serious question on core Jewish belief

[ding]

"We’ve been seeing that term “particularism” quite often this month. At its root, it refers to the core Jewish belief that the Creator of the Universe also has a special and unique relationship with His chosen people." -Mosaic Magazine

Q1 - How could a universal God have a chosen people? If God has a chosen people, He isn't universal. If universal, can't have a chosen people because He stands in a different relationship to some, i.e., is a different kind of God.

Q2 - How is chosen-people-ism different from white supremacy?

You've been miseducated by anti-semitic leftists. Go learn something that isn't bigoted.

OK, then educate me. How is a belief in or support for white supremacy different from a belief in or support for chosen-people-ism?

Because white supremacy is the belief of a superior race whereas chosenism isn't. Remember you have no idea what they were chose for, right? For all you know they were chosen for making really good bagels.

White supremacy, if it exists at all, is a belief in white separatism. To be chosen by the Judean God means nothing else but that: be ye separate.

I disagree. And since you don't know what they were chosen for, you can't speak intelligently on any aspect of their chosenness and what that may mean for God.

 

[ding]

"We’ve been seeing that term “particularism” quite often this month. At its root, it refers to the core Jewish belief that the Creator of the Universe also has a special and unique relationship with His chosen people." -Mosaic Magazine

Q1 - How could a universal God have a chosen people? If God has a chosen people, He isn't universal. If universal, can't have a chosen people because He stands in a different relationship to some, i.e., is a different kind of God.

Q2 - How is chosen-people-ism different from white supremacy?

The term "Chosen" is being defined by your selective use and subjective mind, but is it the context of the meaning in the Biblical sense?

Chosen to keep the laws and instructions, reflect and manifest his Essence and memory for it's time and place to be revealed.

It would be like you having a simple project with simple directions instruction panthlet, but the person you hire to put it together chucks the instructions, writes his own panthlet that says he the worker no longer has to obey the rules of wearing safety goggles and gloves that the original panthlet warned. Then they have the nerve to complain to you the boss (who knows the outcome of not following safety measures), when the rule breaker becomes blind and has his fingertips amputated for not heeding the warning and instructions. Would you not designate someone to supervise and instruct how to follow the shop rules for sake of safety not restriction or punishment.
CHOSEN workers (servants not served) to do your good deeds, preferebly ones who obey and trusts the instructions?

Leaving aside the anthropomorphic quality of your example, my objection remains that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others cannot, by definition, be a universal God. He is not the same God for all people. He is, if I may coin a term, a "biversal" God. But since all humans share the same reality, such a God can't be real.

Or it could be that your assumption that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others... is wrong.

View attachment 498362

That was the formulation as presented by one of your cohorts on this thread, to which I was responding. I don't, in fact, believe that it has any basis in reality.

I have cohorts? Who are my cohorts? Why didn't someone tell me I have cohorts?

Putting that aside, it sounds like you used an argument you don't believe to try to justify an argument you do believe? Did I get that right?

If so, you literally just invalidated your own argument because you don't believe in the argument you are making.

Not to mention you can't even begin to answer this question until you actually know what they were chosen for. Would you like for me to help you with that?

 

[Street Juice]

"We’ve been seeing that term “particularism” quite often this month. At its root, it refers to the core Jewish belief that the Creator of the Universe also has a special and unique relationship with His chosen people." -Mosaic Magazine

Q1 - How could a universal God have a chosen people? If God has a chosen people, He isn't universal. If universal, can't have a chosen people because He stands in a different relationship to some, i.e., is a different kind of God.

Q2 - How is chosen-people-ism different from white supremacy?

The term "Chosen" is being defined by your selective use and subjective mind, but is it the context of the meaning in the Biblical sense?

Chosen to keep the laws and instructions, reflect and manifest his Essence and memory for it's time and place to be revealed.

