Rev
Walter L. Michel, Ph.D.
(Hebrew
and Semitic Studies)
Lutheran
School of Theology at Chicago
1100
East 55th Street, Chicago, Illinois
60615
October
21, 2000 (October 8, 10, 2000)
The web edition was prepared
January 8, 2002 with only very slight revisions and additions
The expression "dabru emet," "speak truth," occurs in Zechariah 8:16. The context is Zechariah 8:14-17.
NOTE: In the original version I quoted the Hebrew text and a translation.
Zechariah is one of the prophets of Israel/Judea at the time of the new and unfamiliar circumstances of the beginning of the reign of the Persian king Darius I (sixth century BCE/BC). Zechariah is not the only one who implores all of the people, dabberu (piel imp. m.pl.) 'emet `ish 'et-re`ehu, "Speak truth each one to another (lit., each one to his friend)."
Prophets and many others before Zechariah and since have appealed to people, in so many words, to "speak the truth," no matter the many jokes, and glib remarks, about, "what is truth?" (See, e.g., John 18:38). Jesus of Nazareth, according to John 4:23, is convinced that God is worshiped in spirit and in truth.
There is little doubt that we are obligated to speak and do "truth" in the relationship between Christians and Jews, especially, since knowledgeable persons are now very familiar with the Shoah/Holocaust and the many reasons (including Christian culpability) which led to this horror.
The first paragraph is a strong and, mostly, correct statement. Anyone who knows the horrendous history of Christian teaching of contempt for Jews and Judaism and the ugly, criminal and sinful consequences (beginning with the New Testament until today) will be happy that such a statement is possible at the end of the twentieth century.
It is the Christian teaching of contempt for Jews which prepared the climate in which the Inquisition, pogroms and, then, finally, the attempted "Endlösung," Final Solution, Shoah, Holocaust during the Nazi era become possible. The use of Martin Luther's book, "On the Jews and their Lies," by the Nazis should shake Lutheran Christians to their foundation. The clear and bold article by a Lutheran theologian, Franklin Sherman, "Martin Was Wrong: Luther's writings on the Jews embarrass to this day despite their repudiation by Lutheran Church bodies" (The Lutheran, October 20, 1982, 11-13). Have Roman Catholics repudiated the statements in Canon Law? (See, e.g., Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961, p. 5f.).
The phrase, "Christianity has changed dramatically," may sound true on the surface. I have lived and continue to live in the world of Christianity, day in and day out. Basic Christian teaching continues to be supersessionist: Jews, and all non-Christians, must convert to Christianity to be saved, to be acceptable to God (God is understood as the Trinity and not as YHWH, Ha-Shem). The Church continues to say that, "ouside of the Church there is no salvation." (See, e.g., Dominus Iesus, published in September 2000 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith)
All the nice statements by Christians of remorse are, of course, sincere (at least, let us hope so), but they do not touch the inner core of Christian teaching. Some Christians continue to say, "We love the Jews so much that we want them to convert and escape the horrors of separation from God, Hell."
On April 18, 1994, a courageous statement was issued by my own church community, "The Declaration of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America to the Jewish Community." The statement includes the following sentence: "We recognize in anti-Semitism a contradiction and an affront to the Gospel, a violation of our hope and calling, and we pledge this church to oppose the deadly working of such bigotry, both within our own circles and in the society around us."
For Christians to express remorse and call their behavior (in relationship to the Jews) merely as something like bigotry is beyond my understanding. Such statements can easily be explained as total ignorance of the history of Christian treatment of Jews since the fourth century CE/AD.
For Jewish persons to accept remorse from Christians and the Christian denunciations of the horrors and murders (committed by Christians, especially since the fourth century CE/AD when "Christianity" became the ideology of the Roman empire with all of its political and military powers) as bigotry, in my eyes, is a sin against YHWH ('eL), Ha-Shem.
As long as Christians do not radically renounce supersession and conversion as the ONLY and proper basis of a Christian relationship with Jews and Judaism then Christians, simply, have not learned the lessons of the Shoah/Holocaust and Jews can feel safe with Christians only as long as Christians do not have political and military power. Christians have a choice: either to continue some form of Constantinian Christianity and be co-guilty for the Shoah/Holocaust or to, finally, embrace the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and live the spirituality so eloquently communicated by him.
