Who Is a Jew?

But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, Romans 9:6-7a  NASB

Not all Israel – In theological history, Paul’s statement about Israel has been one of the most divisive remarks ever made.  The Church has used this and others like it to claim its replacement of Israel.  Paul has been viewed as the ultimate apostate by the Jewish world, and heralded as the premier example of a Christian convert by the Church.  All sides read these words from their own perspectives.  But what if we consider Paul as a Jewish Messianic follower?  Does that change these otherwise incendiary claims?

Let’s start by correcting a major category mistake.  Israel is the name of both the family connected by blood relation to Abraham and the name of those who have accepted (sometimes voluntarily, sometimes not) the life under Torah in the pursuit of God.  There are, of course, people who are descendants from Abraham via Isaac who are not religious and not Torah observant.  This was true in Paul’s time and all the more true today.  They are still “Israel” because of bloodline, but they are not “Israel” because of spiritual commitment.  However (and it’s a big “however”), Paul’s distinction is virtually eliminated by later Rabbinic Judaism.  Between the 3^rd and 4^th Centuries, Rabbinic Judaism established itself as the authority of faith and practice in the Jewish world, and along with that achievement, it redefined what it meant to be “Israel.”  Boyarin notes:

In the imagination of the Rabbis, Judaism has been reconfigured as a grand coalition of differing theological and even halakhic views within the clear and now uncontested borders of rabbinic Judaism.  It is this reconfigured imaginaire of a Jewish polity with no heresies and no heresiologies . . . The Rabbis, in the end, reject and refuse the Christian definition of a religion, understood as a system of beliefs and practices to which one adheres voluntarily and defalcation from which results in one’s becoming a heretic.  At this moment, then, we first find the principle that has been ever since the touchstone of Jewish ecclesiology: ‘an Israelite, even though he sin, remains an Israelite,’ which we find only once in all of classical rabbinic literature, in the Babylonian Talmud and then in the name of a late amora (Sanhedrin 44a).  This same watchword becomes nearly ubiquitous and foundational for later forms of rabbinic Judaism.  There is now virtually no way that a Jew can stop being a Jew, since the very notion of heresy was finally rejected and Judaism (even the word is anachronistic) refused to be, in the end, a religion.  For the Church, Judaism is a religion, but for the Jews, . .  only occasionally, ambivalently, and strategically is it so.[1]

Paul might have believed that there was a distinction between practicing Jews and ethnic Jews.  He might have allowed that those who practiced Torah observance were, in essence, living Jewishly regardless of their ethnic origin.  He might have considered that those who were ethnic members of Abraham’s kin could still claim ethnic affinity but not be spiritually related to the Torah, and therefore not be the real Israel of God.  But all of this is swept away by the 4^thCentury when the Rabbis determine that no action could ever remove a Jew from being Jewish, even sinful disobedience.  For the Rabbis, “Jew” meant “chosen of God” and “member of the Kingdom” regardless of personal behavior.  And once the distinction between “observant” and “non-observant” was no longer connected to two ideas of Israel, the Church simply declared that Judaism was false belief.  After all, how could a religion embrace those who opposed its requirements and still call them “saved”?  The Church dealt with such apostates by calling them heretics, but Judaism didn’t embrace this dualism.  Therefore, Judaism itself must be in error.

Case closed.

What do we learn about Paul’s claim?  Well, first we learn that when Paul wrote this letter, there was no such thing as “religion,” either Jewish or Christian.  Paul was not writing about separate belief systems.  He was writing about behavior within the group.  For him the evidence was clear.  Some who claimed ethnic heritage were not following God or the Messiah.  They were not really Israel in the spiritual sense of the term.  Likewise, some who were not ethnically related were following God’s Messiah, and they were, in Paul’s estimation, included in the spiritual Israel.  But none of this demarcated the difference between Jew and Christian.  It was only the difference between those who followed Torah and those who did not, for in Paul’s view, those who followed Torah would come to see that the Torah endorsed Yeshua as Messiah.  But this did not mean that those who had not yet acknowledged Yeshua as Messiah were somehow no longer Israel.  Being Israel meant being on the path of Torah which Paul believed would inevitably lead to the Messiah.  With tragic consequences, “religion” replaced Paul’s straightforward behavioral analysis with ethnic inclusion, and we have paid the price ever since.

Oh, and one final question:  Does it really matter?

After I wrote  this, I received an email notification from a school in Israel with a slightly different point of view.  Here it is.  See if this aligns with what you’ve learned from Boyarin.

Who is a true Jew?

The interpretation of Romans 2:28-29, particularly regarding the definition of a true Jew, is crucial in understanding Paul’s message and its implications for Christian theology. Traditionally, translations have often focused on the contrast between outward and inward attributes. However, a closer examination of the Greek text reveals a deeper meaning.

In the original Greek, Paul contrasts the “visible Jew” (τῷ φανερῷ Ἰουδαῖός) with the “secret Jew” (τῷ κρυπτῷ Ἰουδαῖος). The word “κρυπτός” implies something hidden or secret, akin to the modern concept of cryptocurrency. This understanding emphasizes not just an inward quality but something concealed from human observation.

Paul’s critique targets hypocrisy, echoing Jesus’ teachings in Matthew 6 about performing acts of righteousness in secret rather than for public acclaim. This aligns with broader Jewish tradition, which also condemns hypocrisy.

It’s crucial to recognize that Paul isn’t condemning Judaism as a whole but rather hypocrisy among some Jews. His criticism extends to any who outwardly adhere to religious practices but lack genuine faith and obedience.

Misinterpretation of Paul’s words can lead to misconceptions about his stance on Judaism. In reality, Paul’s aim is to call all believers, regardless of background, to a life free from hypocrisy and characterized by sincere faith and obedience.  (from Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg).

Topical Index: Israel, Jew, religion, Judaism, Rabbis, Romans 9:6-7a

[1] Daniel Boyarin, Border Lines: the Partition of Judeo-Christianity (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), p. 224.