The Narrow Path Ministries

Did Jews (pre-Christ) believe that failure to keep the Law could cause the violating individual to not be regarded as one of God's people (a Jew)?

I can understand how they might see that failure on a large scale could incur earthly punishment, but did they ever believe that a Jew could sin so as to lose his/her individual standing as a person in the group of what was perceived to be God's people?

In other words, I believe I can lose my standing as a Christian (member of God's people), did the Jews believe the same way, that one could lose their genetically inherited standing as a member of God's people?

Or was there some form of pre-Christ understanding for a parallel to losing one's salvation?

I suppose that last question is what I am really trying to ask.

I can't answer this authoritatively, since I am not sure that there was a single view on any theological topic that was universally held by the Jews. Perhaps someone more familiar with the rabbinic writing than myself can post something more informative.

If I remember correctly, NT Wright included some analysis of the first century Jewish assumption that being a member of the nation was enough to be justified in "What Paul Really Said". His point was basically that there was an assumption that being "Jewish" was enough in itself, that this was indicated by "works of the Law" such as circumcision (que Galatians), but that Paul's argument was that the real people of God were always, only those who were faithful to God like Abraham was. In this, Wright seems to be proposing that the Jews of the first century thought it was impossible for them to lose their justification as long as they identified with the Law nation (so, they could do immorality as long as they obeyed the Sabbath or other things that marked them out as part of the Mosaic nation). I think he based this off of the reading of some of the Dead Sea Scrolls. I hope that helps.

Doug

I doubt the situation was very different from today. People felt 'in' and 'secure' so long as they were members in good standing with their nation (or in today's case, their denomination). It was quite possible to leave Israel (either voluntarily or by excommunication) just as it is possible to leave the church (voluntarily or, rarely, by excommunication). The group was saved, it was largely up to the person whether they stayed in or abandoned the group. I'd be quite surprised if they thought of salvation any more individualistically than that.

I'd go a step beyond that and say that I doubt they thought of salvation the way we do. They wanted to spend eternity with God, but I don't think they realized there was anything genetically wrong with Mosaic Judaism. There didn't seem to be a sense that they thought their sins were inadequately forgiven through the Levitical process. So, even though living people weren't regenerated in the same sense as NT believers they still had an expectation of ending up in heaven. And, since they didn't seem to accept the reality of Deuteronomy 32, they didn't see that the nation itself was in jeopardy. Since the salvation language of the NT was directly associated with being saved from the time of judgment of that nation (all of the Gehenna language, etc.), they couldn't have seen a need to be saved in the NT sense before the time of John the Baptist.

However, they were looking forward to the time when God would finally judge the nations and declare them to be the justified ones. Wright's point is that by the first century they assumed they were justified as long as they were part of the nation (personal sin didn't really jeopardize this as long as they did the acts of the Law that identified them with the nation such as circumcision and Sabbath observance). To use more modern language, as long as God had elected them to be part of the saved group of people they were OK.

Doug

If you look to the OT law, there were individual actions that would cause a person to lose his standing as part of Isarel
Exo_12:15 Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel.
Exo_12:19 Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses: for whosoever eateth that which is leavened, that soul shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he be a sojourner, or one that is born in the land.

These would be the most common situations. There were also laws of capital punishment ... where death would remove some people from among Israel. Plus there were instances of disobedience to a command upon which those guilty people were stoned.

We find some writings in the centuries before Christ which showed that some sects felt that most of Israel had lost its standing and that strict adherence to the sect's lifestyle would keep them "in."

Also with the gospels we see emphasis among the Jews regarding the doing of 'works of the law.' The term 'works of the law' was not used but the emphasis on 'works' seems to be of the same idea.

One scenario was in John
Joh 6:28 They said therefore unto him, What must we do, that we may work the works of God?
Joh 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

Of the scribes and Pharisees Jesus said
Mat_23:5 But all their works they do to be seen of men: for they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,

The gospel quotes suggest an emphasis on the idea of works (and arguably works of the law) within the society. So works appear to be a measurement of whether someone was considered 'in' or 'out.' The Pharisees wished to be seen as exemplars of works. Also, another passage shows that tax gatherers possibly were seen as outsiders.

As I understand it (without direct study), the events tied with the Maccabean revolt led to the emphasis on certain Jewish behaviors ( 'works') to be a true Jew (contrasted against the Hellenist Jew). So this trend (of defining Jews as being 'in' or 'out') probably continued into the first century.

Then there are indications that that Jewish believers (among others) were persecuted. The associated question would be whether the non-Messianic followers saw the Messianic followers as being outside the community (or the covenant). Being a follower of the Messiah placed one at the heart of a religious dispute and was the basis, used by some Jews, to kill the believers.

As such, your question had to be answered for different eras. And then certain eras may have influenced later ones.

Thanks for the input.

D, I'll check out more of what NTW says on the matter.

Mike, I saw the verses and understand that they see a physical cutting off (punishment on earth), but I was curious if they see that the one who is physically sent away from from Israel, or even killed, was also removed in God's mind as one of his people. Did they see it as losing your place in God's chosen people? Kind of like a pre-Christ lost salvation.

I don't know from those verses if I can see that belief was in a punishment that went beyond anything on earth, or an understanding of lost afterlife standing.

What type of signs are we looking for to suggest a perception beyond just the mere physical reality?

It seems that the concept of a post-death benefit is first presented (and maybe solely) in Dan 12, especially in the sense that Daniel would 'stand' at the end of days. I think that Daniel ignited an interest in the idea of a future resurrection.

The only indication I've seen of an expectation of an eternal benefit was the man who asked Jesus how he might receive eternal life.

Mat 19:16 And behold, one came to him and said, Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

In light of the emphasis on works and the absence of elaboration of the details of eternal life, I would expect that the Jews of the first century would have equated the failure to do works as bearing a direct consequence on any prospects of eternal life -- if they thought in terms of eternal life.

It seems further that the idea of 'eternal life' was not a central thought in Judaism. They were focused on the restoration their own nation under a ruler from among their own people. There then was not a focus on eternal life (or their 'salvation', to borrow a Christian term) as was found in Christianity.

Just as a caution, Rom 3 was likely addressed to gentiles who almost were persuaded, by outsider non-believing Jews, toward accepting the doctrine that circumcision was needed. The problem was that the gentiles were uncertain of their standing before God and were tempted to accept the doctrines espoused by non-believer Jews.