lördag 10 april 2010

Evangelical counsels



Scholarship applications for Wikimania 2010 are now open. Apply now!
[Hide]
[Help us with translations!]

Evangelical counsels

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The three evangelical counsels or counsels of perfection in Christianity are chastity, poverty (or perfect charity), and obedience (see e.g. The Code of Canon Law, canons 599–601). As Jesus of Nazareth expressly stated (cf. Matthew 19:10–12; Matthew 19:16–22 = Mark 10:17–22 = Luke 18:18–23, see also Mark 10), they are counsels for those who desire to become "perfect" (τελειος, cf. Matthew 19:21, see also Strong's G5046 and Imitatio dei). This means that they are not binding upon all, hence not necessary conditions without which heaven (eternal life) cannot be attained. Rather they are "acts of supererogation" that exceed the minimum stipulated in the Commandments in the Bible.[1] Christians that have made a public profession to order their life by the evangelical counsels, and confirmed this by a public religious vow before their competent church authority (the act of religious commitment called "profession"), are recognised as members of the consecrated life.

There are early precedents of religious vows in the Christian monastic traditions, for example the Rule of Saint Benedict (ch. 58.17) stipulates for its adherents what has come to be known as the "Benedictine vow" promising "stability, conversion of manners and obedience", which to this day is made by the candidates joining Benedictine communities. But specifically in the form of the three evangelical counsels of chastity, poverty, and obedience religious vows were first made in the twelfth century by Francis of Assisi and his followers,[citation needed] the first of the mendicant orders. These vows are made now by the members of all Roman Catholic religious communities founded subsequently (cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 573) and constitute the basis of their other regulations of their life and conduct.

Not only those wishing to dedicate their life to God in the consecrated life, but every one of Jesus's followers is invited to observe chastity, poverty and obedience, since he exhorted all to "be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (cf. Matthew 5:48). Nevertheless, only the members of the consecrated life confirm their intention to observe the evangelical counsels by making a public vow before the competent church authority. Outside the consecrated life Christians are free to make a private vow to observe one or more of the evangelical counsels; but a private vow does not have the same binding and other effects in church law as a public vow and does not bestow the spiritual benefits that spiritual teachers such as Dom Columba Marmion (cf. Christ the Ideal of the Monk, ch. VI) attribute to the religious "profession".

Henriette Browne "Nonnen im klösterlichen Arbeitsraum"

A young man in the Gospel asked what he should do to obtain eternal life, and Jesus told him to "keep the commandments", but when the young man pressed further, Christ told him: "If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor". (It is from this passage that the term "counsel of perfection" comes.) Again in the Gospels, Jesus speaks of "eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven", and added, "He that can receive it, let him receive it". St. Paul presses home the duty incumbent on all Christians of keeping free from all sins of the flesh, and of fulfilling the obligations of the married state, if they have taken those obligations upon themselves, but also gives his "counsel" in favour of the unmarried state and of perfect chastity (Celibacy), on the ground that it is thus more possible to serve God with an undivided allegiance.

Indeed, the danger in the Early Church, even in Apostolic times, was not that the "counsels" would be neglected or denied, but that they should be exalted into commands of universal obligation, "forbidding to marry" (1 Timothy 4:3), and imposing poverty as a duty on all, see also Legalism (theology).

These counsels have been analyzed as a way to keep the world from distracting the soul, on the grounds that the principal good things of this world easily divide themselves into three classes. There are the riches which make life easy and pleasant, there are the pleasures of the flesh which appeal to the appetites, and, lastly, there are honours and positions of authority which delight the self-love of the individual. These three matters, in themselves often innocent and not forbidden to the devout Christian, may yet, even when no kind of sin is involved, hold back the soul from its true aim and vocation, and delay it from becoming entirely conformed to the will of God. It is, therefore, the object of the three counsels of perfection to free the soul from these hindrances. The love of riches is opposed by the counsel of poverty; the pleasures of the flesh, even the lawful pleasures of holy matrimony, are excluded by the counsel of chastity; while the desire for worldly power and honour is met by the counsel of holy obedience. Abstinence from unlawful indulgence in any of these directions is forbidden to all Christians as a matter of precept. The further voluntary abstinence from what is in itself lawful is the subject of the counsels, and such abstinence is not in itself meritorious, but only becomes so when it is done for the sake of Christ, and in order to be more free to serve Him.

