Should I Convert To Judaism?

Paul’s Ancient Advice And Its Relevance Today.

The short answer is: No, no and no (if you know, you know.)

If you’re still here, it’s because you understand that this simple question can be far more complicated than a “yes or no” answer will ever allow. After all, Paul himself conducted a conversion on Timothy in Acts 16:3, so clearly there are exceptions to this rule, right? If so, what are those exceptions exactly? Additionally what is the rule itself, so that we know when to say "no" and when to say "it depends"? Clearly, we can see that by Paul's own practice, this answer is not so simple after all.

Many Christians, however, will tell you quite the opposite, that it is simple and the answer is always “no” no matter what. This reductionism is a bleedover from the ancient Christian tendency of anti-semitism. The Christians in the 2nd and 3rd centuries tried their best to distinguish themselves from Judaism by any means possible and would use (or rather misuse) Paul’s words as justification to do so. We will go over some of these more common verses, but first, it is important as always to establish the proper context, clarify the details of the political/religious climate of that time period, and then read the verses as though we are the first-century recipient Jew or Gentile to whom the document was written.

The Situation

In the first century there were various schools of thought around the conversion process. The Talmud records a dispute as to what constitutes a valid conversion in Yevamot 46a.

“The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to a convert who was circumcised but did not immerse, Rabbi Eliezer says that this is a convert, as so we found with our forefathers following the exodus from Egypt that they were circumcised but were not immersed. With regard to one who immersed but was not circumcised, Rabbi Yehoshua says that this is a convert, as so we found with our foremothers that they immersed but were not circumcised. And the Rabbis say: Whether he immersed but was not circumcised or whether he was circumcised but did not immerse, he is not a convert until he is circumcised and he immerses.”

This entire page in the Talmud goes on to talk about the varying proof texts and logic used by each Rabbi and his opinion, but to summarize; Rabbi Eliezer represents the opinion of the school of Shammai, that circumcision is necessary for conversion, and Rabbi Yehoshua represents the school of Hillel’s opinion that a baptism is sufficient for conversion.

This is important because the New Testament authors seem to align with the opinion of the school of Hillel in most cases, specifically in the conversion process. In this view, For a conversion to be legitimate, only baptism is necessary. Or at the very least that the baptism constitutes a partial conversion without a full conversion into the legal status of “Jew.” Becoming legally Jewish (full conversion with circumcision) was not necessary to “join the club” into the Jewish sect of “The Way.”

In the first century there were a couple of distinctions one might fall into depending on their conversion status. A "partial convert" would likely have been called a "ger toshav" (lit. sojourning stranger). You'll also find the term "G-d fearer" used in similar fasion, the only distinction being ones proximity to the land of Israel. "Ger toshav" usually applied to those within Israel, while the term "G-d fearer" was used for those outside of Israel. This is a person who is, for all intents and purposes, basically a non-Jew in name only, and in every other way a "practicing" Jew. This distinction no longer exists in Jewish law, but evidence shows that this was a reality on the ground during the first century. [1]

A full-fledged convert to Judaism would be known by the second distinction, "Ben Avraham" (lit. Son of Abraham). This would be the new sir name of the full convert. Abraham is viewed by the early Jews as being the sort of model convert, and father of all converts due to the promise made to him by G-d to be a "father of many nations." Therefore all full converts to Judaism would be referred to as "sons of Abraham." We even see this distinction in the New Testament writings when Paul addresses the crowd in Acts 13:26

“Brothers, sons of Abraham and those among you who are ‘God-fearers’! It is to us that the message of this deliverance has been sent!

Paul is addressing the three primary groups of people within Judaism: "Brothers," who are fellow Jews by birth; "Sons of Abraham," who are converted to Judaism; and "G-d fearers," who are partial converts who practice Judaism but did not fully convert or perhaps do not intend to. The likely reason for these partial convert distinctions is probably due to the ongoing debate as to what constitutes a full convert to Judaism.

Shortly after the fall of the second temple, however, Judaism would no longer be divided on what constitutes a legal conversion, and would ultimately settle that both are required in order for the convert to be considered legitimate. The idea of a "partial convert" would ultimately disappear from Jewish law and common practice.

But until this settlement was reached, Judaism was, at the time of the New Testament writings, in competition with itself concerning this ruling. With the school of Shammai still the dominating school of thought until after the first Jewish revolt, most Pharisees at this time were of the opinion that circumcision was the determining factor. Therefore, the Jews of this time referred to the conversion process as "circumcision" as a shorthand reference to their stance on the subject. They would even become known as "the party of circumcision"(Gal 2:12) which is a direct reference to the fact that there was more than one party when it came to the conversion issue.

The Schism of Acts 15

This debate would actually be seen in the New Testament writings in chapter 15 of Luke’s second volume, known today as “Acts.” Many have previously misused this chapter to argue that the Torah is not applicable to Christians. However, a careful look at this passage will reveal that the topic of discussion is conversion.

The chapter opens with the issues they plan to address.

Some men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers: “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom prescribed by Moses, you cannot be saved!” (Acts 15:1 HCSB)

This is the issue at hand. “Circumcision” is just the shorthand for the “conversion process” in the first century. The reason for this shorthand is self-evident. It is far easier and less expensive (ink and parchment are not cheap) to write “circumcision” than to write “legal conversion to Judaism via the circumcision and its subsequent processes.”

Although “circumcision” is a shorthand, there is nothing short or simple about the Jewish conversion process. One does not simply get a circumcision, and suddenly he is accepted as a Jew; there is a long process in which the candidate undergoes a close inspection of his life and devotion. Often times, new converts do not yet know enough about Judaism to pass the board, and so usually, a candidate will go through classes to learn everything they need to know to become Jewish.

