She and others developed an organization, Presbyterians Concerned About Jewish Christian Relations(PCJCR), which advocates against Messianic Judaism and Jewish evangelism, esp. within the Presbyterian tradition. This organization has published two articles by Cynthia Jarvis and William Harter on their website , which critiques the evangelization of Jews in general and the Messianic Jewish movement in particular.

The PCJCR is advocating that the PC(USA) abandon support of Messianic Jewish congregations and Jewish evangelism. This article is a simple attempt to analyze the PCJCR’s arguments for Presbyterians within the PC(USA) and compare them against Scripture. When the teaching of Scripture are shown, we will see that the PCJCR is making unbiblical arguments. Their selective and incorrect views of Paul’s discourse about the Jewish people in Romans have made it necessary that I do some exegesis of that portion of Scripture myself. Many of their mistakes are due to ignoring or avoiding the contexts of the passages they quote, which actually contradict how they use them.

Cynthia Jarvis’ Article

Cynthia Jarvis argues in her article against evangelizing Jewish people. Jarvis argues that the underlying theological conviction in approving Avodat Yisrael was “short of confession of Jesus as the Christ, Israel is without hope in this world and the world to come. Much can be found in the New Testament and in Christian doctrine to support that conviction.”

Jarvis correctly notes that the historical relationship between Jews and Christians has gone awry. She claims that, in the extreme, this has led to a theological justification of the holocaust. And it has kept the church from an honest examination of our own flawed relationship with God.

Jarvis takes note of the fact that Paul has claimed in Romans 9 that God has not rejected Israel. Our covenant with God does not make the first covenant null and void. While Rev. Jarvis notes that God has made Jews an ememy of the gospel for our sake in regards to election they are loved. Jarvis writes: “In other words, God does not go back on God’s promises and the first covenant holds forever.”

Our common hope then becomes, according to Paul, that in the fullness of God’s time, we will all be branches growing out of one common root of faith in the Living God-Gentiles being the wild olvie shoot grafted on through Christ and Israel being a natural branch… We are left, therefore, in the meantime to sort out our relationship with the firstborn sibling of this God-the same God we know in Jesus Christ-who keeps covenant.

Jarvis then encourages us to leave God’s relationship with Israel to God. She says “I can no longer quietly accept my fellow Christian’s conviction that the translation of God’s revelation into the Christian religion gives us a reason to judge as inadequate the relationship of Israel with God.”

It is clear from her article that Jarvis believes that Jews do not need to believe in Jesus. From a previous interview with her, I know she believes that Jews do not have to believe in Jesus, which confirms and clarifies her comments in her article. Also in our interview, Jarvis would not claim that even Gentiles needed to believe in Jesus, since she claims she is not privy to other arrangements they may have.

As Jarvis mentioned, there are numerous passages in the New Testament which tell us that it is necessary to confess Jesus as Lord. John 14:6 comes to mind, but there are several others. Jarvis is either ignoring or forgetting one simple thing: context! Who were these passages given to? Who was Jesus talking to? When Jesus said one must believe in Him, He was talking to Jews! How on earth can Jarvis’ critique be correct in light of this?

Second, Jarvis mentions that God’s covenant with the Jews is still in effect. While Paul in Romans has a lot to tell us about the relationship of Jew and Gentile to the covenant of Abraham, I would assume Jarvis would agree that the Mosaic covenant is still in affect with the Jewish people (one wonders what she thinks about certain elements of the ceremonial law and what that would do to interfaith relations). In Deuteronomy 18, Moses prophecies concerning Jesus and says that a prophet will come and speak the words of God. And God will command that His people listen to His words. So by the Mosaic covenant, Jews still must obey and listen to Jesus’ words.

William Harter’s Article

Harter, in his article, takes it upon himself to critique the Messianic Jewish movement in general. His first point of contention with the movement is that using the term “Messianic Jewish” is distressing and demeaning to Jews because messianism is central to Jewish and Christian self-understanding.

Harter thinks this is a symptom of a more general theological confusion which lies at the heart of the movement. When a Jewish person chooses to follow Jesus, that person has relinquished Judaism “as Jews understand it.” Harter follows the standard Jewish position that if a Jew believes in Jesus that person is no longer a Jew. “That person is now a Christian of Jewish antecedants.” He goes on to say that the fact “that some Presbyterians may choose to continue to classify that person as Jewish means that we – as Presbyterian Christians – are telling Jews how they should define themselves.”