The Catholic Encyclopedia article ends with the following summary:

“To sum up: it is possible to be rich, and married, and held in honour by all men, and yet keep the Commandments and to enter heaven. Christ's advice is, if we would make sure of everlasting life and desire to conform ourselves perfectly to the Divine will, that we should sell our possessions and give the proceeds to others who are in need, that we should live a life of chastity for the Gospel's sake, and, finally, should not seek honours or commands, but place ourselves under obedience. These are the Evangelical Counsels, and the things which are counselled are not set forward so much as good in themselves, as in the light of means to an end and as the surest and quickest way of obtaining everlasting life.

Temptation of Christ



Scholarship applications for Wikimania 2010 are now open. Apply now!
[Hide]
[Help us with translations!]

Temptation of Christ

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The temptation of Christ is detailed in the gospels of Matthew,[1] Mark,[2] and Luke.[3] According to these texts, after being baptized, Jesus fasted for forty days and nights in the desert. During this time, the devil appeared to Jesus and tempted him. Jesus having refused each temptation, the devil departed and angels came and brought nourishment to Jesus.

Mark's account is very brief, merely noting the event. Matthew and Luke describe the temptations by recounting the details of the conversations between Jesus and the devil. Since the elements that are in Matthew and Luke but not in Mark are mostly pairs of quotations rather than detailed narration, many scholars believe these extra details originate in the Q Document. The story of the Temptation is one of the notable Omissions in the Gospel of John.

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Literary Genre

The account of Matthew uses language from the Old Testament. The imagery of a conflict between an earlier "Jesus" and "the devil" would be familiar to Matthew's contemporary readers, recalling the vision of a conflict between Satan and the Angel of the Lord. In the Septuagint Greek version of Zechariah 3 the name Iesous and term diabolos are identical to the Greek terms of Matthew 4.[4] Additionally Matthew presents the three scriptural passages cited by Jesus (Deut 8:3, Deut 6:13, and Deut 6:16) not in their order in the book of Deuteronomy, but in the sequence of the trials of Israel as they wandered in the desert, as recorded in the book of Exodus.[5][6]

Luke's account is similar, though his inversion of the second and third temptations "represents a more natural geographic movement, from the wilderness to the temple".[7] Luke's closing statement that the devil "departed from him until an opportune time"[8] may provide a narrative link to the immediately following attempt at Nazareth to throw Jesus down from a high place,[9] or may anticipate a role for Satan in the Passion (cf. Luke 22:3).[10][11]

[edit] Accounts

In Luke's and Matthew's accounts, the devil tempts Jesus to:

  • Make bread out of stone(s) to relieve his own hunger
  • Free himself from a pinnacle by jumping and relying on angels to break his fall. The narrative of both Luke and Matthew has the devil quote Psalm 91:11-12 to show that God had promised this assistance, although the devil omits the part of that passage which makes clear that the guarantee applies only to accidents, not deliberate jumps.[reference needed]
  • Worship the devil in return for all the kingdoms of the world. Luke has the devil explicitly claim this authority had previously been handed to himself, the devil.
Duccio's The Temptation on the Mount

Matthew makes clear that the Spirit (presumably the same Spirit (or "Holy Ghost" depending on which translation you read) prominently mentioned only two verses before) has led Jesus into the desert. Many scholars see Matthew as presenting Jesus being tested under the orders of God, rather than the devil being opportunist. The Catholic and Orthodox teaching is that the Devil and the other demons are spiritual or angelic creatures created by God in a state of innocence, and that they became evil by their own act. Other non-Christian teachings[which?] see the devil's role here as echoing Satan's role in some parts of the Old Testament, or as taught in Modern Day Rabbinic Judaism where he is portrayed as an angel acting under God's orders as an official "opposing counsel" to test humans on behalf of God. Thus there are two understandings of Satan, the Christian one of a Satan who is a fallen angel in rebellion to God who became evil, and the Jewish one of a Satan who is not an evil fallen angel, but a servant of God carrying out God's will.