The result is a process that can be a long and tough one. The average conversion process can take months to years, depending on the situation. But for most non-Jews who have a heavy pagan background and almost no Jewish experience, that process will lean more towards the "few years" timeline. The conversion process involves many massive life changes that would overburden anybody. Things like the requirement to live within walking distance of a synagogue often mean one has to uproot his entire family and make massive, financially risky decisions to start the conversion process. Eventually, he will also have to replace everything in his kitchen to ensure that he has an entirely kosher home after his conversion.

Judaism is a lifestyle; it affects what you wear, how you dress, when you wake up, what you pray, how you pray, when you work, when you don't work, what you can or cannot say, who you can or cannot do business with, what you eat, when you eat it, and the list goes on. And your fellow Jews are watching; they take notes and hold each other accountable for everything. Suppose you eat at a non-kosher restaurant, wearing your kippah and tzitzit. In that case, it will not go unnoticed, and your local Rabbi will likely have a few words with you, even possibly declaring your home a non-kosher home, in which community members might no longer come to eat at your house as a result.

Such strict stipulations on conversion are actually for a good cause. If a person is not Jewish, then in the eyes of Judaism, if that person breaks the Sabbath, he is not liable to a Jewish court for the sin. This goes for any sin in the Torah; as long as a person is not legally Jewish, he is not held to the standards of "sin" as determined by both the Torah and the Jewish courts such as the Sanhedrin. Remember, breaking the Sabbath has the death penalty, among other things, in the Torah. But once a person converts, he is immediately held liable to a Jewish court of law for any sins committed, both in the Torah and the Oral Law. If you convert a person too soon, you convert him into sin and possibly condemn him to death [2].

Now, if you are a natural-born Jew, you do not have to worry about any of these things. You were raised in this lifestyle, in the neighborhood already. It's all you know. You would never have to experience a conversion process; this lifestyle is easy for you comparatively. You don't have to "give up" bacon if you've never had it or stop going to non-kosher restaurants when you've never been to one. You don't have to learn a new language at 25 years old; you grew up praying in Hebrew and studying the Torah in the language. This fact alone should shed new light on Peter's words in Acts 15.

Peter stands up to clear the air and presents an argument to settle this problem. Remember again, Peter had received a vision back in Acts 10 and concluded that Gentiles are saved, and this happened before they converted to Judaism. Thus, logically, this means that conversion to Judaism is not a prerequisite to salvation. In his statement, he says this line:

He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. Now then, why are you testing God by putting a yoke on the disciples’ necks that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? (Acts 15:9-10 HCSB)

Many Christians have thought this "yoke" was the Torah and trying to live a Torah-observant lifestyle. But there are other topics of debate here. The debate is not about whether or not Gentiles should or shouldn't practice some Jewish customs; the debate is about whether or not you must be fully Jewish (with circumcision) to truly be a part of the Jewish faith with a Jewish messiah and saved with the Jewish people. Once again, the yoke that none of the Jewish people had to bear was conversion - not Torah. If the Torah was truly unable to bear, then Paul would not have also stated:

Then Paul made his defense: “I have done nothing wrong against the Jewish law or against the temple or against Caesar.” (Acts 25:8)

Paul’s Issues

Now here is the crux of the issue. The arguments presented above are about whether or not a person is considered to be “saved” if they aren’t Jewish. This is, after all, a Jewish faith. The Messiah is a completely Jewish concept and, as far as anybody else is aware, fairly exclusive for the Jewish people, too.

Look for any of the promises about the New Covenant in the Tanakh (commonly called the “Old Testament”) and read them carefully; you’ll find that not a single one of them is a promise made to Gentiles. Not one! Every single promise is made with the Jewish people, to the "House of Israel" and "the House of Judah"(Jer 31:31) and to anybody that joins with them. So the question of conversion at the time was a valid one; Are Gentiles saved if they aren’t Jews to whom the promises are made?

This is the question that Peter received an answer to back in Acts chapter 10. Peter witnesses an occasion in which the same miracle that happened to him on Shavuot (Pentecost) happens to a group of Gentiles too. Finally, Peter understands the meaning that one does not need to be Jewish legally to be included in the House of Israel and its promises.

"...But God has shown me that I must not call any person common or unclean." -Acts 10:28b (HCSB)

And so Peter sides with Rabbi Yehoshua’s opinion, that an immersion (baptism) is sufficient.

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came down on all those who heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. ... Then Peter responded, “Can anyone withhold water and prevent these people from being baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” -Acts 10:44-47 (HCSB)

Now enter stage left the “party of the circumcision." They do not agree with Peter and his teachings. They are likely from the school of Shammai, who not only has a negative disposition towards Gentiles to begin with,[3] but believe in Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion that circumcision is necessary. These believers are known as “Judaizers” in the New Testament writings. So-called because they wish to "make people convert to Judaism" (for more detials on this see the real definition of "Judaizer").

By all accounts, they do appear to be fellow believers; they just believe, of course, that being Jewish is a necessary prerequisite for “salvation.” And it is this position that Paul strongly opposes. The entire book of Galatians is actually about the issue of conversion, and Paul spends a lot of time trying to convince his readers in Galatia not to convert to Judaism legally, his primary concern seems to be that he is worried many believers will put their faith in their conversion, or that conversion will be what gets them "saved." Paul wanted to ensure his readers that being Jewish is not a salvific requirement.

