Considering they were circumcised at 8 days old I'm not sure such a choice was even offered them. Certainly they wouldn't have had the privileges that came via circumcision such as dwelling with God. Do you mean to ask if a Hebrew refused to circumcise their son at 8 days old?
God's covenant with Israel wasn't about them attaining eternal life, though, so the bigger question is whether non-Israelites during the time preceeding Christ had access to eternal life and whether a person who was hereditarily linked to Abraham had to join the community of Israel to attain salvation. That's the one I entertain is possible.
God's covenant with Israel wasn't about them attaining eternal life, though, so the bigger question is whether non-Israelites during the time preceeding Christ had access to eternal life and whether a person who was hereditarily linked to Abraham had to join the community of Israel to attain salvation. That's the one I entertain is possible.
That was the scenario.
As for your second paragraph, no, that is not possible either. God made it clear in Exodus 12:48
And when a stranger dwells with you and wants to keep the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as a native of the land. For no uncircumcised person shall eat it.
God viewed physical circumcision as a crucial requirement in the OT, you cannot run away from that when you read the OT literally.