^[1] All Scripture translations, unless otherwise noted, are from The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016).

^[2] In this article, we follow the convention of using the term “antisemitism” rather than “anti-Semitism.” Jewish publication authorities differ on whether there should be a hyphen or not. We follow the trend in modern scholarship of dropping the hyphen, on the basis that there is no such thing as “Semitism” that can be opposed.

^[3] Some modern scholars see a difference between antisemitism (race-based opposition to Jews that emerged in the nineteenth century) and anti-Judaism (practice- and idea-based opposition that thrived in Christendom in much earlier times). This may be a helpful distinction, but in practice the felt effects upon Jewish people are often the same under both: stereotypes, personal hostility, social distancing, coercion, and violence. Thus, in this article, we are retaining the more commonly known word, antisemitism, and defining it with a broad meaning that includes both race-based and ideological opposition that results in hatred and coercion. This kind of wider definition is employed by the Anti-Defamation League, which defines antisemitism as “the belief or behavior hostile toward Jews just because they are Jewish. It may take the form of religious teachings that proclaim the inferiority of Jews, for instance, or political efforts to isolate, oppress, or otherwise injure them. It may also include prejudiced or stereotyped views about Jews.” For a helpful discussion on how to apply “antisemitism” and “anti-Judaism” to conversations about the New Testament, see Terence L. Donaldson, Jews and Anti-Judaism in the New Testament: Decision Points and Divergent Interpretations (London; Waco, TX: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge; Baylor University Press, 2010), 13–20.

^[4] David Berger, “Jewish-Christian Relations,” in Persecution, Polemic, and Dialogue (Brighton, MA: Academic Studies Press, 2010), 351.

^[5] These scholars have responded with a range of different attitudes toward the New Testament’s passages on Jewish people. For an excellent overview of the issues related to the New Testament and antisemitism, see Terence L. Donaldson, Jews and Anti-Judaism in the New Testament: Decision Points and Divergent Interpretations. (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2010).

^[6] Michael J. Cook, Modern Jews Engage the New Testament (Woodstock, VT: Jewish Lights Publishing, 2008), 17.

^[7] Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, eds., The Jewish Annotated New Testament, 2^nd ed. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2017) xiv.

^[8] Cook, Modern Jews, xiii.

^[9] See the Jewish Annotated New Testament.

^[10] Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, eds., The Jewish Annotated New Testament, 2^nd ed. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2017) xi–xii.

^[11] Of course, there are exceptions to this rule, such as the questionable authenticity of the end of Mark (Mark 16:9–20), the Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7–8), or John 8. Our doubts about these passages are grounded in the evidence of the ancient manuscripts themselves. This is to be distinguished from strategies that conjecture forgery/redaction/inauthenticity of passages from which we have strong manuscript evidence.

^[12] D. A. Hagner, “Anti-Semitism,” ed. Joel B. Green, Jeannine K. Brown, and Nicholas Perrin, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, Second Edition (Downers Grove, IL; Nottingham, England: IVP Academic; IVP, 2013), 19.

^[13] “True enough, there is not now, and never has been, a single Judaism. There have been only Judaisms, each with its distinctive system and new beginning, all resorting to available antecedents and claiming they are precedents, but in fact none with a history prior to its birth.” Calvin Goldscheider and Jacob Neusner, eds., Social Foundations of Judaism (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2004), 7. See also Jacob Neusner, From Politics to Piety: The Emergence of Pharisaic Judaism (New York: Ktav, 1978).

^[14] Luke Timothy Johnson, “The New Testament’s Anti-Jewish Slander and the Conventions of Ancient Polemic,” in Contested Issues in Christian Origins and the New Testament: Collected Essays (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2013), 524.

^[15] E.g., Sirach 50:25–26, Jubilees 30:5–6, Antiquities 20.118–21, John 4. See H. G. M. Williamson and Craig A. Evans, “Samaritans,” Dictionary of New Testament Background: A Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 1056.

^[16] Craig A. Evans, To See and Not Perceive: Isaiah 6.9–10 in Early Jewish and Christian Interpretation, vol. 64, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989), 124.