He compares the two types of converts to being Ishmael and Isaac in Galatians 4:21-24. This passaged is commonly used as an anti-Torah apologetic, but this interpretation is far from the intended meaning by Paul in the letter. This is a parable of sorts, or better described as a "Midrash." In this allegory Ishmael represents the fully converted, while Issac represents the non-convert in this parable:

Tell me, those of you who want to be under the law [full convert], don’t you hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave and the other by a free woman. But the one by the slave was born [joined the covenant] according to the the flesh [works based salvation via conversion through circumcision in the flesh], while the one by the free woman was born [joined the covenant] as the result of a promise [promised into the covenant by faith alone]. These things are illustrations,[allegory] for the women represent the two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai [Full convert] and bears children into slavery [Works based salvation]—this is Hagar. (HCSB - modified)

Entirely parsing out the particulars of this passage is beyond the scope of this article, but the point is this: This is an allegory and not an elucidation of the Genesis story. He is simply using the story outside of its context to make a point (a point the original story was never meant to make). This is very typical of the Jewish hermeneutic of "Midrash." The Midrash allegory is thus: Those who put their faith in works of the flesh (circumcision) are "like" Hagar and her children, and for them, there is no promise of salvation, and they will eventually be cast out of the house. In Hagar's case, Abraham tried to do things his way, to get the promise made to him of a son.

But those who put their faith in G-d alone are "like" Sarah and her son, the promised child of the covenant, born without any human intervention and a sign of total trust in G-d, who would go on to be among the founding fathers of the Jewish faith.[4] In Sarah's case, it was faith alone and G-d alone (doing things G-d's way) that gave Abraham the promised son. The lesson is that when we try to do things our way and try to get the promises ourselves it doesn't work. Abraham tried to do it himself and it failed. The promise made to Abraham is faith based. The true "son of Abraham" (Jew or gentile) is one who is like Abraham, who "trusted G-d, and it was accredited to him as righteousness." (Gal 3:6)

In other words Paul's allegory is to say that "true Jews" are of faith and not of works of conversion.

For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, and true circumcision is not something visible in the flesh. On the contrary, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is of the heart—by the Spirit, not the letter.That man’s praise is not from men but from God. -Romans 2:28-29 (HCSB)

This is not to say that those who have converted have given up their salvation, nor is it to say that, literally speaking, one can be a legal Jew without a conversion. Paul's use of strong language and literary irony is not meant to be taken literally in every case, he is just trying to make a point. It is to say that on a spiritual level, true Judaism is exactly that: spiritual. Regardless of one's status as "legally Jewish" or not. If you are legally Jewish but you do not put your faith in your legal status as a Jew, and instead put your faith entirely in G-d alone, then you are a child of Sarah like Issac. But, even if you are a Jew, and you put your faith in your legal Jewish status for salvation, then you are like a child of Hagar and a slave according to Paul in this parable. The same is true of the gentile.

It seems that the "Influencers" in Galatia believed that faith alone was not enough, and that your legal status as a Jew was more important.[5] In Paul's day the prevailing thought was that your legal status as a Jew was paramount for your salvation.

Now I would like to note here that this is no longer the belief in Judaism today. This particular belief was fairly unique to the time and to the School of Shammai. What most people do not realize is that Judaism today is not like the Judaism of Paul's day in many regards. This view that basically 'all non-Jews are,' for all intents and purposes, 'pagans and condemned by G-d' and therefore 'unclean' and that only Jews can be "saved" died with Shammai and his school of thought shortly after the First Jewish-Roman War in 70CE. Today, Jews teach and believe that Gentiles who become "Noachides" are "saved"[6] and welcome to join the community (with some limitations, of course). A Noachide is basically a moral person who believes in the G-d of Israel and does not intend to become Jewish.[7]

But in the first century with Shammai in charge, this was not the case. Gentiles couldn't so much as shake hands with a Jew according to Shammai. And unfortunately, the culture at the time was such that all religious Jews held to what the authorities said (no matter how wrong). They would not intermingle with Gentiles; they were essentially ruled to be "unclean." Peter himself believed this for a long time until finally, in a vision, G-d showed him that this was incorrect.

"He said to them, “You yourselves know that it is not permitted for a Jewish man to associate with a non-Jew or to visit him... But G-d has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean" -Acts 10:28a (TLV)

This being the case though, it was incredibly tempting to just fully convert so that you would be treated as an equal. Paul opposed this as well. So here's the problem summed up:

Jews at this time do not believe they are allowed to intermingle with Gentiles, and most refuse to do so. Gentiles, by contrast, are coming to a Jewish faith, believing in a Jewish Messiah. Gentiles want to join in with the community but many Jews aren't letting them, not unless they convert, and the Circumcision Party has convinced these new believers that they aren't actually saved at all unless they do. And if gentile non-converts happen to be allowed to hang around, they are treated like second-class citizens.

To Paul, if the Gentiles all convert just to "get in," then this would confirm or legitimize what Paul believes to be a false teaching: That G-d is for the Jews only.

Or is God for Jews only? Is He not also for Gentiles? Yes, for Gentiles too, -Romans 3:29 (HCSB)

So, he urges his listeners not to give in to the temptation to convert. Gentiles shouldn't need to feel like they need to convert to be accepted. Additionally, Jews shouldn't be treating Gentiles like dead bodies, actively trying to force them to convert and holding hostage the community inclusion in order to force their hand. For many Gentiles, this pressure leads them to feel that they aren't saved unless they do, and it's highly likely that the Judaizers in Paul's day were teaching exactly that.

The Judaism that Paul opposed doesn't exist anymore,[8] but Paul's message is still true today and is taught in modern Orthodoxy: You do not have to be Jewish to be accepted and "saved."

Acts 15, otherwise known as the Council of Jerusalem, basically set in place a type of "noachide" law for Gentiles coming into their synagogues. Judaism would later do the same thing, which is now officially called the "Noachide laws," and to follow them within a Jewish context is to be called a "Noachide." At the time of the Jerusalem council however, such a thing was not yet in place, and so a solution was needed to be drawn up within the community of believers to account for the change and rapid expansion of monotheist gentile inclusion.