As a Christian I am convinced that I have no right to say anything about what Jews decide to think and believe. But, as a fellow scholar I am not only allowed but required (under certain circumstances) to express my studied opinion. It is for this reason that I expressed some strong convictions in my response to the first paragraph.
There is little doubt that "a thoughtful Jewish response" to some of the changes among some Christians is welcome and very constructive for all of us and for all religious groups.
I welcome the eight brief statements about "how Jews and Christians may relate to one another" as a "first step." Unfortunately, I think, that most of the statements are more pre-scriptive (how things should be) instead of de-scriptive (how things actually are).
This might be true for only the first three centuries. In the fourth century, though, some Christian theologians develped an idea of the deity, which came to be called Trinity. (See, e.g., Rubenstein, Richard E., When Jesus became God: The Epic Fight over Christ's Divinity in the Last Days of Rome. New York, San Diego, London: Hartcourt Brace & Company, 1999.).
For Jews it is impossible to even think that it is possible for a human being to become YHWH, or part of YHWH. It is equally impossible to think that YHWH can become a flesh and blood human being. In Greek-Roman thinking it is not impossible for a human to become part of the divine world and to become a god.
The view of the deity as the Trinity was accepted by the Roman Emperor (as a possible way of ending the battles between various Christians) and it become an orthodox expression of God for all Christians until today.
There is no doubt that Jewish scholars know that YHWH, Ha-Shem is NOT the same as the Trinity. Even the New Testament is unfamiliar with the concept of God as Trinity. Whatever philosophical and theological schemes we may want to use, in the end, Ha-Shem and the Trinity are totally different concepts of the deity. Jews and Christians do not worship the same deity - unless one could believe that YHWH morphed into the Trinity.
It is true that "through Christianity, hundreds of millions of people have entered into relationship with the God of Israel." I am one of those millions. Through the work of the Jew, Jesus, I, a non-Jew, now also have access to the heart of Ha-Shem through "the door," or the "grafting point," namely Jesus (without circumcision, the rituals, etc. See, e.g., John 10:7f.; Romans 11:17f.). For me, a Gentile, Jesus became the dabar, the Word from YHWH, G-D, to me.
The debates among Jews (e.g., during the first century CE/AD, between Hillel and Shammai) of how one enters the community of God are still not settled. Some Jews do not even accept other Jews as true Jews. And some Christians do not accept other Christians as true Christians. What a despicable spectacle to honest, secular seekers. Why should anyone want to join either one of our communities?
Terminology is very important and, usually, already indicates the interpretation or relationship to the person or item. To state that "Jews and Christians seek authority from the same book" is, at best, very misleading. When Jews, Roman Catholic Christians and Protestant Christians use the word "Bible" they mean different collections of biblical books. They also view and interpret these different collections of books in a quite different light.
A brief summary of terminology might be helpful:
BIBLE comes from Greek byblos, = papyrus, book. Byblos was an ancient Phoenician city from which papyrus was exported. There is only one collection of books for Jews, but, there are a number of different collections of Christian literature, which are called "Bible." And, of course, all Christians include a set of books named "New Testament," which is, of course, not part of the Jewish Bible. So, when one says, "Bible," one must be much more specific.
TANAKH is the Jewish acronym for, Torah = "Teaching;" Nevi'im = Prophets; Kethuvim = "Writings." Jewish persons also use the term Bible instead of Tanakh. When Jewish people and Christian people use the term Bible they mean a different set of literature and a totally different interpretation of the biblical books.
OLD TESTAMENT is the Christian term for the same literature in the Jewish and Protestant Bibles. The Roman Catholic Bible (Old Testament) includes many more books than the Protestant Bibles. The term "Old" Testament is used by Christians to state that that literature is only a "preparation" for the "New" Testament. Therefore, Jews and Christians have a totally different view of this same literature. When Protestants and Roman Catholics refer to the Old Testament they mean a different set of literature and also a different approach to that literature.
HEBREW BIBLE is an attempt to remove the particular religious connotation of Tanakh and Old Testament. It is used, mainly by secular persons. I think, that the practice began with Protestant scholars.
The issues are very complicated, but, the brief summary, given in paragraph two, of some of the basic teachings in the Jewish part of the "Bible," is well done. Christians do share most of these teachings, but, Christians insist that redemption (for all humans, including Jews) has already happened and is available to all through, Jesus and the "new" covenant, which has replaced the "old" covenant - therefore the expressions "Old Testament" and "New Testament," and "Old Israel" and "New Israel." This event is celebrated by Christians in the Eucharist, the Lord's Supper.