^[17] For example, 1QS 2.4–10: “The Levites in turn shall curse all those foreordained to ⁵Belial. They shall respond, ‘May you be damned in return for all your wicked, guilty deeds. May the ⁶God of terror give you over to implacable avengers; may He visit your offspring with destruction at the hands of those who recompense ⁷evil with evil. May you be damned without mercy in return for your dark deeds, an object of wrath ⁸licked by eternal flame, surrounded by utter darkness. May God have no mercy upon you when you cry out, nor forgive so as to atone for your sins. ⁹May He lift up His furious countenance upon you for vengeance. May you never find peace through the appeal of any intercessor.’ ¹⁰All the initiates into the Covenant shall respond to the blessers and cursers, ‘Amen, amen.’” Michael O. Wise, Martin G. Abegg Jr., and Edward M. Cook, The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation (New York: HarperOne, 2005), 118.

^[18] Luke Timothy Johnson, “The New Testament’s Anti-Jewish Slander,” 535.

^[19] m. Sanhedrin 10:1 in Jacob Neusner, The Mishnah: A New Translation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1988), 604.

^[20] Hershey H. Friedman, “Talmudic Arguments: The Use of Insults, Reprimands, Rebukes and Curses as Part of the Disputation Process,” SSRN Scholarly Paper (Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network, June 28, 2016), https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2801821.

^[21] Referring to Elisha ben Abuyah, who was renamed “Aher,” meaning “Other,” for disagreeing with the sages.

^[22] Luke Timothy Johnson, “The New Testament’s Anti-Jewish Slander and the Conventions of Ancient Polemic,” 526. He concludes his essay (p. 539) with further explanation: “If by definition sophists are hypocritical, and philosophers of all opposing schools are hypocritical, and philosophers in general are hypocritical, and Alexandrian pagans are hypocritical, and Apion is a hypocrite, are we really surprised to find scribes and Pharisees called hypocrites? If sophists are by definition blind, and Apion is blind, and Alexandrian pagans are blind, and Zealots are blind, and men of the pit are blind, should we be shocked to see scribes and Pharisees called “blind guides” by Matthew and non-messianists called “blinded by the god of the world” by Paul? If Socrates was suspect because of his “demon” and sophists are “evil-spirited” and the brothers of Joseph are driven by evil spirits, and all dwellers on earth have evil spirits and the sons of the pit are children of Belial, should we be surprised to find that Samaritans have demons, or that Jesus has a demon, or that his opponents have the devil as their father, or that when he betrays Jesus, Judas is said to have Satan enter his heart?”

^[23] Luke Timothy Johnson, “The New Testament’s Anti-Jewish Slander,” 539.

^[24] Just a few representative examples writing about this benediction include Adele Reinhartz, Cast Out of the Covenant : Jews and Anti-Judaism in the Gospel of John (Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2018); Edward W. Klink, III., “Expulsion from the Synagogue? Rethinking a Johannine Anachronism,” Tyndale Bulletin 59, no. 1 (2008): 99–118; Joel Marcus, “Birkat Ha-Minim Revisited,” New Testament Studies 55, no. 4 (October 2009): 523–51; Philip L Mayo, “The Role of the Birkath Haminim in Early Jewish-Christian Relations: A Reexamination of the Evidence,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 16, no. 2 (2006): 325–43; Uri Ehrlich and Ruth Langer, “The Earliest Texts of the Birkat Haminim,” Hebrew Union College Annual 76 (2005): 63–112; David Instone-Brewer, “The Eighteen Benedictions and the Minim before 70 CE,” The Journal of Theological Studies 54, no. 1 (April 2003): 25–44; Pieter W. van der Horst, “The Birkat Ha-Minim in Recent Research,” The Expository Times 105, no. 12 (September 1994): 363–68; S. J. Joubert, “A Bone of Contention in Recent Scholarship: The ‘Birkat Ha-Minim’ and the Separation of Church and Synagogue in the First Century AD,” Neotestamentica 27, no. 2 (1993): 351–63; William Horbury, “The Benediction of the Minim and Early Jewish-Christian Controversy,” Journal of Theological Studies 33, no. 1 (April 1982): 19–61; Reuven Kimelman, “Birkat Ha-Minim and the Lack of Evidence for an Anti-Christian Jewish Prayer in Late Antiquity,” in Jewish and Christian Self-Definition (Volume 2): Aspects of Judaism in the Greco-Roman Period, ed. E. P. Sanders, 1^st ed., vol. 2 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981), 226–44; J. Louis Martyn, History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel (New York : Harper & Row, 1968).