Proper Motivation

The thing Paul really worried about was "works-based salvation" as we so very often hear from the Christian rhetoric. Conversion to achieve salvation is, in fact, a type of "works-based" salvation. Paul feared if he was too lenient with allowing conversions that many others would be led into a false sense of security by their conversion. It would also signal to the Shammaite believers (Judaizers) that their position is a valid one.

But of course there are occasions in which a conversion is acceptable to Paul. One such is as we mentioned before, Timothy (Acts 16:1-3). The thing about Timothy, though, is that he was kind of half-Jewish already. He was born to a Jewish mother and a Gentile father, and the fact he did not undergo a circumcision means that he was not "halachically" (legally) Jewish. So for Timothy, Paul likely encouraged him to fully embrace his Jewishness, as it was his legal obligation as the son of a Jewish woman to be circumcised according to the Torah. However, Paul circumcised Timothy fully confident that Timothy understood very well that this official conversion is not an automatic "saved for life" card.

Titus, on the other hand, is living proof for Paul to the Jews that a conversion is not a necessity. So, Titus was likely strongly discouraged from conversion since his very status as a saved Gentile is a testimony to others of the validity of Paul's teaching on the subject (Galatians 2:3).

For the Galatians, the influencers were trying to force the gentile's hands, and so Paul discourages conversion for them on principle, to resist the pressure. For the Corinthians, Paul seems to treat them a bit like the Galatians, but with much less emphasis, simply saying, "You should stay in whatever situation in which you were called" (1 Corinthians 7:20). He discourages conversion, but he does not put forth the same passionate arguments he outlined to the Galatians, likely because the Corinthians didn't have an "influencer" problem like Galatia did. Paul instead gives an attitude of mere suggestions or guidance rather than a command in this instance.

We See Paul encouraging Jews to remain steadfast in their Judaism and people like Timothy, who had Jewish heritage, to return fully to Judaism and remain steadfast in it.

Was anyone already circumcised when he was called? He should not undo his circumcision. Was anyone called while uncircumcised? He should not get circumcised. -1 Corinthians 7:18 (HCSB)

It is impossible for anybody to "undo his circumcision," and even more so, if Paul were speaking literally here, then women would be completely left out of this discussion. The fact is again that "circumcision," in this case, is just a shorthand for being legally Jewish. Paul is encouraging his Jewish audience to remain Jewish and not forsake their Judaism while at the same time encouraging Gentiles to not convert.

The Modern Problem Is Different

In Paul's day, there was no "Christianity," which existed as a materially separate religion. "Christianity" was actually still very much a Jewish religion, a sect within the greater Judaism of Paul's day. They referred to themselves as "the sect of The Way" and did not view this sect as a new or separate religion from Judaism at all. For the Gentiles coming into the fold, there was only one option: Judaism.

Today this is not the case. Christianity would soon become a distinct religion around about the early to mid-second century. In the modern era, the options within Christianity are vast, with over 60,000 different denominations and sects (and growing). The modern person has an endless stream of options to choose from that can basically be tailor-made to fit their liking. But more important than the options today is the fact that Judaism is no longer on that table of options at all. The early Christians did not have a choice between a Christianity of a particular type. So, for them, it was also a fairly logical assumption that they would have to enter the religion of their beliefs: Judaism.

Additionally, as stated before, the Judaism of Paul's day, which he opposed, also no longer exists, and so his arguments, which are directed to a particular philosophy, are not applicable to modern-day Orthodox Judaism. But there is one other problem that also exists today that Paul did not address because it didn't exist, and that is that Christianity today does not have a properly Jewish option either. Christianity does not offer a solution to the believers who wish to heed The Master's words in Matthew 23:2-3;

“The scribes and the Pharisees are seated in the chair of Moses. Therefore do whatever they tell you, and observe it..." (HCSB)

The Pharisees would eventually go on to become the rabbis, which are the direct descendants of Pharisaism. To obey these words of the Master today means to follow the Rabbinate of Orthodox Judaism. (For more details on this understanding, see this article about the "seat of Moses")

However, there is no Christian version of this today. Generally speaking, there is no sect of Christianity that adheres to the Orthodox Jewish customs and practices that The Master asked his disciples to follow. Messianic Judaism, by and large, is still Christianity, of the evangelical variety, which utilizes some Hebrew words here and there and some Torah practice as well.

Oftentimes, this Christian (sola scriptura) approach leads to having an unrecognizable Torah from Judaism - separated from Oral Torah. With each person being their own authority, Messianics often celebrate sabbaths polar opposite to other messianics, creating division in the community and a lack of ability to hold each other accountable. Additionally many of these congregations will shun a person for observing any rabbinic ordinances, and will treat you like an enemy.

Remember, in Paul's day, new gentile believers went to the local synagogue, and so far that we can tell, he fully expected this to be the reality moving forward. He saw a future in which Gentiles came to synagogues, welcomed with open arms, and praying along side their Jewish bothers as a fellow brother "in Christ" (not "in the flesh" via conversion). That is to say, to be considered a brother by the Jewish communities because of Messiah who brought them into the fold of Judaism. Maybe not necessarily accept them as fully legal Jews, but to accept them none the less, regardless if everybody in that Jewish community accepted Yeshua as the Messiah or not. Paul envisioned a future where not only did Jew and gentile pray together in the synagogues, but also messianic believers and non-believers side by side in community.

