Here is an article on the Jewish people as the chosen people, by Dennis Prager
I assume that the type of person who reads columns such as this one has wondered at one time or another why, for thousands of years, there has been so much attention paid to Jews and why, today, to Israel, the one Jewish state.
But how do most people explain this preoccupation? There is no fully rational explanation for the amount of attention paid to the Jews and the Jewish state. And there is no fully rational explanation for the amount of hatred directed at Jews and the Jewish state.
A lifetime of study of this issue, including writing (with Rabbi Joseph Telushkin) a book on anti-Semitism (“Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism”) has convinced me that, along with all the rational explanations, there is one explanation that transcends reason alone.
It is that the Jews are God’s chosen people.
Now, believe me, dear reader, I am well aware of the hazards of making such a claim.
It sounds chauvinistic. It sounds racist. And it sounds irrational, if not bizarre.
But it is none of these.
As regards chauvinism, there is not a hint of inherent superiority in the claim of Jewish chosen-ness. In fact, the Jewish Bible, the book that states the Jews are chosen, constantly berates the Jews for their flawed moral behavior. No bible of any other religion is so critical of the religious group affiliated with that bible as the Hebrew Scriptures are of the Jews.
As for racism, Jewish chosen-ness cannot be racist by definition. Here is why: a) The Jews are not a race; there are Jews of every race. And b) any person of any race, ethnicity or nationality can become a member of the Jewish people and thereby be as chosen as Abraham, Moses, Jeremiah or the chief rabbi of Israel.
And with regard to chosen-ness being an irrational or even bizarre claim, it must be so only to atheists. They don’t believe in a Chooser, so they cannot believe in a Chosen. But for most believing Jews and Christians (most particularly the Founders who saw America as a Second Israel, a second Chosen People), Jewish Chosen-ness has been a given. And even the atheist must look at the evidence and conclude that the Jews play a role in history that defies reason.
Can reason alone explain how a hodgepodge of ex-slaves was able to change history — to introduce the moral God-Creator we know as God; to write the world’s most influential book, the Bible; to devise ethical monotheism; to be the only civilization to deny the cyclical worldview and give humanity belief in a linear (i.e., purposeful) history; to provide morality-driven prophets and so much more — without God playing the decisive role in this people’s history?
Without the Jews, there would be no Christianity (a fact acknowledged by the great majority of Christians) and no Islam (a fact acknowledged by almost no Muslims). Read Thomas Cahill’s “The Gifts of the Jews” or Paul Johnson’s “A History of the Jews” to get an idea about how much this people changed history.
What further renders the claim for Jewish chosen-ness worthy of rational consideration is that virtually every other nation has perceived itself as chosen or otherwise divinely special. For example, China means “Middle Kingdom” in Chinese — meaning that China is at the center of the world; and Japan considers itself the land where the sun originates (“Land of the Rising Sun”). The difference between Jewish chosen-ness and other nations’ similar claims is that no one cares about any other group considering itself Chosen, while vast numbers of non-Jews have either believed the Jews’ claim or have hated the Jews for it.
Perhaps the greatest evidence for the Jews’ chosen-ness has been provided in modern times, during which time evil has consistently targeted the Jews:
— Nazi Germany was more concerned with exterminating the Jews than with winning World War II.
— Throughout its 70-year history, the Soviet Union persecuted its Jews and tried to extinguish Judaism. Hatred of Jews was one thing communists and Nazis shared.
— The United Nations has spent more time discussing and condemning the Jewish state than any other country in the world. Yet, this state is smaller than every Central American country, including El Salvador, Panama and even Belize. Imagine if the amount of attention paid to Israel were paid to Belize — who would not think there was something extraordinary about that country?
— Much of the contemporary Muslim world — and nearly all the Arab world — is obsessed with annihilating the one Jewish state.
In the words of Catholic scholar Father Edward Flannery, the Jews carry the burden of God in history. Most Jews, being secular, do not believe this. And many Jews dislike talk of chosen-ness because they fear it will increase anti-Semitism; they may be right.
But it doesn’t alter the fact that the obsession with one of the smallest countries and smallest peoples on earth, and the unique hatred of the Jews and the Jewish state by the world’s most vicious ideologies, can be best explained only in transcendent terms. Namely that God, for whatever reason, chose the Jews.
Prager’s observation about how bad the Jewish scriptures make the Jews look runs parallel to the observations of many Christian apologists about how bad the four Gospels make the disciples look. In the Judeo-Christian scriptures, most of the major figures are described as very, very human, warts and all.
The basic idea? God chose people for reasons that He knows, but we don’t…. and the reasons don’t have much to do with the apparent qualities of those people.
Which does not make them one whit less chosen.
