’Twas the Blight before Christmas—Antisemitic Interpretations of the Nativity

For a convenient recent (April 2025) listing of definitions offered by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), the Nexus Taskforce, the Jerusalem Declaration, T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), see Toby H. Manewith, “Five Definitions of Antisemitism,” Union for Reform Judaism.

Editor’s note: See Tamás Visi, “Did the Jews Crucify Jesus?” TheTorah (2024).

Decades ago, one dominant view was that Matthew (the Gospels were originally anonymous; I’ll use the traditional names) addressed a narrow community of “Jewish-Christians” resistant to having gentiles in their fold. This approach requires inventing xenophobic Jews who rejected association with gentiles. It also presumes that Matthew, who likely had access to the Gospel of Mark and so was part of a network of Jesus’s followers at the end of the first-century C.E., was interested in speaking only to this hypothetical community and so not interested in reaching any follower of Jesus who wanted to know more about their Lord. Given that Matthew changes Mark’s narrative, for example by adding nativity and resurrection appearances and by eliminating Mark’s claim that Jesus abrogated the dietary laws (Mark 7:19), it is likely that Matthew sought to address, among others, Mark’s audiences.

The term “Christmas Stories” is both short-hand and anachronistic, but I use it for its convenience and familiarity. On supersessionism, see Amy-Jill Levine, “Supersessionism: Admit and Address Rather than Debate or Deny,” Religions (2022).

Mark begins with Jesus’s baptism; John has an opening hymn about the Word (Logos) that became flesh.

Amy-Jill Levine, “The Jewish Origins of the Christmas Story,” TheTorah (2019).

Marc Brettler and I have previously noted, and corrected, several of these motifs:

• the view that Jews were xenophobic and the story of the Magi (Matt 2) shows the new openness of Christianity to the gentiles;
• the view that Jews were misogynistic and the focus on Mary and Elizabeth (Luke 1–2) shows the beginnings of feminism;
• claims that Jews are bellicose and the newborn “prince of peace” inaugurates a non-militaristic ideology, and so on.

See Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, “Five Christmas sermon blunders that get Judaism (and Jesus) wrong,” Religion News Service (24 December 2021). Responses to our article have ranged from denial (e.g., of the “I never heard such things” variety) to doubling down (e.g., the Pharisees really were legalistic and about to stone the woman take in adultery; surely some Jews were misogynist, bellicose xenophobes).

^{Matt 1:18} Τοῦ δὲ ⸀Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ ἡ ⸀γένεσις οὕτως ἦν. ⸀μνηστευθείσης τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ Μαρίας τῷ Ἰωσήφ, πρὶν ἢ συνελθεῖν αὐτοὺς εὑρέθη ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου. (Biblical translations follow the NRSVue, with modifications. Unless otherwise indicated, Greek New Testament texts are from the SBLGNT.)

See Michael L. Satlow, “Marriage and Divorce,” in The Jewish Annotated New Testament, ed. Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, 2^nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2017), 608–611.

^{Matt 1:19} Ἰωσὴφ δὲ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς, δίκαιος ὢν καὶ μὴ θέλων αὐτὴν ⸀δειγματίσαι, ἐβουλήθη λάθρᾳ ἀπολῦσαι αὐτήν.

The story of Susannah is a fictional detective story, not a window into the 5^th-century B.C.E. Babylonian Jewish community.

Rabbinic discourse on capital punishment is likely more a matter of the rabbis’ concern for their own authority. More prescriptive than descriptive, it does not provide clear evidence of stoning for adultery, and it offers indications against the practice. For example, the Mishnah records:

^{משנה מכות א:י} סַנְהֶדְרִין הַהוֹרֶגֶת אֶחָד בְּשָׁבוּעַ נִקְרֵאת חָבְלָנִית. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר, אֶחָד לְשִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה. רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמְרִים, אִלּוּ הָיִינוּ בַסַּנְהֶדְרִין לֹא נֶהֱרַג אָדָם מֵעוֹלָם.

