The Quran Predicted The Mutual Conflicts Between Christians And Jews

[فداء الرسول]

The Quran Predicted The Mutual Conflicts Between Christians And Jews

Prof. Salama Abdelhady

.113 The Jews say: "The Christians have naught (to stand) upon; and the Christians say: "The Jews have naught (to stand) upon." Yet they (profess to) study the (same) Book. Like unto their word is what those say who know not; but God will judge between them in their quarrel on the Day of Judgment.
This verse predicted what happens now between Christians and Jews. In spite of Jesus was one of the Jews, the Jews say, as we see in the First part of the article, the Christians have naught to stand upon. Such statement proves the Quranic Prediction in this Verse
First Part:Jewish theology rejects the idea that the messiah, or any human being, is a divinity, and such an idea has always been regarded as idolatrous. Further, Judaism does not view the role of the messiah to be the salvation of the world from its sins, an integral part of Christian theology (1). Judaism does not accept Jesus as the biblical messiah, nor does it assign him any religious role at all. Contrary to Christian beliefs, Judaism Jesus as a messiah, because:


Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies of Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zachariah.
Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the MessiahJesus was not a prophet, prophecy having ended with Malachi approximately 350 years prior to Jesus's birth.Jesus was not a scion of the house of David, as tribal affiliation in Judaism is solely patrilineal, and Jesus is claimed to be the son of God, not man.

Jesus did not lead the Jews back to full Torah observance, instead contradicting the Written and Oral Laws in the New Testament.
Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations, including those relating to virgin birth and suffering servitude.
Jewish belief is based on national revelation, not on miraculous events performed for small groups, and there was no mass revelation similar to the one at Sinai.
The place of Jesus in Messianic Judaism is not clearly defined (2).
Messianics believe the first role of Messiah was to rescue the world from spiritual bondage, and that he will return again to rescue the world from physical oppression and establish his unending Kingdom – again, a belief that is identical to the normative Christian view of the Messiah. George Berkley claims that Messianics "worship not just God but Jesus" whom they call Yeshua (3). As with many religious faiths, the exact tenets held vary from congregation to congregation. In general, essential doctrines of Messianic Judaism include views on God(omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal, outside creation, infinitely significant and benevolent). Jesus is not believed, in the views of Jews, to be the Jewish Messiah though views on his divinity vary, Messianics believe that Israel (the Children of Israel are central to God's plan,replacement theology is opposed), the Bible (Tanakh and the New Testament are usually considered the divinely inspired Scripture, though Messianics are more open to criticism of theNew Testament canon than is Christianity), eschatology (similar to many evangelical Christian views), and oral law (observance varies, but virtually all deem these traditions subservient to the written Torah). Certain additional doctrines, including sin and atonement and faith and works, are more open to differences in interpretation (4).
There exist among Messianics a number of perspectives regarding who exactly makes up God'schosen people. These are 'covenant membership, and halakhic definitions. Most commonly, Israel is seen as distinct from Ekklesia; Messianic Jews, being a part of both Israel and Ekklesia, are seen as the necessary link of the 'Gentile' People of God to the commonwealth of God's people of Israel. The two-house view, and the one law/grafted-in view are held by many identifying as Messianic, although some Messianic groups do not espouse these theologies (5). Many Messianics believe that all of the moedim, indeed the entire Torah, intrinsically hint at the Messiah, and thus no study of the End Times is complete without understanding the major Jewish Festivals in the larger prophetic context. To these believers, Passover, First Fruits, and Shavuot were fulfilled in Jesus's first coming, and Yom Teruah, Yom Kippur, and Sukkot will be at his second. Many Messianics believe in a literal 7000 year period for the human history of the world, with a Messianic Millennial SabbathKingdom before a final judgment (6). There is a variety of practice within Messianic Judaism regarding the strictness of Torah observance. Generally, "Torah observant" congregations observe Jewish Law, biblical feasts, and Sabbath, although they do not teach that Gentiles need observe Torah. While most traditional Christians deny that the ritual laws and specific civil laws of thePentateuch (though still affirming that Torah is the word of God) apply directly to themselves, passagesregarding Torah observance in the New Testament are cited by Messianics that Torah was not abolished for Jews. They point out that in Acts 21 we find that the Jewish believers in Jerusalem are "zealous for Torah" and that Paul himself never stopped being observant. Most Messianics believe that observance of the Torah brings about sanctification, not salvation, which was to be produced only by the Messia

The Christians have the (same) Book of the Jews and call it the Old Testament. However; they say: the Jews have naught to stand upon; which proves the Quranic prediction in the stated verse since more than 14 centuries..