[edit] Fasting

Fasting traditionally presaged a great spiritual struggle.[12] Elijah and Moses in the Old Testament fasted 40 days and nights, and so Jesus doing the same invites comparison to these events. At the time, 40 was less a specific number and more a general expression for any large figure.[13] Fasting does not necessarily mean a complete abstinence from food and consequently that Jesus may have been surviving on the sparse food that could be obtained in the desert.[14][15]

[edit] Locations

Each temptation takes place in a different setting.

[edit] 1. Stones to Bread

The temptation of making bread out of stones occurs in the same desert setting where Jesus had been fasting. Jones reports that the wilderness mentioned here has since the fifth century been believed to be the rocky and uninhabited area between Jerusalem and Jericho, with a spot on Mount Quarantania traditionally being considered the exact location. The desert was seen as outside the bounds of society and as the home of demons such as Azazel (Leviticus 16:10). Some have read this reference to the wilderness as a comparison to Adam in the Garden of Eden, implying that Jesus will be a new Adam (cf Book of Romans 5) . However scholars like Gundry reject this idea, stating that nowhere does Matthew's text imply such a comparison, but rather the desert is more likely an allusion to the wilderness through which the Israelites wandered during the Exodus, and more specifically to Moses.[15] Jesus replies, "It is written: 'One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God.'"[16]

Ary Scheffer's The Temptation of Christ

[edit] 2. Pinnacle of the Temple

After the first temptation is rejected, the devil takes Jesus to a high pinnacle in what Matthew terms the holy city. Most Christians consider that holy city refers unquestionably to Jerusalem and the temple to which the pinnacle belongs is thus identified as the Temple in Jerusalem. Gospel of Matthew refers to "the temple" 17 times without ever adding "in Jerusalem". That Luke's version of the story clearly identifies the location as Jerusalem may be due to Theophilus's unfamiliarity with Judaism.[17]

What is meant by the word traditionally translated as pinnacle is not entirely clear since the Greek dimunitive form pterugion ("little wing") is not extant in other architectural contexts.[18]. Though the form pterux ("large wing") is used for the point of a building by Pollianus [19] Schweizer feels that little tower or parapet would be more accurate, and the New Jerusalem Bible does use the translation "parapet". The only surviving Jewish parallel to the temptation uses the standard word šbyt "roof" not "wing": "Our Rabbis related that in the hour when the Messiah shall be revealed he shall come and stand on the roof (šbyt) of the temple" (Peshiqta Rabbati 62 c-d) [20]

Gundry lists three sites at the Jerusalem temple that would fit this description[15]:

  • On the top of the temple's main tower, above the sanctuary proper, some 180 feet above ground, the location that artists and others using the traditional translation generally set the story.
  • Atop the lintel of the main gateway into the temple, the most prominent position where the pair could easily have been seen.
  • A tower on the southeast corner of the outer wall that looks down into the Kidron Valley, which James the Just was said to have later been thrown from by way of execution.

Once more, Jesus maintained his integrity and responded by quoting scripture, saying, "Again it is written, 'You shall not put the Lord, your God, to the test.'"[21]

[edit] 3. Mountain

For the final temptation, the devil takes Jesus to a high place, which Matthew explicitly names a mountain, where all the kingdoms of the world can be seen. Interpretations of this are as follows:

  • The teller of this story believed the earth was flat.
  • John Calvin supported the view that the devil took Jesus to a vision of a high place where he could see the entire world, and the Geneva Bible translates the passage in this way.
  • kingdoms could be a reference to power rather than geography.
  • all...of the world could refer only to the "known world", a comparatively small region at the time of Matthew.
  • Satan flew Jesus to a mountain top and from there flew him around the entire world. Jesus normally walked from place to place.
  • The mountain is not literal if the whole temptations only occur in the mind's eye of Jesus. For example if the Gospel accounts record this mind's eye view, as related in parable form, to the disciples at some point during the ministry.[22]

Jesus replies "Get away, Satan! It is written: 'The Lord, your God, shall you worship and him alone shall you serve.'"[23]

[edit] Purpose

16th century master illuminator Simon Bening's depiction of the devil approaching Jesus with a stone to be turned into bread

