Christian Antisemitism: An utterly absurd oxymoron

Tension between Judaism and Christianity goes back to the generation of Jesus and the Apostles.  John the Baptist was accepted as a prophet by the followers of Christ, but rejected by the official leadership of Judaism in Jerusalem.  Likewise, Jesus himself, although like John receiving support from the masses, was rejected by all but a few in the hierarchy of Judaism, a group that was the focus of much of Jesus' ire in his preaching.  In the Early Church, first centered in Jerusalem under the leadership of Jesus' half-brother James, and peopled almost entirely by converts from Judaism (who considered themselves to be reformers of Judaism, not founders of a new religion), there was also tension with the leadership of Judaism which led to the first Christian martyr after Jesus: Stephen. 
The Early Church might have retained a strong connection to Judaism if not for two later developments: the massive success of the Apostle Paul among Gentiles (and concurrent failure among his own people, leading to the anguished thoughts of Romans 9-11, excerpted below), and the destruction of Jerusalem leading to the end of 2nd Temple Judaism and the Diaspora.  As the first generation of the Church came to a close, the organization took on a distinctly Gentile character, and its Jewish origins faded into the background.
Animosity and hostility toward the Jewish minority in what was to become Christendom was not non-existent, but it was never widespread on the level that would become the later pogroms, forced conversions by the Inquisition, and then ultimately genocide at the hands of the Nazis until the Late Middle Ages.  In 1096, in response to Pope Urban II's call for a Crusade to recapture the Holy Land, Peter the Hermit, who raised an army in the Rhineland, perpetuated there the first large scale massacre of Jews by Christians.  To the shame of the Church, this trend has continued to this day, and while few are alive who witnessed the Holocaust, the scourge of Antisemitism residing within those claiming to be a part of the Church remains.

This is, of course, a patent absurdity.  There is no such thing as Christian Antisemitism.  There are those who claim to be Christian who espouse Antisemitism, and there may be those who are indeed Christians whose minds are still infected with Antisemitism, but the two mindsets are diametrically opposed to each other.  In the end, the mind of Christ will prevail, and hate will be banished, or the true un-regenerated nature of those claiming to follow Christ will be revealed and their ongoing hatred will refute any pretense of being a Christ-follower.

There is, and must be, a gap between Christianity and Judaism (as long as one accepts and the other rejects Jesus as the Messiah), but that gap ought to elicit sorrow and compassion on the part of Christians, as it did for the Apostle Paul, and not prejudice or hatred.  We have, as Christians, an undeniable debt toward Judaism, for our New Covenant and New Testament are built upon the Abrahamic/Mosaic Covenant and the Hebrew Scriptures.

It is incumbent upon Christians, always and everywhere, not as an option but an obligation, to reject Antisemitism in both its violent forms and its more subtle conspiracy theories and racial stereotypes, those who fail to do so are doing a disservice to the Gospel, and those who instead embrace them by their attitudes/words/actions are declaring themselves to be fighting against the Word of God, and calling into question their own salvation.

That the Church has failed to live up to the demands of Scripture by allowing Antisemitism to fester and even thrive in its midst, and that the people associated with the Church have been either bystanders to, or complicit in, the brutalization of the Jewish people and eventually their genocide, is the greatest shame and most enduring stain upon the Bride of Christ.  We, collectively, over the past 2,000 years, have failed in this, we will answer to God for that failure, for Christian Antisemitism is an abomination.

Romans 9:3-5 New International Version (NIV)
3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.

Romans 11:1-6 New International Version (NIV)

11 I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel: 3 “Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me”? 4 And what was God’s answer to him? “I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5 So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. 6 And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.

Romans 11:11-24 New International Version (NIV)
11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!
13 I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry 14 in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. 15 For if their rejection brought reconciliation to the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16 If the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy, so are the branches.
17 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.” 20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.

22 Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. 23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!

What Every Christian Should Know About: Church History

Church History
In this 3 part series, Pastor Powell seeks to highlight some of the most important ideas, people, and movements within the universal Church during its two-thousand year history.  

To view the PowerPoint used by Pastor Powell during the presentation, click on the link below:

Church History PowerPoint

In part 1, the Early Church, the Early heresies regarding the person of Jesus, the Ecumenical Councils, and St. Augustine are the focus.

Church History, Part 1 of 3

In part 2, Monasticism, the power struggle between popes and emperors/kings, the Great Schism, and the Crusades are discussed.

Church History, Part 2 of 3

In part 3, The Reformation, the Thirty Years War, the Modern Missions Movement, and the status of the Church in the World Today are discussed.