The origins of anti-Judaism or Christian anti-semitism (8) can be traced back to the growing estrangement between the early Christian communities and the Jewish leaders of formative Judaism (9) in the Roman Empire of the first century of the common era. According to a traditional reading (10) of the Gospels found in the New Testament, this hostility was a product of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and other Jewish groups' attacks and plots against Jesus, and more specifically, their stubbborn refusal to accept his teachings about the Law and the Kingdom of God. (11) For instance, in the Gospel of Matthew (27:23-25), the charge of deicide--possible one of the most damaging and enduring calumnies against Jews by Christians--finds its roots in the alleged response by the "Jews" to Pilate's claim of innocence, "Let Him be crucified! ... His blood be upon us and on our children." Likewise, a literal reading of the usually virulent anti-Jewish rhetoric found in the Gospel of John has also encouraged and justified the historical marginalization and demonization of Jews. For instance, the author of this Gospel records Jesus denouncing a group of Jews with the words, "You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do" (Jn 8.44). (12) However, modern biblical scholarship, which among other things, recognizes the vital importance of the contextual nature of these and other New Testament writings, clearly demonstrates that the above literal readings of Matthew's and John's Gospels distorts their meanings. Therefore, for the sake of atoning for past mistakes, preventing them from being committed again, and building a new relationship with Jews, today's Christians must utilize and promote contextual readings of the Gospels

As pointed out above, the Gospel of Matthew contains anti-Jewish rhetoric, which, if read uncontextually, produces an uncharitable picture of ancient Jewish communities. (13) In contrast, a contextually aware interpretation demonstrates that Jesus' anti-Jewish rhetoric actually reflects the animosity of Matthew's community towards the local Jewish leaders of formative Judaism with whom it is in conflict. Matthew's community predominantly consisted of Jewish Christians who kept the Law, but in a manner that was faithful to those values taught by Jesus--justice, mercy, and faithfulness. (14) However, this respect for the Law and the Gospel writers' "extensive use of the Old Testament ... in order to connect Jesus to the history of Israel and to portray him as the embodiment of Jewish hopes [and] its stress on Jesus as one who comes not to destroy but to fulfil the Jewish law," (15) did not prevent conflict with the local leaders of formative Judaism. To the contrary, the author of Matthew was keen to differentiate and protect his community from what he believed were the false teachings of the scribes and Pharisees. (16) For example, the Gospel of Matthew makes the observation that because these Jewish leaders do not support Jesus' "new interpretation" of the law, they are not righteous (17) Furthermore, Matthew's desire to discredit those Jews who made life difficult for his community in Antioch (18) motivated him to present all the different Jewish groups as one homogenized, united force against Jesus and to insidiously exaggerate the conflict between Jesus and Jewish leaders by projecting his contemporary problems with the Scribes and Pharisees of Antioch into the world in which Jesus inhabited. (19)