To Paul, the whole point was for Gentiles to be accepted as a fellow citizen of Israel in a spiritual sense. He expresses it best in Ephesians 2:11-14

So then, remember that at one time you were Gentiles in the flesh—called “the uncircumcised” by those called “the circumcised,” which is done in the flesh by human hands. At that time you were without the Messiah, excluded from the citizenship of Israel, and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus, you who were far away have been brought near by the blood of the Messiah. For He is our peace, who made both groups one and tore down the dividing wall of hostility. (HCSB)

Again notice here he's not saying that in Messiah, Israel and Judaism disappear (which is Christian rhetoric) he says you were once "excluded from Israel" and now you are "brought near" and "made both groups one." Paul goes on in verse 19 in case it wasn't clear enough:

"So then you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household." (TLV)

"Fellow citizens with G-d's people". Who are G-d's people? The Jewish people. Paul made the same argument in Romans 11 using imagery of an olive tree, in which the tree is Israel and Gentiles have been grafted into it. Again, Paul indicates he fully expected for Gentiles to join in the synagogue services and be fellow participants in the religion of Judaism, but he warns the Gentiles,

"do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, it is not you who support the root but the root supports you." (Romans 11:18 TLV)

James the brother of the Master, also agreed with this vision of gentile inclusion when he helped to create an easier way for Gentiles to be welcomed into the synagogues in Acts 15:19-21 saying:

"Therefore, I judge not to trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God— but to write to them to abstain from the contamination of idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what is strangled, and from blood. For Moses from ancient generations has had in every city those who proclaim him, since he is read in all the synagogues every Shabbat.” (TLV)

Paul did not live in a world where Christians had their very own organized religion. As far as he was concerned Judaism is the way, with Messiah Yeshua as the leader "Rebbe" of this particular sect of Judaism. It was understood that gentiles coming in because of the Messiah would be practicing Judaism, at least to some extent.

Reasons to Fully Convert

Since Chritianity does not have this Orthodox Jewish lifestyle option, one option is to do as Paul intended, and simply start going to a synagogue. Once there however, we may encounter different problems.

The fact is, that although the Judaism Paul stood against no longer exists, there are still some remnants of it which made their way into the modern day. Not in the way Paul was familiar with, in which Gentiles were generally treated with some hostility or distain. If you visit a synagogue today you'll be treated with respect even as a non-Jew and you'll be welcome to participate in much of the services and even mingle with the crowed after over some snacks and drinks.

Today, however, you'll find yourself facing a kind of different obstacle, that of full inclusivity. Remember, the concept of a "partial convert" no longer exists in Jewish law or common practice. There are some laws in Judaism that prevent Jews from doing certain things with a Gentile, mostly in the area of Kosher laws. For one, no matter how well you adhere to the Orthodox standards of Kosher kitchens (called Kashrut), since you are not halachically Jewish, no kosher keeping Jews are allowed to eat from your home or in your home at all.

Now, nothing is stopping you from being allowed to eat at a kosher Jewish home, and you may even get invited to join a family at their table for Shabbat meal after service, but not always. There are some observant Jews who are not comfortable inviting a Gentile to their Shabbat table, since they view the Sabbath as being an intimately Jewish experience. Additionally there are certain wines which if you touch an open bottle, the kosher keeping Jews are now prohibited from drinking it, and so they may not let you anywhere near that wine. Jews are also not technically allowed to invite a non-Jew to a Passover seder or any other high Holy day meal for that matter. While this doesn't mean you cannot participate in one, you would have to invite yourself to a public table if anybody in the community is hosting one.

There are many more particulars, but I think it suffices to say that although you'll be treated like a normal person and welcomed with lots of respect by the synagogue, you will never truly be a full member of the community as long as you are not halachically Jewish. What's more, if you believe in Yeshua as Messiah, you'll likely be uninvited, since to a Jew today this almost always means you're an idol worshiper (believing a human to be G-d). To a Jew, if you aren't halachically Jewish and you believe in Yeshua, you're perceived as a Christian (one who fully believes all Christian doctrines, regardless of what you say). Whether you like it or not, this is the reality we face in today's culture.

This is often the leading motivation behind a modern day conversion. You want to be fully involved in the community at 100%. You want your house to be trusted, you want to raise your kids in a Jewish day school brought up in Torah. You want to be able to host Shabbat meals and Passover Seders, or go to your close friend's Seder meal. But at the moment, although you feel no ill-will from the others, you do feel like your being held at arms length. And most importantly you don't want to be affiliated with greater Christianity anymore.

Christianity doesn't want you anyway. If you're not trinitarian, well, then by definition you're not "Christian" according to the orthodox definition of "Christian." Just being Torah observant in many cases will get you uninvited from the majority of churches. Messianic congregations are largely no different. If you aren't asked to leave because you're not trinitarian, you will likely be asked to leave because you keep to the Rabbinic ordinances, which to many of them is a sort of blaspheme. So you do what the early gentile believers did, you go to synagogue, only to be uninvited there as well on the basis of being a "Christian" (even though clearly you are not).

Seemingly, you aren't accepted as a part of the Jewish community, and you aren't accepted in the Christian community. But since you also adhere to Orthodox halachah, you also aren't accepted in the majority of Messianic circles either. You are a sojourner with no land, no people, and no support. You want to attend synagogue because you adhere to Orthodox Judaism, the only difference is your belief in the identity of a specific messiah. Seemingly, you are left only with the option; you must convert if you want to belong to the community you most identify with: Judaism.

Obligations

The trouble is this; do you remember all of those stringencies to the conversion process? A conversion to Judaism would mean that you are required by Jewish law to keep Jewish law as a Jew. Paul himself even said this to the Galatians.

"Again I testify to every man who gets himself circumcised that he is obligated to keep the entire law." (Galatians 5:3 HCSB)

Right now, as a non-Jew, you are under no particular obligation, legally speaking, to keep and observe the "whole Law," which includes the oral traditions as well. The thing about being Jewish is it comes with a heavy responsibility.

Think of converting to Judaism as like taking an oath of office or joining the military. You swear to uphold, defend and carefully guard every aspect of Judaism, whether you fully agree with it or not, until your dying day. Additionally, you swear to follow all orders passed down to you from all officers or higher ranks above you (regardless if you agree with them or not). This is a massive responsibility, and one the Jewish people do not take lightly. Once you take that oath, breaking it is tantamount to destroying an ancient historical and priceless irreplaceable relic.

But if you don't convert, then there's no pressure on the responsibility that comes with the oath of enlistment. You are not held to the same standard. You can be more relaxed in your observance allowing yourself more room for mistakes because nothing is legally binding you to the oral law. But once you convert, you are legally bound to it, and there are no more "days off" or "relaxing" the standards. Paul himself even said so.

Have a cold and don't feel like davening shacharit as the sun is rising? Had a late night and want to sleep in? Too bad, you are under a legal obligation to wake up early regardless of how you feel (unless it is life-threatening of course). Do you want a cheese burger from your favorite (probably non-kosher) restaurant? Well, even if you disagree with the rabbinic ordinance against cheese burgers, too bad.

This is not to say that being Jewish means you suffer every day or that it's a terrible experience. Being Jewish comes with many of its own blessings and rewarding experiences, but all of that is part of the reward that comes from accepting the deep responsibility that is unique to the Jewish people as ordained by G-d.

"Then what is the advantage of being Jewish? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? Much in every way. First of all, they were entrusted with the sayings of God." -Romans 3:1-2 (TLV)

Think of it like this: The firstborn is given a double portion, but being the firstborn comes with a heavy set of responsibilities which you are held accountable for. You might have it "better" off but that reward only comes with the added duties and responsibilities that belong to that person. Being "entrusted" to uphold Judaism to its fullest is in itself a massive blessing and also a massive responsibility.

You cannot expect to receive certain rewards or prestige that come with a certain job or rank without also taking upon yourself the responsibilities of that position. Why do you want to be a "rabbi" or a pastor? Is it to be treated and respected like a rabbi/pastor or is it to serve your community selflessly and in earnest? Jesus himself ridiculed the rabbis of his day who enjoyed the honor and prestige of being a leader but who also did not live up to the responsibilities of that position.

They do everything to be observed by others: They enlarge their phylacteries and lengthen their tassels. They love the place of honor at banquets, the front seats in the synagogues, greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by people. -Matthew 23:5-7 (HCSB)

Respect comes with the job, but for good reason, the job is not an easy one; it is incredibly demanding. One's Jewishness is not a higher social status or rank or prestige in any way (in today's world especially, it's often quite the opposite, in fact); rather, being Jewish is taking upon yourself an oath with serious gravitas.

This is why, if you express an interest in conversion, you are likely to be asked, "Why would you possibly want to convert?" This is often followed by things like, "do you have any idea what it means to be Jewish?" or "Why would anybody volunteer to to make their life harder on purpose? It's not like you get better merits because of it." These kinds of comments come from a good place. They mean to communicate that for them, they have a duty to the Torah, but you are under no such obligation, and still, you'll have a place in the world to come, so why bother?

Again this is in line with Paul's stance on the subject.

"Was anyone already circumcised when he was called? He should not undo his circumcision. Was anyone called while uncircumcised? He should not get circumcised. Circumcision does not matter and uncircumcision does not matter, but keeping God’s commands does." (1 Corinthians 7:18-19)

Full Circle

This now brings us all the way back around to the exceptions to the rule, like Timothy. Timothy had some connection to Judaism already, and as stated before, Paul likely encouraged him to embrace his Judaism fully. He also likely did so knowing that Timothy was mature enough to realize that his formal conversion to Judaism was not a guarantee of salvation and that he wasn't doing it in order to achieve salvation on his own merits. Timothy knew full well that one's status as a Jew holds no special merit when it comes to salvation and that G-d shows no favoritism.

So what would Paul say given today's particular climate? Since we know most of his ancient advice is irrelevant now that Judaism has taken a shape that he would have likely been part of himself. Judaism has largely (though not fully) become the Judaism he wished to see. With Christianity being a different religion entirely, something that would be totally foreign to him (which he would likely not approve of), would he have a different message to speak to those who have embraced the Jewish Messiah today coming out of Christianity?

Should You Convert?

Based on his writings, I would give the following guidance:

Generally speaking, no. Paul clearly sees no particular reason that a Gentile should feel like they need to convert at all, and the fact that they are saved without conversion is a miracle in itself. Converting to Judaism would, in essence, negate the miracle, having now become part of the promise by doing it yourself instead of just trusting that Yeshua's work was enough.

Take note! I, Paul, tell you that if you get yourselves circumcised, Christ will not benefit you at all. -Galatians 5:2 (HCSB)

Paul is speaking in strong language here and should not be taken entirely literally, Messiah benefits all, both Jew and gentile. But the idea here is that you're "making yourself Jewish rather than letting Messiah do it for you." As we already briefly mentioned above, Paul's parable in Galatians 4 explicitly makes the point that whether you're Jewish or not, it is your faith that makes one a "true Jew" whether actually (for legal Jews) or spiritually (for non-legal Jews and gentiles).

When to Convert

Paul would likely recommend conversion if you meet the following two criteria:

1. You have Jewish ancestry

2. You fully understand that the conversion does not grant you higher or special status with G-d in terms of salvation or social rank.

