Messianic Judaism is a complex and diverse movement that defies easy definition. It is not a denomination or a single, unified organization but rather a group influenced by a wide range of historical, cultural, and religious factors. The term “Messianic” refers more to a style of worship than to a specific belief system. Congregations within the movement vary greatly in their practices, beliefs, and liturgies.
Roots of Messianic Judaism trace back to the early Jewish Christians who believed in Yeshua (Jesus) as the Messiah while continuing to observe traditional Jewish customs. However, these practices gradually faded as Christianity evolved, especially during the Dark Ages.
With the Protestant Reformation reviving biblical study, some Christians began adopting Jewish practices, which later influenced the modern Messianic movement. By the 19th and 20th centuries, Christian outreach to Jews had developed into Hebrew Christian congregations, eventually rebranded as “Messianic Judaism” in the 1970s.
In the 20th century, Messianic Judaism gained significant momentum, particularly through movements like “Jews for Jesus.” More Jews embraced Yeshua as the Messiah while preserving their Jewish identity. This growth has had a profound impact on both Jewish and Christian communities, challenging traditional views and prompting a renewed interest in Jewish customs, such as the Sabbath and dietary laws, among Christians.
A Historical Perspective on Jewish Believers in Jesus
Understanding the history of Jews who accepted Jesus is essential in addressing common misconceptions. A common stereotype suggests that Jews have always been resistant to Jesus, but history tells a different story. From biblical times to the present, there have always been Jewish believers in Jesus.
One of the greatest challenges within Adventism today is demonstrating this reality. Many assume that Jews stubbornly rejected Jesus, yet historical evidence reveals a continuous presence of Jewish followers of Jesus throughout different eras.
To counter this misconception, it is important to trace the history of Jewish believers from biblical times through the medieval period, the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and into the present. Examining this progression provides a broader perspective on Messianic Judaism and its significance today.
Jewish Acceptance of Jesus in the Bible
Turning to the Bible reveals how many Jews accepted Jesus. Matthew 26, which takes place during Passover, first describes the chief priests’ intent to arrest and kill Jesus. Verses 3-5 states, “Then the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders of the people assembled at the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, and plotted to take Jesus by trickery and kill Him. But they said, ‘Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people.’”
This raises an important question. If Jews universally rejected Jesus, who were the people that would have protested His death? If they truly rejected Him, why would there have been concern about public unrest?
Numerous passages throughout the Gospels reveal that many Jews accepted Jesus during His ministry. For example, John 11:45 states, “Then many of the Jews who had come to Mary, and had seen the things Jesus did, believed in Him.”
Again, it specifically says “many of the Jews” believed. It is a mistake to assume that all Jews rejected Jesus. In the Gospel of John, the term “Jews” is used in multiple ways. Sometimes it refers to those who resisted Him, but it also includes those who accepted Him.
Another example appears in John 12:17-19: “Therefore, the people who were with Him when He called Lazarus out of his tomb and raised him from the dead bore witness. For this reason, the people also met Him because they heard that He had done this sign. The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, ‘You see that you are accomplishing nothing. Look, the world has gone after Him.’”
The chapter begins with Jesus coming to Bethany, just east of Jerusalem, where Mary anoints His feet with oil. Verse 9 states: “Now a great many of the Jews knew that He was there; and they came, not for Jesus’ sake only, but that they might also see Lazarus, whom He had raised from the dead.”
And in verse ten: “But the chief priests plotted to put Lazarus to death also, because on account of him many of the Jews went away and believed in Jesus.”
In fact, the decision to kill Jesus, as recorded in John 11, was made immediately after the resurrection of Lazarus. Verse 47 states: “Then the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered a council and said, ‘What shall we do? For this Man works many signs. If we let Him alone like this, everyone will believe in Him.’”
Jesus was not executed because people thought He was insignificant or delusional. He was perceived as a threat to the authority of the religious leaders. Verse 48 further clarifies their concern: “And the Romans will come and take away both our place and nation.”
The issue was not just about doctrine. It was also about power and influence. If Jesus had been dismissed as a mere lunatic, the leaders would not have taken Him so seriously.
Misconceptions About Jewish Expectations of the Messiah
This discussion is often approached in church settings with a common argument, frequently drawn from The Desire of Ages, which suggests that Jews rejected Jesus because they were expecting a political Messiah – a revolutionary leader to overthrow Rome. However, did the Pharisees hold such expectations?
No. The Pharisees were comfortable under Roman rule and did not seek a political general.
Historical records show that during the first Jewish war against Rome, the Pharisees did not support the rebellion. It was the zealots who led the revolt. So, who was really expecting a political Messiah? It was not the Pharisees or those who opposed Jesus. It was His own disciples. This is evident in Acts 1:6 when they asked: “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
Even after Jesus’ resurrection, His followers still anticipated a political kingdom, as revealed by this question.
The concept of the remnant is also significant. Isaiah 59:20-21 prophesies: “The Redeemer will come to Zion, and to those who turn from transgression.” This suggests that the Messiah would come to those who repented. In Matthew 3:1, John the Baptist preaches repentance in the wilderness. Those who responded to this message were among the first to accept Jesus.
Among the earliest Jewish believers were those who heeded John’s call for repentance, were baptized, and prepared their hearts to receive the Messiah. These individuals did not reject Jesus outright. Instead, they were willing to turn from their sins and accept Him.
Moving Beyond Misconceptions in Church Discussions
The Gospels clearly distinguish between those who accepted Christ and those who rejected Him.
This distinction is crucial when discussing Jewish outreach in churches. The Desire of Ages describes Jews who did not accept Jesus, and these passages are often quoted, sometimes selectively. However, constantly repeating that “the Jews rejected Jesus” reinforces a negative stereotype. Those who are rejecting Him are unlikely to be persuaded by it.
Instead, the ones who hear this message are often Jewish individuals who have already taken a step toward faith. What purpose does it serve to tell them, “Your people rejected Jesus”? If a Jewish person is present in a church, they may already be thinking differently.
One constructive approach involves acknowledging the many Jews who accepted Him and recognizing the rich Jewish foundation of the early church.
It is also a common misconception that the Jews who rejected Jesus did so because they were expecting a political leader. In reality, the Pharisees were not seeking a revolutionary Messiah, nor was this the primary issue for many others.
Even Jesus’ own disciples struggled to understand His mission. The crowd that shouted “Hosanna” welcomed Him with unclear expectations. Even Peter, despite declaring Jesus as the Messiah, rebuked Him when He spoke of His coming death.
Many disciples abandoned Jesus when they realized He would not lead a political uprising. The real struggle was not limited to the Pharisees or Sadducees. It extended even to His closest followers.
When discussing Jewish outreach, it is essential to emphasize that many Jews did accept Jesus. Before quoting Ellen White on those who rejected Him, we must first acknowledge the thousands who believed. This positive message should be central in church discussions about Jewish ministry.
Understanding the Judeo-Christian Foundation
The term “Judeo-Christian” is often misunderstood. To grasp its true meaning, we must look at the Book of Acts, beginning with Acts 2. This chapter describes the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, a festival also known as Shavuot.
Acts 2:5 states, “And there were in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven.” This verse refers to the Jewish diaspora. Jews from different regions traveled to Jerusalem for pilgrimage festivals. Pentecost, occurring in the summer, was an ideal time for travel.
The account describes how these Jews were astonished to hear the Apostles speaking in their own languages. This passage is often misunderstood in Pentecostal traditions, where “speaking in tongues” is interpreted as ecstatic utterances. However, Acts 2 describes a miracle in which the Apostles were given the ability to communicate in real foreign languages so that Jews from various nations could understand.
This moment marked the formation of New Covenant Israel, which initially consisted entirely of Jews. These Jewish believers came from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds.
Even today, Jewish communities reflect similar diversity. In cities like Los Angeles, Israeli Jews speak Hebrew, Hasidic Jews primarily use Yiddish, and American Jews often learn Hebrew in school but do not use it in daily conversation.
Because of the Apostles’ miraculous ability to communicate, Peter’s sermon led to the conversion of thousands. Acts 2:37 describes the response: “They were cut to the heart” and asked, “What shall we do?” Then, in verse 41, “those who gladly received His word were baptized, and that day about 3,000 souls were added to them.” Historians point to this moment as the foundation of the first Judeo-Christian community.
Acts 4 recounts Peter and John healing a lame man, which led to another opportunity to preach. As a result, 4,000 more Jews were baptized. Given that Jerusalem had a population of approximately 20,000 at the time, these conversions were significant.
Later, in Acts 21:20, Paul is told, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law.” The Greek word for myriad refers to 10,000, meaning that tens of thousands of Jewish believers were present in Judea alone. This was not a small remnant but a substantial movement within the Jewish community.
Rethinking the Stoning of Stephen
Another argument often raised in discussions about Jewish rejection of Jesus is the stoning of Stephen. Some assume that this event marked a turning point where God shifted His focus entirely to the Gentiles, but a careful study of Acts tells a different story.
First, it is problematic when people begin with Ellen White’s writings instead of studying Scripture first. This was never her intention.
It is worth noting that Acts of the Apostles was written shortly before her death. In her later years, she stated, “If you want to know my position on the Jews, look at the book Acts of the Apostles, not Desire of Ages.” These books were written two decades apart, with Prophets and Kings even completed after her death. Understanding the sequence of her writings helps clarify her perspective.
Acts 6:7 states, “Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem.” It also adds that many priests became obedient to the faith.
Stephen actively worked with the families of priests, which is why he was targeted. His stoning was not merely because Jews rejected Jesus but because certain priests sought to prevent others from accepting Him.
Additionally, the idea that Jewish evangelism ceased after Stephen’s stoning is incorrect. Acts 11:19 states that after the persecution, believers scattered to Phoenicia and Antioch, but “they preached only to Jews.”
The first mention of preaching to Gentiles appears later, in Acts 11:20, when diaspora Jews from Cyprus and Cyrene spoke to Greeks about Jesus. Even in Acts 11:1, when Peter returned to Jerusalem, Jewish believers contended with him over the inclusion of Gentiles like Cornelius.
This confirms that the early church remained primarily Jewish and was still navigating how to incorporate Gentiles. Acts 11:26 records an important shift: “The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” This did not signify that God had turned away from the Jews but rather that Jewish believers were now preaching Jesus to Greeks as well.
Clarifying the Term “Jewish Nation”
Another point of confusion arises from Ellen White’s use of the term “Jewish nation.”
Many interpret it as referring to all Jewish people, as one might speak of the Russian or Ukrainian nations. However, this may not have been her original intent. It may simply reflect the language conventions of her time. Understanding the terminology used in historical writings is essential to grasping their intended meaning.
By studying Scripture first and considering historical context, we gain a clearer picture of the Jewish response to Jesus. The early church was not a rejection of Judaism but rather its fulfillment, embraced by thousands of Jewish believers. This perspective allows for a more accurate and meaningful approach to Jewish ministry today.
The 70 Weeks Prophecy and the Role of the Temple
Daniel 9 outlines the prophecy of the 70 weeks, a crucial period designated for “your people and your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). This time frame was set apart to accomplish several purposes: finishing transgression, making an end of sins, reconciling iniquity, bringing everlasting righteousness, sealing up the vision, and anointing the Most Holy.
These objectives were deeply tied to Jerusalem and, more specifically, the temple at its center. Who was responsible for these tasks? Was it the people, or was it the holy city itself? The answer lies in the temple, the place where reconciliation for sin took place and righteousness was established.
Daniel, troubled by the 2,300-day prophecy and whether the sanctuary would ever be restored, received reassurance from Gabriel that the city and temple would indeed be rebuilt. However, the prophecy of the 70 weeks also indicated that the temple’s role would not remain the same forever.
The prophecy foretold the arrival of the Messiah, stating that after 62 weeks, He would be “cut off,” and later, the city and sanctuary would face destruction. The focus was not solely on the Jewish people but on Jerusalem’s role and the temple’s function during this period.
With the fulfillment of the 70 weeks, Jerusalem’s central place in the plan of salvation came to an end. The earthly sanctuary had served its purpose through Christ’s sacrifice, and the preaching of the gospel transitioned from Jerusalem to Antioch.
This shift was not a rejection of the Jewish people but rather the fulfillment of prophecy. Jesus’ death on the cross completed the work of the earthly temple, directing attention to the heavenly sanctuary where He now serves as the true High Priest.
The Transition from the Earthly Temple to the Heavenly Sanctuary
This transition is reflected in the book of Acts. Following the stoning of Stephen, Antioch became the new center of the Christian faith, with Paul using it as a base for spreading the gospel.
Jesus had told His disciples they would be His witnesses, beginning in Jerusalem before expanding to Judea, Samaria, and the ends of the earth. This progression unfolded as Philip preached in Samaria and Paul took the message to the Gentiles.
The focus had shifted not from one people to another but from the earthly temple to Christ’s eternal work in the heavenly sanctuary. When Stephen was martyred, he saw Jesus standing at the right hand of God, signifying the anointing of the Most Holy.
In the context of Daniel’s prophecy, the “Most Holy” refers to the sanctuary itself, not Jesus. The temple in Jerusalem had been a representation of the Messiah’s work, and the 70 weeks marked the period in which it remained central. However, once Christ had come, the temple’s role was no longer necessary.
The prophecy began with the decree of Artaxerxes in 457 BC to restore Jerusalem. This was not an arbitrary date but a divinely appointed timeline demonstrating how long the city would serve as a type of Christ’s redemptive work.
Although the temple remained standing after this period, its significance in the plan of salvation had ended. The true Lamb of God had already died, rendering the temple’s rituals obsolete. From that moment on, there was no further prophetic role for the earthly sanctuary, as the work had shifted entirely to the heavenly one.
Even as the temple remained physically intact for a time, its spiritual function had ended. It had served its purpose in teaching what was to come, yet its leadership failed to recognize the fulfillment in Christ.
The high priest, who was meant to be a type of Christ, oversaw the stoning of Stephen, marking a turning point. Stephen had helped bring many priests to faith, but others rejected the truth.
This event signaled the end of the temple’s role in God’s plan, as the focus had now moved fully to Christ’s work above.
Patterns in History and the Spreading of the Gospel
History shows similar patterns. In the Russian Empire in the 1890s, Adventism was only permitted among Germans, not among ethnic Russians or Orthodox Christians. Then, during the revolution, a period of chaos created an opportunity for many to accept the gospel.
From 1917 to 1927, often called the “golden years” of Adventism in the Soviet Union, many embraced the message. However, when Josef Stalin rose to power in 1927, the opportunity was closed for decades, only reopening in 1990.
The gospel often moves in waves, and believers must be prepared to act when the opportunity arises. Sometimes prayers for an open door are not answered immediately, but faithfulness allows one to be ready when the moment comes.
A similar pattern was seen in Jerusalem, where even priests were accepting the gospel, but then the movement stopped. The 70 weeks prophecy was not about rejecting the Jews but about explaining the timeline of events. God did not turn away from the Jewish people in favor of the Gentiles.
Throughout Acts, many Jews continued to accept the gospel. The Bereans, for example, studied the Scriptures in their synagogue and embraced the message. Paul’s missionary journeys often began in synagogues. While some rejected his message, many accepted it.
This raises an important question: what kind of message should be preached in churches today? If the focus is only on those who reject the gospel, it does not help the mission. Instead, focusing on those who accept the message encourages others.
A Jewish person who visits a church often feels isolated and uncertain about how they will be received. Seeing others accept the gospel can help them feel less alone and more encouraged.
The Role of the Church in Welcoming Believers
Some continue observing traditions with their families while navigating their faith in Christ. If they do not find a welcoming church community, they may drift away.
However, when they find common ground with others, they can thrive in their faith. Much depends on the atmosphere of the church. For this reason, efforts are being made to develop a series of articles and training materials to help congregations understand and apply these lessons effectively.
The book of Acts demonstrates that many Jews in the Diaspora, as well as in Jerusalem and Judea, were actively accepting Jesus. However, two key factors contributed to the broader shift that followed.
Understanding these historical patterns provides insight into the fulfillment of prophecy and the continued spread of the gospel.
The Second Judean War and Its Impact
A major factor influencing the shift in Christianity’s development was the Second Judean War, also known as the Bar Kokhba Rebellion, which occurred from 125 to 132 AD. While the First Judean War in 70 AD resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, the second war was a Jewish rebellion led by Bar Kokhba.
This conflict introduced new dynamics that significantly shaped attitudes toward Jews and contributed to what we now recognize as anti-Semitism. Historical conflicts often go beyond the battlefield and extend into the realm of public perception.
The events of October 7, 2023 offer a modern parallel. In the aftermath of the attack on Israel, media narratives largely emphasized the suffering of Palestinians. Israeli commentators observed that despite military victories, Israel ultimately lost the war for hearts and minds due to the way the conflict was portrayed.
During the Roman Empire’s wars against the Jews, a similar phenomenon took place. The Romans not only fought military battles but also waged an information war designed to demonize the Jewish people.
Roman Propaganda and the Sabbath
One of the most effective tools in this information war was the use of Roman theater. In public performances, comedies would mock Jewish customs, such as depicting a camel fasting on the Sabbath to ridicule Jewish observances. The Romans saw the Jews as a distinct religious group, and their refusal to worship the emperor set them apart.
The Sabbath became one of the most visible markers of Jewish identity, making it a prime target for Roman propaganda. This portrayal had lasting consequences. In the Roman world, anyone who refused to worship the emperor, whether Jewish or a follower of Jesus, was categorized as Jewish. As a result, attacks against the Jewish people often extended to early Christians, particularly those who continued to observe the Sabbath.
Over time, these anti-Jewish sentiments became embedded in broader cultural and religious thought. Anti-Semitism became a tool that Satan used to obscure biblical truth. The Roman Empire’s opposition to the Jews was not only about political control but also about undermining Sabbath observance. By attacking the Jewish people, Rome was also attacking the Sabbath, which was one of the clearest distinctions between Jewish and pagan worship.
This narrative did not remain confined to Roman propaganda. Over time, it seeped into Christian thought, leading to the label “Jewish Sabbath.” By the middle of the second century, a major shift was underway. The connection between early Christianity and its Jewish roots was fading. Judeo-Christianity, the expression of faith that maintained continuity with the practices of Jesus and the apostles, was coming to an end.
The Decline of Judeo-Christianity
A turning point in church history came with the decline of Judeo-Christianity. It marked the first period when the large influx of Jews into the Christian church came to a halt. One primary reason for this shift was the Sabbath.
Early church leaders, particularly figures such as Ignatius of Antioch, were clear in their stance. Ignatius explicitly stated that Christians should not keep the Jewish Sabbath and should not be associated with those who had crucified Christ.
By the second half of the second century, ideas promoting a change in the Sabbath had begun to take shape. This shift occurred 150 years before Constantine.
When Constantine later legalized Christianity and designated Sunday as an official day of worship in the Roman Empire, the negative perception of the Jewish Sabbath was already well established. By Constantine’s time, there were no known Christian groups within the empire that still observed the Sabbath.
Another major factor that contributed to the decline of Judeo-Christianity was the increasing influence of philosophy. The history of early Christianity can be divided into distinct periods.
The first century is known as the apostolic era, during which the apostles were still alive and actively leading the church. The last of them, John, lived in Ephesus, in what is now Turkey, before being exiled to the Isle of Patmos.
After John’s death, the church entered what is known as the age of the apostolic men. These were individuals who had been direct disciples of the apostles. One example is Polycarp of Smyrna, a Greek believer who was martyred for his faith. Another key figure was Irenaeus of Lyon in France.
During this period, theological debates emerged, particularly over the observance of Passover. This became a contentious issue between Polycarp and the Bishop of Rome.
The third generation of church leaders, known as the philosophers, ultimately reshaped Christian theology and distanced it from its Jewish roots. Among them, Origen was particularly influential.
His background played a significant role in shaping his views. His mother was Jewish, while his father was a wealthy Greek from Alexandria. Origen was educated in Alexandria’s prestigious philosophical school, which was often regarded as the “Harvard of the Roman Empire.” One of his classmates was Plotinus, the founder of Neoplatonism.
Origen’s education had a profound impact on his theological approach. He strongly opposed the literal interpretation of Mosaic Law, believing that everything Moses received from God should be understood allegorically rather than literally. This perspective led him to interpret the Sabbath, not as a practical day of rest, but as a symbolic representation of the second coming of Christ.
Despite his Jewish heritage, Origen expressed strong anti-Jewish views in his writings. He was not alone in this stance.
Another prominent figure, Justin Martyr, also known as Justin the Philosopher, wrote Against the Jews, one of the first Christian texts advocating for a complete separation of Christianity from Judaism. In this work, he argued that the Jews were responsible for killing Jesus and that the observance of the Jewish Sabbath should be abolished.
As philosophical thought increasingly shaped church doctrine, Jewish believers found themselves unwelcome. The broader anti-Semitic attitudes within the Roman Empire further fueled hostility toward Jews in the church.
Over time, Judeo-Christianity faded, and Jewish believers ceased to be part of the Christian movement.
Little is known about whether a remnant of Judeo-Christians survived. Some scholars suggest that many fled Roman persecution and settled in places like Glendalough, Ireland, an ancient Christian site. There is also evidence of a large influx of Jews into Germany, particularly along the Rhine River in towns like Frankfurt, Worms, and Spire, which became known as the Ashkenazic Triangle.
Jewish Life in Spain and the Rise of the Inquisition
Jews had lived in the Iberian Peninsula since the third century BC. After the destruction of the First Temple by Nebuchadnezzar, they spread across the Mediterranean. Phoenician traders helped them settle in what is now Spain.
Throughout various periods of rule, including Roman, Visigoth, and Muslim control, Jews maintained a strong presence. In the sixth century, the Visigoths converted to Christianity, but many Jews continued practicing their faith. By the seventh century, forced conversions began. Under Muslim rule in the eighth century, many Jews converted to Christianity to avoid persecution. These conversions continued for centuries. Some converted for survival, while others did so voluntarily.
By the 15th century, Spain had undergone the Reconquista, during which Christian forces reclaimed land from Muslim rule. Jews who had lived in Spain for nearly 1,500 years faced growing pressure to convert. Some did so for personal or economic gain, while others converted out of religious conviction.
A notable example was Felix Pratensis, a Jewish-Christian figure who grew up as a Christian but remained aware of his Jewish roots. He even contributed to printing a Hebrew Bible. During this period, the identity of many converted Jews was erased as they were expected to fully integrate into Christian society. However, tensions remained as some Spaniards resented the presence of Jewish converts in positions of power. This suspicion led to increasing scrutiny of their faith and loyalty.
One of the most infamous figures of this era was Tomás de Torquemada, often called the father of the Spanish Inquisition. According to legend, though possibly exaggerated, Torquemada played a key role in shaping policies that targeted Jewish converts.
Following the Reconquista, Spanish rulers required that all officials in their newly reclaimed territories be Catholic. Muslims and Jews were excluded, creating resentment when some Jewish converts retained their influential positions. The Spanish nobility, who had fought to reclaim these lands, expected to be rewarded with power. Instead, many conversos, Jewish converts to Christianity, remained in prominent roles.
This led to widespread suspicion of these converts, giving rise to the term “Jewish blood,” which referred to those with Jewish ancestry who had embraced Christianity. Many doubted their sincerity, believing they might still secretly practice Judaism.
Public scrutiny of these conversos intensified, and the Inquisition began investigating and interrogating those suspected of maintaining Jewish practices. If someone was accused of practicing Judaism or was thought to be an insincere convert, they were taken in for questioning and often faced severe consequences.
The Expulsion of Jews from Spain and Its Lasting Effects
Largely based on reports from neighbors and acquaintances, the Inquisition operated with suspicion. If someone was suspected of secretly practicing Judaism, an accusation could arise from something as simple as hearing them pray in Hebrew.
Once accused, the individual would face interrogation and, in many cases, torture to force a confession that their conversion to Christianity was not genuine but done for personal gain. Those who confessed were punished, often by public execution through burning. If they died under torture, they were considered true Christians who had suffered for their faith.
Unlike common misconceptions, the Spanish Inquisition was not primarily aimed at Protestant heretics. Its main target was Christian converts from Judaism who were suspected of insincerity. It was not about punishing Jews who remained Jewish but about persecuting Christians of Jewish descent.
In 1492, King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella issued an edict giving Jews three choices: convert to Christianity, leave Spain, or face death. Many chose to flee, with a significant number finding refuge in the Ottoman Empire. Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent welcomed them, allowing Jewish communities to settle in places like Greece, Sarajevo, Bulgaria, Algeria, and Morocco.
Those who remained and converted were labeled Marranos, a derogatory term meaning “pig” in Spanish. They were often forced to publicly prove their conversion by engaging in acts that violated Jewish law, such as eating pork. Many of these converts, unable to practice Judaism openly, became Crypto-Jews, secretly maintaining their Jewish identity for generations.
Some even made their way to the Caribbean, where they blended into hidden communities or, in some cases, joined the pirates who roamed the region.
Forced conversions created a generation of people caught between two identities. While some assimilated into Christian society, others lived in fear of being exposed as secret Jews. This scrutiny led to the infamous practice of investigating a person’s “Jewish blood,” a concept that persisted for centuries and justified continued suspicion of converted Jews.
This historical reality was a major factor in shaping Jewish attitudes toward Christianity. The forced conversions and betrayals left a lasting wound that influenced how Jews responded to Christian evangelism in later centuries.
Martin Luther and the Jewish Question
Shifting focus to Germany, Martin Luther initially had a favorable view of Jews. He befriended rabbis at the Erfurt Synagogue and studied Hebrew, believing that if he could strip away Catholic traditions, Jews would be more open to accepting Jesus.
However, this assumption failed to account for the deep wounds left by the Inquisition and forced conversions. Jews, understandably, remained skeptical of Christian teachings, having witnessed centuries of persecution.
When they did not respond as Luther had hoped, his attitude changed dramatically. In 1545, near the end of his life, he published Against the Jews, a bitter and inflammatory work in which he declared, “It is easier to baptize the devil than baptize a Jew.”
Some scholars suggest that age and illness may have influenced his harsh tone, but his frustration over Jewish resistance to conversion was likely the driving factor.
Luther’s anti-Jewish sentiment was not merely personal frustration. It was deeply tied to his theological beliefs, particularly his view of the Old Testament and the law. He saw the Old Testament as emphasizing works, whereas the New Testament emphasized grace.
This distinction led him to reject the Sabbath, viewing it as a remnant of the Jewish system of works-based righteousness.
Over time, this perspective shaped Christian thought in ways that extended beyond Luther himself. Many 19th-century biblical commentaries, including some referenced in Desire of Ages, reflect the same anti-Jewish biases.
Widespread belief in the inherent legalism and inferiority of Judaism compared to Christianity reinforced negative attitudes toward Jewish identity and traditions.
The Lasting Impact on Jewish-Christian Relations
There is a critical distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Judaism. Anti-Semitism is hatred of Jews simply for being Jewish, while anti-Judaism rejects Jewish identity and culture, often demanding that Jews abandon their heritage to be accepted as Christians.
Throughout history, both attitudes have played a role in shaping how Jewish people have been treated by the Christian world.
Even within some Adventist circles today, there remains a tendency to overlook the Jewish roots of Christianity. Some are uncomfortable acknowledging that Jesus was Jewish or that the early church had strong Jewish influences.
While this does not stem from outright hatred of Jews, it reflects an inherited discomfort with Jewish identity.
For Adventists engaging with the Jewish community, understanding this history is essential. Many Jews do not reject Jesus because they are waiting for another Messiah but because of the centuries of persecution inflicted upon them by those who claimed to follow Him.
Establishing trust requires acknowledging this past and demonstrating a commitment to standing apart from those who have caused harm.
The Absence of Jewish Converts to Christianity
Historical records indicate a nearly nine-century absence of documented Jewish conversions to Christianity. Multiple factors contributed to this prolonged gap.
During this period, most Jews lived under Muslim rule and were not exposed to Christianity. From the seventh to the eleventh century, the largest Jewish community was in Baghdad, which was then the center of the caliphate. At this time, the caliphs, particularly during the Abbasid dynasty, valued knowledge and intellectual advancement. They developed algebra, translated Aristotle into Arabic, and supported education.
In contrast, Western Europe, including France, Germany, and England, was far behind in medicine and scholarship.
Baghdad was considered the intellectual capital of the world until Genghis Khan destroyed it. Afterward, Jews migrated to Spain, which was also under Muslim rule. The Jewish community thrived there during the Golden Age of Spanish Jewry from the eleventh to the fourteenth century.
The caliphs in Spain encouraged theological debates between Jews, Christians, and Muslims, much like the intellectual gatherings in Baghdad. Eventually, the Jewish intellectual center moved from Baghdad to Cordoba.
At the same time, Jews in Central and Eastern Europe, particularly in the Ashkenazic communities, faced suffering due to the Crusades. The violent campaigns against Muslims and Jews further separated Jewish communities from Christianity, reinforcing the long period in which no Jewish conversions to Christianity were recorded.
The French Revolution and its Impact on Jewish Communities
Multiple aspects of the French Revolution require careful examination. The Great Controversy presents it primarily in a negative light, particularly emphasizing the Jacobin period. However, the Revolution was a complex event with broader implications.
Its initial objective was to establish a constitutional monarchy, a model like Britain’s limited monarchy. King Louis XVI was willing to accept this arrangement, but the pope strongly opposed the Revolution due to the longstanding alliance between the French monarchy and the papacy.
As tensions escalated, the clergy and nobility resisted the Revolution and attempted to help the king flee to Austria. When the king was caught, he was arrested, tried, and eventually executed along with his family. This led to widespread attacks on the church, which many viewed as having been complicit in the monarchy’s oppression. This is the period described in The Great Controversy as godless, and in many ways, it was.
However, the Revolution also brought ideas of liberté, égalité, and fraternité, which were not inherently negative. One of the major social changes was the abolition of the aristocracy. Nobles lost their privileges, and everyone became a citizen, including Jews.
For centuries, Jews in Western Europe had been treated as second-class citizens. They were not part of the established guilds, could not own land, and were confined to ghettos. The word “ghetto” itself comes from Venice, where Jews were forced to live in segregated areas. In cities like Prague, Jews were required to wear yellow coats and hats to mark them as outsiders.
The French Revolution changed this reality. With the aristocracy abolished and citizenship extended to all, Jews gained the right to enter universities, obtain degrees, and hold government positions. They were no longer confined to ghettos and could practice their faith freely.
With the rise of secularism, some Jews found it easier to explore Christianity. In the nineteenth century, following the Revolution, more Jews accepted Jesus than had been seen in centuries. One well-known example is Joseph Wolff, a Jewish convert whose story is included in The Great Controversy.
Before these reforms took full effect, France went through the Reign of Terror under Robespierre. This period was marked by extreme leftist policies and mass executions, including the fall of the monarchy. Following this turmoil, Napoleon came to power and brought stability.
Napoleon ended the dominance of the church over the state and implemented a secular government. His legal reforms replaced the old Roman law and removed many religious restrictions. This shift toward equality allowed Jews to fully participate in society.
His influence extended beyond France and reshaped Western Europe. The changes he brought helped Jews integrate into European society, access higher education, and enter fields that had been previously closed to them. This period also led to an increase in Jewish conversions to Christianity.
The Emergence and Foundation of Hebrew Christian Churches
In the nineteenth century, sweeping changes led many well-known figures from Jewish backgrounds to embrace Christianity. One notable example is Felix Mendelssohn, a Jewish convert to Christianity. These conversions laid the foundation for the creation of Hebrew Christian churches, which would later become the forerunners of modern Messianic Jewish congregations.
By the end of the 19th century, the Hebrew Christian movement had begun to take shape. Several factors contributed to its emergence. Christian anti-Judaism in Protestant churches, the influence of preachers and theologians sympathetic to Jews, and the rise of Christian Zionists all played a significant role. These circumstances provided a foundation for the movement’s growth and development.
The term “Hebrew Christian” in this period referred to Jews who had converted to Christianity but sought to maintain aspects of their Jewish identity. However, beyond avoiding harassment from Christians who accused Jews of killing Jesus, their cultural practices largely aligned with Protestant Christianity. While some maintained minor Jewish customs, they were primarily assimilated into Christian traditions.
Not all Jewish converts identified with the Hebrew Christian movement. Many chose instead to join established Christian churches. Despite this, the theology of the movement remained firmly rooted in traditional Protestantism, particularly the perceived opposition between grace and law. Some Jewish converts simply integrated into existing Protestant churches, while others became involved in dedicated Hebrew Christian societies. Missionary organizations played a crucial role in expanding the movement.
Missionary Efforts and the Growth of Jewish Conversions
The Society of Hebrew Christians, particularly the British Society of Hebrew Christians, collaborated with missionary organizations to evangelize Jewish communities across the Ottoman Empire, Austro-Hungary, and other parts of Europe. As a result, the Hebrew Christian movement spread into Germany, Austria, and other Western European nations. However, it made little impact within the Russian Empire.
By the mid-19th century, approximately 250,000 Jews had converted to Christianity. Given that the global Jewish population at the time was only around four million, this represented a significant demographic shift.
Tracing the origins of this movement reveals its connection to the theological and social developments of the early 19th century, particularly around 1844. Traditional Protestant theology continued to shape the movement. Despite opposition from some church leaders, who cited the lack of Jewish converts, the substantial number of Jewish conversions provided a strong counterpoint to these criticisms.
The Adventist Connection and Challenges in Jewish Evangelism
While the Hebrew Christian movement grew, few Jews were exposed to Adventism. Among the earliest Jewish Adventists was Isaac Lichtenstein, who worked alongside A.T. Jones and contributed to The Review and Herald. However, Lichtenstein eventually left the Adventist Church due to tensions related to anti-Judaism, particularly in his interactions with Jones.
Another key figure was F.C. Gilbert, an Orthodox Jewish convert from England who embraced the Adventist message. Gilbert became instrumental in developing Jewish missions within Adventism, establishing a mission in Boston at the turn of the century. His correspondence with Ellen White played a role in shaping her views on Jewish evangelism. His influence contributed to revisions in The Desire of Ages and the more respectful tone toward Jews in Acts of the Apostles.
Despite Gilbert’s contributions, his efforts faced resistance, particularly from those who adhered to the doctrine of verbal inspiration. Some within the Adventist Church challenged the idea that Ellen White’s writings could be revised. Discussions surrounding her authority intensified after the 1919 Bible Conference, where church leaders debated her relationship to Scripture.
The conference documents were sealed for fifty years and were only made public in the 1990s. When released, they revealed no scandal, only a normal theological discussion. However, the secrecy surrounding the issue hindered the development of Jewish outreach within Adventism.
After Gilbert, Samuel Kaplan became a leader in Jewish Adventist missions. In the 1930s, despite the economic hardships of the Great Depression, Kaplan established a highly successful Jewish mission in New York.
There are several powerful stories from this period that highlight the mission’s impact. One example involves a Jewish couple who were struggling with unemployment and contemplating suicide. They found a pamphlet that led them to Kaplan’s ministry. This encounter ultimately transformed their lives.
In the 1950s, Jewish outreach within Adventism saw a resurgence. Documents from the Adventist Heritage Center show that the General Conference actively supported these efforts. This demonstrated a continued commitment to Jewish missions.
The Hebrew Adventist Church in New York played a significant role in shaping Jewish Adventism. It influenced figures like Alan Reinach and Sean Carney, who later made important contributions to the movement.
However, maintaining continuity within Hebrew Christian congregations proved challenging. Many early leaders, such as Mitch Greenbaum and Paul Engel, aged out of leadership roles by the 1980s. As time went on, the challenge of sustaining a Jewish identity within these congregations became more evident.
The Impact of Global Events on Hebrew Christianity
World War I played a role in the growth of the Hebrew Christian movement, especially among German Jews. During this time, a distinction began to form between two groups: secular Jews who joined Hebrew Christian churches and religious Jews who were drawn to Hebrew Adventist congregations due to their shared observance of the Sabbath.
By the 1930s and 1940s, missionary organizations like the American Board of Missions to the Jews became active in Jewish outreach. However, divisions within the movement led to the rise of groups like Jews for Jesus and Chosen People Ministries.
Jews for Jesus and similar groups adopted a direct evangelistic approach, aiming to spread their message broadly rather than cultivating long-term congregational structures. This distinction created tensions within the broader movement.
A significant challenge for Hebrew Christian congregations was the issue of interfaith marriages. Historically, Jewish men were more likely to convert to Christianity than Jewish women, which led to difficulties in maintaining Jewish identity within these communities.
Over time, many Hebrew Christian congregations saw a decline in Jewish representation as members married non-Jewish spouses. Some congregations tried to counter this trend through missionary efforts, but sustaining a distinctly Jewish presence within Christianity remained a struggle.
The Holocaust and Its Lasting Impact
Nazi persecution had devastating consequences for Jewish communities across Europe, and the trauma of the Holocaust profoundly affected the Hebrew Christian movement. Many Jewish Christians perished alongside their Jewish brethren, while others faced suspicion from both Jews and Christians due to their dual identity.
In the post-Holocaust era, theological and cultural shifts further complicated the movement’s future. Despite these challenges, the Hebrew Christian movement laid the groundwork for what would later develop into Messianic Judaism.
Historical developments in the 19th and 20th centuries set the stage for new approaches to Jewish-Christian identity, which would continue to evolve in the decades to come.
One of the greatest tragedies for the Hebrew Christian movement was the Holocaust. No event in history was more catastrophic for Jews who believed in Jesus. While persecution had always been a reality for Jewish Christians, just as Jesus predicted in the Gospels, nothing compared to the devastation inflicted by Hitler.
The roots of this crisis can be traced back to a racial ideology that originated in 15th-century Spain. The theory of “Jewish blood” held that Jews who converted to Christianity remained Jewish by ancestry, regardless of their religious beliefs.
Under his rule, Hitler adopted a similar framework, defining Jewish identity by race rather than religion. In the United States today, the term “Jew” is often understood in religious terms, but in Europe, Jewish identity was and still is considered an ethnicity, much like Hispanic identity in the United States.
In addition, Hitler implemented the Nuremberg Laws, which mandated that churches identify and expel members of Jewish descent. This had nothing to do with theology or Sabbath-keeping. It was purely about race. Even Christian converts of Jewish heritage were barred from entering churches.
One particularly heartbreaking case involved a Jewish Adventist who was disfellowshipped under Nazi orders and later sent to a concentration camp. Against all odds, he survived.
After the war, he wrote to his church, requesting to be reinstated. The response was silence. No apology was given, and there was no acknowledgment of the injustice. The leaders who had turned him away never admitted their wrongdoing, even decades later.
The Nazi regime’s relationship with the Adventist Church in Germany was complicated. Many Adventists were drawn to Hitler initially because of his apparent support for their values. He was a vegetarian and admired the Adventist emphasis on community service.
During Germany’s severe economic depression in the 1920s, Adventists had provided aid to struggling communities. As a result, many Germans joined the church. When Hitler came to power, he praised Adventists for their contributions to the nation. This led some church members to believe he was a divinely appointed leader.
By the end of World War II, most of the Jewish Christian population in Europe had been wiped out. Among the six million Jews murdered, there was no exemption for those who had converted to Christianity. The global community failed to provide refuge, and countries like the United States and Britain denied visas to Jewish refugees, including Jewish Christians. This tragic loss had profound consequences for the Hebrew Christian movement, which had already been struggling with its identity within Christianity.
Following the war, the focus of Jewish Christians shifted to the United States. However, by the 1940s and 1950s, many Jewish Christians began distancing themselves from their Jewish heritage. Intermarriage with non-Jews and assimilation into mainstream Christianity caused many to lose their cultural identity, even while maintaining their faith.
In the 1960s, a period of social upheaval and a quest for deeper meaning prompted many young Jewish and non-Jewish individuals to seek out new spiritual paths. Evangelists such as Billy Graham redirected Christianity toward a message of love and a personal connection with God, a message that deeply resonated with many Jewish Christians.
The Rise of Messianic Judaism and the Rebranding of Hebrew Christianity
During the 1960s, worship styles within Christianity began to change. Some churches, including the Assemblies of God, incorporated contemporary music and elements of Jewish culture into their services. This shift contributed to the rise of Messianic Jewish congregations, which combined Jewish traditions with belief in Jesus.
As the movement gained momentum, the term “Hebrew Christian” began to fade and was replaced by “Messianic Jew.” These congregations varied in beliefs and practices, but many emphasized their Jewish heritage in ways that earlier Hebrew Christian communities had not.
This transformation marked a significant turning point. Jewish Christians were no longer merely assimilating into Protestant churches. Instead, they were reclaiming their identity, reshaping the movement, and influencing the broader religious landscape in ways that continue to this day.
Messianic Judaism has grown by emphasizing Jewish identity while believing in Yeshua as the Messiah. It has influenced Christianity, encouraging some Christians to reexamine Jewish traditions. However, mainstream Jewish organizations do not recognize it as a legitimate form of Judaism.
The Future of Messianic Judaism
Despite its growth, Messianic Judaism faces opposition from both mainstream Jewish organizations and traditional Christian denominations. As a result, the future of Messianic Judaism remains uncertain.
It may continue to grow, assimilate into traditional Judaism, or evolve into a distinct form of Messianic Christianity. The direction it takes will largely depend on the choices made by individual congregations.
Essentially, Messianic Judaism consists of Jews and non-Jews who follow Yeshua while worshiping in a Jewish cultural and religious context. The journey of these believers reflects a continuing dialogue between heritage and faith, with significant implications for both Jewish and Christian communities in the years ahead.
