Why Aren’t Christians Speaking Out? An Answer

By Bob W. Lovelace

The following contains my reply to an article written by Cynthia Ozick: “Why Aren’t Christians Speaking Out?,” W.S.J. October 30, 2000. A disclosure appearing with her article states that Ms. Ozick is a novelist who authored “Quarrel & Quandary: Essays” (Knopf, 2000).

She writes, “The current violent challenge to both Jews and Christians is in accordance with an evolving and fanatically accelerating Palestinian fabrication: that the Temple never existed, that it is a Jewish invention for local political gain, that the Jewish attachment to Jerusalem is historically and religiously nil.” Along with this she attaches moral and historical deprivations saying, “So far, no mainstream Christian voices have been raised against these moral and historical depredations, and one wonders why.” She asks why has there been no “Christian protests” over Muslim rioting, the burning of a synagogue in Palestinian- ruled Jericho, or a mob’s razing of Joseph’s Tomb? With her reminder of the Holocaust and reference to the infamous Christian “silence” of years past now expiated through Christian understanding, conscience, and remorse for that unforgotten and dire omission she asks again, “But what of now?” She suggests that Christians speaking up now might “require going the extra mile.” (Entertaining myself I’m thinking the “extra mile” notation is to prick our consciences to an awareness of a violation of the Lord’s command in Matt. 5:41 wherein one might be “forced” to go one mile. Indeed how applicable!) Going on she writes, “But should not Christians speak up for the history and central claims of Christianity? If Judaism has no roots in Jerusalem, then Christianity was never born.” Then she presents herself as Jew who just a week ago, on the holiday of Simchat Torah celebrating the ethical mandates of a 4,000-year-old tradition, opened the Gospels and read of the Christian connection to the Temple Mount. She forces on: “If the Temple is a Jewish chimera, as Palestinian and farflung Muslim anger affirms, it is not only Jewish history and religion that is wiped away. The heart of Christianity, too, suffers erasure, and Christian muteness in the face of the annihilation of Christian belief becomes incomprehensible. If there never was a Temple, then where did Jesus walk?”

MY ANSWER

Cynthia Ozick’s compulsion that Christians speak out for the Jews (“Why Aren’t Christians Speaking Out?” Oct. 30th, 2000) on behalf of the history and central claims of Christianity displayed her ignorance of what Christianity truly is. I will agree that it would be absurd for any Palestinian or other wise to claim there never was a Temple. However, should some try to make the historicity of the Temple a “chimera” as she states then I believe that Christianity will still stand. As a Christian I do not see, as she does, “the heart of Christianity” suffering erasure here; the Bible with its New Testament is here to stay. Please indulge me on this for but a brief moment as I speak out. God did not give Christians the work of upholding the practice of Judaism (I’ll use the term “Judaism” to refer to the Law of Moses as God’s temporary religion given to the Jews at Mount Sinai). Christians are not taught to uphold the Jewish “faith” anymore than they are taught to uphold “the faith” of Palestinians who believe otherwise than they do. Christians are to uphold the Gospel of Christ as the power of God unto salvation unto all men, both to Jews and Gentiles (Romans 1:16). When it comes to “religion” that’s where we stand!

It appears to me that she errs in thinking somehow that the Temple is a “central” claim of Christianity when Jesus the author of our faith said while speaking of the Temple, “Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down” (Matthew 24:1-2; Hebrews 5:9). God’s prophecy was fulfilled in A.D. 70. The Temple services were part of the Mosaic covenant or law that was abrogated at the death of Christ and taken out of the way having been nailed to the cross (Matthew 27:51; Heb. 9:7-15; Colossians 2:14-17). A Jew who was a Christian who sought justification by the Mosaic law is said to have fallen from grace (Galatians 5:4). The Hebrew writer in his epistle to Jewish Christians explains that forgiveness of sins did not come by the old Mosaic covenant. Redemption came by the blood of the “new” covenant (Matthew 26:28; Hebrews 10:4) wherein Jesus is Mediator of a “better” covenant (than the Mosaic) which was established upon “better” promises than the Mosaic offered to the Jews. And he quoted the prophet Jeremiah to prove his point (Hebrews 8:6-13). While emphasizing the importance of Christ’s “new” covenant he described the Mosaic covenant with these words: “that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” The “new” (Christ’s) he says made the “old” (the Mosaic) obsolete! (Hebrews 8:13). He explains that when Christ became man’s eternal High Priest, a Minister of the true tabernacle in Heaven which God erected not man, that the priesthood thus being changed necessitated a change in the law from the “old” to the “new” covenant (Hebrews 7:12; 8:1-2). He also explains that the blood of Christ was shed for those who had lived under the “first” (Mosaic) covenant (Hebrews 9:15). God did away with the “first” that He might establish the “second” (Hebrews 10:9).

Ms. Ozick says, “If Judaism has no claims in Jerusalem then Christianity was never born.” Does she give the greater emphasis to the “lesser covenant” that did “not” have the better promises? Christians say that Judaism as a religion given by God was a temporary religion given to the Jews until Christ came (Galatians 3:15-29). The Mosaic covenant was “not” the better covenant established upon the better promises (Hebrews 8:6); it served its purpose in bringing the Jews to Christ that they might believe in and obey Him (Galatians 3:24-29). Thus all Christians whether they are Jew or Gentile are “Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” given to Abraham that through his Seed, Christ, all nations of the world would be blessed (Galatians 3:16; Genesis 22:18). That promise of Christ Jesus came long before the Mosaic covenant, and the Mosaic covenant could not disannul the promise so as to make the promise of no affect (Galatians 3:17). Whatever men may erringly think about the existence of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem the blessings of the promise in Christ will stand! It is the New Covenant, not the “old” Mosaic Covenant, that the Hebrew writer in the book of Hebrews (a New Testament book) says is a “better” covenant established upon “better” promises! And Jesus taught the same in His Gospels (Matthew 26:28; Mark 16:15-16). The Temple in Jerusalem was never a part of Christ’s “new” covenant. The Gospels teach that the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70 was the fulfillment of prophecy (Matthew 24:1-2). Ms. Ozick, if you ask a true Christian to speak up about the Jews and Jerusalem he will tell you that the New Covenant came into effect with the death of Christ. The Gospel of Christ was proclaimed by inspired Jews to the Jews in Jerusalem as recorded in Acts chapter 2 on the Day of Pentecost. They preached Jesus Christ and Him crucified according to God’s eternal plan (Acts 2:23). Those who gladly received the word were baptized for the remission of their sins and added to His church (Acts 2:41). They obeyed the Gospel in order to receive all the blessings inherent in God’s plan of redemption which was planned before the world began! (Acts 2:16-41; 2 Timothy 1:9) But somehow I just don’t think that is the “kind” verbal empathy you’re looking for.

Back to the Table of Contents

Home