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.
372 Peter H.W. Lau
They could not be expected to identify with the collective sin of Israel
in the penitential prayer. Second, the Deuteronomic inspiration also
extends to the participants of the covenant ceremony. The presence of
assimilated foreigners in the Deuteronomic ceremony (Deut 29,9-
15[10-16]) (70) is a strong indication that they would also be involved
in Neh 10. Since the passages promoting separation from gentiles
dominate in EN, the presence of these two verses effectively func-
tions as a tacit acknowledgement of the assimilationist view by the
author/redactor of EN. Indeed, a strong ethnocentric tone comes to
the fore again in the concluding chapter of EN (Neh 13).
*
**
The Passover observance in Ezra 6,21 reinforces the ideological
stance of EN towards ‘outsiders’. Participation in the Passover func-
tions to mark out those who are willing to separate themselves from
‘the people of the land’ and join with the community of Israel in fol-
lowing YHWH exclusively. As such, it functions as an identity marker
that forms a boundary between Israel and non-Israel. While the bulk
of EN constructs an almost impenetrable boundary for gentiles, this
verse, along with its counterpart in Neh 10,29[28] hints that member-
ship may be granted on religious, not just genealogical grounds.
Politically, a religious basis for membership in the Israelite com-
munity would have been useful for the redactor(s) of EN. The man-
date given to the returnees was to establish a religious community.
The acceptance of foreigners who conformed with the religious stan-
dards of the Restoration community would have been consistent with
this mandate.
The acceptance of outsiders is also consistent with the general at-
titude towards the nature of lineage in the early Restoration period. As
part of the transitional milieu of the time, there was a downplaying of
genealogy as a factor in political leadership and social hierarchy. For
instance, this is seen in the conflation of the scribe and the priest in
the Second Temple period (e.g., Ezra), with the resultant qualifying
factor being virtue and skill rather than heredity (71). It is not until later
(70) BLENKINSOPP, Ezra-Nehemiah, 314.
(71) See M. HIMMELFARB, A Kingdom of Priests. Ancestry and Merit in An-
cient Judaism (Philadelphia, PA 2006) 11; M. HIMMELFARB, “‘A Kingdom of
Priests’: The Democratization of the Priesthood in the Literature of Second Tem-
ple Judaismâ€, Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 6 (1997) 102.