The Gospel of Matthew is not the only New Testament source that has engendered anti-Jewish sentiment. Comparatively speaking, the Gospel of John is even more anti-semitic than any other Gospel. Despite its rebel as the "spiritual Gospel" because of its "uplifting and challenging" portrait of Jesus as the Divine Word, and its "overall Jewish 'feel,'" (20) this Gospel presents a very negative picture of Jews living in Palestine during the life of Jesus. Some examples of this representation of Jews are: it is claimed that the Jews wanted to persecute, and kill Jesus (Jn 5:16-18). because, he healed on the Sabbath anti equated himself to God; they do not follow anything in the Torah (Jn 7:19-24); they are potentially violent towards him when they take up stones to hurl at him (Jn 8:59 & 10:31); and they bear responsibility for Jesus' death because the chief priests and police shout out to Pilate who finds him innocent to "Crucify him! Crucify him!" (In 19:6) (21) Traditionally, Christians have interpreted these and other anti-Jewish rhetoric as evidence that virtually all Jews in the time of Jesus were against him and his followers and used this as an excuse to persecute for nearly two millennia. However, a contextual reading reveals that these negative representations, like those of the Gospel of Matthew highlighted above, are not an accurate reflection of Jesus' relationship with the Jewish leaders of his day; instead, they are a comment on the struggle between John's community and the local Jewish authorities who had recently being excluding Christians from some synagogues. (22) Thus, the Gospel of John can be considered a polemic and apologetic against a group of local Jews who "refuse[d] to believe that Jesus is the Messiah and Son of God" which presents Jesus and his followers as separate from "the Jews" (23) and Judaism, (24) not a manifesto to individually and collectively denigrate and persecute Jews.

[فداء الرسول]

Unfortunately, this historical-critical approach to the New Testament did not exist until the late seventeenth century, but even then the Catholic Church shunned it until Pope Plus XII in 1943 sparked a renewal of biblical studies with the encyclical, Divinio afflante Spiritu. (25) Consequently, distorted representations and beliefs about Jews stemming from the New Testament became a popular and durable component of Catholic theology from the classical era to the mid-twentieth century.

In the classical era, many prominent theologians and church leaders revealed their disdain for Jews and their religion by attacking "Judaisers" (26) and reiterating the charge that Jews were responsible for Jesus' death. For instance, in an attempt to counter Marcion's radical proposition to reject the Hebrew Scriptures as part of his wider campaign to distance Christianity from its Jewish roots, (27) church fathers such as Justine Martyr (100-165), Tertullian (160-225), and Origen (185-254) disclose their anti-semitism by, shifting the:

[r]everence for the Jewish tradition [found in the Hebrew scriptures] onto the Church while simultaneously demeaning the Jews as unworthy of the fruits of their own religion: because the Jews had rejected Jesus and the prophets, the entitlements of Judaism should now be transferred to Christianity. (28)


This demeaning theological depiction is also evident in the writings and speeches of Saints Melito of Sardis, Jerome (ca. 342-420), John Chrysostom (347-407), and Augustine of Hippo (354-440), who, in the name of apologetics, reveal their explicit distaste or hatred of Jews. In addition, the late second century bishop Melito of Sardis, who, fearing the prosperous Jewish community of Sardis which "undermined Christian claims to have replaced and perfected Judaism," was the first Christian to explicitly charge the Jews with "deicide." (29) In the Homily on the Passover, Melito of Sardis further demonstrates a prejudice against Jews with this interpretation of the "historical record":

Listen, as you tremble in the face of him on whose account the earth trembled. He who hung the earth in place is hanged. He who fixed the heavens in place is fixed in place. He who made all things fast is made fast on the tree. The Master is insulted. God is murdered. The King of Israel is destroyed by an Israelite hand. (30)

Approximately a century later, the renowned biblical scholar, St. Jerome, despite a personal relationship with a prominent rabbi similarly harbored a low opinion of Jews which p evident in the declaration, "If it is requisite to despise individuals, and the nation, so do I abhor the Jews an Inexpressible hate." (31)

Arguably two of the most influential classical Christian scholars and church leaders who harbored anti-semitic views were St. John Chrysostom and St. Augustine of Hippo. St. John Chrysostom revealed his antipathy for Jews in his intemperate attacks against Jews and Judaisers expressed in his Eight Homilies against the Jews in 387. (32) For example, in Homily 1, Chrysostom describes the Jews as "pitiable and miserable" because they rejected "so many blessings from heaven." (33) He also supported the popular belief of deicide with the observation that Jews crucified "him whom the prophets had foretold." (34) Even more strikingly, he disparagingly claims that not only were Jews "dogs," (35) but incredulously they: [s]acrificed their own sons and daughters to demons. They refused to recognize nature, they forgot the pangs, of birth, they trod underfoot the rearing of their children, they overturned from their foundations the laws of kingship, they became more savage than any wild beast. (36)

