]

I don't know about the intention of the OP, but what actually got posted was an article, by someone called Geri Ungurean. The two messages I got from it were:
 
1. Any who gave Geri the 'rabbit in the headlights' look when he/she shared their testimony are not saved.
 
2. 'Replacement theology' is an idea concocted by antisemites for antisemitic reasons, the OBvious implication being that any who subscribe to replacement theology today are antisemites.
 
Whether I'm off or not on those messages, one thing for sure is that the article isn't about soulwinning, but rather it is very specifically making the point that replacement theology is antisemitic in essence and has been the bedfellow of Jewish persecution down the ages.
 

Here is an account of the anti-Semitic view of Replacement Theology...

QED

 

For what it's worth, I'll share some thoughts on this. Someone like me who's grown up an atheist in a secular environment in the 1990s will have had no exposure whatsoever to church history or end times politics or theology, and moreover they will have been taught from very early on not to treat people differently based on race. On top of that, again if they are like me, they will have heard nothing about eschatology, dispensationalism, preterism, replacement theology etc when being witnessed to. Rather they will have heard a very simple Gospel message about their state as a sinner and the call to repent and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ and His work on the cross for their salvation.

 

So a new Christian, from a secular background, might get a bit 'rabbit in the headlights' when someone comes up to them with their testimony if they are emphasising their race--it's the PC generation and all that. Someone like me will be thinking "that's wonderful but it's just as wonderful, and no more, if a Mexican gets saved, or a Pakistani, or a Swanhili".

 

Is that naive of someone like me? I think so, since someone's background is bound to be part of their salvation story (and didn't I just talk about mine?). Furthermore if someone gets saved for whom the Gospel is even harder to hear because traditionally the bearers of the message have been their persecuters, then that's a wonderful story about God's victory over Satan's devices.

 

I have a friend for whom becoming a Christian has started her on a journey of reclaiming her Jewish heritage. She read about the Jews in the Bible and then she found out that her ancestors had changed the family name to something 'non-Jewish' to avoid persecution when they came to the UK. My friend has just changed her name back. That should be part of her testimony.

 

But if someone like me doesn't entirely relate to politics involving Israel, or is totally unfamiliar with eschatology and complicated theological doctrines, I would hope that someone like Geri would put that down to cultural/historical naivity and PC upbringing, rather than antisemitism (and being unsaved!). And I would hope he/she would understand that it can get a bit confusing, after hearing a very simple Gospel message and being given to understand that it is one message of salvation to all no matter what race, to suddenly start hearing things ranging from 'race does matter' and 'God has different plans for different races' all the way to extremes like 'there are different gospels for different races'.

 

Is the onus on people like me to get into the Word and understand these doctrines and moreover to learn a bit of history and stop being so naive? Yes it is, but in the meantime we've all got backgrounds that bring to bear on how much we already know.

[Ukulelemike]

The difficulty, I think, in understanding the relationship the 'gentile' believer has with Israel, which has brought about replacement theology, is that we ARE, in Christ, brought in under the convenant made with Abraham, but that covenant was a covenant of promise, disticnt from the covenant made at Sinai. The covenant of Abraham has no end: it is revealed fully in Jesus Christ, and thus, those born again are born to that promise of Abraham, which Isaac, the child of promise, is a picture, as opposed to Hagar, who represented Sinai, and the law. 

 

As believers, we are not Israel, we haven't taken the place of anyone, we have just been born into the Abrahamic covenant, but that doesn't make us Israel or Jews, just a part of a promise given of which was said that all people would be blessed by it. And so we are, blessed by Jesus Christ.

 

In Christ, the wall of partition between us has been broken down-that's why the Mosaic law has been done away for the believer-because it was a wall between israel and the other nations. Once salvation came, it was longer necessary for those who are of faith. As well,it was never given to anyone BUT Israel. Babylon was not required to keep the Sinaitc laws. Nor was Nineveh, or Assyria or any other nation.

[Salyan]

Reading all those teachings by the so-called 'church fathers' made me think of Romans 11:20:

 

"Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:"