^{m. Mak. 1:10} A Sanhedrin that executes [a perpetrator] once every seven years is called destructive. R. Elazazar b. Azariah says: Once in seventy years. R. Tarfon and R. Aqiva say: If we had been members of a Sanhedrin, nobody would have ever been executed.

Elsewhere, the Mishnah mandates that twenty-three judges preside over capital cases (m. Sanh 4:1) and details the admonitions given to witnesses in capital cases, including warning the accused against the crime (m. Sanh 4.5–5.1). See Beth A. Berkowitz, Execution and Invention: Death Penalty Discourse in Early Rabbinic and Christian Cultures (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006) and her retrospective, “Execution and Irony,” Ancient Jew Review (2009).

^{במדבר ה:כז} וְהִשְׁקָהּ אֶת הַמַּיִם וְהָיְתָה אִם נִטְמְאָה וַתִּמְעֹל מַעַל בְּאִישָׁהּ וּבָאוּ בָהּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרֲרִים לְמָרִים וְצָבְתָה בִטְנָהּ וְנָפְלָה יְרֵכָהּ וְהָיְתָה הָאִשָּׁה לְאָלָה בְּקֶרֶב עַמָּהּ.

^{Num 5:27} When he [the priest] has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall discharge, her uterus drop, and the woman shall become an execration among her people.

Editor’s note: On the ritual, see Zev Farber, “Sotah: A Purification Ritual for an Adulteress Revised into an Ordeal,” TheTorah (2025); and Hanna Liss, “The Sotah Ritual: Permitting a Jealous Husband to Remain with His Wife,” TheTorah (2019).

^{John 8:4} λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, Διδάσκαλε, αὕτη ἡ γυνὴ κατείληπται ἐπ᾽ αὐτοφώρῳ μοιχευομένη· ^8:5 ἐν δὲ τῷ νόμῳ ἡμῖν Μωϋσῆς ἐνετείλατο τὰς τοιαύτας λιθάζειν. σὺ οὖν τί λέγεις. (Greek texts from John 8:1–11 follow UBS5.)

^{John 8:7} ...Ὁ ἀναμάρτητος ὑμῶν πρῶτος ἐπ᾽ αὐτὴν βαλέτω λίθον.

Images of the Jews’ dropping stones as they leave the Temple are a creation of Hollywood, not John.

^{John 8:6} τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγον πειράζοντες αὐτόν, ἵνα ἔχωσιν κατηγορεῖν αὐτοῦ.

See also Matthew 16:1 (on giving a “sign from heaven”); 19:3 (on circumstances under which divorce is possible); 22:35 (on the “greatest commandment”).

^{Luke 1:39} Ἀναστᾶσα δὲ Μαριὰμ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταύταις ἐπορεύθη εἰς τὴν ὀρεινὴν μετὰ σπουδῆς εἰς πόλιν Ἰούδα, ^1:40 καὶ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸν οἶκον Ζαχαρίου καὶ ἠσπάσατο τὴν Ἐλισάβετ.

Marketing description for “A Christmas Carol: Scrooge in Bethlehem,” adapted and arranged by Anna Laura Page and Jean Anne Shafferman, Stanton’s Sheet Music. See also the Google preview: “A Christmas Carol: Scrooge in Bethlehem.”

^{Luke 2:6} ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἐκεῖ ἐπλήσθησαν αἱ ἡμέραι τοῦ τεκεῖν αὐτήν, ^2:7 καὶ ἔτεκεν τὸν υἱὸν αὐτῆς τὸν πρωτότοκον, καὶ ἐσπαργάνωσεν αὐτὸν καὶ ἀνέκλινεν αὐτὸν ⸀ἐν φάτνῃ, διότι οὐκ ἦν αὐτοῖς τόπος ἐν τῷ καταλύματι.

Luke 4:17, 37, 42; 6:17; 9:12; 10:1, 32; 11.1, 24; 14:9,10, 22; 16:28; 19:5; 21:11; 22:40; 23:33.

This interpretation plays into the earlier Lutheran and then more generally Protestant polemics against Roman Catholic ritual.

