Strangers in Israel

[Peairtach]

Every native Israelite shall do these things in this way, in offering a food offering, with a pleasing aroma to the Lord. And if a stranger is sojourning with you, or anyone is living permanently among you, and he wishes to offer a food offering, with a pleasing aroma to the Lord, he shall do as you do. For the assembly, there shall be one statute for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you, a statute forever throughout your generations. You and the sojourner shall be alike before the Lord. One law and one rule shall be for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you.” (Numbers 15:14-16)

And the priest shall make atonement for all the congregation of the people of Israel, and they shall be forgiven, because it was a mistake, and they have brought their offering, a food offering to the Lord, and their sin offering before the Lord for their mistake. And all the congregation of the people of Israel shall be forgiven, and the stranger who sojourns among them, because the whole population was involved in the mistake. If one person sins unintentionally, he shall offer a female goat a year old for a sin offering. And the priest shall make atonement before the Lord for the person who makes a mistake, when he sins unintentionally, to make atonement for him, and he shall be forgiven. You shall have one law for him who does anything unintentionally, for him who is native among the people of Israel and for the stranger who sojourns among them. But the person who does anything with a high hand, whether he is native or a sojourner, reviles the Lord, and that person shall be cut off from among his people. Because he has despised the word of the Lord and has broken his commandment, that person shall be utterly cut off; his iniquity shall be on him.” (Numbers 15:25-31)

Who precisely were the "strangers in Israel". They seem to be admitted to at least, elements, of "the cult" (worship).

Were they admitted without becoming Israelites by circumcision and profession of faith? Or are such passages referring only to those once foreigmers and sojourners in Israel who had become part of Israel by circumcision and profession of faith, and not referring to those strangers who had not?

 

[py3ak]

Originally, probably members of the "mixed multitude" who left in the chaos of the first Passover night.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

My wife put this together for a Bible study, where we were discussing a sermon, concerning the various "strangers" in Israel:

Leviticus 19:10 And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather every grape of thy vineyard; thou shalt leave them for the poor and stranger: I am the Lord your God.

Zechariah 7:10 Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, saying, Execute true judgment, and shew mercy and compassions every man to his brother: And oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the stranger, nor the poor; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart.

OK, here it is: the word stranger that is included in both Lev 19:10 and Zechariah 7:10 is the Hebrew word ger.

Strong’s 1616: ger was a foreigner who put himself under the protection of Israel and of Israel’s God. He submitted to many requirements of the law of Israel and was therefore given certain privileges not accorded to the nokriy and zar who were also called strangers.

The ger was allowed to rest on the Sabbath and was supposed to be treated kindly (Exodus 20:10; 22:21; 23:9, 12). He was classed with the Levite, the fatherless, and the widow (Deut 14:21, 29 16:11; 26:11-13). He offered sacrifices to the Lord and was expected to observe various ceremonial and other requirements (Lev 17:10ff,; 18:26; 24:16-22).

5236: nekar 5237: nokriy was a foreigner who did not have religious fellowship with Israel, since his allegiance was claimed by another people and another deity. He was forbidden to ether the sanctuary (Ezek 44:7-9), and interest could be exacted from him (Duet 15:3; 23:20).

2114: zar was not necessarily a foreigner. It is often used of foreigners as people entirely different from, or even hostile to, Israel (Isa 1:7; Ezek 11:9).

The stranger ger in these 2 OT passages that are being preached on fell under the protection of Israel.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

The two portions clearly refer to non-Israelites, as distinct from those who had joined fully with the nation.

I suppose vv14-16 should be read as insisting that, given one law for all, the non-Israelite would have to comply with the entire law and first be circumcised, in order to bring an acceptable offering. Calvin, and many others, believe this is the case. I am open to an argument that it could refer to a foreigner's offering of "token" devotion, or a "fearful" tribute.

V14 refers a) to the "sojourning stranger," which description runs the gamut of non-Israelites in the land; and b) one who is simply, literally, "among you," and I think the ESV quoted fails to give a good sense for the Hebrew, because it seems to separate a "permanent resident" from the previous category. In fact, the second category would go the opposite way--it refers to any non-Israelite who might (in someone's mind) not be covered by the "sojourning stranger" description. No, but anyone AT ALL; the last phrase incorporates the least intentional, shortest staying person imaginable.