The plea for respect for the different interpretations is important and indicates that such a plea is necessary because respect is not guaranteed and, actually, not present in many religious communities (Jewish and Christian).
Of course, they "can," but not all do. The re-creation of the State of Israel (after almost 2,000 years) is celebrated and welcomed by many Jews and Christians as a miracle. But, the ugly fact is that some of the more so-called liberal Christians voice Palestinian/Arab views and would much rather see Israel disappear. I heard a respected professor at a Christian theological school state, categorically, "I would not cry a tear if Israel would diappear tomorrow." This person does not believe in the right of Israel to exist. This is not an isolated view among some Christians. Also, quite a few think that Israel has forfeited and continues to forfeit any right to the land because of her treatment of the Palestinians. (Often Leviticus 18:24-30 is quoted).
The debate about "the right of Israel to exist" is indication enough that the existence of the State of Israel is not assured. The shrill call for the destruction of Israel, by some, is not a joke, and deeply embedded in the "spirituality" of quite a number of powerful and numerous people. Some Palestinians think that they are very gracious by considering the option of living on only 20% of their land.
Even some Jewish groups view the State of Israel as problematic and premature, because the Messiah, the Anointed One (of the LORD), has not, as yet, arrived. The more "evangelical" and the more "fundamentalistc" Christian groups welcome the re-creation of the State of Israel, but, only as a sign of the impending "return of Jesus," and the end of this world. The re-creation of the State of Israel is interpreted totally differently by Jewish and Christian groups.
That "Jewish tradition mandates justice for all non-Jews who reside in a Jewish state" is, of course, true, but, also a bone of serious contention, because, many do not agree that such justice is, actually, practiced in Israel.
This is an excellent paragraph. I feel terrible, though, that I still have a few problems with it.
Jews understand what they mean when they say "Torah." Most Christians do not understand the word and concept of "Torah." The word "Torah" is usually translated "Law." Because of a totally different understanding of "sin" by St. Paul in the New Testament (namely, as an overwhelming demonic power which can not be resisted) "Law" is understood, among Pauline-Augustinian-Constantinian Christians, as something completely negative and legalistic. The Hebrew word tôra*h, Torah, should have never been translated as "law, Law." Jews understand Torah/Law as "guidance, teaching," and as "revelation," from God. Most Christians do not have such an understanding.
Also the expression "in the image of God" is, usually, not well understood. I am deeply concerned about the misunderstanding of this expression and, therefore, I have expressed my views on this expression in the Excurses (see below).
I totally agree with the sentiments of the fourth statement. My comments, I think, underline and strengthen what is so well expressed here. I, especially, agree with the necessity to witness, in words and deeds, to the shared moral emphasis which Jews and Christians accept as their religious obligation and duty. But Jews and Christians come to this "shared moral emphasis" from totally different perspectives.
There must be no doubt among us that "Such witness is especially needed after the unprecedented horrors of the past century." These horrors are well known among most Jews. They are not as well known to Christians. What is almost totally unknown among Christians is the fact that the Christian teaching of contempt for Jews and Judaism prepared the climate in which such horrors became possible. Such ignorance can not be excused after 1945. But, few seminaries (which prepare Christian clergy) include studies which would lift and eliminate such ignorance. After the Shoah/Holocaust this can no longer be excused. I interpret the exclusion of the relevant studies as a purposeful anti-Jewish attitude. In addition, I also interpret the lack of a thorough study of Biblical Hebrew, in Christian theological schools, as coming from the same anti-Jewish source.
This is an extremely important and intellectually and spiritually magnificent statement. As a Protestant/Lutheran Christian from Vienna, Austria, I marvel at the magnanimity of this statement.
But, again, I know, that many Christians are completely unaware of the truth expressed in this statement. Most Christians do not know that "Without the long history of Christian anti-Judaism and Christian violence against Jews, Nazi ideology could not have taken hold nor could it have been carried out." Actually, I have witnessed harsh anti-Jewish comments from some Christians after visiting the Holocaust Museum in Washington and seeing the picture of Luther there and reading the comments about him. ("How dare they malign our hero.")
I have spoken about this ugly and poisonous aspect of "Christian" teaching as a pastor (since the sixties) and, especially, as a professor at a seminary (where I teach Hebrew and Tanakh/Old Testament since 1972). I am very ashamed to admit that I have done this in the relative safety of oral presentations in my functions as pastor and professor. It should not come as a surprise to anyone that persons who speak out about this isssue are not very welcome in some Christian communities. I was afraid to publish my views.
