Teaching Team

Part 2) "One Law" in the Late Second Temple Era

Continued from previous blog, "Part One: 'One Law' in Context"

Co-authored by Aaron Eby and Toby Janicki

By the end of the Second Temple Era in which the apostolic community lived, ideas had changed. The semantic value of the word ger had shifted somewhat. In each of the "one law" passages in which the word ger appears, the predominant view in Judaism was that the term did not denote a resident alien non-Jew but a proselyte to Judaism. This type of a ger was a person who had joined with the Jewish people and religion through a formal conversion process.

In the late Second Temple times, the term ger had become virtually synonymous with "proselyte," and strangers were admitted to the religious fellowship of Israel.(1)

Milgrom explains that the word ger had already taken on the meaning of proselyte three hundred years prior to the apostles.(2)

Scholars find evidence of this semantic shift in a variety of ancient sources. The semantic shift of ger is fully developed, for example, in Philo (20 BCE -50 CE).(3) Tim Hegg points out that the Greek version of the Torah (Septuagint or LXX) frequently translates the word ger as proselyte (proselutos, προσηλυτος), but where context would render such an interpretation nonsensical, a more generic word for "foreigner" is used. He explains:

The term "proselyte" became equivalent, then, with a foreigner who had undergone this religious ceremony of becoming circumcised. This shift in the meaning of the term appears to have influenced the LXX translators.(4)

Proselutos literally means "newcomer," but by the time of the apostles, the Jewish community used the word proselutos to refer exclusively to a Gentile who undergone a legal conversion to Judaism.

To the Jewish people in the days of the apostles, the "native" and "stranger" mentioned by the "one law" passages did not mean Jew and Gentile. "Natives" meant people born Jewish; "strangers" meant converts to Judaism. But contrary to the historical, grammatical, contextual reading explained above (in the previous blog post), the sages understood the term "one torah" as referring to the entire Torah, not just a single statute about sacrificial procedure:

I might understand that the proselyte is like the born Jew only with respect to Passover. How about all the other commandments of the Torah? Scripture says: "One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger." This passage comes to declare the proselyte equal to the born Jew with respect to all the commandments of the Torah. (Mekhilta on Exodus 12:49 [JPS])

A Legal Transition

Ancient literature shows that Second Temple era Jews understood ger as a legal convert to Judaism. A convert to Judaism was considered to be under obligation to all the Torah's commandments in the same way as native born Jewish people. They were even forbidden from marrying Gentiles.(5) In all respects, a convert became a Jew. But in what sense? How could a Gentile become Jewish?

A proselyte is a Gentile who goes through a legal conversion to become legally Jewish. That does not mean that a Gentile can become "ethnically" Jewish. One might be led to think so by later rabbinic texts such as those that describe a convert as "as Israel in every respect" (6) or "like a child newly born" (7) a term that bears resonance with John 3. Despite texts such as these, neither second Temple era Judaism(s) nor later rabbinic Judaism considered the change that took place at conversion to be biological or "ethnic." Rather, the change from being a Gentile to being a Jew was considered a legal transition, and that is why it impacted obligation to Torah. This is apparent from the fact that conversion has a practical impact on one's observance, particularly in regards to family relationships.

The legal transition from Gentile to Jew can be compared to the legal status change that occurs when one adopts a child or gets married. No biological transformation occurs, but their status is affected in a very real and practical way in civil law.

The legal perspective is illustrated by the Rabbinic requirement that a court of three (beit din) must preside over the conversion process. The sages derived the concept that conversion is a legal concern from the biblical text itself:

Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan, "A convert [ger] requires three [judges, because the word] 'judgment' [mishpat] is written concerning him [in Numbers 15:16]." (b.Yevamot 46b)

In other words, it mattered legally whether someone was obligated or not. It had bearing, not just on their personal relationship with God, but in legal matters in a Torah community.

We must remember that the Torah is not merely a personal guidebook to life, but in its original context it was given as a national constitution and foundation for civil law, to be arbitrated by judges in courts of justice. Many of the traditional Jewish interpretations of the Torah come from their experience applying it in this legal, national context.