Despite the attempts of supporters to minimize their impact, (37) these attacks are unmistakably anti-semitic. A study of some of St. Augustine's works reveals that he shared a similar hatred for Jews. (38) According to Brackman, Augustine believed Jews were "filled with bitterness and gall like that they gave Jesus on the cross" and that the guilt for Jesus' death is an inherited trait. (39) While Augustine's "witness theory" (40) arguably qualifies this teaching, and thus seems to soften its impact, its ambivalent nature towards Jews became a "warrant for some Christians to express their attitudes in violent and inflammatory ways" and "encouraged inconsistency in subsequent church actions and policies." (41)

The consequences of the anti-semitic teachings of various church leaders and scholars, otherwise known as the "Adversus Judeos" tradition, (42) were highly damaging to Jewish-Christian relations in Europe. They were highly damaging because they formed the basis of the growing body of anti-Jewish law in the late antiquity that increasingly infringed on liberties Jews had enjoyed for hundreds of years within the Roman Empire, especially after Christianity was established as the official state religion in 380. (43) For instance, when the Theodosian Codes were instituted many church anti-Jewish proscriptions, such as the prohibition against the intermarriage between Jews and Christians, (44) were given an official status by the Roman state. Furthermore, when the Justinian Codes (or Corpus Juris Civilisus) came into force in 534, Jewish privileges were eroded even further. (45) As a result of the state's imprimatur of these church based anti-Jewish proscriptions, religious authorities could now more effectively promote their anti-semitic beliefs whereas previously they had to rely on a much less threatening moral authority to convince people of their purported merits. (46)

The passage of anti-Jewish laws in late antiquity greatly contributed to the spread and entrenchment of Christian anti-semitism in the emerging medieval society. While theologically there was more continuity than change in the church's negative attitude towards the Jews between these eras, (47) historical evidence strongly indicates Christian anti-semitism took on a more violent and hateful dimension. (48) Transparent examples of this successful spread and hardening of anti-semitic attitudes within Christian communities can be found in sixth- and seventh-century Spain. For instance after the Arian Visigothic King Reccared I (586-601) converted to Catholicism, the previously "peaceful" life enjoyed by Jews was soon undermined (49) when the third Council of Toledo (50) prohibited Jews and Christians from intermarrying, and prohibited Jews from holding public office or owning Christian servants. (51) A more extreme attack against Jews was made by King Sisebut who decreed in 613 that, "all Jews who refused compulsory baptism must leave Spain," which, reflecting the church's evermore ingrained anti-semitism, was lauded by the much admired Bishop Isidor of Seville as a "heroic deed." (52) Even compulsorily baptized Jews--who were often suspected of insincerity--were not immune From persecution. In 633, the fourth Council of Toledo declared these Jews were in bondage to the church thereby robbing them of even more dignity and freedom. It was not until the Arabs and Berbers invaded and conquered Spain in 711 that both Orthodox and compulsorily baptized Jews were spared from an increasingly oppressive anti-semitic milieu. (53)

The above examination of Jewish persecution in Spain clearly demonstrates that a significant segment of the Catholic Church was directly involved in fomenting anti-semitism and the violent persecution of Jews in the early medieval period. One church leader who greatly contributed to this spread of Christian anti-semitism in the medieval period was Agobard, archbishop of Lyon. According to Fredrick Leer, Agobard's anti-semitic prejudice was linked to a fear that because Christians could not match the Jews' missionary skills, the latter would become more influential and threaten the Carolingian Empire's Christian foundations. Agobard expressed this fear of Jewish improvement when he lambasted Emperor Louis for providing Imperial protection to the Jews in the letter De insolentia Judaeorum because tie claimed it "made the Jews insolent, so that they dared to abuse Christ quite openly." (54) The archbishop's anti-semitic worldview is also revealed in a pastoral letter he coauthored with two other bishops titled De judaicis Superstitionibus within which they demanded the prohibition on Christian and Jews from eating together and the immediate cessation of synagogue building. (55) Abogard justifies these discriminatory demands by arguing in this letter:

It is unworthy of our faith that a shadow should fall on the children of Light through their intercourse with the sons of Darkness. It is also unseemly that the Church of Christ, who should conduct immaculate and unblemished to her heavenly bridegroom, be defiled by contact with the unclean, senile and corrupt synagogue. It is strange to see the immaculate virgin, the promised Bride of Christ, seated at table with a whore. (56)

In addition, he describes Jews as "Sons of Devils" and instructs Christians to remember that, "the Jewish prophets themselves branded their race for all time as a sinful, useless race, as children of profligacy ... they are the descendants of the princes of Sodom and the people of Gomorrah." (57) Therefore, it is obvious Abogard and his supporters were in no doubt who was the church's and Christian Europe's major enemy--the Jews.

Bishop Abogard's transparent preudice towards Jews is only one of countless other historical examples of the church's keen support of Christian anti-semitism. One good example of this support was the inclusion during the ninth century of the anti-semitic petition Oremus er pro perfidis judaeis in the Good Friday prayer at the expense of the relatively benign, although patronizing, passage Pro Judaeis no flectant. (58) This petition along with similarly themed prayers and sermons were used in the church for centuries to propagate anti-semitic prejudice to the faithful and create a giant rift between Christian and Jewish communities. Evidence that this kind of preaching was successful in poisoning Christians' minds about Jews is starkly illustrated in the promise made by the leader of the First Crusade, Godfrey Bouillon, to "leave no single member of the Jewish race alive," (59) and the massacres and forced conversions of Jews in Rouen, Orlens, Limoges, Mainz, and Rome. (60) Also, the reason for the appalling massacre of tens of thousands of Jews in 1096 C.E. by unruly and fanatical Crusaders traveling through Europe--despite explicit orders from Emperor Henry IV to his knights not to attack Jews and the protection provided by some bishops--is inexplicable without the build-up of predujice and bitterness in Europe achieved by nearly one thousand years of anti-semitic teaching by the church. (61) Even Pope Callixtus II's (1119-1124) papal bull Sicut Judaies, which was an official attempt boll the church to curtail violence against Jews, (62) openly denigrated Jews for their "obstinacy" in remaining faithful to Judaism. (63) The evidence presented above strongly supports the thesis that there is a very close link between the spread of Christian anti-semitism in medieval Europe and Catholic Church tradition. However, there is evidence that religious prejudice was not the sole reason for this growing marginalization and persecutions of Jews by Christians throughout the Middle Ages. This essay will sup, port this argument by demonstrating how five historical developments from the Middle Ages indicate that race was also a factor, if only a small one, in the marginalization and persecution of Jews. These events include, the accusation of the ritual murder of St. William of Norwich (1144) and its link to the blood libel; the anti-Jewish cannons of the church's Fourth Lateran Council (1215); the anti-semitic preaching and boycotts against Jews led by the Franciscan order; and the virulent anti-semitic ravings of Martin Luther (1543).