Church History, Part 3 of 3

Sermon Video: A Chosen People once more - Joshua 5:1-12

Having successfully crossed the Jordan River, and having memorialized God's display of power, the people of Israel are now commanded by God, through Joshua, to re-institute the rite of circumcision before proceeding on toward Jericho.  As the text unfolds, we then discover that circumcision was not the only thing neglected by the generation that wandered in the wilderness, the people had also not celebrated Passover since Mt. Sinai.  The people obey, observing both the rite of initiation into the covenant, and the feast of commemoration of God's power in keeping the covenant by leading his people from bondage in Egypt. 
Why did God command these things, here and now?  The timing in the book of Joshua is repeatedly emphasized, as God's command to Joshua came on the west side of the Jordan, already in the Promised Land, and vulnerable to their enemies.  Because the battles ahead belong to the Lord, not to Joshua's strategic thinking, the need to be spiritually prepared for the task ahead is emphasized by God when he chooses this moment to insist that the people keep their covenant obligations.
The passage in Joshua reminds us of the need we have as a Church to emphasize both baptism and communion, for they are our rites of initiation and remembrance, and of the need we have as a Church to begin with obedience to the commands that we have already been given.  If we hope to do great things for the Kingdom of God, step one is to obey what we've already been commanded in the Word of God.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

A 16th Century Attempt at Toleration within Christendom

While the 17th century is rightly remembered for the epic bloodshed of the 30 Years War which saw atrocities committed by, and against, Catholics, Lutherans, and Reformed Christians in the name of God (partly, but also propelled by rivalries for power), it is worth noting a little-known attempt at religious toleration, within Christendom, that occurred about 50 years earlier in Transylvania.  In 1568, the Transylvanian Diet (legislature) issued the Edict of Torda, under the direction of their king John Sigismund.  And although their fledgling kingdom was menaced by potential invasion by both the Ottoman Empire and the Hapsburg Empire, they decreed that within the kingdom, the right of Catholic, Lutheran, Orthodox, and Unitarian (Anti-Trinitarian, and thus heretical acc. to the earliest Church ecumenical councils, and the overwhelmingly accepted interpretation of the Scriptures; thus a non-orthdox viewpoint) preachers to be free from governmental harassment or threats.  And while the vast majority within Christian history would consider non-trinitarian views to be heretical, and thus worthy of opposition (a judgment with which I concur), it is remarkable that the Transylvanian Diet refused to allow violence to be used to further theological debates.  This stance of toleration contrasts profoundly with the war that loomed over the divided European landscape, and I know that those who fear heresy consider it to be a menace (rightly) to the Church, but we have also learned that coercion and force are not effective means of spreading the Gospel.  Violence begets violence, hatred begets hatred.  The Gospel will prevail, not by force of arms, but by the power of the Holy Spirit working in the Church of Jesus Christ.  Should we oppose heresy and threats to the Church?  Absolutely, but we must do so with Truth, not lies, with Love, not hatred, and with Peace, not violence.  How the Church defends itself is of crucial importance, let us look to the example of those who would make peace, even with their enemies, even with those they profoundly disagree with, rather than those who shout for violence, especially in the name of Christ.

The text of the edict is below, for a decision made in the 16th century, it is indeed remarkable, and with little precedence.

 "His majesty, our Lord, in what manner he – together with his realm – legislated in the matter of religion at the previous Diets, in the same matter now, in this Diet, reaffirms that in every place the preachers shall preach and explain the Gospel each according to his understanding of it, and if the congregation like it, well. If not, no one shall compel them for their souls would not be satisfied, but they shall be permitted to keep a preacher whose teaching they approve. Therefore none of the superintendents or others shall abuse the preachers, no one shall be reviled for his religion by anyone, according to the previous statutes, and it is not permitted that anyone should threaten anyone else by imprisonment or by removal from his post for his teaching. For faith is the gift of God and this comes from hearing, which hearing is by the word of God." - The Edict of Torda, 1568

Sermon Video: That all the earth might know the LORD - Joshua 4

Having provided a supernatural way across the Jordan River, the LORD instructs Joshua to have the people of Israel construct a memorial using twelve stones carried from the midst of the river.  The memorial is to serve as a object lesson to facilitate the teaching of future generations regarding the wonders performed by God on behalf of his people.  In addition to the construction of the memorial itself, Joshua instructs the people that it will be the responsibility of future parents to teach their children about the LORD.
Both of the ideas in Joshua chapter 4 are easily applicable to the Church today.  We too need to celebrate what God has done for us, finding appropriate ways to memorialize them, and we too need to emphasize the need for parental responsibility regarding the instruction of the next generation regarding the LORD.  As a Church, it is our responsibility to reinforce and encourage the instruction that ought to begin in the home, which of course necessitates that those who are parents within the Church have themselves been instructed in order to make them capable of teaching their children.

To watch the video, click on the link below: