Preface
In an article by journalist Jean Duhaime, reporting on the symposium held at the commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council Nostra Aetate Declaration, in 2005, he recounts that:
At the beginning of his speech, Cardinal Kasper read out a letter from Pope Benedict XVI. (On the 40th anniversary of Nostra Aetate):
The Pope expressed his hope that “in theological dialogue and in everyday contacts and collaboration, Christians and Jews will offer an ever more compelling shared witness to the One God and his commandments, the sanctity of life, the promotion of human dignity…
Cardinal Kasper subsequently emphasized the theological mission awaiting each new generation. We have fragments, but not yet a fully elaborated theology of Judaism, and we are also waiting for – if it is at all possible – a Jewish theology of Christianity. Ibid.
The contribution of this chapter to the theological dialogue consists in concentrating on various examples of the New Testament teaching on the existence of two ways of redemption, as already seen in various parts of my previous work (A. Yoel Ben Arye, op.cit.) and in a large part of this work, and furthermore, to add new perspectives in the forming of a Jewish theology of Christianity, which Cardinal Walter Kasper sees as the theological mission of the new generation. It is also recalled that the contribution to the forming of a Jewish theology of Christianity that I seek to make in this work consists in remembering the following: the people of G-d is made up of two houses or kingdoms, the house of Judah and the house of Israel. These houses are currently separated and traversing different ways of salvation and in the last two thousand years Gentiles have also been added the house of Israel (Babylonian Talmud. Pesachim 87b), for their salvation too.
It is well known that the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church, as expressed in the Catholic Church’s documents and especially documents of the former Pope, not only do not conceive, but also do not accept the existence of two ways of salvation, i.e., one for the Gentiles as expressed in Rom 10:9 and another for the Jews also clearly implied throughout the New Testament, as will be seen in some examples below.
Introduction
This section will seek to contribute to the two themes proposed by Cardinal W. Kasper, i.e. to the theological dialogue and in this context to deal with an aspect of our Jewish vision of Christianity, based on an interpretation of the New Testament, which attempts to be, on this subject, more consistent than those expressed until now.
From the very beginnings of Christianity, the Church Fathers, who came from paganism, interpreted the New Testament, so to say, “with a key of two”, i.e. they divided the message of redemption of this text into only two groups: the Jews and the Gentiles.
In this way the Church interpreted Mt 15:24 (as already seen in my previous work, ibid. ch. 3: Verus Israel, a Problem of Identity and also, for instance, in the document of the Pontifical Biblical Commission,The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible, section…, in Ch. IV of this work), which says: He (Jesus) replied, I was sent only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel, in the sense that his mission was principally to the Jews and then in the second stage to the Gentiles. However, the text of Matthew is very clear in respect to Christ’s mission, which is directed to the house of Israel and not to the Jews who make up the house of Judah. The house of Israel consists in the so-called “ten lost tribes of the house of Israel”, who are intermingled in the Gentile world and who lost all their national religious identity, as a result of the conquest of the northern kingdom (the house of Israel) and the dispersion of the great majority of its population by the Assyrian Empire in 722 BCE. Certainly, without the retrieval of this vital part of the people of Israel there cannot be salvation either for the Jews or for the rest of the world, as attested not only by the Old Testament and Jewish tradition (e.g. Ez 37:15-28; Jer 3:17-18; Zech 10:3-8; Jn 10; Lk 15; Rom 11, etc.), i.e., the salvation is for the twelve tribes of Israel and not for any tribe(s) in particular. The New Testament is consistent in this conception: a) The walls of it (of the celestial Jerusalem) were of a great height, and had twelve gates; at each of the twelve gates there was an angel, and over the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel… Apoc 21:12-14. b) Then I heard how many were sealed: a hundred and forty-four thousand, out of all the tribes of Israel. Apoc 7:4; c) James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes scattered among the nations: Greetings. Jas 1:1; d) Not all those who descend from Israel are Israel; not all the descendants of Abraham are his true children. Remember: It is through Isaac that your name will be carried on… it is only the children of the promise who will count as the true descendants (Rom 9:7) … or as scripture says elsewhere: I showed my love for Jacob and my hatred for Esau; (Mal 1:2-3; cf. Rom 9:13)
From the last quotation it can already be deduced that both parts of the people of Israel go along different paths. Here I will not go into the “why” of this difference of ways of salvation in order to reach the same objective of redemption. I will merely point out that the New Testament clearly states these two ways.
One of the keys for understanding the existence of the two ways consists in reading the New Testament on the subject, with a “key of three”, i.e., that the text is talking about three very well defined groups: the house of Judah (the Jews), the house of Israel (the ten lost tribes) and the Gentiles, although the last two are today so intermingled that now it is impossible to distinguish whether each individual belongs to one of the tribes or to the Gentiles. Nevertheless, the New Testament refers clearly to the three groups that constitute key elements for a more correct understanding of the New Testament.
I will indicate here some historical milestones:
Start of King David’s reign: 1000 BCE
Start of King Solomon’s reign: 960 BCE
Start of King Rehoboam’s (Rehavam’s) reign: 920-913 BCE
The schism Jeroboam 922 -901 BCE
Exile of the Kingdom of Israel (or house of Israel), by Assyria 722 BCE
Exile of the Kingdom of Judah by Babylon 526 BCE
Return of the house of Judah, promoted by King Cyrus of Persia 461 BCE
Destruction of Jerusalem by Rome 70 CE
Second exile of the house of Judah, by the Roman Empire 130-132 CE
The Examples
Here I will present some examples of the existence of the two ways of salvation.
l
Matthew 9:17
This first example was already presented in my previous work. Nonetheless it is important to present it again in this chapter. The three Synoptic Gospels bring this allegory, but it will suffice to analyze it according to the text of Matthew, which teaches:
“Neither do people pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.” Mt 9:17 (Mk 2:22 and Lk 5:37-39).
According to Christian tradition, the “new wine” represents the NT; thus we find that:
“This opposition between the old and the new probably alludes to the old covenant, as opposed to the new […]” P. Benoit , M.E. Boisamad, J.L. Malillos. Sipnosis de los Cuatro Evangelios. Vol. II. Ed. Española Desclee de Brouwer. Bilbao. 1977. pp. 106 [My emphasis].
According to another opinion:
“The new wine in this image (Mk 2:22) clearly represents the Gospel …”
Baum, Gregory, O.S.A. The Jews and the Gospel. A reexamination of the New Testament, 1964, (Nihil Obstat and Imprimi Potest), pag. 53.
If the “new wine” represents the New Testament, clearly the Old Testament is represented by the “old” and the “wineskins” would represent, in turn, the receptacles of the wines. Certainly, the recipients of the “old wine” are the Jews and Judaism and for their part the recipients of the “new wine” would be the Gentiles and Christianity. This quotation is teaching that it is forbidden to place new wine in the receptacle of the old, i.e. to place the New Testament, the salvation by the confession of faith of Rom 10:9 in the Jews and Judaism.
It should be noted that none of the Synoptic Gospels prohibit pouring “old wine” into “new wineskins”, i.e. placing the Old Testament in Christianity, and this is, in fact, what occurs.
On the other hand, any attempt to place “new wine” in “old wineskins” means not only the perdition of Judaism and the Jews, but also the perdition of the “new wine” or the New Testament, i.e. the instrument of salvation of the Gentiles would be lost, which would mean ultimately that they would be lost.
This text of Matthew (and parallels) comes to confirm the Church’s obligation to take care not only of the “old wine” or Old Testament but also the “old wineskins”, i.e. the Jews and Judaism that contain it, and also to recognize in their doctrine the need for two ways of redemption, i.e. one through observing the Law of Sinai by the Jews and the other, through the faith in Jesus Christ, for the Gentiles.
From this viewpoint, one can better understand Jesus’s declaration in the Gospel of John 4:22 “for salvation comes from the Jews”, namely, if the Jews are lost, the salvation of the Gentiles disappears at the same time.
ll.
The circumcision of Timothy: Acts 16:1-3
1From there he (Paul) went to Derbe, and then on to Lystra. Here there was a disciple called Timothy, whose mother was a Jewess who had become a believer; but his father was a Greek. 2The brothers at Lystra and Iconium spoke well of Timothy, 3and Paul, who wanted to have him as a travelling companion, had him circumcised. This was on account of the Jews in the locality where everyone knew his father was a Greek. (My emphasis)
Acts 15:1-3 (Jerusalem Bible version)
Above all it should be taken into account that Judaism is transmitted by the mother (or acquired by conversion); in this case Timothy was Jewish by birth and according to Mosaic Law he should have been circumcised. This is what Paul does.
Here one of the two possibilities concerning the words “on account of the Jews” must be considered. It should not necessarily be interpreted as a protest of the Jews by keeping Timothy uncircumcised, since the text says “everyone knew his father was a Greek (Gentile)”; this was not the case for his mother, and the text tells us that his mother was known as a Jewess, since this is a situation that gives Timothy the status of a Jew.
However, the other possibility must also be considered, that it is Paul who did not know about Timothy’s Jewish origin and found out about this situation through the local Jews who did know that he was Jewish, and on being informed of his status, Paul agreed with local Jews, and according to his conception of the two ways of salvation he decided to circumcise Timothy. This is the reason that Paul decides to circumcise Timothy “on account of the Jews”. There is no pejorative declaration against the Jews in this account in Acts, since in light of the circumstance that they presented Paul has no reason not to agree with them, quite the contrary.
While it was known that his father was a Gentile, this did not give Timothy a Gentile status, according to Jewish law. Precisely this statement on the Greek origin of his father might be the intention of the author of Acts to hide the knowledge that his mother was Jewish, a fact that did not go unnoticed (or rather, could not go unnoticed) for the members of the Jewish community of Lystra.
In any case it is an error (or contempt for Paul) to consider that Paul circumcised Timothy for social reasons foreign to Timothy’s Jewish origin, since Paul knew very well and taught that:
2 Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law.” 4 You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5 For through the Spirit we eagerly await by faith the righteousness for which we hope; (my emphasis)
Gal 5:2-5
When in Gal 5:5 Paul states that: For through the Spirit we eagerly await by faith the righteousness for which we hope, he is referring to “we the Jews” in general.
According to this, Paul would be removing his disciple from the way of redemption inaugurated by Jesus and committing him to the way of salvation through the fulfilling of the Law of Sinai. Is this attitude of Paul correct? Certainly. As a son of a Jewish mother, Timothy is Jewish by definition and his only way of salvation is through the observance of the Law and for this reason he had to be circumcised. There was no other alternative for Timothy. Men’s ways of salvation are predefined, one for the Gentiles as appears in Rom 10:9, and the other for the Jews, by observance of the Law. Free will, in this case, consists in accepting or rejecting the predetermined way. This being the case, in the first case the option must be correct and in the second case it is an erroneous alternative and therefore a sin.
From another viewpoint, it must be considered that Timothy’s circumcision is carried out before he begins his apostolic career. However, it cannot be said that if Timothy had not been circumcised he had the possibility that his way of salvation would be by the grace of Jesus Christ who brings salvation only for the house of Israel and the Gentiles. Timothy would always be Jewish, whether circumcised or not. From here we learn that for Paul a Jewish apostle must obey the entire law, and very particularly the circumcision of the flesh:
And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every male throughout your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any foreigner, that is not of your seed.
He that is born in your house, and he that is bought with your money, must needs be circumcised; and My covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
And the uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.
Gn 17:12-14 (see also Phil 3:5)
This attitude of Paul reinforces Jesus’s teaching that he does not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it:
5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
5:18 In truth I tell you, till heaven and earth disappear, not one dot, not one little stroke, is to disappear from the Law until all its purpose is achieved.
5:19 Therefore, anyone who infringes even one of the least of these commandments and teaches others accordingly will be considered the least in the kingdom of Heaven; but the person who keeps them and teaches them will be considered great in the kingdom of Heaven. Mt 5:17-19
According to this, it can be easily deduced that all the Jewish apostles were circumcised and fulfilled the Law.
On the other hand, the fact of “eagerly awaiting by faith the righteousness” (Gal 5:5) does not exempt the Jews from the obligation of observing the entire Law. It must be clear that the “faith” to which Paul refers here is not the faith in Jesus Christ, since this faith does not save those who are circumcised, who must observe the entire law and have faith in G-d the Father, which is the faith that redeems the Jew. According to this, a Gentile who is circumcised, such as Titus, is obliged to keep the entire Law. However, the faith of a Jew in Jesus of Nazareth, as defined in Rom 10:9, does not redeem the Jew, because, on account of his circumcised status, he is obliged to keep the entire Law. On the other hand, the fact that a Jew is not circumcised does not exempt him from having to keep the Law, but he is in an anomalous status that must be corrected. In conclusion, the circumcised man has no option of changing the way of salvation, while for the Gentile this option exists, although it is not recommended, according to Paul’s preaching that everyone should stay in whatever state he was in when he was called:
17 Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 18 Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man already uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God’s commands is what counts. 20 Everyone should stay in whatever state he was in when he was called.
1 Cor 7:17-20 (My emphasis)
Therefore, I emphasize, Paul and all the Jews were working for the restoration of Israel as the book of the Acts of the Apostles teaches: Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel? Acts 1:6. The New Testament teaches about a process of restoration, not replacement of one people by another. The object is to restore a divided, broken Israel, in which one of the parts is lost, i.e. it has lost its national and religious identity. Therefore, those who are circumcised must keep the entire Law and separate from the way of salvation by divine grace, which Jesus inaugurated for the salvation of the house of Israel and the Gentiles. The fact of being born a Jew does not exempt from but obliges circumcision. This is not an option as already seen, it is a predestination: Since these ways are not optional, the salvation of the Gentiles is through an act of confession on the messianic nature of Jesus and the belief that G-d made him rise from the dead, and salvation is obtained, as appears in Rom 10:9, while the Jews obtain salvation through fulfillment of the law of Sinai including circumcision (Gn 17:9-14).
III.
Galatians 2:7-9
In this example I shall begin with an analysis of a passage from Paul’s Letter to the Galatians and I shall take the opportunity to indicate the problems that incorrect translations might cause:
7 On the contrary, they recognized that I had been commissioned to preach the Good News to the uncircumcised just as Peter had been commissioned to preach it to the circumcised.
8 The same person whose action had made Peter the apostle of the circumcised had given me a similar mission to the pagans.
9 So, James, Cephas and John, these leaders, these pillars, shook hands with Barnabas and me as a sign of partnership: we were to go to the pagans and they to the circumcised. Gal 2:7-9. (Catholic.net database). Jerusalem Bible.
According to Gal 2:7-9 James, Cephas (Peter) and John go to the circumcision and not only Peter (Cephas).
In Gal 2:7, the Jerusalem Bible translation is incorrect. The Greek text states that the Gospel of the uncircumcision was entrusted to Paul as the gospel of the circumcision was to Peter (The R.S.V. Interlinear Greek-English N.T., by Rev. Alfred Marshall. Samuel Bagster and Sons. Fourth Impression 1985). For its part, the text of the Interlinear Greek-Spanish N.T., by Francisco Lacueva, Clie, 1984, Barcelona, states: “but on the contrary, the Gospel of the uncircumcision was entrusted to me (to Paul) as the gospel of the circumcision was to Peter.” The translation into Spanish of the New Testament by the United Bible Societies (1960 Edition) is also correct.
The Greek text clearly states that the Gospel of the uncircumcision was entrusted to Paul as that (the Gospel) of the circumcision was to Peter.
This is very important, since the Gospel of the uncircumcision is not the same as the Gospel of the circumcision. Here the reference is to two different Gospels, for two different publics: the Jews and the Gentiles. In this context, if the Gospel of the uncircumcision consists in the three Synoptic Gospels plus that of John, and by extension, of all the New Testament, the question is: what is the Gospel of the circumcision, i.e. that of the Jews? Where is this Gospel which by definition, according to the text, is not the same as that of the uncircumcision? Here, we can only conclude that this would be a single message of Salvation for the two parts of Israel that would teach about two ways of salvation with the common denominator about the principal commandments that Jesus teaches in Mk 12:29-31 (cf. Dt 6:4-5 and Lv19:18). On the other hand, both parts share the same conception that a new era has started during which a new way of salvation is opened for all men who wish to enter into it, except to the Jews (who possess their own way, through fulfillment of the Law of Moses), i.e., what the Jews call the two thousand years of the days of the Messiah and the Christians: the messianic era.
lV
Romans 3:28-31
From another perspective, we read in Rom 3:28-31
28 As we see it, a man is justified by faith and not by doing something the Law tells him to do. 29 Is God the God of Jews alone and not of the pagans too? Of the pagans too, most certainly, 30 since there is only one God, and he is the one who will justify the circumcised (circumcision) because of their faith (by faith) and justify the uncircumcised through their (the) faith. 31 Do we mean that faith makes the Law pointless? Not at all: we are giving the Law its true value.”
Rom 3:28-31
From this it can only be concluded that the circumcised (the Jews) are justified by the direct belief in G-d [by faith] and the uncircumcised (the Christians) are justified by the faith in G-d (Father) through the faith in the intermediary (Jesus Christ); it is also confirmed that the faith of the Jews and that of the Gentiles confirm the law, i.e. the Law of Sinai also has implicitly the faith in the Father through the faith in the Son, as was seen in my previous work, pp. 257-258, in HaAmek Davar’s interpretation on Bereshit (Genesis) 50:23. Here the apostle Paul teaches about two types of faith in the Father, one is that of the Jews who are under the law and their faith is directly in the Father and the other, that of the Gentiles who are not under the law of Moses, consists also in a belief in Jesus, the intermediary between men and the Father. See Rom 8:26 and 34 as regards the salvation of the Gentiles; in Hebrews we find:
It follows, then, that his (Jesus’s) power to save is utterly certain, since he is living for ever to intercede for all who come to God through him.”
Heb 7:25 (My clarification in brackets).
V
Romans 3:21-24
Another example appears in the Letter to the Romans:
“But now apart from [“without-law”(Interlinear-Nestle, RSV)] the law, the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify (OT). This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ (also in Gal 2:16) to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.”
Rom 3:21-24 (My clarifications in brackets and my emphasis)
The most logical and simplest understanding of this passage, consists in considering that: “Apart” from the law (or without law) another way of salvation opens: “G-d’s justice through faith (in Jesus Christ)“; this means that those who are not and cannot be justified by the law, will be justified by G-d’s righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ, i.e. G-d’s grace redeems them, returning to them the “glory of G-d” that is Jesus Christ. Certainly, for the Jews who are under the law that Moses gave to the people of Israel at Sinai, that justification is not free, but is conditional on fulfillment of this law. The reasons for this situation were already discussed in my previous work (pp. 53-55). For now, in this example too, the existence of two ways of salvation must be confirmed.
Vl
Ephesians 2:5
Another example on this subject can be found if we pay attention to an interesting play of words made by Paul in Ephesians 2:3-6, and especially in Ephesians 2:5:
“G-d made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.”
(Eph 2:5)
When Paul writes that the salvation is by grace for the Gentiles (you “it is by grace you have been saved”), he is not referring to “we”, since for “we” G-d gives us life together “with Christ”, while “you”: “it is by grace you have been saved”, i.e. the life that “we” (the house of Judah) receive together “with Christ” is not by grace, by which only “you” have been saved.
Ephesians 2:8-9 confirms the above deduction:
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.
Here the reference is to the Gentiles who are saved through faith, i.e. through faith in an intermediary: Jesus, and certainly this salvation is not by the works of the law. I emphasize, however, that the salvation of the Jews is by direct faith in G-d which includes the fulfillment of the works of the law that G-d gave at Sinai.
Vll
2 Peter 1:1
Again in Peter’s second letter we read:
“Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who through the righteousness of our God and (the) Savior Jesus Christ [the Greek-English Interlinear reads: “…of our God and the Savior Jesus Christ”], have received a faith as precious as ours….”
2 Pt 1:1 (My clarifications in brackets)
Firstly the Greek version is much clearer than the Spanish or English version, since from the Greek reading it is perfectly clear that Peter differentiates between “our G-d” and “the Savior Jesus Christ”.
According to this quote, Peter differentiates between the faith of the public to which the letter is addressed and the faith of Peter and his fellow apostles. The faith of the recipients of the letter is “a faith as precious as ours”, i.e. a faith of the same quality, of the same value, but not the same faith “as ours”. The faith of Peter and the Jews is a direct faith in G-d the Father, the Shepherd of the house of Judah (Zech 10:3-6) and the fulfillment of the law, while the faith of the Gentiles includes a faith in the Savior Jesus Christ, i.e. through a mediator (or intermediary) between G-d and mankind (See Gal 3:20; 1 Tim 2:5; Heb 8:6; 9:15 and 12:24).
Vlll
1 John 4:15-16
Continuing this method of analysis, the apostle John in his First Letter also refers to the two dispensations:
“If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him, and he in God. We ourselves have known and put our faith in God’s love towards ourselves. God is love and anyone who lives in love lives in God, and God lives in him.”
1 Jn 4:15:16
According to this quote the apostle is presenting a contradiction, since, in the first part of the quote, the condition for G-d to live in the individual and the individual in G-d consists in confessing that Jesus is the Son of G-d. However in the second part of the quote, the condition of the confession does not exist for the individual to live in G-d and G-d in him, since this presence is a result of the knowledge and faith in “God’s love towards ourselves”.
In the first part of the quote, John refers to “anyone” and in the second to a much more specific group: to “ourselves“.
The first group consists in the house of Israel and the Gentiles, who certainly must confess that Jesus is the Son of G-d (Rom 10:9) while the house of Judah lives in G-d and G-d lives in it, as a result of the knowledge and faith in G-d’s love (cf. Ez 37:19 and in the NT in Lk 15:31, where Christian tradition identifies the older brother with the Jews, as is also the case in the Letter to the Romans, Rom. 9:3-5).
lX
1 Timothy 2:3-6 and 2 Timothy 1:1-2
In the heading to the First Letter to Timothy we read:
From Paul, apostle of Christ Jesus appointed by the command of God our savior and of Christ Jesus our hope, to Timothy, true child of mine in the faith; wishing you grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and from Christ Jesus our Lord.
1Tim. 1:1-2
In the following sections of this letter he continues with this distinction between G-d the Father savior of the Jews, in this case Paul and the addressee of this letter: Timothy (Acts 16:1)(Both Jews):
2:3 To do this is right and will please God our Savior:
2:4 he wants everyone to be saved and reach full knowledge of the truth.
2:5 For there is only one God, and there is only one mediator between God and mankind, himself a man, Christ Jesus,
2:6 who sacrificed himself as a ransom for them all. He is the evidence of this, sent at the appointed time.
2:7 and I have been named a herald and apostle of it and—I am telling the truth and no lie—a teacher of the faith and the truth to the pagans.
1Tim. 2:3-6
For the Jews Paul and Timothy, G-d the Father is the Savior and the success in the mission that begins with the redeeming sacrifice of Jesus Christ for the reincorporation of the house of Israel and the incorporation of the Gentiles in the people of Israel is his hope. Certainly, without Jesus’s sacrifice, which in principle is for the ransom of the house of Israel and the Gentiles, ultimately it affects the salvation of the Jews, since, without the salvation of the house of Israel there is no salvation for the house of Judah either.
When Jesus affirms that “he gave himself in ransom for all”, he is referring only to his sheep (the house of Israel and the Gentiles). He cannot give his life for the Jews, who, as already seen, are always with the Father, according to the Church’s interpretation in the Parable of the “Prodigal Son” (Lk 15:31) and in John 10:26, where Jesus explains to the Jews that since they are not his sheep, i.e. since they do not belong to Jesus’s flock not only cannot they believe in him, but nor should they believe in him.
The second Letter to Timothy begins:
From Paul, appointed by God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus in his design to promise life in Christ Jesus; to Timothy, dear child of mine, wishing you grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and from Christ Jesus our Lord.
2 Tim. 1:1-2
It should not be interpreted that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the Jews, and in this case, of the Jewish apostles: Paul and Timothy. Jesus as Lord of the Jewish apostles is their teacher and guide in their mission, since the only savior of the Jews is the Father himself as attested by Paul in the First Letter. Moreover this statement by Paul is not exceptional in the scriptural text, as already seen for example in the parable of the prodigal son (Lk 15:31), in Rom 11:25-26, in Zech 10:3-4, in Ez 37:19, etc.
X
The chair of Moses Matthew 23:1-4 and parallels
1 Then addressing the people and his disciples Jesus said, 2 The scribes and the Pharisees occupy the chair of Moses. 3 You must therefore do what they tell you and listen to what they say;” but do not be guided by what they do: since they do not practice what they preach. 4 They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulder, but will they lift a finger to move them? Not they!
Mt 23:1-4 (Mk 12:38-40; Lk 11:37-54; 20:45-47)
This is further proof of the existence of two ways, according to the New Testament. Here Jesus teaches his disciples and the Jews in general that they must keep the Law of Moses. Furthermore, since the salvation of the Jews is by the fulfillment of the law of Sinai, therefore Jesus does not come to propose a new way of salvation for the Jews, but only for the house of Israel and the Gentiles. Paul in Galatians 5:1-5 explains to the Gentiles that they must not keep the law and be circumcised because this is the way of salvation only for the Jews, as already seen in the previous sections.
Xl
Acts 15:7-11
Peter’s statement in Acts 15:7-11 must be understood along the same lines as the previous example.
7 And after the discussion had gone on a long time, Peter stood up and addressed them. ‘My brothers,’ he said ‘you know perfectly well that in the early days God made his choice among you: the pagans were to learn the Good News from me and so become believers. 8 In fact God, who can read everyone’s heart, showed his approval of them by giving the Holy Spirit to them just as he had to us. (Acts 10:44; Acts 2): 9 God made no distinction between them and us, since he purified their hearts by faith. 10 It would only provoke God’s anger now, surely, if you imposed on the disciples the very burden that neither we nor our ancestors were strong enough to support? 11 Remember, we believe that we are saved in the same way as they are: through the grace of the Lord Jesus.
Acts 15:7-11
According to this passage of the book of the Acts of the Apostles, it is observed that the apostle of the Gospel of the circumcision (i.e. of the Jews) states that: God made his choice among you: the pagans were to learn the Good News from me (Peter) and so become believers. It was already seen in my previous work (pp. 224-225) where I quoted a midrash of Jewish tradition extensively, how Peter was sent by the Jewish leadership that had selected him as leader. According to this midrash, Peter had a dual mission, on one hand to protect the Jews and to instruct the Church not to harm them and to leave them in peace in fulfilling of their Jewish customs and traditions, and on the other, to lead the Church. The quotation refers to the “Agadata of Shimon Kaipha”. Beit HaMidrash, part 6 until end. Taking into account that the public of this midrash are Jews and it is written by rabbis, very probably at the time when the Church was already exercising political power and the Jews were under this control, this would explain the threatening descriptions of the Church with respect to the Jews and Judaism and the situation of dependency of the Jews to the nobility of the period, which in these subjects, was subordinate to the religious authority.
Sections 8 to 11 of the quotation do not create any problem, since if the Gentiles received the Holy Spirit by the way of salvation initiated for them (Rom 10:9) like that of the Jews by the fulfillment of the law of Sinai, it is only a proof that there are two ways of salvation and that the way initiated by Jesus of Nazareth for the house of Israel and Gentiles does not suspend the way of the Jews.
When he says: Remember, we believe that we are saved in the same way as they are: through the grace of the Lord Jesus, we must not fall into the error of believing that the Jews must change their way of salvation; the following remarks can be made on this quotation (Acts 15:11):
- The text says “through the grace of the Lord Jesus” and it certainly does not say: “through our faith in the Lord Jesus”.
- The faith of the Gentiles in the Lord Jesus (Rom 10:9) is the salvation for them only. On the other hand, the salvation of the Jews who are under the law of Sinai implies the circumcision (Gal 5:2-4); we already saw that Paul circumcised Timothy since he was a Jew by birth and not circumcised. However, the salvation of the Jews depends also on the salvation of all Israel, i.e. the grace that the Lord Jesus grants to the Gentiles (to the house of Israel and the Gentiles who are added to them) and in this sense: “we are saved in the same way as they are”. Certainly, if the Gentiles do not believe in the Lord Jesus they will not be saved, since this is the way for their salvation; in such a situation there is no salvation for the Jews either even if they fulfill the entire law. The salvation is for all Israel and not for a part of it:
and in this way all Israel will be saved. As it is written:
“The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob (Is 59:20).
Rom 11:26
However, Paul would be referring to Isaiah 60:21:
Then all your people will be righteous and they will possess the land forever. They are the shoot I have planted, the work of my hands, for the display of my splendor.
Is 60:21
In the same way, if the Jews do not fulfill the law, there is no salvation for the world either, for salvation comes from the Jews (Jn 4:22) who fulfill the law. Again the existence is found of two ways of salvation, although the traditional interpretation of this passage of Acts 15 understands the opposite. See for instance: Víctor Manuel Fernández Pablo apasionado (De Tarso hasta su plenitud). San Pablo Ed. Buenos Aires. 2009. P. 80.
Xll
Justified by faith in Jesus Christ: Galatians 2:16-17; 19-21
16 We acknowledge that what makes a man righteous is not obedience to the Law, but faith in (Through-faith-of– Christ Jesus Interlinear, Greek-English RSV. Op. cit.) Jesus Christ. We had to become believers in Christ Jesus no less than you had, and now we hold that faith in Christ rather than fidelity to the Law is what justifies us, and that no one can be justified by keeping the Law. 17 Now if we were to admit that the result of looking to Christ to justify us (in order that-we might be justified-by faith on Christ- and-not-by Works-of the law) is to make us sinners like the rest, it would follow that Christ had induced us to sin, which would be absurd. 19 Through the Law I am dead to the Law, so that now I can live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ (co-crucified), and I live now not with my own life but with the life of Christ who lives in me. The life I now live in this body I live in faith: faith in the Son of God (by faith-I live-of the-Son of God) who loved me and who sacrificed himself for my sake. 21 I cannot bring myself to give up God’s gift: if the Law can justify us, there is no point in the death of Christ.
Gal 2:16-17; 19-21
Remarks
According to the Greek text, it is explained that man’s justification is by the faith of Christ Jesus and not by the faith in Christ Jesus (Gal 2:16).
- If we (the Jews) believe in Jesus Christ, i.e. in his mission, this faith in Jesus Christ does not save us, but we are justified by the faith of Christ which is the direct faith in the Father, i.e. the Jewish faith.
- In 2:17 Now if we were to admit that the result of looking to Christ to justify us (in order that-we might be justified-by faith on Christ- and-not-by Works-of the law) is to make us sinners like the rest. The faith in Christ (the Messiah son of David) is a necessary but insufficient condition for the Jews, because they must also fulfill the law. The text does not say that the faith that justifies the Jews (“us”), consists in the faith in Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus that refers to the Messiah son of Joseph, but only in Christ, which refers to the Messiah son of David.
- In 2:16-17 the justification of “us” (the Jews) is by the faith of Jesus Christ (the Messiah son of Joseph) and also by the faith in Christ (the Messiah son of David).The works of the Law are a necessary, but insufficient, condition, since it is also necessary to believe in Christ, i.e. in the Messiah, as already seen in point 2.
- From the analysis of Galatians 2:19-21, the following conclusions can be drawn: a) This quotation has connotations that belong to the esoteric level of interpretation. b) Do the Scriptures wish to say that Paul, individually, is co-crucified with Christ?
- That Paul lives (personally) “in the faith of the Son of G-d”. The translation from the Greek does not say that Paul possesses the faith in the Son of G-d, but the faith of the Son of G-d, i.e. that he and the Son of G-d share the same faith.
- In no way does Paul say that this faith is for his salvation or justification, i.e. that Paul who is circumcised cannot be saved by the faith of the Gentiles, as he himself teaches below in Galatians 5:2-4: “Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.”
- When he says that “if the Law can justify us, there is no point in the death of Christ” he is right. The justice initiated by Jesus of Nazareth is by the faith in Him as defined by Romans 10:9 for the house of Israel and the Gentiles. However, the Jews must continue to be justified by the observance of the law and the class of faith implicit in it, i.e. the direct faith in the Father, the shepherd of the house of Judah (Zech 10:3-5).
Xlll
Luke 16.19-31
Another example of the teachings of the two ways of salvation is in Luke’s account of the rich man and Lazarus:
16:19 There was a rich man who used to dress in purple and fine linen and feast magnificently every day. 20 And at his gate there lay a poor man called Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who longed to fill himself with the scraps that fell from the rich man’s table. Dogs even came and licked his sores. 22 Now the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to the bosom of Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried.23 In his torment in Hades he looked up and saw Abraham a long way off with Lazarus in his bosom. 24 So he cried out, “Father Abraham, pity me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in agony in these flames.” 25 “My son,” Abraham replied “remember that during your life good things came your way, just as bad things came the way of Lazarus. Now he is being comforted here while you are in agony. 26 But that is not all: between us and you a great gulf has been fixed, to stop anyone, if he wanted to, crossing from our side to yours, and to stop any crossing from your side to ours.” 27 The rich man replied, Father, I beg you then to send the beggar Lazarus to my father’s house, 28 since I have five brothers, to give them warning so that they do not come to this place of torment too. 29 ”They have Moses and the prophets,” said Abraham “let them listen to them.” 30 “Ah no, father Abraham,” said the rich man “but if someone comes to them from the dead, they will repent.” 31 Then Abraham said to him, If they will not listen either to Moses or to the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’
Lk 16:19-31
This account again confirms the existence of two ways of redemption. Here it is confirmed that the faith of Romans 10:9 does not save the Jews who must continue to obey the Law of Moses in order to be saved, even when a different way of salvation is opened to the Gentiles.
Above all it must be clarified that the sin of the rich man consisted in the failure to fulfill the principal commandments of loving one’s neighbor. Certainly this commandment is at the basis of the two ways of salvation, for the two parts of the people of Israel. Therefore it is deduced from here that the family of the rich man did not obey this commandment of the law. Since it is a Jewish family, it should have obeyed the law that Moses gave in the desert to the people of Israel and fulfilled the precepts and ordinances of this law and naturally, one of its pillars, the love of one’s neighbor, i.e., inter alia being responsible and merciful to the needy, as taught by Paul in the Letter to the Galatians 5:2-4, as seen above.
XlV
Galatians 2:20
Yet another example is in Paul’s declaration on the nature of his faith when he writes in the Letter to the Galatians:
I have been crucified with Christ, and I live now not with my own life but with the life of Christ who lives in me. The life I now live in this body I live in faith: faith in the Son of God (by faith-I live-of the-Son of God) who loved me and who sacrificed himself for my sake.
Gal 2:20.
Paul lives in the faith of the Son of G-d and not in the faith in the Son of G-d.
This means that Paul and Christ have the same faith, i.e. in the Father, since the faith of the Son cannot be a faith (or belief) in himself.
XV
1 Corinthians 15:14
Another proof of the NT teaching of the existence of two ways of salvation is in the First Letter to the Corinthians:
“If Christ has not been raised then our preaching is useless and your believing it is useless.” 1 Cor 15:14. (My emphasis)
According to this, Paul teaches the Corinthians two things, if Christ has not been raised: a) “Our preaching” includes the Jew Aquila and his wife Priscilla and Timothy and Silas in Paul’s second apostolic journey, i.e. the reference is to the Jews accompanying him. This means that your faith is not our faith, the faith of Paul and the Jews accompanying him, i.e., the faith of the Jews is not useless even if Christ has not been raised, since it is founded on the direct belief in the Father and not like that of the Gentile Corinthians that consists in the faith in the Son (Rom 10:9) and through his intermediation in the Father. b) In the hypothetical case that Christ’s resurrection did not take place, only the mission of the Jews to the Gentiles is useless, not the Gentiles’ faith. Since Christ was raised, Paul’s teaching is limited to emphasizing the existence of two ways i.e., of two types of faith and that both are redeeming, as seen in the previous points: “your faith” and that refers implicitly, also, to the other faith, “our faith”, i.e. that of the Jews as a different faith.
Paul distinguishes between “our preaching” (i.e. that of the Jews to the Gentiles) and “your believing”, i.e. the faith in Jesus Christ (e.g. Rom 19:9) which, as already seen on several occasions, is not the faith of the Jews.
“Our preaching” consists in continuing Jesus’s mission to seek the house of Israel (Jer 3:18 and Mt 15:24) and of the Gentiles (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Pesachim 87b), for the inclusion in the olive tree of Israel together with the house of Judah (the Jews).
In the Parable of the “Prodigal Son”, the elder brother complains that the Father had never sacrificed a calf for him, although he is always working in the house of the Father and knows that everything that belongs to the Father also belongs to him.
In Christian tradition the calf represents, or rather, is an allegory of Jesus’s sacrifice for his sheep: the house of Israel and the Gentiles (Jn 10), when it returns (or rather, so that it will return). According to this, Jesus’s sacrifice is not for the house of Judah, i.e. the Jews. Therefore, this is further proof of the existence of two ways of salvation.
XVl
In this section, I shall demonstrate the existence of a situation of theological dissonance in the Magisterium of the Catholic Church as regards the way of salvation for the Jews. When some original declaration is made on Judaism, as a logical consequence of Nostra Aetate, there are cognitive inconsistencies that would seem very difficult to overcome. One example is in the passage of Pope John Paul II’s address to the Jewish community of Mainz (Germany) on November 17, 1980, in which he states “… “… the people of God of the Old Covenant, which has never been revoked”. This address, in turn was included in the document Notes on the Correct Way to Present the Jews and Judaism in Preaching and Catechesis of the Roman Catholic Church, 1985. The statement should open the way to the obligatory conclusion that there are two ways of salvation according to the NT teachings, i.e. a way of salvation for the Jews through fulfilling the Law of Moses and another, for the rest of mankind, through Jesus’s redeeming sacrifice and by an act of confession of faith as explicit in Romans 10:9.
However, an official doctrinal declaration on the obligatory conclusions of such an affirmation has never been made, and this allows adopting of diverging positions on this subject by clergymen, theologians and believers in general. We find contradictions of this kind in the same “Notes”, when elsewhere he states that when Jesus declares (Jn. 10:16) that there shall be “one flock and one shepherd”, the Church and Judaism cannot then be seen as two parallel ways of salvation and the Church must witness to (preach) Christ as the Redeemer for all. This cognitive inconsistency lies in the fact that in the same document a declaration of the Pope is cited maintaining that the Old Covenant was never revoked and that this is based on the New Testament (Rom 11:28-29), i.e. it continues to be valid, although only for the Jews, yet on the other hand in the same text the possibility of the existence of two ways of redemption is denied. In other words, if the Old Covenant was not revoked, this means that it continues to be the way of salvation for the Jews and as seen in the case of Timothy, there is no optional way of salvation for the Jews.
In this respect, I consider it important to again quote an unequivocal opinion of the Protestant theologian Allan R. Brockway, whose position, even though addressed to the Protestant churches, is valid also for the Catholic Church (A. Yoel Ben Arye. Op.cit):
“That is definitely so for those churches which have gone on record as affirming the contemporary validity of Israel’s covenant (salvation through observing the Law), for that affirmation wipes away in one stroke all ambivalence about the centrality of Jewish mission to the definition of the Church. Once it is clear to Christians and the churches that God remains faithful to the covenant with the elect people, then any attempt to woo Jews away from that covenant is revealed as an attack upon the God who made the covenant. In sum, Christian mission to Jews is nothing less than Sin.”
Brockway. Allan R, “The theology of the Churches and the Jewish People” Center for the Study of Judaism and Jewish Christian Relations. Birmingham. England. 1989.www.abrock.com/birmingham
XVl
Another demonstration on the two ways is found in the Apocalypse in chapter 15:3:
15:3 And they were singing the hymn of Moses, the servant of God, and of the Lamb: How wonderful are all your works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are all your ways, King of nations.
(Apoc. 15:3)
Important remark.
The author of the Apocalypse speaks of two ways: that of Moses and that of the Lamb. Both ways are just and true. This would be yet another confirmation of the two ways of redemption. One way through the law of Moses, for those who are under this law, i.e. the Jews, and the other way is that of the Lamb (of the Parable of the Prodigal Son, that the Father sacrifices to celebrate the return of the prodigal son, i.e. the ten lost tribes of the house of Israel) who is sacrificed for the salvation of the house of Israel and the Gentiles (Lk 15:23):
And they were singing the hymn of Moses, the servant of God , and of the Lamb: How wonderful are all your works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are all your ways, King of nations.
(Apoc. 15:3)
XVll
A final example on the validity of the Covenant of Sinai (now only for the Jews) is in the Book of the Apocalypse 11:19:
Then the sanctuary of G-d in heaven opened, and the Ark of the Covenant could be seen inside it. Then came flashes of lightning , peals of thunder and an earthquake, and violent hail.
According to this text, in the heavenly Temple, “the Ark of the Covenant” of Sinai continues to exist, and no other Ark, since only the Ark of the Covenant is that of Sinai. No other covenant that has an ark exists, except for that of Sinai. According to this vision, the Covenant of Sinai continues to be valid, not only in heaven but also on earth, which is a material reality (so to say) of the heavenly reality. If this were not the case, why should this vision be mentioned?
Conclusions
- a) One of the keys for more consistent understanding between all the parts of the Holy Scriptures, as regards principally the subject of the Redemption, consists in reading the Scriptures with a key of three, i.e. the house of Judah, the house of Israel and the Gentiles, and not as has been done until now (in the last 1900 years) in a key of two, i.e. Gentiles and Jews only.
- b) With these hermeneutics a more consistent understanding is reached of the New Testament, where seemingly unconnected parables and allegories support each other and thus reinforce its messages as in the case of the Romans 11 (the allegory of the good olive tree), Lk 15:11-32 (the parable of the prodigal son), or John 10, for instance, where the parallel between the cut off branches and the prodigal son who abandons his Father’s house is clear. The parallel that remains is equally clear, i.e. the branches that are not cut off, but remain on the trunk of the good olive tree and the elder brother who is together with the Father, are images of the house of Israel and the house of Judah, respectively and the third component, are the branches of the wild olive grafted into the “cultivated olive” (or people of Israel) who are the Gentiles. The same is true of the three types of sheep in the Gospel of John 10.