In certain cases, it was absolutely necessary for a court of law to determine legally if a person was liable to certain laws or not. For example, suppose that a Gentile was found gathering sticks on the Sabbath and brought before the Sanhedrin. Should he be stoned?

To clarify such ambiguities, second Temple era Judaism taught that Gentiles who felt a calling to join the people of Israel and their God had the ability to do so by means of a conversion. As a legal process, this conversion was essentially a change of nationality or citizenship. One who converted was not biologically transformed into a member of the Jewish "race"; rather, he was naturalized into the Jewish nation. Like an immigrant to the United States that becomes naturalized as a citizen, he could enter into a contractual and constitutional legal agreement with the other people of the nation. Just as American civil law applies in special ways for citizens, granting them additional privileges (such as voting) and responsibilities (such as jury duty), so does the Torah apply in a special way for legally bound citizens of Israel.

The ritual of conversion cannot be dismissed simply because it is "man-made." It was based squarely on legal and covenantal norms found in the Torah, including the commandment of circumcision and the covenant initiation ceremonies in the Torah. Saying that it is "man-made" and therefore irrelevant would be a bit like saying that a marriage is illegitimate because the wedding ceremony was not explicitly written out in the Bible.

Apostolic Perspective on Converts

So far, we have shown that to the ancient Israelites, a ger may not have been considered an Israelite, but neither were they considered obligated to all of the Torah's commands. To the Jews who lived in the days of the apostles, a ger was considered obligated to the entire Torah, but they were also considered Jews, having gone through a legal process of conversion.

What matters most to us is how the apostolic community understood it. Were they throwbacks to the days of Moses (i.e. a historical, grammatical, contextual, sola scriptura reading of Torah), or did they see the Torah through the same lens as the Jewish communities from which they emerged?

On one hand, Paul spoke of believing Gentiles in terms of citizenship and even the covenants of Israel:

Remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. (Ephesians 2:12-13)

On the other hand, Acts 15, Galatians, and Paul's writings make it clear that they did not hold the Gentile believers to the proselyte standard of one law.

We do not have any indication that the apostles reinvented Judaism or objected to contemporary interpretations, seeking to restore a Moses-era interpretive model. They continued to practice the form of second Temple Judaism with which they were familiar. Therefore, the apostles would not have understood the one law passages any differently than their Jewish contemporaries.

Several passages in the New Testament indicate that the Apostles recognized the category of the proselyte (convert) to Judaism. The tie between apostolic thought and contemporary Judaism of their day is bolstered by the fact that proselutos is an invented Greek word that does not appear outside of Jewish and Christian texts.(8)

Luke acknowledges proselytes in the narratives of Acts. In Acts 2:11 he differentiates between "Jews and proselytes." In Acts 6:5 he mentions that one of the seven deacons was "a proselyte from Antioch." In Acts 13:43, he mentions "Jews and devout proselytes" who were intrigued by Paul's message. Paul himself differentiates between Jews, proselytes, and God-fearing Gentiles in Acts 13:26.(9)

The God-fearing Gentile would have been the natural identity for believers who were not Jewish. The apostles never suggest that they understood a Gentile believer's obligation to Torah as being different than that of a Gentile God-fearer in the greater Jewish community. Unless a Gentile believer went through a ritual conversion to take on legal Jewish status, the apostles would not have applied the Torah's "one law" passages to him. The legal obligations of the conversion process are taken as matter-of-fact in Paul's argument in Galatians 5:3: "I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law."(10)

It is well known that the Greek LXX text was commonly employed by the apostolic communities and considered to be an accepted standard. This gives us an indication of how the apostolic community would have understood and interpreted the "one law" passages. We have already seen that the LXX often translated the word ger as proselyte (προσηλυτος). Under the influence of the LXX, they would have interpreted Numbers 15:15-16 to read as follows:

As for the assembly, there shall be one statute for Jews and for the proselyte, a perpetual statute throughout your generations; as a Jew is, so shall the proselyte be before the LORD. There is to be one Torah and one ordinance for Jews and for the proselyte who sojourns with you. (Numbers 15:15-16; paraphrased)

If the apostles accepted this reading, then from their perspective, both Jews and proselytes to Judaism were obligated to the same laws of Torah and liable to a Torah court of law for the same punishments for violations of Torah. The apostles assumed this perspective in the statement that Paul makes in Galatians 5:3 and the apostolic decision in Acts 15.