It would be like you having a simple project with simple directions instruction panthlet, but the person you hire to put it together chucks the instructions, writes his own panthlet that says he the worker no longer has to obey the rules of wearing safety goggles and gloves that the original panthlet warned. Then they have the nerve to complain to you the boss (who knows the outcome of not following safety measures), when the rule breaker becomes blind and has his fingertips amputated for not heeding the warning and instructions. Would you not designate someone to supervise and instruct how to follow the shop rules for sake of safety not restriction or punishment.
CHOSEN workers (servants not served) to do your good deeds, preferebly ones who obey and trusts the instructions?

Leaving aside the anthropomorphic quality of your example, my objection remains that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others cannot, by definition, be a universal God. He is not the same God for all people. He is, if I may coin a term, a "biversal" God. But since all humans share the same reality, such a God can't be real.

Or it could be that your assumption that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others... is wrong.

View attachment 498362

That was the formulation as presented by one of your cohorts on this thread, to which I was responding. I don't, in fact, believe that it has any basis in reality.

That's because you also subjectively and selectively define the word God as you do the word Chosen.
The Jewish tradition is that G-d is non anthropromorphic, our beliefs are that The Hebrew God is an Essence and not a man nor figure or form.
Sources:
Isaiah 42:8 we can't pray to any image of anything physical- Exodus 20:3-7 and Deuteronomy 5:8-10

God is not a man nor form-(Isaiah 2:22, 14:13, I Samuel 15:29, Numbers 23:19, and Hosea 11:9, Deuteronomy 4:11-12 and the 13 major principles of the Jewish faith based on the Rambam's teaching of "ain lo demus haguf ve'ayno guf" -- that Hashem has no physical form.)

The Gemarah (Baba Batra 75) Tells us Jerusalem is named after G0D and is the place commemorating his name(description)& essence.

In Sefer D’varim (12:5, 11, 14, 18, 21; 14:23,24, 25; 15:20; 16:2, 6, 7, 11, 15, 16; 17:8, 10; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11).the place that I will choose to place My Name(the messenger of God shares this name and reflects this Essence). That is referring to YeruShalem because Sifri identifies the place which Hashem will choose (12:18) as “Yerushalayim”.
Shalem means completeness/wholeness thus describing the Essence to be all we could and should be aka evolve/progress.

If you don't believe this, then why is Shalem the key symbol on your dollar bill and premise of the early colonies to become complete and whole? (Shalem)

"The Jewish tradition is that G-d is non anthropromorphic,"

Isn't the concept of "chosen" itself grossly anthropomorphic? I mean, you can't argue that God is an "essence" and simultaneously argue "He" actualizes "His" will through the utterly corporeal act of selecting these people here and not those people there as his favorites.

 

[Street Juice]

"We’ve been seeing that term “particularism” quite often this month. At its root, it refers to the core Jewish belief that the Creator of the Universe also has a special and unique relationship with His chosen people." -Mosaic Magazine

Q1 - How could a universal God have a chosen people? If God has a chosen people, He isn't universal. If universal, can't have a chosen people because He stands in a different relationship to some, i.e., is a different kind of God.

Q2 - How is chosen-people-ism different from white supremacy?

The term "Chosen" is being defined by your selective use and subjective mind, but is it the context of the meaning in the Biblical sense?

Chosen to keep the laws and instructions, reflect and manifest his Essence and memory for it's time and place to be revealed.

It would be like you having a simple project with simple directions instruction panthlet, but the person you hire to put it together chucks the instructions, writes his own panthlet that says he the worker no longer has to obey the rules of wearing safety goggles and gloves that the original panthlet warned. Then they have the nerve to complain to you the boss (who knows the outcome of not following safety measures), when the rule breaker becomes blind and has his fingertips amputated for not heeding the warning and instructions. Would you not designate someone to supervise and instruct how to follow the shop rules for sake of safety not restriction or punishment.
CHOSEN workers (servants not served) to do your good deeds, preferebly ones who obey and trusts the instructions?

