2 of 3

And that's where orthodox Christians part ways with Carroll. A writer equally conscious of the Jewish character of the early church but faithful to the message of the Gospels is Oskar Skarsaune. In his newly published In the Shadow of the Temple, Skarsaune busts the myth that Carroll buys—that Christianity lost its Jewish roots by the end of the first century and consequently turned anti-Semitic. No, says Skarsaune, Christians returned to Jerusalem after Titus left the ruins smoldering. And fourth-century historian Eusebius records a list of Jewish Christian bishops beginning with James, brother of Jesus, running unbroken until 135 A.D., when Jewish revolutionary Bar Kokhba challenged Roman rule and Hadrian responded by leveling Jerusalem and prohibiting Jews (including Jewish Christians) from living there.

What about the charges of anti-Semitism in the New Testament? If we look at the letters of Paul (some of the earliest written) we find him following Jesus' own policy by taking the gospel "to the Jew first" during his missionary journeys. Gentiles who listened to Paul and converted to Christianity were almost always "God-fearers" already attached to a local synagogue. Such people esteemed Jewish law highly, points out Skarsaune, and they understood their newfound faith in Christ to be in continuity with the promises made to God's chosen people, the Jews. Rather than despising the Jews, these new believers held them in highest regard for having introduced them to the one true God.

What do we do, though, with "difficult" passages like Stephen's speech to the Sanhedrin in Acts 7, in which he blasts the Jews as "stiff-necked people with uncircumcised hearts and ears?" Understand it, rather, as a rebuke from within, much as the prophets of the Old Testament called their people to repentance. This is the pattern we find throughout Scripture—the Jews falling away from the true worship of Yahweh and God calling a prophet to turn them back. These same people now refused to accept the incarnate Word of God, Stephen would say, much as they had jeered and shamed the prophets of old. His intent was not to smear the Jewish name, but to reconcile his Jewish brethren to the risen Lord.

This is a message Hikind and other Jews protesting The Passion of Christ don't want to hear. But if they would give Gibson's film a chance, they might perceive the good news in Jesus' story—that their messiah has come, and that those who believe in him will reign with him in his second coming. And this coming will inaugurate that kingdom Jews have been awaiting for so long.

Copyright © 2003 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

In a recent editorial, CTsuggested that The Passion provides an opportunity for Christians to demonstrate that Christ's sacrifice isn't what critics claim.

Film Forum has kept up with Passion news and reviews-here, here, and here.

Weblog posted Gibson's early responses to the critics, got testy when groups protested the movie before seeing it, and wondered "Is Mel Gibson Plotting the Death of Jews?"

Christian History Corner appears every Friday on Christianity Today's website. Previous editions include:

Thanks, Da Vinci Code | Tbe book sends us back to Christianity's "founding fathers"—and the Bible we share with them. (Nov. 14, 2003)

Breaking The Da Vinci Code | So the divine Jesus and infallible Word emerged out of a fourth-century power-play? Get real. (Nov. 7, 2003)

next page... |  2 of 3

share this page

November (Web-only) 2003, Vol. 47