Although Paul discouraged people from undergoing conversion, he did not do so because he saw it as an invalid, man-made institution. Rather, he discouraged conversion because he believed it to increase an individual's obligation to certain commandments, an obligation that they might not be willing to meet, and because his theological opponents viewed it as a prerequisite for salvation.

Conclusion

As we have shown, there are two possible approaches one may take in interpreting the "one law" passages.

If one takes the historical, grammatical, contextual approach, "one law" applies to the surrounding context only--predominantly sacrifice--and not as a reference to entire yoke of the commandments. From this sola scriptura perspective, rituals like the Passover sacrifice were not binding on the stranger, but if the stranger did choose to participate, he had to do it in the same manner that the native born Jew did.

If one seeks instead to try to understand the "one law" passages from the first century Jewish perspective of the apostolic world, we can interpret the "one law" passages as referring to the entire Torah. However, that same interpretation limits the meaning of the word ger in those contexts to the formal convert: the proselyte.

Either way, these verses do not support the idea that Gentile and Jewish believers have an identical obligation to the entire yoke of Torah.

A Final Word from Boaz:

At First Fruits of Zion, we teach that there is only one Law--one Torah. Torah is God's teaching and instruction. The Torah is sweeter than honey, more precious than gold. The Torah presents God's standard for man--it reveals his wisdom and will. However, that one Torah applies to Jews and Gentiles differently. For example, a Gentile is not required to be circumcised.

A Gentile believer might ask, "If I am not obligated in the same way as a Jewish person, why should I bother making personal sacrifices for a commandment like Sabbath?"
Keeping God's commandments is never a wasted effort! All of us at FFOZ, both Jews and Gentiles, have made tremendous sacrifices for the sake of living out our convictions about keeping God's commandments. We see each commandment as an expression of God, a reflection of Messiah, and a light to our path. Sacrifice for the sake of keeping the kingdom is never in vain:

There is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or farms, for My sake and for the gospel's sake, but that he will receive a hundred times as much now in the present age, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and farms, along with persecutions; and in the age to come, eternal life. (Mark 10:29-30)

To be absolutely clear, we at FFOZ are not advocating that Gentiles convert to Judaism. A God-fearing Gentile has every right to take on as much Torah as possible. In Messiah, Gentile believers are sons of Abraham and have been grafted into the olive tree of Israel. There is no need for Gentile believers to feel like second-class citizens or seek some human affirmation by pursuing conversion. The apostle Paul strongly discourages Gentiles from doing so.

1. David L. Lieber, "Strangers and Gentiles," Encyclopedia Judaica (2nd Edition) 19:241-242.
2. Jacob Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers (Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish publication Society, 1989), 402.
3. See, for example, Special Laws 1:308-309, where he quotes Deuteronomy 10:18.
4. Tim Hegg, Fellow-Heirs: Jew and Gentile together in the Family of God (Marshfield, MO: First Fruits of Zion, 2003), 6.
5. b.Yevamot 47b.
6. b.Yevamot 47b.
7. b.Bechorot 47a; b.Yevamot 22a, 48b, 62a, 97b.
8. Gerhard Friedrich, "προσηλυτος," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament 6:728.
9. In the nomenclature of the synagogue, proselytes are called "sons of Abraham."
10. See Lancaster's blog, "One Simple Verse."

Links to Related Blog Articles:
Reasoning Together
One Simple Verse: Galatians 5:3
Moral vs. Ceremonial
The Unbearable Yoke
Q&A: Divine Invitation
The Tipping Point
Acts 15 Re-Examined
The Lone Voice of FFOZ
One Law in Context Part One
One Law in Context Part Two

About the Author: Toby Janicki is a teacher, writer and speaker for FFOZ. He is also a writer for Messiah Journal and the author of the Restoration and Boundary Stones workbooks as well as a book on the Mezuzah.