^{Luke 1:59} Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῇ ⸂ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ⸃ ἦλθον περιτεμεῖν τὸ παιδίον, καὶ ἐκάλουν αὐτὸ ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ Ζαχαρίαν. ^1:60 καὶ ἀποκριθεῖσα ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ εἶπεν· Οὐχί, ἀλλ ὰ κληθήσεται Ἰωάννης.

See, e.g., Matthew 9:20–22, Mark 5:25–34, and Luke 8:43–48 (bleeding woman); Matthew 8:1–4; Mark 1:40–45; and Luke 5:12–16 (skin disease); Luke 7:14, 8:54, and John 11:41-44 (corpses).

^{Luke 2:10} καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ ἄγγ ελος· Μὴ φοβεῖσθε, ἰδοὺ γὰρ εὐαγγ ελίζομαι ὑμῖν χαρὰν μεγάλην ἥτις ἔσται παντὶ τῷ λαῷ, ^2:11 ὅτι ἐτέχθη ὑμῖν σήμερον σωτὴρ ὅς ἐστιν χριστὸς κύριος ἐν πόλει Δαυίδ· ^2:12 καὶ τοῦτο ὑμῖν ⸀τὸ σημεῖον, εὑρήσετε βρέφος ἐσπαργανωμένον ⸀καὶ κείμενον ἐν φάτνῃ.

The term “outcast” has rhetorical effect: it does not explain from what these individuals were cast out, or who did the casting.

Translation follows Gail Labovitz, “Tractate Qiddushin,” in The Oxford Annotated Mishnah: A New Translation of the Mishnah with Introduction and Notes, ed. Shaye J. D. Cohen, Robert Goldenberg, and Hayim Lapin, 3 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022), 2:328. The list continues:

^{משנה קידושין ד:יד} רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשְּׁמוֹ, הַחַמָּרִין, רֻבָּן רְשָׁעִים, וְהַגַּמָּלִין, רֻבָּן כְּשֵׁרִים. הַסַּפָּנִין, רֻבָּן חֲסִידִים. טוֹב שֶׁבָּרוֹפְאִים, לְגֵיהִנֹּם. וְהַכָּשֵׁר שֶׁבַּטַּבָּחִים, שֻׁתָּפוֹ שֶׁל עֲמָלֵק.

^{m. Qidd. 4:14} R. Judah says in his name: Donkey drivers, most of them are wicked; but camel drivers, most of them are fit. Sailors, most of them are pious. The best of doctors is for Gehinom, and the most fit of butchers is a partner of Amalek.

A Talmudic version includes:

^{מסכת סופרים טו:י} רובן של ממזרין פקחין רובן של עבדים נאים רובן של בני אבות ביישנים רובן של בנים דומין לאחי האם.

^{Tractate Soferim 15:10} Bastards are mostly keen-witted, slaves are mostly arrogant, the children of reputed parents are mostly bashful, and children usually resemble the mother’s brother.

Translation follows The Minor Tractates of the Talmud, trans. A. Cohen (London: Soncino Press, 1965).

^{Luke 2:17} ἰδόντες δὲ ⸀ἐγνώρισαν περὶ τοῦ ῥήματος τοῦ λαληθέντος αὐτοῖς περὶ τοῦ παιδίου τούτου. ^2:18 καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐθαύμασαν περὶ τῶν λαληθέντων ὑπὸ τῶν ποιμένων πρὸς αὐτούς.

An alternative interpretation is that the shepherds were children, whom the Jews thought of as nobodies. Jewish tradition, however, values children, a point that should be obvious from the multiple accounts of couples suffering infertility and praying for children (e.g., Gen 25:21, 30:1–24; 1 Sam 1:1–20). In addition, if children were “nobodies,” then the parents in Bethlehem would not mourn their dead toddlers (Matt 3:16–18), and parents would not request Jesus heal their children, or bless them, or touch them (e.g., Mark 5:21–43; 10:13–16; cf. Matt 19:13–15).