The accusation of ritual murder, the blood libel, and charge of host desecration formed a potent nexus of calumnies against Jews commonly heard in medieval Europe. (64) The accusation of ritual murder was first recorded in 1144 and involved the myth that a group of local Jews in Norwich murdered a Christian child named William, an apprentice skinner, for the purpose of mocking Christ's crucifixion and acquiring Christian blood as a curative for hemorrhoids of which all Jews allegedly suffered from as punishment for Christ's death. (65) According to Thomas of Monmouth s biased account, (66) after a group of local Jews tricked William to go with them to a house, he was bound, tortured, stabbed, and fixed to a cross while rioting in a "spirit of malignity." (67) While no Jew was directly harmed-because of the murder, (68) ritual murder accusations and blood libels against Jews quickly spread to other areas in England and throughout Europe often resulting in cruel murders and massacres of Jews. (69) Also, a key element of this evidence was based on the belief that there was a secret worldwide Jewish network, which met every year to determine the place where the next ritual murder of a Christian child was to take place. This is an important observation because as Marc Saperstein, quoted by Carrol, explains, "earliest recorded account of Jewish ritual murder ... is embellished with the suggestion of an international Jewish conspiracy ..."--an idea which would become a key element of Nazi modern anti-semitism. Unsurprisingly, despite the Emperor Frederick II's and Pope's Innocent IV's rejection of the ritual murder allegations against Jews, (70) charges of ritual murder continued to be made into the twentieth century (71) and cults were even established to venerate some of its victims. (72) References:(1). Grudem, Wayne A.(1994). "The Atonement" (Google Books). Systematic theology: an introduction to biblical doctrine.Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan. p. 569. ISBN 9780310286707. OCLC 29952151.http://books.google.com/books?id=DA8...page&q&f=false. Retrieved September 13, 2010. "Jesus understood that God's plan of redemption…made it necessary for the Messiah to die for the sins of his people."(2). Simmons (March 6, 2004). "Why Jews Don't Believe in Jesus". Aish HaTorah. http://www.aish.com/jw/s/48892792.html. Retrieved September 13, 2010.(3). Messiah#Christian view for further elaboration.(4). Berkley, George E. (February 1997). "And Collapse…and Collapse". Jews. Boston, MA: Branden Books. pp. g. 129. LCCN 96-47021.ISBN 0828320276. http://books.google.com/books?visbn=...7CFP8Pvh8uXt8s. "(5). "Typical Messianic Statement of Faith". Messianic Jewish Alliance of America. 2007. Archived from the original on April 5, 2007. (6). "Who Is A Jew? Messianic Style". Chaia Kravitz. MessianicJewishOnline.com. 2007. Archived from the original on August 11, 2007. http://web.archive.org/web/20070811053053/http://www.messianicjewishonline.com/article1022.html. Retrieved 2007-08-23. "In Messianic Judaism, children are generally regarded as being Jewish with one Jewish parent. Since we are one in Messiah, both Jew and Gentile, there is not sharp division between the two groups. Therefore, if a Gentile has a heart for Israel and God's Torah, as well as being a Believer in Yeshua, and this person marries a Jewish Believer, it is not considered an "intermarriage" in the same way Rabbinic Judaism sees it, since both partners are on the same spiritual plane. Children born from this union are part of God's Chosen, just like the Gentile parent who has been grafted in to the vine of Israel through His grace." (7.) Ryan, ed., Jewish-Christian Relations: A Textbook for Australian Students, 245.(8.) This essay will use the term Christian anti-semitism in place of anti-Judaism because it will assist the reader to distinguish between the various permutations of anti-Jewish prejudice extant between the New Testament era and the twentieth century.(9.) D.C. Sim, "The Social Setting of the Matthias Community," in Apocalyptic Eschatology in the Gospel of Matthew (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 183.(10.) Typically, a traditional reading is synonymous with a literal reading of the Gospels, which by its nature, ignores their contextual background. Also, Sarah J. Melcher points out that even modern feminist biblical exegesis and theologising has contained or is informed by anti-Jewish stereotypes. See Melcher, "The problem of Anti-Judaism in Christian Feminist Biblical Interpretation: Some Pragmatic Suggestions," Cross Currents 53 (Spring 200:3): 110-12.(11.) Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (Rep., London: Phoenix Giant, 1998), 128-29.