Harter echos Jarvis when he states that the Jewish people are still participants in a “vital, continuing covenant,” the Abrahamic covenant, which continues to this day. Jews have not been superseded by Christians. According to Harter, Paul makes this clear in Romans 9:4-5 and Romans 11:1-2. Later, Harter continues to assume that Jews are already in good standing with God because of the nature of their covenants.

Harter assumes that if you say Jews must believe in Jesus you are saying the promises given by God to the Hebrews have been abrogated or cancelled. Harter is showing his ignorance here of the larger Christian world. There is a huge segment of the believing Christian world, both Messianic Jewish and Gentile, which believes that the Abrahamic covenant is irrevocable and that Jews still need to believe in Jesus. There are also more nuanced positions which does not entertain either.

Harter claims this debate is not a liberal/conservative issue. I would disagree. “Liberalism” is a nice way of saying “unbelief.” And this issue hinges around unbelief about the gospel. Harter does correctly assert that this topic revolves around “profound issues of biblical interpretation.” It is my contention that only an incredibly faulty or unbelieving exegesis could come to Harter’s conclusion.

When reading Harter and Jarvis, one can scarcely believe that they have read the New Testament. Beyond ignoring the context of Romans, one wonders if they have actually read the book of Acts. In the Acts of the Apostles, it is assumed that when a Jewish person believes in Jesus they are still a Jew. Paul still identifies himself as a Jew. How does believing in the Jewish Messiah make one not Jewish? The Council of Jerusalem was a debate over whether Gentile converts had to become Jews.

When Jarvis echoed similar thoughts in our interview, I brought up the book of Acts for her consideration. I wondered why if the debate was about being Gentile and Christian two thousand years ago is that debate reversed today. To her credit, Jarvis admitted she hadn’t considered that. I hope Harter would say the same.

In the book of Acts, we also see Paul trying to convert Jews in the synagogue. This demonstrates that Harter’s exegesis of Romans is completely off-base. Paul knows Jews need Jesus. Peter was the apostle to whom? To the Jewish people!

And, frankly, if God created the Jewish people through the Abrahamic covenant, God gets to define who a Jew is or is not. Not anyone else, even Jewish people. Jewish people, even today, disagree about how to define who is Jewish and who is not. Even if Harter would like to rely on the Talmud, it states that an apostate is still considered a Jewish person (Sifra on Leviticus 1:2; Tossafot, Sanhedrin 72b).

Romans 9-11

Paul in Romans 9-11 sets out the most detailed explanation of the relationship between Israel, the Church, and the gospel. We will now turn our attention to these passages and clearly demonstrate that Harter’s and Jarvis’ understanding of this section of Scripture is lacking. Indeed, this passage actually contradicts their understanding, and if properly understood, would necessitate the PCJCR to dissolve.

Background:

In Romans, Paul is trying to explain to his readers that there is no difference between Jew and Gentile in relation to gospel. Paul states: I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. (Rom. 1:16) In Romans, Paul affirms that both Jew and Gentile are under sin, and righteousness comes through faith in Jesus (Rom. 3:9, 21-22). Faith in Jesus is the way we are made right in God’s sight and it is the same for both Jews and Gentiles (Rom. 3:29-31; Gal. 2:15-16).

In Romans 8, Paul extols the faithfulness of God. And meditating on this faithfulness brings up an important topic. If God is faithful and is promised to be faithful to Christians, what about the people of Israel? Didn’t God have promises with Israel as well? Most of the Jewish people, even in Paul’s day, did not believe in Jesus. Did God’s promises fail?

Chapter 9

1 I speak the truth in Christ — I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit — 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel.

Before we continue, let’s notice what is going in the beginning of this section. Paul has unceasing anguish and great sorrow. Why? Because Israel’s covenants are still valid and they are in right-standing before God? Of course not.

Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen!

Jarvis and Harter believe this passage means that God’s covenants with Abraham and Moses will allow Jews to be saved regardless of whether they have faith in Jesus. We must notice Paul is not contradicting his teachings from earlier in the same book. The context of verses 1-4a wouldn’t allow for this interpretation either. But what is the text actually saying? The people of Israel have seen God’s glory, they have covenants with God, His promises, and most importantly—the Jewish people gave us the Messiah.

6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the natural children who are God’s childre, but it is the children of the promise who regarded as Abrham’s offspring. 9 For this was how the promise was stated: “At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son.”

If I may give a Presbyterian paraphrase: not all of Calvin’s descendants are Calvin’s children. Not everyone who is in the visible church is in the invisible church. Did God’s word to the Jewish people fail? No. Because not everyone who is in the covenant community is elect. The promises aren’t for everyone who is in the covenant. Look no farther than Abraham himself. The promises are for Isaac, not Ishmael. The promises aren’t for everyone and being in the covenant community does indeed have value. You get to hear the Word and the promises. But that doesn’t mean, apart from faith, the promises are for you.

Paul continues:

30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works They stumbled over the “stumbling stone.” 33 As it is written: “See I lay in Zion a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.”

Would the PCJCR endorse this line of thinking? Of course not. Israel has not obtained righteousness? This is a scandal to interfaith dialogue. Jesus, the chief cornerstone is also the stumbling stone. If we want to dialogue, let’s dialogue about the stumbling stone.

10:1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved.

Why would Paul be praying for Jewish people to be saved? Because unbelieving Jews need to be saved. At this point on really must ask the PCJCR a question: Do you reject Scripture or your current position?

Later Paul writes:

11:1 I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah – how he appealed to God against Israel: “Lord, they have killed your prophet and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill Me”? So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace.

Those opposed to Jewish evangelism wish to say that the Jewish people haven’t been rejected by God. And with that, we can agree, but for vastly different reasons. The biblical answer is that God has shown that He hasn’t rejected the Jewish people because today there is a remnant of Jewish believers in Jesus. Irony of ironies! Messianic Jews prove one thing the PCJCR would like to maintain.

11 Again I ask: did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!

Notice the great tragedy of those who oppose the gospel going to Jews. The lostness of Jewish people means that Gentiles, like me, have received the gospel. It breaks my heart and shows us a glimpse of the unsearchable mysteries of God. If God has given us the gospel through the Jewish people and through their rejection of the gospel, should we not notice the unmitigated gall of Christians withholding the gospel to those who brought them the gospel originally.

But more than that, withholding the gospel hurts not just them, it hurts us as well. How much greater riches will their fullness bring? If those of the PCJCR have their way, we may never know.

13 I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry 14 in the hope that I may somehow arose my own people to envy and save some of them. 15 For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16 If the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy, so are the branches.

17 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not boast over those branches. If you do consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.” 20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.

When I interviewed Cynthia Jarvis, I asked about this section. I asked her who the broken off branches were. She didn’t know. However, the exegesis at this point is not difficult. Unbelieving Jewish people are no longer part of the olive tree, which represents the covenant community which receives God’s saving grace.

Take head Presbyterians. Presbyterians have an incredible heritage. Augustine to Luther and Calvin. From Calvin and Knox, we have a rich theological heritage which we can be proud of. We are spiritually descended from those who died for the faith and wrote those great confessions we are ordained to uphold. But if this passage teaches us anything, it teaches us that if we have unbelief we, too, will be broken off and thrown out of the covenant community.

25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be saved …

While this passage has had a few interpretations, I believe, along with some older Reformed exegesis, it is saying that in the future Israel will turn en masse to Jesus. What it is not saying: all Israel will be saved regardless of whether or not they do or do not have faith in Jesus. Again, Paul is not contradicting himself.

Summary

In this day of interfaith dialogue, believing that people are lost is a modern scandal. In fact, Gentiles need Jesus too. Many today are trying to be nicer than God Himself. Listen to the words of Scripture: “Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! “

Some think it is arrogant and presumptuous to say that one needs to believe in Jesus in order to obtain eternal life. If so, Jesus was incredibly arrogant and presumptuous. Paul was incredibly arrogant and presumptuous. But our standard for doctrine is not whether we appear to be arrogant and presumptuous. Our standard is truth.

What is arrogant is to withhold the gospel from Jewish people and to say Jewish believers are not Jewish any more. To say that Jewish believers are not Jewish is to deny the Jewishness of our faith. To deny the Jewishness of our faith is to deny the truthfulness of our own faith.

We do not proclaim the need for Jesus because we have some perverse desire to have people think like we do (but I do confess I want people to think like I do). We proclaim this message because it is the only way of escape. If it did not matter, we would not want to rock the interfaith boat either. But it does matter. And getting this matter wrong has eternal consequences.

In this matter, my conscience is bound by Scripture and gratefulness. I cannot help but be thankful that God through His sovereign plan gave us the gospel through the Jewish people. How can I who have received such an immeasurably great gift turn around and withhold it from others, esp. the Jewish people? How can the branch hate the root?

But more simply, how can Presbyterians read Scripture and not believe in the necessity of belief in Jesus for both Jew and Gentile? That is a great mystery.

Further Reading:
Presbyterians Concerned About Jewish Christian Relations
Original Philadelphia Inquirer Article About Avodat Yisrael (registration required)
Geoff Robinson’s Avodat Yisrael Research
Towards a Reformed Israelology
Not Replacement, Expansion! Reformed Comments on the Jewish People