Exactly what the devil was trying to achieve by these temptations has been open to debate. The traditional view is that the devil on each occasion is trying to make Jesus commit a particular sin - avarice by offering power over the kingdoms of the world, gluttony by suggesting a way to relieve Jesus' hunger, and hubris by suggesting that Jesus jump and rely on angels to break his fall. Most modern scholars do not accept this view, Jones for example noting that labeling someone a glutton after a fast because of the temptation of food is hyperbole.[24]

Another view popular for a time (for example, see Dostoyevsky's The Grand Inquisitor in The Brothers Karamazov) was that the devil wasn't so much tempting Jesus as presenting him with the different options he could take to be a Messiah, and making him choose one. Evangelicals point to the word usually translated as tempt as being more accurately translated as test, i.e. that the devil was testing Jesus' understanding of his role rather than trying to lure him to sin.[14] Rejected options under this interpretation are:

  • Someone who alleviates physical hardships, as manifested by miraculously feeding himself when hungry
  • A magician and miracle worker who wins converts by spectacular acts, as manifested by surviving a jump from a high pinnacle. That the devil places Jesus in a very public location, rather than the numerous high pinnacles in the desert, gives credence to this view.
  • A political liberator from the oppression of the Romans, as manifested by having power over the kingdoms of the world

Another view, popularized by the book The Politics of Jesus by John Howard Yoder, suggests that the three temptations of Jesus foreshadow the three points in his ministry where political temptations were the greatest:

  • right after the miracle of the loaves and fish was performed, when the hungry crowds wanted to make him king;
  • when he cleansed the Temple, at which time he had already secured enough political and moral support from the crowds to start a political movement; and
  • the night at Gethsemane when he played with the idea of calling on twelve legions of angels to stop his arrest - he could have initiated a holy war should he choose to.

There remains the question of the validity of the temptations offered to Jesus. As the Son of God, he would be able to attain any of these desires without the aid of the Devil. He was, in essence, being tempted with offers that he already had in his hand.

[edit] Jesus' banquet

Thomas Cole's Angels Ministering to Christ in the Wilderness

Once the temptations are over, the narrative has the devil depart and Jesus being looked after by angels. In the original Greek of Matthew, "devil left him" was in the historic present tense, indicating a lack of permanence, i.e. that the devil would later return to further tempt Jesus (which Luke spells out explicitly). While both Mark and Matthew mention the angels, Luke does not, and Matthew seems once again here to be making parallels with Elijah[25], who was fed by ravens. The word minister/served is often interpreted as the angels feeding Jesus, and traditionally artists have depicted the scene as Jesus being presented with a feast, a detailed description of it even appearing in Paradise Regained. This ending to the temptation narrative may be a common literary device of using a feast scene to emphasize a happy ending[13], or it may be proof that Jesus never lost his faith in God during the temptations.[24] In the War Scroll found at Qumran, angels are described as forming an army to battle evil, which is somewhat at odds with most interpretations of the portrayal of angels here, but it could indicate that the angels in the passage should instead be interpreted as ministering to Jesus by driving off the devil. After forty days and nights of no food, Jesus needed sustenance and once the temptations had ceased, miraculous aid was at hand. God kept his promise to take care of Jesus.

[edit] Parallels in Gospel of John

The story of the Temptation is one of the notable Omissions in the Gospel of John. However some readers have identified parallels inside John which indicate that the author of John may have been familiar with the Temptation narratives in some form.[26]

  • Stones into Bread → John 6:26,31 to make bread in the wilderness.
  • Jump down from the temple → John 2:18 to perform a Messianic sign in the temple.
  • Kingdoms of the World → John 6:15 to take the kingdom by force.

[edit] Cultural influences

The temptation of Christ has been a frequent subject in the art and literature of Christian cultures. It is largely the subject of John Milton's four-book epic, Paradise Regained. Fyodor Dostoyevsky's The Grand Inquisitor, part of the novel The Brothers Karamazov, features an extended treatment of the temptation of Christ. Andrew Lloyd Webber's Jesus Christ Superstar has brief references to Christ being tempted by mortal pleasures and Stephen Schwartz devotes a scene to it in Godspell. A stanza on the poem "O Operário em Construção" ("The Building Operary"), by Vinícius de Moraes, alludes to the temptation as well. Lastly, the film Jesus of Montreal has a parallel scene where the actor playing Jesus is taken to the top of a skyscraper and offered lucrative contracts by a lawyer if he will serve him.