There are numerous books which could enlighten Christians, and, especially their leaders. But these books are read by only a few concerned Christians. To my mind the following are among the most important books. I have suggested these books to persons who attended my presentations, lectures and courses and, if I had any power, I would force all theological students to read and study them before they would be allowed to be ordained and serve a congregation.
I list the books according to the date of publication because this gives me also a quick survey over the history of the verious insights.
· 1948 Isaac, Jules, Jesus and Israel. Edited, and with a Foreword, by Claire Huchet Bishop. Translated by Sally Gran. New York/Chicago/San Francisco: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971 (1959, 1948). - A sober statement, only three years after 1945, and almost totally neglected by Christians.
· 1961 Hilberg, Raul, The Destruction of the European Jews. Chicago: Quadrangle, 1961. - I would like to have all Christians read, at least, Table 1, on page 5-6, which lists the Christian and Nazi Anti-Jewish Measures side by side. How can one continue to be a Christian and a joyful human being after absorbing the information in this book?
· 1962 Isaac, Jules, The Teaching of Contempt: Christian Roots of Anti-Semitism. Translated by Helen Weaver. Biographical Introduction by Claire Huchet Bishop. New York/Chicago/San Francisco: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1964 (1962). - The content of this book should be known by all Christians, but it is not.
· 1965 Flannery, Edward H., The Anguish of the Jews: Twenty-Three Centuries of Antisemitism. New York/Mahwah: A Stimulus Book. Paulist Press, 1985 (1965). - This book brought all the various pieces of information, finally, into perspective for me and shook me to the very foundations of my Christian faith. How can one continue to be a Pauline-Augustinian-Constantinian Christian after absorbing the facts in this book?
· 1974 Radford Ruether, Rosemary, Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism. New York. A Crossroad Book. The Seabury Press, 1979 (1974). - Why is this book still not read by every Christian or, at least, by every one who is on the way to become a pastor or priest in a Christian community?
· 1992 Carmichael, Joel, The Satanizing of the Jews: Origin and Development of Mythical Anti-Semitism. New York: Fromm International Publishing Corporation, 1993 (1992). - It is Christians who were responsible for satanizing the Jews and in this way prepared the climate in which pogroms, murders and then the extermination (not just murder) of Jews by the Nazis became possible.
· 1993 Nicholls, William, Christian Antisemitism: A History of Hate. Northvale, New Jersey and London: Jason Aronson, 1993. - What a shameful and nauseating history, and it is almost totally unknown by Christians. If I were forced to pick only one reading (as an introduction to the topic) it would be this book.
There is no end to important publications on this topic.
NOTE: I have prepared an extensive bibliography on the subject and also a Reader (collected materials) which I have entitled, "How Christianity Can Survive the Shoah/Holocaust." I use these materials in my presentations on the subject. (If you write to me I can sent to you, at least, the Table of Contents)
The consequences of the Christian teaching of contempt for Jews and Judaism (see Jules Isaac) are now well known to some concerned Christians: expulsions, forced conversions, pogroms and then, finally, the Shoah/Holocaust.
In my opinion, Christianity, the way it has been manifest in the various forms since the fourth century CE/AD), has died in the fires of Auschwitz and has forfeited all respect. For Christians to continue to teach contempt for Jews, after 1945, is a sin against God and humanity, and Christians become co-guilty of the attempted total extermination of Jews and Judaism by the Nazis, the Shoah/Holocaust. For human beings and, especially, for Jews the Shoah/Holocaust is an appalling horror, but for Christianity it is the end ... unless it changes radically.
There is one more book I want to mention, Benzion Netanyahu, The Origins of the Inquisition in Fifteenth Century Spain (New York: Random House, 1995. 1384 pages). Race? I always thought that it was a concoction of the nineteenth century. Wrong. In the section, "The Rise of Racism," (pages 975-1004) I learned of the theory and policy of limpieza de sangre, "purity of blood," in fifteenth century Spain. Jews who denied Jesus were, according to some, not only "vipers," but, an "accursed seed," "sons of the devil" (Cf. John 8:44), a "perverse generation," a human species clearly inferior, morally and intellectually, to Christians. No wonder then that the papal nuncio in 1944 (!) is reported to have said, "There is no innocent blood of Jewish children in the world. All Jewish blood is guilty. You have to die. This is the punishment that has been awaiting you because of that sin (deicide)." (Quoted in E. Fleischner, Auschwitz ..., 1974, n. 7, p. 441f.)