Reconnecting your Jewish soul with Judaism is a great thing and should be seriously considered. Paul asked his Jewish audience to remain steadfast in their Jewish ancestry and never forsake it. He believed it so much that he took no issue at all with making sure Timothy was "converted" so that he would be halachically Jewish. Jews with ancestry are not always halachically Jewish and are required to go through a conversion process to restore their legal Jewish status.

Another reason for conversion

A third (but minor) reason would also be marriage. A person who is already married to a Jew, and found their spirituality later on, should undergo a conversion for the sake of their spouse. Another reason would be if a religious couple wishes to be married and one of them is not Jewish, the Gentile should convert before the wedding. However, the conversion must not be done only so that they can be married, this is considered to be an invalid conversion. The conversion must be sincere first, with the intention of becoming Jewish and the intention of obedience with sincerity, and not only so the gentile can now legally marry the Jewish person in question.

An example of this could look like the following: A Gentile who is heavily involved in the community already, and largely lives the Orthodox Jewish life to the extent he is able/allowed. He meets a lovely Jewish woman and they begin to take things serious about their future. They have a lot already in common, including their religious convictions, but the gentile just has not yet taken the leap into legal Jewish status, probably because he felt no reason to do so yet. He's already proven to be a serious candidate; the community is likely ready to vouch for him. Now, however, if he and his lovely Jewish girlfriend want to marry, He will have to finally take the leap. In this case, it would be permissible.

Paul's primary concern was making sure that everybody understood that your status as a Jew does not give anybody a "get outa hell free" card, or that being Jewish is also not a "ticket to Heaven, guaranteed." If a potential convert, in any way, indicates that they are doing this in order to "get in" with G-d, then the conversion is invalid. Even by today's Orthodox Jewish standards, conversion without the proper intentions is an invalid conversion.

What if I have no Jewish ancestry?

I believe Paul would take this under a case by case basis. Again, generally speaking the answer is 'no they should not,' but I do not believe Paul would put a blanket ban for all gentiles to convert, only most. I believe Paul would consider conversion for a gentile who came wanting to do so all on his own, with no outside pressure and with no belief that doing so would earn them salvation, or special status with G-d.

However, I believe that such a Gentile would have to meet certain criteria in addition to the two stated above in today's environment and situations.

First, I believe that the Gentile in question would have to not be a Trinitarian of any sort. This view is strictly forbidden in Judaism outright. Interestingly enough the Tosefta in tractate Avoda Zara actually allows non-Jews to be "Trinitarian" and still be considered a monotheist, but explicitly forbids a Jew from holding such a view, stating that a Jew, being held to a higher standard, should know better. [9]

Secondly, the Gentile in question should be already living within and greatly involved with their local Jewish community. Any Gentile seeking to convert who does not live within or near a community is already at a massive disadvantage and would be required to make a big move to a community anyway. So for the Gentile who does not live in or near an established Jewish community, they should not consider conversion at all. The convert would not be able to live according to the Jewish laws properly outside of a community. The Gentile living in or near a community has begun to grow accustomed to the life and also grown a rapport with the community they would be joining. You wouldn't want to convert and then discover that the community hates you and kicks you out.

Also, with the gentile being more directly involved with the community, they can see first hand the life they may be about to enter, and can more rightly decide if this is the lifestyle they are willing to take upon themselves after having some practical experience with it. Another advantage to this is they have the opportunity to see if the community will accept their belief in Messiah (with the caveat of non-divinity and non-worship of course), as even with the caveats many communities still might not allow you to join. Yeshua is a rather touchy subject for many Jews and you may need to find a different community that is more willing to understand your position. Connecting with like-minded Orthodox individuals can help locate these communities easier.

Which brings me to my third point I believe Paul might require: No proselytism! For too long Jews have been told to abandon Judaism "in the name of Christ" and this is purely 100% incorrect. In fact it should be the opposite. The Christians should have been encouraging Jews to be even more Jewish "in the name of Christ." Unfortunately, that is not how history panned out. The result is now if you try to convince a Jew to believe in your messiah, you will be met with a strong intergenerational trauma response of full rejection.

Do not go around trying to convince other Jews to believe in your messiah. To a Jew who has experienced this time and time again, they take this to mean that you are trying to get them to abandon Judaism. Even if you aren't, trust me when I say, you will be seen as an infiltrator and promptly kicked out or uninvited from the synagogue/community. If a person wants to have a conversation about Yeshua with you, let them approach you. Do not be the one to initiate it. Also, understand that many in the community will always harbor a distrust of you when they find out you believe in Yeshua, even if you aren't trinitarian and don't proselytize. The 2,000 years of harsh persecution in Jesus' name has unfortunately scared the Jewish world for many more years to come. We may never see this vitriol disappear in our lifetime, and it may never come to pass at all until Moshiach comes, and you need to be okay with that.

Don't get me wrong, we are not saying that you should be ashamed of Yeshua, Heaven forbid! However, you must be sensitive to the reality on the ground. You are not there to proselytize, you are there to learn and be in community with Judaism like Yeshua and Paul intended, whether they believe the same as you or not. Your dedicated unwavering practice and devotion should be your only form of "preaching" Yeshua. Let people see you live like Yeshua, not hear you. Trust me when I say this approach will garner far more respect from your fellow Jews in the community, and they will feel safer around you to trust you.

Lastly, you must be willing to fully submit yourself to the Jewish Laws, which includes the Oral Torah (Galatians 5:3). You want to be Jewish? Well that means accepting everything that comes with it, baggage and all. Judaism has evolved over time, but you do not get to pick and choose Judaism to make your own. Doing this is creating your own religion, something protestants are accustomed to and see as normal, but is unacceptable in Orthodox Judaism. One of the quintessential aspects of Judaism is unity. Unity always means individual compromise, for the sake of the whole. You must be willing to put aside yourself and your disagreements with the Rabbis and live how the community lives, as one.

