Peter H.W. Lau, «Gentile Incorporation into Israel in Ezra - Nehemiah?», Vol. 90 (2009) 356-373
In contrast to other texts dated to the post-exilic period, Ezra – Nehemiah is well known for its separatist policy towards gentiles. Two exceptions in EN are the possible participation of foreigners in the Passover ceremony (Ezra 6,19-21) and the community pledge to follow the Torah (Neh 10,29[28]). An examination of antecedent Passover celebrations reveals that participation in the Passover marks out those who are members of ‘true’ Israel. This article argues that these cases indeed exhibit an anomalous inclusiveness, and discusses how it can be understood within the wider ethno-theological thrust of EN.
Gentile Incorporation into Israel in Ezra – Nehemiah? 357
can be taken on their own literary terms as part of a common tradi-
tion.
a) Exodus 12,43-49
According to biblical account, the first Passover implies the con-
cept of Israel as a nation (Exod 12,3) (2). It is closely connected to the
tenth plague that strikes down the firstborn of Egypt (12,29-32). This
reinforces ‘the distinction between Egypt and Israel’ (11,7); those
who are members of Israel and those who are not. It might be ex-
pected, then, that the Passover would be restricted to the Israelites.
Yet even at the institution of the ritual, members of the ‘mixed multi-
tude’ (br br[) (3) who joined Israel in leaving Egypt (Exod 12,38)
have the opportunity to participate (Exod 12,43-49).
The general restriction of non-assimilating ‘foreigners’ (rkn ˆb) (4),
including the ‘resident’ (bçwt) and the ‘hired worker’ (rykç) is first as-
serted (12,43.45) (5). The only two groups of foreigners permitted to
participate in the Passover are the ‘purchased slave’ (πsk tnqm db[) (6)
and the ‘resident alien’ (rg) (7). The slave is to partake of the Passover
as a member of his owner’s household (12,44.46). This is consistent
with legislation found elsewhere in the HB, which includes depen-
dents as part of a religious celebration (e.g., Lev 22,10-11; Deut
16,11.14). Similarly, the resident alien can also observe the Passover,
(Louisville, KY 1993) 18; S. JAPHET, “The Supposed Common Authorship of
Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemia Investigated Anewâ€, VT 18 (1968) 330-371, also
denies the common authorship of Chronicles and EN, she argues that EN is the
prior composition. For these reasons this paper will examine the Passover cele-
brations historically antecedent to EN, excluding the accounts in Chronicles, viz.
Hezekiah (2 Chr 30) and Josiah (2 Chr 35–36).
(2) For the first time, each member of a fathers’ house (tba tyb) is also iden-
tified as part of a larger social group: the congregation of Israel (larçy td[).
(3) Cf. πspsah, the hapax legomenon in Numbers 11,4 describing the same
group of people with a derogatory tone (‘riffraff’ in NJPS).
(4) Although literally ‘son of a foreigner’,in the context of this passage, in
which verses 43 and 45 form an inclusio, it is best understood generally as ‘for-
eigners’, paralleling the more specific ‘resident’ and ‘hired worker’ (12,45). This
is consistent with the usage of rkn ˆb elsewhere in the HB (Gen 17,12.27; Lev
22,25; Ezek 44,9).
(5) Cf. Lev 22,10, where the bçwt and rykç are grouped with the ‘stranger’ (rz).
(6) Although not all slaves were purchased, the qualification here is probably
used to heighten the distinction between slaves and the semi-free resident/hired
worker. Cf. W.H. PROPP, Exodus 1-18 (AB 2; Garden City, NY 1998) 417.
(7) This interpretation, 12,48 as restricting 12,45, is similar in principle to
PROPP, Exodus 1-18, 419, but differing in detail.