^[25] There is very little evidence of Gentile Christian knowledge of the Mishnah or Talmud until the Middle Ages, but some of the few Christians who interacted with Jews knew that it existed. Eusebius (fourth century) knew about “unwritten tradition” (deuterosis, δευτέρωσις=Mishnah) within Judaism (Ecclesiastical History 4.22.7, Preparation for the Gospel 11.5, 12.4), as well as, perhaps, the Didascalia’s (third century) references to deuterosis.

^[26] Koine Greek, the language of the New Testament, was the lingua franca of the first century, making the New Testament accessible to many. Within a few centuries, the New Testament was translated into other major languages of the nations, including Latin and Syriac (second century), Coptic (third century), and many others. See “Versions, Ancient,” David Noel Freedman, ed., The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 6:787–813.

^[27] Luke Timothy Johnson, “The New Testament’s Anti-Jewish Slander,” 539.

^[28] James D.G. Dunn, “The Question of Anti-semitism in the New Testament Writings of the Period,” edited by James D.G. Dunn, in Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999) 210.

^[29] Jewish Publication Society, Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1985).

^[30] Dunn writes, “[I]t is questionable whether hostility shown against one faction within Judaism should be described as anti-semitism rather than, say, factional polemic. Otherwise the denunciation of the national cult by biblical prophet, by the Psalms of Solomon or by Qumran covenanters would have to be regarded equally as anti-semitic.” Dunn, “The Question of Anti-semitism in the New Testament,” 193. Hagner writes: “At first, disagreements between the Jews who believed in Jesus and those who did not constituted an intramural argument: Jews arguing with Jews. This certainly was the case within the NT itself, where criticism of Judaism can no more be labeled as anti-Semitism than can the prophets’ denunciations of Israel.” D. A. Hagner, “Anti-Semitism,” ed. Joel B. Green, Jeannine K. Brown, and Nicholas Perrin, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, Second Edition (Downers Grove, IL; Nottingham, England: IVP Academic; IVP, 2013), 19.

^[31] The criterion of embarrassment states that a historical account that is willing to bring embarrassment upon the author is likely a trustworthy account that is telling the full story, rather than hiding the unflattering parts. Some ancient writers wrote only positive and flattering accounts of their actions, such as Sennacherib’s Annals as preserved in the Taylor Prism. The Assyrian King (reigned 704–681 BCE) chronicled his conquests throughout the Middle East, including all the cities and kings that fell into his hand. However, when Sennacherib described his campaigns in Israel, he neglected to mention his failure to capture Jerusalem and King Hezekiah (cf. 2 Kings 18, Isaiah 36, Isaiah 37, 2 Chronicles 32). Instead of admitting (embarrassingly) that he was unable to conquer the city, the Assyrian king spun the failure positively: “Like a bird in a cage in his royal city Jerusalem, I shut [Hezekiah] up.” “The Stones Cry Out,” Bible and Spade 0 (Autumn 1987): 28–29.

^[32] O. H. Steck, Israel Und Das Gewaltsame Geschick Der Propheten: Untersuchungen Zur Überlieferung Des Deuteronomistischen Geschichtsbildes Im Alten Testament, Spätjudentum Und Urchristentum. Vol. 23. Wissenschaftliche Monographien Zum Alten Und Neuen Testament. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967.

^[33] Not to be confused with “the Deuteronomistic history,” which is a modern critical theory about the composition of Deuteronomy and other books of the Tanakh by a professional scribal class many years after their purported events.

^[34] These six points were first articulated by Steck. See also James M. Scott, “Paul’s Use of Deuteronomic Tradition,” pages 647–50. The sixth point appears to be reversed in Ezekiel 36:24–29, so the framework is not rigid.

^[35] James M. Scott, “Paul’s Use of Deuteronomic Tradition,” Journal of Biblical Literature 112 (1993): 647–650. David P. Moessner, “Luke 9:1–50: Luke’s Preview of the Journey of the Prophet like Moses of Deuteronomy,” Journal of Biblical Literature 102 (1983).

^[36] Dead Sea Scroll 4Q398 (also known as 4QMMT) states, “[W]e are aware that part of the blessings and curses have occurred that are written in the b[ook of Mos]es. And this is the end of days, when they will return in Israel to the L[aw …] and not turn bac[k].” Florentino Garcı́a Martı́nez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Leiden; New York: Brill, 1997–1998), 2:803.

^[37] Dead Sea Scroll 4Q398 (also known as 4QMMT) states, “[W]e are aware that part of the blessings and curses have occurred that are written in the b[ook of Mos]es. And this is the end of days, when they will return in Israel to the L[aw …] and not turn bac[k].” Florentino Garcı́a Martı́nez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Leiden; New York: Brill, 1997–1998), 2:803.

^[38] Neither can an appeal to “the people” be seen as Matthew’s technical term for “the entire nation of Israel,” somehow construed from Matthew 27:64. Matthew includes several positive usages of the word “people” (laos, λαός) when referring to Israel (1:21, 2:6, 4:16, 4:23, 26:5). We would not expect Matthew to say that Jesus will save the “entire nation of Israel” (laos) from her sins (Matt. 1:21) if the “entire nation of Israel” (laos) is cursed (27:25). In both cases, “people” refers to a subset of Jews, all of whom are within the people of God by virtue of the covenant with Abraham.

^[39] Craig Blomberg, Matthew, vol. 22, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 414; D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Matthew–Mark (Revised Edition), ed. Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland, vol. 9 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 638–639; Michael L. Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus: General and Historical Objections., vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000), 155.

^[40] Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, The Jewish Annotated New Testament, 2^nd ed. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2017) xi–xii.

^[41] The sages call for blood being upon the heads of those who:

·        Drink water from rivers or pools directly or with the hand (b. Avodah Zerah 12b)

·        Go into public before the rooster crows (b. Yoma 21b)

·        Eat peeled garlic (because it has an evil spirit), eat a peeled onion, drink diluted liquids that were left standing overnight, sleep in a graveyard, or clip one’s nails and throw them into the public domain (b. Niddah 17a)

·        Pass between two palm trees (b. Pesachim 111a)

^[42] Craig Blomberg, Matthew, 414.

^[43] Against the Sadducees, he accepted the existence of angels (Matt. 13:41, 16:27) and the resurrection of the dead (Matt. 22:23–33). Against the Essenes, who were likely those present at Qumran, and the Samaritans, Yeshua accepted Jerusalem’s institutions (temple, sacrifices, priesthood) and worked within them (John 4:19–22).

^[44] Jesus only criticized the Pharisees’ gaudy use of these instruments, making them more visible than necessary.

^[45] b. Yebamot 49b; b. Sanhedrin 103b; Josephus Antiquities 10.38; Lives of the Prophets 1:1; Martyrdom of Isaiah; Ascension of Isaiah 5.1; Tertullian Scorpiace 8.

^[46] Louis Ginzberg, Henrietta Szold, and Paul Radin, Legends of the Jews, 2nd ed. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2003), 1068.

^[47] Lives of the Prophets 2.1; 4 Baruch 9.28–32; Tertullian Scorpiace 8

^[48] We have two diverging accounts: Ezekiel was killed by the ruler of his people (Lives of the Prophets 3) or by his people (Apocalypse of Paul 49).

^[49] Amos was killed by Amaziah (Lives of the Prophets 7) or by King Uzziah (Ginzburg, Legends of the Jews, Chapter XX) after being struck on the head.

^[50] Quotations from the Babylonian Talmud are from Jacob Neusner, The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2011).

^[51] Michael J. Cook, “Foreword.” In David L. Turner, Israel’s Last Prophet: Jesus and the Jewish Leaders in Matthew 23 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2015).

^[52] For a fuller discussion of the passages in this paragraph, see Stephen Motyer, Your Father the Devil?: A New Approach to John and “The Jews” (Colorado Springs, CO: Paternoster, 1997), 79–87.

^[53] Michael J. Cook, Modern Jews Engage the New Testament, 220.

^[54] Ibid., 219.

^[55] Ibid., 219. See also John T. Townsend, “The Gospel of John and the Jews,” in Antisemitism and the Foundations of Christianity, Edited by Alan Davies (New York, NT: 1979), 74.

^[56] Reinhartz writes, “Of the 196 New Testament occurrences of hoi Ioudaioi, 70 occur in the Fourth Gospel. Only 4:22, in which Jesus proclaims that ‘salvation is from the Jews,’ is unambiguously positive. A number of the occurrences are entirely neutral and descriptive. In this category are included the references to Jewish festivals (2:13; 5:1; 6:4; 7:2; 11:55), Jewish practices (2:6; 19:40), and to the Jews as a social, political, or ethnic group (3:1; 18:20, 33; 19:19–21). In John 4, the term functions to distinguish Jews from another group, namely, the Samaritans (John 4:9). Another group of passages portray the Jews as wavering between belief in Jesus and non-belief. In some passages the choice is ultimately for nonbelief (2:18–20; 6:41–52; 10:19, 24); elsewhere the crowds are divided (7:11–15, 35); occasionally their choice is unequivocally for Jesus (11:36, 45; 12:9; 13:33). The rest are negative, including passages that portray Jews as unequivocally unbelieving and/or as actively seeking to harm or kill him.” Adele Reinhartz, “John, Gospel Of,” ed. John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow, The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010), 818.

^[57] Adele Reinhartz, “The Gospel According to John,” in The Jewish Annotated New Testament, 172.

^[58] John 1:47, 49; 12:13. We would add John 1:31 to this list.

^[59] Michael J. Cook, Modern Jews Engage the New Testament, 225.

^[60] Ibid., 226.

^[61] Philip S. Alexander, “‘The Parting of the Ways’ from the Perspective of Rabbinic Judaism,” in James D. G. Dunn (ed.), Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways A.D. 70 to 135, WUNT 66 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1992), 19.

^[62] The Cairo Genizah is a collection of thousands of Jewish manuscripts found in the storeroom of a synagogue in Old Cairo, Egypt.

^[63] Epiphanius (Refutation 29.9.2) writes, “Not only do Jewish people bear hatred against [Jewish believers in Jesus]; they even stand up at dawn, at midday, and toward evening, three times a day when they recite their prayers in the synagogues, and curse and anathematize them—saying three times a day, “God curse the Nazoraeans.” Epiphanius, The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Book I, trans. Frank Williams, 2nd Revised, Expanded ed. (Leiden; Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2008), 130. For Jerome, see Commentary on Isaiah 2.51, 13.21, 14.17.

^[64] Justin Dialogue with Trypho 47, 96, cf. 95, 108, 123, 133.

^[65] Justin Dialogue 17, 108.

^[66] See chapters 14–16 in Oskar Skarsaune and Reidar Hvalvik, eds., Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007).

^[67] During the post-Babylonian-exile period, the term “Jew” was used to describe anyone descended from Jacob, irrespective of tribal affiliation. For canonical evidence of this, see the usage of the term in the post-exilic books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther.

^[68] J. A. Weatherly, “Anti-Semitism,” ed. Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 15.

^[69] Michael J. Cook, Modern Jews Engage the New Testament, 226.

^[70] Heinz Schreckenberg, The Jews in Christian Art: An Illustrated History (New York: Continuum Intl Pub Group, 1997).

^[71] There are significant questions about the meaning of this verse in Hebrew. Translations often differ. However, Targum Onkelos, the most respected ancient rabbinic translation, says, “They have corrupted themselves, the children no longer belong to Him.” Kevin Cathcart, Michael Maher, and Martin McNamara, eds., The Aramaic Bible: The Targum Onqelos to Deuteronomy, trans. Bernard Grossfeld, vol. 9 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1990), Dt. 32:5.

^[72] Sifrei Deuteronomy 96.9 includes a rabbinic discussion about two aspects of sonship, one of which Israel always has, and one which can be lost due to sinful conduct. Shraga Silverstein, “Sifrei Devarim,” Sefaria, n.d., https://www.sefaria.org/Sifrei_Devarim.96.9?lang=en&with=Translations&lang2=en.

^[73] Joseph Telushkin, A Code of Jewish Ethics: Volume 1: You Shall Be Holy (city: Harmony, 2006) Kindle location 462.

^[74] Steven Motyer, “Editorial: Is John’s Gospel Anti-Semitic?” Themelios 23, no. 2 (1998): 3.

^[75] The devil is called by various names in Jewish literature: Satan, Belial/Beliar, Mastema, Azazel, Sammael. For example, Jubilees 1:20: “And do not let the spirit of Beliar rule over them to accuse them before you and ensnare them from every path of righteousness so that they might be destroyed from before your face.” See also B. Qiddushin 81b and Werner Foerster, “Διαβάλλω, Διάβολος,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–74).

^[76] Catholics see Peter as the first bishop of Rome, making him the first Pope. This highly controversial assertion can overshadow Peter’s Jewishness.

^[77] For evidence of synagogues catering to the needs of Greek-speaking Jews who traveled to Jerusalem from the Diaspora, including hostel services, see Paul Barnett, The Birth of Christianity: The First Twenty Years, vol. 1, After Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 19–20. See also Acts 6:9, which mentions synagogues made up of Jews from various Diaspora regions.

^[78] There is no punctuation in the original Greek of this verse. The comma has been added to this verse by the translators of this passage (the English Standard Version). The addition of this comma can lead one to believe that Paul was thinking about all Jews, rather than the specific subset of Jewish people who were instrumentally responsible for his death.

^[79] David Fox Sandmel, “1 Thessalonians” in The Jewish Annotated New Testament, 374.

^[80] Samuel Sandmel, A Jewish Understanding of the New Testament, 83. Michael J. Cook, Modern Jews Engage the New Testament (Woodstock, VT: Jewish Lights Publishing, 2008), 322.

^[81] For a fuller treatment of these themes, see James M. Scott, “Paul’s Use of Deuteronomic Tradition,” Journal of Biblical Literature 112 (1993): 659–65.

^[82] Take note the anger with which Moses responded to Israel’s rebellion in Numbers 20:10–11.

^[83] James M. Scott, “Paul’s Use of Deuteronomic Tradition,” Journal of Biblical Literature 112 (1993): 656.

^[84] An unfortunate contemporary example is found here: “People were not Jews if their Jewishness was no more than outward appearance. Going through the ceremonial activities of Judaism did not make a person a Jew. And real circumcision was not that which was merely external and physical. A person was a Jew only if he or she was one inwardly.” Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 102.

^[85] We are using the word “American” in its colloquial usage: United States citizens. Yes, we are aware that Canada, Central America, and South America exist and that their citizens have rights to be called “Americans” as well. However, this is not the common connotation of the word.

^[86] Hence many exegetes conclude that the verse should be read as referring to true Jews or ideal Jews who are both Jewish by birth and Jewish in heart, cf. Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 174. Although he gives credence to the idea that Gentiles may be “inward Jews,” Messianic Jewish scholar David Stern says that the p’shat (plain) reading of the text “is that the only real Jew is the born Jew who has been born again by trusting in Yeshua the Messiah, for only he lives up to what the name ‘Jew,’ conferred on him at birth and confirmed by physical circumcision, implies and demands.” David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary: A Companion Volume to the Jewish New Testament, electronic ed. (Clarksville: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1996), Ro 2:28. Cf. Colin G. Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, ed. D. A. Carson, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company; Apollos, 2012), 155.

^[87] Rom 9:24; 1 Cor. 9:20; 10:32; 2 Cor. 11:24. Also note Romans 4:12, which describes how Jewish believers in Jesus have Abraham as their father for two reasons: circumcision (heritage) and walking in Abraham’s footsteps (faith).

^[88] Mark D. Nanos, “Commentary on Romans 2:29,” in The Jewish Annotated New Testament, second ed., 292.

^[89] Mark D. Nanos, “Commentary on Romans 2:29,” 291.

^[90] Ronald Trail’s Exegetical Summary identifies fourteen abbreviated Protestant commentaries that identify the group as ethnic Jews: Alf, BNTC, EC, ICC, LD, Lns, NIC, NIGTC, NTC, Sw, TH, TNTC, Wal, WBC. Ronald Trail, An Exegetical Summary of Revelation 1–11, 2nd ed. (Dallas, TX: SIL International, 2008), 56–57. Others we have identified include Patterson (NAC), Johnson (EBC), Spence-Jones (PC), Wiersbe (BEC), Utley (SGCS), Brown, (AJOJ, Vol. 1, 2.8), Victorinius (second cent), Tychonius (fourth cent), Oecumenius (sixth cent), Bede (eighth cent).

^[91] Examples: John Walvoord, Craig Keener, Paige Patterson, Michael Brown.

^[92] David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary: A Companion Volume to the Jewish New Testament, electronic ed. (Clarksville: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1996), Rev 2:9.

^[93] David Frankfurter, “Revelation,” The Jewish Annotated New Testament, edited by Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, 2^nd ed. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2017), 543.

^[94] For example, New Testament: Matt. 23:15, Acts 13:43; Josephus: Antiquities 20, Against Apion 2.123, Against Apion 2.282-84, Wars 7.45; Philo: QE II.2, On Abraham 67; Juvenal: Satires 14

^[95] Scot McKnight, “Proselytism and Godfearers,” Dictionary of New Testament Background: A Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 846.

^[96] Joshua Ezra Burns, “God-Fearers,” ed. John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow, The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010), 681.

^[97] He is eventually convinced to “go the whole way” via circumcision.

^[98] Joshua Ezra Burns, “God-Fearers,” 682.

^[99] Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 3^rd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 550.

^[100] Paul R. Trebilco, “Jewish Communities in Asia Minor,” Dictionary of New Testament Background: A Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 566.