I invite all the signers of "Dabru Emet" to attend Christian services during the week before Easter and on Easter Sunday. Many sermons will include phrases like, "the Jews killed Jesus, their own Messiah ... they killed God ... they did not accept the light offered to them," (Cf. John 1) etc.
The Jewish people have always known the truth of the above statement while Christians have not. Many Christians (to their own detriment) do not agree that "Neither Jew nor Christian should be pressed into affirming the teaching of the other community."
Jews have "solved" the problem of supersession with the development in rabbinic tradition of the "Noachite Laws" (see, e.g., EncJud 12 [1972] 1189-1191). The minimal moral duties, which are expected of all humans (the seven Noachide laws according to tradition) are the prohibition of idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, sexual sins, theft, and eating from a living animal, as well as the injunction to establish a legal system. The Noachite tradition is mentioned in the Tosefta (second century CE/AD). An appeal to this tradition may not be quite satisfactory, when speaking of the ralationship to Christians, but it is, certainly, to be preferred to exclusivistic, supersessionist teaching. (Cf. Michael S. Kogan, "Toward a Jewish Theology of Christianity," Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 32:1, Winter 1995, and http://www.icjs.org/info/kogan.html, 10/11/00, p. 4)
Islam and Christianity have not "solved" the problem of supersession with dangerous and often deadly consequences for their own religious traditions and for their neighbors or subjects when they have political and military power.
Christians are convinced - and even after 1945 continue to be convinced - that they have superceded other religions and that they have a commission, which is expressed at the end of the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Mark.
Matthew 28:18-20: (18) And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. (19) Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (20) and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age."
Mark 16:15-16: (15) And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation. (16) The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned."
The interpretation of this "commission" is extremely important and either life-giving or deadly. As long as it continues to be interpreted as shaming or forcing others into a Christian community there will be tension between Christians and others. In spite of some conciliatory statements, lately, by some Christian communities, I am afraid that Christians have not changed, basically, and if they would continue to wield political and military power they would not hesitate to use it to "convert" Jews and others to their type of relgiosity. What is the difference between conversion and extermination? Surely there is a great difference, but, the result is the same: no more Jews and Judaism. It is also important to remember that supersessionist Christians feel insecure as long as there is even one Jew alive. For many Christians it is incomprehensible that there are people who are not eager to jump at the chance of accepting the Christian message.
In one of my presentations I said, "Any ... religion or ideology which claims that it supercedes, replaces and invalidates another condemns itself by that very statement, as invalid for consideration by even one human being." (Quoted by Paul Galloway, "In closing, a final word about the Word," Chicago Tribune, Friday, February 9 1996, Section two, 11.)
But the "commission" can also be understood as Jesus asking his disciples to invite others to live and act in the same biblical/Torah spirit, the Messianic Spirit, the Holy Spirit, which he exemplified in his teaching of the "Kingdom of God," i.e., the vision which God has for the life of his covenanted people and for the lives of all human beings (see below on "Image of God).
This is how I have understood the commission, and the "good news" of access to God for all repentant sinners, and because of this understanding I remain a Christian and continue to live, study and teach in the Christian community. I do not have to become a Jew and neither does a Jew have to become a Christian - and neither Jew nor Christian needs to convert to Islam. All of us are invited to live according to the spirit, will and vision of God, which is clearly expressed in the Bible. Officially belonging to either a Jewish or Christian group does not save us from God's displeasure and a spiritually dead life. I understand this to be the clear teaching of the Torah, the Prophets and of Jesus of Nazareth.
I have learned, a long time ago, that I can express and live my Christian faith in such a manner, that the more than one million Jewish children, exterminated during the Shoah, do NOT need to be ashamed of me and die again. (Cf. Irving Greenberg, "Cloud of Smoke, Pilar of Fire: Judaism, Christianity, and Modernity after the Holocaust," pages 7-55, in Eva Fleischner, ed., Auschwitz: Beginning of a New Ear? Reflections on the Holocaust. New York: KTAV / the Cathedral Church of St. John the Divine / the Antidefamation League of B'nai B'rith, 1974).
I agree, but, as a Christian I do not think that I have a right to critique this statement.