May 18th, 2011 4:21 pm
Did that not end with the 490 year prophecy? Or did that just signify some change in strategy?
May 19th, 2011 4:32 pm
So no mortal can possibly know why God chose people. Therefore, God’s decision about a segment of us has to be considered by us as completely arbitrary, at least in this life. So any religious group bestowing this title upon themselves is basing the assertion on ignorance essentially; ignorance confirmable by each group’s applicable sacred writing.
I’m not understanding the purpose of this practically random, aimless, God-given designation. Maybe the ethnocentrists are trying to make this divisive idea a little more palatable, to lessen the inevitable vengeful outrage or suffering of those not chosen. At any rate, I see the costs of making this decision as too negatively high, historically. I don’t see any momentous necessity for it. But again, I’m not allowed to see.
May 19th, 2011 4:42 pm
Did you read this paragraph?
If you don’t believe in a Chooser, of course this is all nonsense. If you do, then you’re immediately struck that no one is really worthy to be chosen by God, so his criteria are something other than worthiness, as we understand worthiness.
I have to say, the “outrage or suffering of those not chosen,” historically, doesn’t measure up to what the Jews have endured for millenia. Gee, don’t you just see people lining up all around the world saying, “I want to be a Jew. Choose me! Choose me!”? Of course not…. because Jews have mostly endured the “outrage and suffering” of the chosen.
Of course, if you believe the Old Testament to be a divinely revealed and inspired writing, then the Israelites did not bestow the title upon themselves, God did. If you don’t believe the OT, then the whole discussion is bound be pointless to you, except insofar as you can throw rocks at those who believe it.
May 22nd, 2011 6:27 am
It seems odd to me that many ‘Christians’ struggle with the Old Testament and can’t get their mind around the idea that: 1. It is a true historical account. 2. It is God’s Word. 3. The things written there actually happened. 4. It has application for us today.
If you don’t believe the O.T., why would you believe the New? Jesus constantly referred to the O.T. and was a wise teacher of it at age 12 (assuming one believes the accounts of His life in the N.T.) And Jesus was a Jew. He said, “…I am not come to destroy the law but to fulfill the law).
May 22nd, 2011 2:01 pm
Yes. I am often befuddled that so many Christians seem to believe the NT, but not the OT, especially in its portrayal of God. It’s especially odd because, Jesus, as you point out, obviously was a Jew who believed the OT (which was the only scripture they had, of course).
Generally, I find this to be true of people who want to accept Jesus’ moral teaching (or some of it, the “social justice” part) but not His role in the salvation of individuals and His moral teaching regarding personal behavior and ethics. The “Jesus as the Way to salvation” makes no sense without the OT.
May 23rd, 2011 1:20 pm
Sorry if I don’t believe like you do. It doesn’t mean people like me are closet atheists or whatever.
As stated earlier: is there any constructive purpose for putting the meaning of Chosen in that light? If you wanna go there: I believe, through God’s grace, we are all worthy to be chosen by God. In fact, we HAVE all (not SOME, ALL) been chosen by God. I know it’s a little cheesy. You’re free to jump all over me for that nonsense if you want.
My best guess is: Jewish Monotheism was the most hopeful scaffolding available at the time for Jesus to introduce his gospel. In that sense (and no more), God chose the Jews. I could be wrong, but that isn’t going to cause me to throw up my hands and stop thinking. God doing something just because “He said so” is the kind of thinking reserved for those who cannot, for whatever reason, put away their childish things. Or maybe we get them out and put them away on specific occasions to rationalize our perceived conflicting beliefs. Admittedly, we all do that. I apologize for sounding like I was throwing rocks at people by pointing it out.
I’ve long believed that the entire Bible is a Divinely revealed and inspired writing. But even that doesn’t make it perfect. The Divinely revealed and inspired part obviously is. It’s just the required writing and reading parts that aren’t. There’s been plenty of foolish oppressive societal values derived from miswritten and misread scripture in the past, which we can all agree on. And there’s some which we can not. But I’ve never seen that as enough reason for experiencing a OT-versus-NT faith crisis. Let’s just say, regarding faith-matters, that I know not to rely on flawed literal inspirations from God nearly as much as I rely on God. The Bible taught me that. Why do you think that makes me an atheist?
May 23rd, 2011 1:35 pm
Innermore, I’m sorry if you thought I labeled you as an atheist. I certainly didn’t intend that message to come to you. But I think you do see the OT and NT as fundamentally different in terms of historic reliability/inspiration status.
Do you think God spoke to Abraham and made a covenant with him and his descendants, or not? If so, do you think that covenant ended with Jesus? If you don’t believe God made that covenant, then your view of the OT is very different than your apparent view of the NT.
I keep remembering Jesus saying he didn’t come to wipe out the old teachings/understandings/historical record/law.