(12.) Adele Reinhardt, "The Gospel of John: How 'the Jews' Became Part of the Plot," in Jesus, Judaism and Christian anti-Judaism: Reading the New Testament after the Holocaust, ed. Paula Frederickson and Adele Reinhardt (Louisville, Ky.: John Knox Press, 2002), 99.(13.) It is important to note that this essay is not arguing that the original Gospel writers were themselves anti-semites because that would mean they despised their own race. (14.) Nigel B. Mitchell, "Matthew's Gospel and Judaism," in Gesher 1 (November 1996); available from http://www.jcrelations.net/en/?id=760; accessed 11 September 2004.(15.) Donald Senior, The Gospel of Mathew (Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon Press, 1997), 72. See also Matthew (5:17-18) where Jesus says, "Assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."(16.) Sim, "The Social Setting of the Matthias Community," 184.(17.) George Mastrantonis, "The Sermon on the Mount"; available fromhttp://www.goarch.org/access/othodoxy; Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, 1996; accessed 11 September 2004.(18.) Exemplified by the possibility that his community was forced to leave the synagogue, see Sire, "The Social Setting of the Matthias Community," 186, 191, 19219.) Ibid., 184.(20.) Reinhardt, "The Gospel of John: How 'the Jews' Became Part of the Plot," 99, 102. (21.) Ibid., 103.(22.) Marianne Dacy, "The Parting of the Ways between Judaism and Christianity," in Jewish-Christian Relations: A Textbook for Australian Students, ed. Ryan, 27.(23.) The word "Jews" is used 71 times in this Gospel not all of which have a negative connotation. See Dennis Hamm, "Are the Gospel Passion Accounts Anti-Jewish?," Journal of Religion and Society 6 (2004): 20.(24.) For example, Jesus refers to Jewish law as "your law" (Jn 8:17 and 10:34) and claims he is not bound by the Sabbath (Jn 5:17). See Reinhardt, "The Gospel of John: How 'the Jews' Became Part of the Plot," 103.(25.) Translated as, "Inspired by the Divine Spirit." See Richard P. McBrien, Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to John Paul II (New York: HarperCollins, 1997), 365.(26.) Strictly speaking, Judaisers were, "A party of Jewish Christians in the Early Church, who either held that circumcision and the observance of the Mosaic Law were necessary for salvation and in consequence wished to impose them on the Gentile converts, or who tit least considered them as still obligatory on the Jewish Christians." See F. Bechtel, "Judaizers" in The Catholic Encyclopaedia, Volume VIII; available from http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08537a.htm; accessed 21 September 2004.More generally, it refers to Christians suspected of harboring sympathies or adopting Jewish practices. For example, Judaisers demonstrated their respect for the Jewish tradition by celebrating both the Sabbath and the Sunday observance. See Dacy, "The Parting of the Ways," 33, 34.(27.) Mark Ellingsen, Reclaiming our Boots: An Inclusive Introduction to Church History. Volume 1: The Late First Century to the Eve of the Reformation (Harrisburg, Penn.: Trinity Press International, 1999), 62.(28.) Ryan, "History of Jewish-Christian Relations," 42.(29.) Ibid., 43.(30.) Ibid., 44.(31.) Harold Brackman, "'Christ-killer'--the long shadow of a blood libel," in Midstream 50 (February-March 2004): 16.(32.) "John Chrysostom: Eight Homilies Against the Jews [Adversus Judeaus]"; available from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sourc...tom_jews6.html; Paul Halsall, Internet Medieval Sourcebook, Fordham University., New York, October 1997; accessed 7 July 2004.(33.) Ibid.(34.) Ibid.(35.) Ibid.(36.) See Homily I:6 in ibid. Other examples of Chrysostom's anti-semitism include: "But I am talking about the ungodliness and present madness of the Jews(37Available from http:/www.fordham.edu/ halsall/source/chrysostom-jews6-react.html; Paul Halsall, Internet Medieval Sourcebook, Fordham University, New York, August, November, 1998; accessed 7 July 2004.(38.) Ryan, "History, of Jewish-Christian Relations," 44.(39.) Brackman, "'Christ-killer'--the long shadow of a blood libel," 17.(40.) His "witness theory" proposes that the "Jews should not be killed because they had a role to play as testimony to Christian prophetic truth." See James Carroll, cited in Brackman in ""Christ-killer."(41.) Ryan, "History of Jewish-Christian Relations," 44.(42.) The Adversus Judeos tradition refers to the hateful polemical attacks by church fathers against Jews. See Brackman, "'Christ-killer'--the long shadow of a blood libel," 17; and Dacy, "The Parting of the Ways between Judaism and Christianity," 37.(43.) Jacob Marcus, cited in "Jews and the Later Roman Law: 315-531"; available fromhttp://www.fordham.edu/halsall/jewis...