See, e.g., Elise Ann Allen, “Vatican Nativity scene with Palestinian keffiyeh causes a stir,” Crux, December 11, 2024; David Parsons, “ICEJ relieved Vatican withdrew Nativity display featuring ‘Palestinian Jesus,’” ICEJ Press Statement, November 12, 2024.

Differences in what becomes the Hebrew Tanakh and the Septuagint, the Greek translation that underlies most New Testament citations, are part of the problem. See Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, The Bible With and Without Jesus: How Jews and Christians Read the Same Stories Differently (New York: HarperOne, 2020).

^{Matt 1:21} τέξεται δὲ υἱὸν καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν, αὐτὸς γὰρ σώσει τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν.

The magi—sometimes (incorrectly) called “wise men” or identified as “three kings”—are (for Matthew) pagan astrologers. For more on this narrative, see Amy-Jill Levine, “The Jewish Origins of the Christmas Story,” TheTorah (2019).

^{Matt 2:2} λέγοντες· Ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ τεχθεὶς βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων; εἴδομεν γὰρ αὐτοῦ τὸν ἀστέρα ἐν τῇ ἀνατολῇ καὶ ἤλθομεν προσκυνῆσαι αὐτῷ.

^{John 1:17} ὅτι ὁ νόμος διὰ Μωϋσέως ἐδόθη, ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο.

See Eva Mroczek, “Stereotypes about God in the Old and New Testaments,” in The Jewish Annotated New Testament, ed. Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, 3^rd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, forthcoming in 2026).

While efforts have been made to locate both Gospels “within Judaism” (yet another complicated topic), we cannot determine with certainty whether the evangelists called “Matthew” and “Luke” were Jews, and we cannot determine with certainty any initial audience to which they were addressed. We do, however, know that these texts were preserved by an increasingly gentile audience that regarded themselves as the true heirs of Israel’s Scriptures and covenants, and the true children of Israel’s God. These increasingly gentile audiences saw themselves as saved from sin and death by the cross and resurrection of Jesus. Some of these audiences, eventually called “Christians,” believed that Jews who did not accept their claims were at best temporarily misguided or stumbling but that these doubters would eventually come to accept Jesus as Lord (at some future point, at their death, at Jesus’s return). Others concluded that these non-messianic Jews epitomized the unfaithful (Latin: perfidious) who crucified Jesus and whose guilt carries over the centuries. It is this view of perpetual guilt along with any manifestation of antisemitism that Nostra Aetate #4, the proclamation from Vatican II, rejected. The document “decries hatred, persecutions, displays of anti-Semitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone” (see Nostra Aetate #4). Pope Leo, on the sixtieth anniversary of its publication, strongly reaffirmed Nostra Aetate #4. See Isabella H. de Carvalho, “Pope at Audience: ‘the Church does not tolerate anti-Semitism,’” Vatican News, October 29, 2025.

On the Greek term Ἰουδαῖος, see Joshua D. Garroway, “Ioudaios,” in The Jewish Annotated New Testament, ed. Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, 2^nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2017), 596–599.

This eschatological supersessionism is consistent with Paul’s view that “all Israel will be saved” (οὕτως πᾶς Ἰσραὴλ σωθήσεται; Rom 11:26). For Paul, “Israel” means “Jews”; Paul expects that “at the name given to Jesus every knee should bend” (Phil 2:10).

^{Luke 13:35} ...λέγω ⸀δὲ ⸀ὑμῖν, οὐ μὴ ⸂ἴδητέ με⸃ ἕως ⸂ἥξει ὅτε⸃ εἴπητε· Εὐλογημένος ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἐν ὀνόματι κυρίου.

See Levine, “Supersessionism.”

^{Rom 11:29} ἀμεταμέλητα γὰρ τὰ χαρίσματα καὶ ἡ κλῆσις τοῦ θεοῦ. See Mark D. Nanos, “‘The Gifts and the Calling of God are Irrevocable’ (Romans 11:29): If So, How Can Paul Declare that ‘Not All Israelites Truly Belong to Israel’ (9:6)?,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 11.1 (2016): 1–17.