The way in which modern people are CHOSEN is fundamentally different than the way God chose the descendants of Abraham. There is a much greater element of choice, for one thing. (Could the Cushites or someone have “chosen to be CHOSEN”? I don’t think so.)
It probably isn’t helpful to conflate the two senses of the term.
In general, though, you seem not to accept the straightforward presentation in the OT that God chose Israel. You appear to gravitate to sociological interpretations of the form “the Jews had to tell themselves ‘this or that’ “. This statement, “Jewish Monotheism was the most hopeful scaffolding available at the time for Jesus to introduce his gospel. In that sense (and no more), God chose the Jews.”, seems to imply that God didn’t choose Israel in the first place 1800 years or so before Jesus, and that “Jewish Monotheism” somehow sort of arose from the ground and God merely took advantage of it to enter the world as Jesus. But where did “Jewish Monotheism” come from if it was not a response to God’s choice of Israel?
Perhaps I have misunderstood your intent.
A side question that may clarify: When you referred to “Jesus and his gospel”, what do you think that gospel is, exactly?
May 25th, 2011 5:01 pm
Innermore, how do you know that the written Bible is ‘flawed’? Upon what do you base your opinion other than your opinion? And if what you say is true, then – wait a minute!! What you have written here is nothing more than black shapes on paper; meaningless and without merit. There is no way to even know that YOU actually wrote them.
My thinking brain must ask what possible purpose could God have in Divinely revealing and inspiring the Bible and then not bothering to protect His stuff. Is He some kind of Divine idiot? Or is He a sadist who delights in keeping us guessing?
“There’s been plenty of foolish oppressive societal values derived from miswritten and misread scripture in the past, which we can all agree on.” Can you cite any example of this? (Please don’t say slavery or ‘the Crusades’ because there is ample evidence of revisionist history regarding these two, and we’re all sick of hearing about them).
May 25th, 2011 5:07 pm
Rom 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Rom 3:3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
May 28th, 2011 1:26 pm
Miner, law and history isn’t really the purpose of the Bible to me. I was taught to look for the personal spiritual meanings behind it all; their Inspiration, if you like. I don’t need to believe God made a covenant with Abraham to know that God loved him. So why go there? Judging written infallibilities or flaws doesn’t affect the Bible’s Inspiration in any way. At least it doesn’t to me; how about you? Sorry if that sounds like I’m trying to squeak out of the issue. Let’s just say I think the argument is predictably unproductive.
One important “fulfillment of the law” looking at this Chosen area (which caused me to post a comment about this article) was to not lord it over others. For me, as for the Jews, that means: keep it to yourself. No sense in running around reminding everybody that you’ve been Chosen. Some may interpret your gloating as arrogant exclusion, which detracts greatly from your purpose for being chosen in the first place. Christ’s gospel is why we were all chosen, btw. I could go on and on cracking that nutshell. But that’s as exact as I’ll get using the flawed medium of written words.
May 28th, 2011 1:27 pm
Tonedeaf, any human recording of anything is defective. But it doesn’t tarnish the Inspired original, thankfully. God ingeniously chose not to protect His Stuff. It wouldn’t have done any good anyhow. Free inquisitiveness is what keeps us mortals faithfully interested. How do you think the truth has persisted so long? There’s a precious risk in God allowing imperfect human perspectives.
As far as goofy laws: how ’bout Leviticus 11? Ephesians 6:5-9 describes how to properly treat your slaves. I might call that a moral contradiction. So what. It doesn’t matter if the Bible agrees with slavery or not. That’s not its purpose. The same is true for all the lousy social conditions under which the Bible was Inspired, revealed, written and recited; despotism, bigamy, male chauvinism, or racism in general. It’s enough that the Bible mentions them in its manner of expression. But it doesn’t, nor does it need to, condone or deny them directly. That’s up to society. The Bible was designed to enlighten individual members of societies.
May 30th, 2011 6:34 am
That pesky Old Testament. What was God thinkin’? It’s such a comfort that we have the great wisdom of men today who know better than to take the Bible literally. In fact, what do we even need it for?
May 30th, 2011 9:25 am
That pesky human mind. What was God thinkin’? It’s such a comfort that we have infallible Biblical truth so literally dictated to us by wise men that our foolish minds need not be engaged. In fact, what do we even need thoughts for?
I don’t mean to sound like a lofty wise guy. Believe me, I don’t pooh-pooh basing your faith on literal interpretation alone. But I certainly don’t see my tendency towards “figurative” interpretation as a threat to your “literal” faith (or vice-versa), do you? God’s Word doesn’t read like a primary school math book to me; just like I assume it doesn’t read like Aesop’s Fables to you.
May 31st, 2011 6:01 am
Hey Phil, read your email.