Who is really considered a Jew?

by Justahuman24 5 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Justahuman24

  I've been told by a lot of Jewish people - and have read on-line too - that a Jewish person is considered Jewish ONLY if his/her mother was Jewish; that once "Jewishness" is passed on through the mother.

  Now if that is true, then how come the Jews consider Solomon, Moses' sons, David and others mentioned in the Bible - and who were important characters too - to be Jewish? Ruth wasn't Jewish and she was David's grandmother. David is considered Jewish. I don't quite understand it.

  justahuman - but super nonetheless
• 

  Lumptard

  Forgive my ignorance, but what was Ruth, if not jewish?
• 

  greendawn

  It may be the difference in the times, Jewish traditions and regulations may differ today from those of Biblical times. However even today anyone can become a Jew (by religion) by accepting the Judaic religious law. I know someone that did and now lives in Jerusalem with his Israeli wife. His parents are not happy but what can they do? Ruth was from the nation of Moab, one closely related to the Jews since Lot was the cousin of Isaak.
• 

  Justahuman24

  That's what I thought; that it must be historical difference and that it's NOW that they consider someone jewish only if their mother was jewish. But I mean, why would they change that? No matter what, the person will be half jewish even if the mother is jewish but the father is not, genetically speaking and therefore shouldn't make any difference.

  And yes, Ruth was a Moabite. And the Moabites were related to the Jewish people. But so was Job. He was a Chaldean but he's not considered Jewish.

  justahuman - but super nonetheless
• 

  greendawn

  I suppose they automatically consider the offspring of Jewish mothers and (non Jewish fathers) to be Jewish and put them to circumcision but I suppose even those of Jewish fathers and non Jewish mothers can become Jews when they grow up if they wish so.
• 

  Leolaia

  There were different halakhah on marriage, depending on the rabbinical tradition. One may note that Deuteronomy 3:4-5, Ezra 9-10, and Nehemiah 13:23-29 take a strong stand against any intermarriage, whereas the view that ultimately prevailed accommodated intermarriage as long as the spouse converts to Judaism (cf. Kiddishin 3:12 on the status of proselytes as Jews). On this view, David was legitimately Jewish because Ruth was a convert to Judaism (cf. Yevamoth 47b). But one may note that the criterion of matrilineal descent is a relatively late rabbinical view (dependent on an interpretation of grammatical peculiaries in Deuteronomy 3:4-5), and first century AD Jewish sources do not show an awareness of this definition of Jewish identity (cf. Philo of Alexandria, Vita Mosis 1.27.147, 2.36.193, De Tribus Virtutibus 40.224, Josephus, Antiquities 16.225, 18.139, 18.141, 14.121, 14.403, etc.), and of course the two genealogies of Jesus in the NT are patrilineal and trace Jesus' lineage to Judah through male ancestors (Matthew 1:1-16, Luke 3:23-38), and the same is the case with the genealogies of the Chronicler (1 Chronicles 1-9), and in the Torah itself (e.g. Genesis 5, 10-11, etc.).

  Neither does the post-exilic book of Ruth specifically claim that Ruth was a Jewish convert, although she is a pious worshipper of Yahweh (Ruth 1:16-17); its primary concern is to show how a Moabite (a traditional enemy of Israel) could be the great-grandmother of Israel's most illustrious king (a tradition that seems to lie behind the obscure statement in 1 Samuel 22:1-4), especially in light of the contrary view in Deuteronomy 23:3 that "no Ammonite or Moabite or any of his descendants may enter the assembly of Yahweh even down to the tenth generation". Thus Ruth aims to confer special blessing on Ruth that excepts her from this rule (see Ruth 2:12).