The offerings contemplated in the first vv of Num.15 seem to be primarily voluntary vows and freewill offerings. They should be viewed as a species of the "peace" offering, Lev.7:11ff. For the Israelite it would doubtless be thus connected to the rest of his religious life. For him, this sort of offering was of whole cloth with the rest of his covenant identity.

But for the non-Israelite, the uncircumcised, these could not be properly construed as "peace offerings." Yet, perhaps the outsider was permitted to offer such token acknowledgement of "the God of Israel." Though not willing, for whatever reason, to take up the covenant privileges and responsibilities; still their public, quasi-formal recognition of the reign of Jehovah--to whatever degree it went--was accepted. We might compare this service to the paying of a tribute to a human king of a land not the traveler's home. There's a "politeness" to that gesture, which might even hold the seeds of even higher respect. "You seem to have a decent king (or God); I wish mine from back home (or where I came from) was half as worthy."

This understanding is reflected through the existence of the "court of the Gentiles" in Herod's Temple. "In Herod’s temple the outer court was marked off from the inner by “the middle wall of partition” (to mesoitoichon tou phragmou, Eph.2:15), beyond which a Gentile could not go. In this outer court was a house of prayer for the Gentiles (Mk.11:17)," A.T. Robertson. The same author on Act.21:28,

And moreover also he brought Greeks also into the temple (eti te kai Hellēnas eisēgagen eis to hieron). Note the three particles (eti te kai), and (te) still more (eti) also or even (kai). Worse than his teaching (didaskōn) is his dreadful deed: he actually brought (eisēgagen, second aorist active indicative of eisagō). This he had a right to do if they only went into the court of the Gentiles. But these Jews mean to imply that Paul had brought Greeks beyond this court into the court of Israel. An inscription was found by Clermont-Ganneau in Greek built into the walls of a mosque on the Via Dolorosa that was on the wall dividing the court of Israel from the court of the Gentiles. Death was the penalty to any Gentile who crossed over into the Court of Israel (The Athenaeum, July, 1871).

We are reminded from the Gospel accounts and Acts of the many Gentiles, passing through the Jewish lands, or curiously visiting Jerusalem, particularly at the feast-days, e.g. Jn.12:20ff (it is not possible to determine by John's use of the name "Greeks" what levels, possibly various, of devotion this grouping included); cf. Act.2:11. They were not all present there as worshipful, circumcised proselytes; though some would have been, and others were "God-fearers," as Cornelius, Act.10:22; and 13:16,26; who believed in the God of Israel, but who were more akin to "sojourning strangers." It's false, I believe, to interpret the "sojourning stranger" as a true proselyte.

According to Lev.22:25, no animal offering was acceptable that had been gotten from a foreigner/stranger (nekar). This could be a clear statement that precludes any non-Israelite offering. But, if the distinction holds observed in Steve's post above, between types of strangers, then not necessarily. Assuming they were permitted to make any sort of offering or donation, it had to have been procured by them from an Israelite. And of course, as with any offering, it had to be passed to the priest.



So, to sum up--the simplest way to understand this rule is to recognize that the "ONE rule or odinance" included whatever prior conditions were necessary to make a "sojourning stranger's" person--and thus his offering--acceptable.

Conversely, a particular kind of sincere expression of fear or respect or honor to the God of Israel, presented by a stranger, might have found acceptance provided it met the same strict standards of cleanness and perfection as a covenant-member's. Scripture bears witness that God at times accepted very imperfectly offered worship, consider 2Ki.5:17-19; or 2Chr.30:17-20. Job 42:8 refers to offering and prayer, offered by a mediator, in behalf of others who's understanding of God is deeply flawed, even ignorant.

Finally, consider 2Chr.6:32-33 "Likewise, when a foreigner, who is not of your people Israel, comes from a far country for the sake of your great name and your mighty hand and your outstretched arm, when he comes and prays toward this house, hear from heaven your dwelling place and do according to all for which the foreigner calls to you, in order that all the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you, as do your people Israel, and that they may know that this house that I have built is called by your name." Material offerings ordinarily came with prayers from the ancients. It's how things were done.

In the final portion of Num.15 quoted, vv22-26, the mediation is clearly being offered for ALL PARTIES in the land, anyone who had the least worry of divine displeasure. Rest assured, God was propitiated for even the anxious stranger. And the final part, vv27-29, bridges the matter of unintentional sin and intentional. No one is supposed to fear unappeasable wrath and retribution who does not wilfully defy the law.

 

[Peairtach]

Thanks for these, Steve and Bruce. The PB, as always, is a great education.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2