[edit] Parallels in Other Religions

In Buddhist tradition, the god of Illusion tempts the Buddha in various ways, including urging him to transform the Himalayas into gold.

In Egyptian tradition, Horus fled to the desert and was tempted by Set, the Egyptian God of evil and chaos. Much like Jesus, Horus resisted the temptation (though not before being blinded in one eye).

Rejection of Jesus



Scholarship applications for Wikimania 2010 are now open. Apply now!
[Hide]
[Help us with translations!]

Rejection of Jesus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The New Testament records some rejection of Jesus in the course of his ministry. According to Alister McGrath, it seems that the only thing that distinguished Jewish Christians from 1st century Judaism was the additional belief that Jesus was the messiah[1]. For a comparison of the religions as they exist today, see Judaism and Christianity. Other non-canonical primary sources also record rejection of Jesus by many people.


Contents

[hide]

[edit] Hometown (Nazareth) rejection

This is an event recorded in the Synoptic Gospels, Mark 6:1-6, Matthew 13:54-58, Luke 4:16-30, where Jesus is strongly rejected by the people of his hometown, which Luke specifies as Nazareth. The core saying is also mentioned in John 4:44.

According to the Synoptics, shortly after Jesus has given his first set of teachings (and before John the Baptist is killed), Jesus returns to his hometown. On the sabbath, he is described as entering a synagogue and teaching. Luke states that Jesus performed a reading of scripture, then claimed he was the fulfilment of a prophecy at Isaiah 61:1-2, though the other synoptics do not provide this detail. All the synoptics describe the crowd as negatively questioning the origin of his teachings (see also Mark 3), and criticising him for being a lowly carpenter's son (Matthew) or himself a carpenter (Mark). In Matthew and Mark the crowd are also described as referring to Jesus as being the brother of James, Simon, Joseph, and Judas (in Mark they also mention but do not name Jesus's sisters), in a manner suggesting that the crowd regards them as just ordinary people, and criticising Jesus' quite different behaviour.

Jesus though is described as rebuking them (in variations of the same wording between each gospel)

a prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house - Matthew 13:57

Matthew states that Jesus didn't do many miracles there because of their lack of faith. Though this can be interpreted as Jesus being disheartened, or punishing them, it can also be interpreted as implying that the miracles of Jesus were more so possible when the crowd believed. This also opens the possibility that the miracles were illusions, or allegory, which by definition could only work if the crowd believed. In a similar passage Mark says that Jesus was not able to do any miracles there except for healing a few sick people. This passage in Luke 4 is a source of the saying Physician, heal thyself.

Luke, however, deviates from the other synoptics, and instead states that Jesus recounted a story about how during the time of Elijah only a Sidonian woman was saved, and how during the time of Elisha a Syrian was healed. This, according to Luke, causes the people to attack Jesus, and chase him to the top of a hill in order to try to throw Jesus off, though Jesus slips away. The historicity of Luke's version is easily questionable, since there is no "cliff face" in Nazareth[2], indicating the author of Luke was unfamiliar with Nazareth, and had never been there.

The negative view of Jesus' family may be related to the conflict between Paul of Tarsus and Jewish Christians:

"Wilson (1992)[3] has hypothesized that the negative relationship between Jesus and his family was placed in the Gospels (especially in the Gospel of Mark) to dissuade early Christians from following the Jesus cult that was administered by Jesus’ family. Wilson says: “…it would not be surprising if other parts of the church, particularly the Gentiles, liked telling stories about Jesus as a man who had no sympathy or support from his family (p. 86).” Butz (2005)[4] is more succinct: “…by the time Mark was writing in the late 60s, the Gentile churches outside of Israel were beginning to resent the authority wielded by Jerusalem where James and the apostles were leaders, thus providing the motive for Mark’s antifamily stance… (p. 44).” Other prominent scholars agree (e.g., Crosson, 1973;[5] Mack, 1988;[6] Painter. 1999)."[7][8]

See also Pauline Christianity and Paul of Tarsus and Judaism.

[edit] Rejection of the cornerstone

Matthew 21:42, Acts 4:11 and Mark 12:10 talk of Jesus as the stone which the builders (or husbandmen) rejected. 1Peter 2:7 discusses this rejection of Jesus. Theologians suggest that rejection does not diminish Jesus but rather diminishes those who reject him [9]. Rejection of the cornerstone is also referenced in Psalms 118:22 which has similar wording and is referenced by Supersessionism.

[edit] Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum

According to The Gospel of Matthew and The Gospel of Luke, the Galilean villages of Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum did not repent in response to Jesus's teaching, and as a result Jesus cursed them to hell (Matthew 11:23, Luke 10:13-15).

[edit] Many disciples leave

John 6:60-6:66 records "many disciples" leaving Jesus after he said that those who eat his body and drink his blood will remain in him and have eternal life (John 6:48-59, for interpretations of this passage, see Real Presence). In John 6:67-71 Jesus asks the Twelve if they also want to leave, but St. Peter responds that they have become believers.

[edit] Sanhedrin trial

After the incident in the Temple, Jesus was arrested and sent to the Sanhedrin who rejected his appeal and sent him to Pontius Pilate for final disposition. See also Responsibility for the death of Jesus.

[edit] Jewish rejection

Jesus was and continues to be rejected by many Jewish people as a failed Jewish Messiah claimant: Messianic Jews and other converts are the exceptions. Belief in the divinity of any human being, messiah or otherwise, is incompatible with Rabbinic Judaism:

  • "The point is this: that the whole Christology of the Church - the whole complex of doctrines about the Son of God who died on the Cross to save humanity from sin and death - is incompatible with Judaism, and indeed in discontinuity with the Hebraism that preceded it."[10]
  • "Aside from its belief in Jesus as the Messiah, Christianity has altered many of the most fundamental concepts of Judaism." (Kaplan, Aryeh)[11]
  • "...the doctrine of Christ was and will remain alien to Jewish religious thought."[12]
  • "For two thousand years, Jews rejected the claim that Jesus fulfilled the messianic prophecies of the Hebrew Bible, as well as the dogmatic claims about him made by the church fathers - that he was born of a virgin, the son of God, part of a divine Trinity, and was resurrected after his death. ... For two thousand years, a central wish of Christianity was to be the object of desire by Jews, whose conversion would demonstrate their acceptance that Jesus has fulfilled their own biblical prophecies."[13]
  • "No Jew accepts Jesus as the Messiah. When someone makes that faith commitment, they become Christian. It is not possible for someone to be both Christian and Jewish."[14]

The accounts of Jewish rejection of Jesus are prominently featured in the New Testament, especially John's gospel. For example, in 7:1-9 Jesus moves around in Galilee but avoids Judea, because "the Jews/Judeans" were looking for a chance to kill him. In 7:12-13 some said "he is a good man" whereas others said he deceives the people, but these were all "whispers", no one would speak publicly for "fear of the Jews/Judeans". Jewish rejection is also recorded in 7:45-52, 8:39-59, 10:22-42, and 12:36-43. 12:42 says many did believe, but they kept it private, for fear the Pharisees would exclude them from the Synagogue, see also Council of Jamnia.

An illustration from a medieval manuscript. Top: Jews (identifiable by rouelle) reject Jesus. Bottom: Jews are being burned at stake.

According to Jeremy Cohen,

"[e]ven before the Gospels appeared, the apostle Paul (or, more probably, one of his disciples) portrayed the Jews as Christ's killers[15] ... But though the New Testament clearly looks to the Jews as responsible for the death of Jesus, Paul and the evangelists did not yet condemn all Jews, by the very fact of their Jewishness, as murderers of God and his messiah. That condemnation, however, was soon to come."[16]


Emil Fackenheim wrote in 1987:

"... Except in relations with Christians, the Christ of Christianity is not a Jewish issue. There simply can be no dialogue worthy of the name unless Christians accept—nay, treasure—the fact that Jews through the two millennia of Christianity have had an agenda of their own. There can be no Jewish-Christian dialogue worthy of the name unless one Christian activity is abandoned, missions to the Jews. It must be abandoned, moreover, not as a temporary strategy but in principle, as a bimillennial theological mistake. The cost of that mistake in Christian love and Jewish blood one hesitates to contemplate."[17]