-romanlaw.html; Paul Halsall, Internet Jewish History Sourcebook, Fordham University, New York, July 1998; accessed 21 September 2004.(44.) This was one of four anti-Jewish cannons passed by the Western Church Council of Elvira in Spain held between 305 and 306. See Dacy, "The Parting of the Ways between Judaism and Christianity," 34.(45.) Ibid., 35.(46.) Ibid., 34.(47.) For instance, Brackman argues that Pope Innocent III's declaration in 1199 forbidding violence against Jews but at the same time welcoming their baptism could have been written by St Augustine. See Brackman, "'Christ-killer'--the long shadow of a blood libel," 17 and "Innocent III: Letter on the Jews 1199"; available from http:/www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/inn3-jews.html; Paul Halsall, Internet Medieval History Sourcebook, Fordham University, New York, February 1996; accessed 7 July 2004. However, as will be explored below, Innocent III's role in developing the anti-Jewish cannons at the Lateran Council of 1215 demonstrates that he was a supporter of traditional Christian animosity towards Jews.(48.) Ryan, "History of Jewish-Christian Relations," 46.(49.) Fredrick Leer, God's First Love: Christians and Jews over Two Thousand Years (London: Weidenfeld & Nieholson, 1970), 55f.(50.) The Spanish Church Councils acted in both a secular and religious capacity. Thus, any measures passed had the legal authority of the Kingdom behind them. See Leer, God's First Love, 57.(51.) Joseph Jacobs, "Toledo," JewishEncyclopedia.com, 2002; available athttp://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/vi...=254&letter=T; accessed 21 September 2004.(52.) Leer, God's First Love, 56.(53.) For instance, at the Sixteenth Council of Toledo, it was decreed that all Spanish Jews were vassals of the kingdom, which gave the king authority to make "presents" of Jews to his subjects and ensure that once the children of these Jews were six years of age they would be taken away and brought up as Christians. See Leer, God's First Love, 57.(54.) Ibid., 61.(55.) Ibid. This letter also reiterates many of the Church father's anti-Jewish invective and lists all the ecclesiastical measures against Jews. See Leer, God's First Love, 57.(56.) Ibid., 62.(57.) Ibid.(58.) Ibid.(59.) Brackman, "'Christ-killer'--the long shadow of a blood libel," 18.(60.) Leer, God's First Love, 63. Leer's dating and description of this event is somewhat confusing. (61.) Ryan, "History of Jewish-Christian Relations," 47; Johnson, A History of the Jews, 207-08; and Leer, God's First Love, 66.(62.) Specifically, this papal bull demands that, "'no Christian shall use violence to force them into baptism while they are unwilling and refuse." See Ryan, "History of Jewish-Christian Relations," 48. Also, according to Mary Boys (cited in Ryan, "History of Jewish-Christian Relations," 47) this bull was issued by 21 different popes between the 12th and 15th centuries whereas in contrast James Carroll states 23 popes issued it. See James Carroll, Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews: A History (Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2001), 365 for comparison.(63.) Ibid. As James Carroll points out, this ambivalence about the Jews inherited from St Augustine was a significant factor in the violence perpetuated against them. See Carroll, Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews: A History, 269-71.(64.) Brackman, "'Christ-killer'--the long shadow of a blood libel," 18.(65.) Johnson, A History of the Jews, 209-10.(66.) Thomas of Monmouth was a local monk whose anti-semitic prejudice probably led him to accept without question the veracity of this ritual murder charge. See "Thomas of Monmouth: The Life & Miracles of St. William of Norwich, 1173"; available fromhttp://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sourc...amnorwich.html; Paul Halsall, Internet Medieval Sourcebook, Fordham University, New York, October 1997; accessed 7 July 2004.(67.) Ibid.(68.) Although a group of Jews who were found guilty by an ecclesiastical court, the local sheriff protected them from harm. See Johnson, A History of the Jews, 209.(69.) Brackman explains that Jews convicted of ritual murder would sometimes be hung upside down between two clogs "in a cruel parody of the crucifixion." See Brackman, "'Christ-killer'--the long shadow of a blood libel," 18.(70.) Frederick's defense of the Jews is found in his Golden Bull of 1236 while Innocent IV's rejection of the blood libel is found in his bull of 1247.(71.) B.A. Robinson, "Two Christian Myths Against Jews: Blood libel & host desecration; 1144CE to Present Time"; Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance; available from http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_blib2.htm; accessed 21 September 2004.