As a scholar, though, I am allowed to quibble with the comment that Christianity originated within Judaism. It is slightly more correct to say that rabbinic Judaisms and the various Christianities originated in the cauldron of the first century CE/AD. Christianity, at first, was one of many forms of expressing "Judaism." What is called "Christianity," and what is understood as "Christianity" today, developed only in the fourth century CE/AD as an "orthodox" expression of this faith and became the ideology of the Roman empire. It has little to do with the Tanakh or with Jesus and his teachings.
I totally agree. Following the spirit of the Torah and of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth I am convinced that I forfeit the right to call myself a Christian if I do not live "justice" and "peace" whenever and wherever I am called to act as a "neighbor" in my relationship to any other human being and to myself (Cf., e.g., Lev 19:17-18; Matthew 19:19; 22:39; Luke 10:29-37, i.e., the story of the Good Samaritan. Already as a small boy I wondered why this story does not continue "... and then he gathered his servants, pursued the robbers and brought them to justice." Why pay the hospital bills and then just wait for another attack and more hospital bills? Incomprehensible.).
Isaiah's hope and dream, that one day all humans will "walk in God's paths" and will live God's vision for us all in our daily lives, is not so much a dream, but the absolute basic condition for a wonderful life in our affairs with one another. We have a choice, and "the People of God" are chosen to be choosing God's vision as a light and guidance for us all.
LET US SPEAK TRUTH, COMPASSION AND LOVE TO ONE
ANOTHER
SO WE CAN LIVE WITHOUT LIES, DREAD AND HATE.
NOTE: In the original version I added a translation with notes and comments on Genesis 1:26-28. My literal translation makes the intention, vision and image, which G-D intended for humanity abundantly clear. I translated Genesis 1:26 as follows:
"And
ELOHIM said,
'Let US (majestic plural) make
humans(collective noun)
according
to OUR image(i.e., vision/design)
as
OUR likeness(i.e., vice-regents/agents/delegates)
and
let them have dominion (i.e., governance, guidance, management)
over
the fish of the Sea
and
over the birds of the Skies(Heavens/Space)
and
over the cattle
and
over all
(inserted
from Syriac: the wild beasts of)
the
Earth
and
over every creeping thing that creeps upon the Earth.'"
1. A German version of my response was published as "Einige Probleme mit 'Dabru Emet'," in FRIEDE UND FREIHEIT 4. Zeitschrift Evangelisch-Reformierter Kirche in Sachsen (2001) 6-8, in an abbreviated form.
2.
Jon Levenson's article, "How Not to Conduct Jewish-Christian
Dialogue" (A much-hailed statement, signed by dozens of rabbis and Jewish
scholars, evades the faiths' profound differences), on DABRU EMET appeared in
COMMENTARY Vol. 112. No. 5 (December 2001) 31-37.
He says pretty much the same about DABRU EMET, from a Jewish perspective, as I
have from a Christian perspective (I shared a copy of my article with him last
year). This was, probably, the reason why my article was not published in
COMMENTARY, although, I think, that it would have been interesting for Jewish
readers to read what a Christian Hebrew scholar has to say about the matter.
The editor of COMMENTARY, Neal Kozodoy, though, encouraged me to write a letter
to the editor. I wrote the following concerning Levenson's article:
"I totally agree with J. Levenson's assessment of Dabru Emet as a
Christian scholar of the Tanakh/Old Testament and as a Lutheran pastor. The
signers of Dabru Emet are not speaking truth, worse, they propagate half
truths. Their appeasement politics are a danger to Judaism and a (purposeful?)
misunderstanding of Christianity. The Shoah would not have been possible
without the pernicious Christian teaching of the victory of Christianity over
Judaism, i.e., supersession, that ONLY through Jesus, the Christ, a relationship
with God is possible. Since 1945 Christians have NOT repudiated this teaching.
Supersession = genocide."
Rev. Dr. Walter L. Michel. Emeritus Professor of Old Testament.
3.
J. Neusner published a review of The Rebbe, the
Messiah, and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference by David Berger (Littman
Library of Jewish Civilization. 208 pages) in THE JERUSALEM POST (Jerusalem,
Oct. 19, 2001). I totally agree with his assessment of the situation: "Two
fifth columns threaten the integrity of Judaism: theological liberalism run
amok and halachic Christianity. Both trends lower the walls that separate
Judaism from Christianity - one from the Right the other from the Left. The
lesser known left column, Dabru Emet, legitimizes the Christian Bible."