You're not alone either, by the way. Plenty of Jews have tons of disagreements with the current laws or the rabbis (as the adage goes, "where there are two Jews, there are three opinions and 4 synagogues"), but they save that for the intellectual conversations amongst themselves while they actively follow the rulings they disagree with. Remember, you are an enlisted soldier in the Army of HaShem, and the rabbis are the officers appointed over you. Disagree with the orders all you like, debate their validity even, but be sure to obey them regardless. It is not your place to overrule the officers in charge. Discipline and obedience are the cornerstone of a successful army. Rebellion within the ranks will lead to division and then defeat.

Judaism has survived and even preserved the scriptures entirely on this selfless obedience to G-d and to the authorities He appointed over them. If you join the ranks of the Army of HaShem, you will be expected to carry on this charge to continue to preserve Judaism in all its ways. A potential convert needs to understand this fact and be willing to accept the authorities that will be appointed over him no matter what they may think about it.

Conclusion

All that to say, I do believe there are provisions in which Paul would accept a Gentile to convert in today's world. However, generally speaking, he strongly advises against it. Paul seems to only encourage conversion if the person in question is "Jewish" but not legally Jewish as a result of some kind of situation outside of his control. Paul clearly encouraged Jews to remain Jewish and for Gentiles to partake in the Jewish communities while also not converting and to feel no sense of obligation to do so. There are few exceptions to the rule, but there are exceptions nonetheless.

Paul Put it this way in the form of the parable in Galatians 4:21-26 as previously mentioned. Wouldn't you rather be the miracle child whose citizenship came only from G-d? Or would you rather be the child who earned his citizenship on his own and by doing it his own way?

In Paul's eyes, he goes so far as to even suggest that he believes a "partial convert" should be accepted in Judaism like a full convert by faith alone, using not only Abraham's story as the model but also just outright saying

Just as Abraham “believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”know then that those who have faith are sons of Abraham. -Galatians 3:6-7

Now, in this section in Galatians, he is not saying that faith alone makes you fully Jewish legally; he instead is using this in reference to "righteousness," which is not obtained by conversion, just like in Abraham's case. But the statement is still a striking one to an ancient audience. He chose this wording specifically to make a striking statement here and to provide a mindset that would discourage conversion to Judaism, which he goes on later to do in chapter 4's parable as explained above.

To Paul, if you convert then your citizenship with Israel and its promises is no longer the miracle it once was. You got your citizenship with your own work; you earned it yourself. Paul thinks you should rather want to remain as the miracle child, whose citizenship was clearly and solely from the miraculous result of G-d's intervention in your life, just like Isaac was who was the promised son with a miraculous birth! Not that converting makes you not a miracle anymore necessarily, but Paul would think, "why on earth would you ever give up being a living miracle and living proof of the New Covenant and of Yeshua's Messiahship?"Just like he thought with Titus.

---

Foot Notes:

[1] Sim, David C. & MacLaren, James S. (2013). "Gentiles, God-fearers and proselytes (Chapter 1): God-Fearers (Section 3)". Attitudes to Gentiles in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 9–27.

[2] Some consider this the issue that Jesus himself scolded some of the Pharisees about - converting without proper teaching and guidance, thus leaving them for 'death'. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel around by sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of Gehenna as yourselves. (Matthew 23:15)

[3] See Shabbat 13b-17b and Yerushalmi Shabbat 1:4. In these passages Shammai Usurps Hillel in order to pass 18 decrees against gentiles in various matters. The reason Shammai made these rules, according to the Talmud, was to further separate and prevent Jews from intermingling with gentiles. Most of these 18 decrees would be overturned after Shammai's death.

[4] Hegg, Tim. (2010). "Paul's Epistle to the Galatians Commentary." Tacoma Washington: Torah Resource. p.168-170

[5] Lancaster, Thomas D. (2011) "The Holy Epistle To The Galatians: Sermons on a Messianic Jewish Approach." Marshfield, Missouri: First Fruits Of Zion. p.23 -(The "Influencers" referenced in the epistle to Galatians are likely not only fellow believers in Yeshua, but also probably themselves converts.)

[6] "Saved" is in quotations here because Judaism does not share the concept of "salvation" with Christians in the Christian sense of the word. In Judaism, "salvation" is a future tense moment in time when Messiah comes and "delivers" Israel and restores the kingdom of Israel ruling from Jerusalem. "Salvation" to a Jew does not happen till the resurrection. In contrast, to a Christian "salvation" is a state of being in the present tence, used to describe a person as to whether or not they are faithfully a "born again" Christian. For the sake of simplicity for my Christian audience, I will continue to use the word in the Christian sense.

[7] See b. Sanhedrin 56a-b and b. Avoda Zara 9:4. A Noachide is one who adheres to the 7 laws of Noah as spelled out in Talmudic liturature. The 7 laws are very basic laws of morality and against idolitry. 1) No Idolatry. 2) Do not curse G-d. 3) Do not murder. 4) Do not commit adultery or sexual immorality. 5) Do not steal. 6) Do not eat flesh torn from a living animal. 7) Establish courts of justice.

[8] Except in incredibly rare fringe instances such as those who follow Yaron Ruven. However, this is such small fringe minority that it's hardly worth mentioning at all, and one is not likely to encounter this in their lifetime. Generally speaking, the overwhelming majority of Judaism in the modern era is such that the Judaism Paul opposed, for all intents and purposes, no longer exists.

[9] Tosafot Bekhorot 2b and Sanhedrin 63b. See also Rema, Orah Hayyim 156:1