"Synagogue of Satan" is a
strong declaration, deliberately strong. Given the historical context of the creation of the designation, I'd argue that there are at least as many
churches today that should wear the name "synagogue of Satan" as modern Jewish congregations.
Why do some Jews reject Christ, simply at a human level? Is it not partly on account of historic animosity between the Jewish party and the Christian? Partly due to past harshness from Christians? Is it not partly ignorance? It has been a long time, and I have to wonder whether Christians as a group, or Christian doctrine as Jewish heresy, often come up in their sermons; I suspect it is hardly common to have invective--like that of an Islamist tirade--on display.
When in Rev.2:9 & 3:9 the designation is given, it is to Christians who are suffering because of the persecuting hostility of particular Jews. It is less a
doctrinal description as it is a
behavioral. Yes, there is a link between beliefs, motives, and actions. But we should make a distinction between common levels of unbelief, and possession by evil spirits. Judas Iscariot was an unbeliever and apostate; but it is a
strong declaration when Luke and John write that "Satan entered" him.
Jesus said that it was a special mark of hostility and resistance to the truth to declare that plain goodness was attributable to the work of demons. It takes a special kind of evil to devise murder against someone so evidently holy, so kind, so clear and truthful in speech.
So, it is inaccurate to simply declare all religious and observant Jews as those belonging to "synagogue of Satan." If it is one's habit to turn to hyperbole to describe ALL deviations in doctrine or religion as the work or agents of Satan, I think such language leaves little room for appropriate escalation of rhetoric when it is called for.
Put in context, we'd have to save this term for those who claim to follow the Torah zealously, and who exempt themselves from judgment for heinous acts of hostility and persecution that are contrary to the Law's expression; that is, we should have some evidence that certain people are under the
strongest dominion or influence of Evil. Some so-called Christians might deserve such a name
by extension or
application.
But I suppose that run-of-the-mill legalists, cultural Jews, and any who reject Jesus as Messiah (whether poorly or accurately presented) for the many superficial reasons men in general do--even if they are Jews--do not deserve for reasons of simple identification to be classified as witting or unwitting Satanists. Let's save the term for any of and only those who precisely fit the bill.