Leaving aside the anthropomorphic quality of your example, my objection remains that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others cannot, by definition, be a universal God. He is not the same God for all people. He is, if I may coin a term, a "biversal" God. But since all humans share the same reality, such a God can't be real.

Or it could be that your assumption that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others... is wrong.

View attachment 498362

That was the formulation as presented by one of your cohorts on this thread, to which I was responding. I don't, in fact, believe that it has any basis in reality.

I have cohorts? Who are my cohorts? Why didn't someone tell me I have cohorts?

Putting that aside, it sounds like you used an argument you don't believe to try to justify an argument you do believe? Did I get that right?

If so, you literally just invalidated your own argument because you don't believe in the argument you are making.

Not to mention you can't even begin to answer this question until you actually know what they were chosen for. Would you like for me to help you with that?

"Not to mention you can't even begin to answer this question until you actually know what they were chosen for. Would you like for me to help you with that?"

Thanks, but I think I've got a handle on it. Nothing you have said has in the slightest refuted the argument implied in my question. No real God can be the One Universal God while simultaneously having a distinct relationship with a subset of humans. It is a logical impossibility unless one is willing to go to the absurd and repugnant extreme of simply declaring some humans to be not humans--an extreme from which, in fact, some of your more vile rabbis haven't recoiled in order to preserve Jewish supremacy, er, separatism.

 

[ding]

"We’ve been seeing that term “particularism” quite often this month. At its root, it refers to the core Jewish belief that the Creator of the Universe also has a special and unique relationship with His chosen people." -Mosaic Magazine

Q1 - How could a universal God have a chosen people? If God has a chosen people, He isn't universal. If universal, can't have a chosen people because He stands in a different relationship to some, i.e., is a different kind of God.

Q2 - How is chosen-people-ism different from white supremacy?

The term "Chosen" is being defined by your selective use and subjective mind, but is it the context of the meaning in the Biblical sense?

Chosen to keep the laws and instructions, reflect and manifest his Essence and memory for it's time and place to be revealed.

It would be like you having a simple project with simple directions instruction panthlet, but the person you hire to put it together chucks the instructions, writes his own panthlet that says he the worker no longer has to obey the rules of wearing safety goggles and gloves that the original panthlet warned. Then they have the nerve to complain to you the boss (who knows the outcome of not following safety measures), when the rule breaker becomes blind and has his fingertips amputated for not heeding the warning and instructions. Would you not designate someone to supervise and instruct how to follow the shop rules for sake of safety not restriction or punishment.
CHOSEN workers (servants not served) to do your good deeds, preferebly ones who obey and trusts the instructions?

Leaving aside the anthropomorphic quality of your example, my objection remains that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others cannot, by definition, be a universal God. He is not the same God for all people. He is, if I may coin a term, a "biversal" God. But since all humans share the same reality, such a God can't be real.

Or it could be that your assumption that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others... is wrong.

View attachment 498362

That was the formulation as presented by one of your cohorts on this thread, to which I was responding. I don't, in fact, believe that it has any basis in reality.

I have cohorts? Who are my cohorts? Why didn't someone tell me I have cohorts?

Putting that aside, it sounds like you used an argument you don't believe to try to justify an argument you do believe? Did I get that right?

If so, you literally just invalidated your own argument because you don't believe in the argument you are making.

Not to mention you can't even begin to answer this question until you actually know what they were chosen for. Would you like for me to help you with that?

"Not to mention you can't even begin to answer this question until you actually know what they were chosen for. Would you like for me to help you with that?"

Thanks, but I think I've got a handle on it. Nothing you have said has in the slightest refuted the argument implied in my question. No real God can be the One Universal God while simultaneously having a distinct relationship with a subset of humans. It is a logical impossibility unless one is willing to go to the absurd and repugnant extreme of simply declaring some humans to be not humans--an extreme from which, in fact, some of your more vile rabbis haven't recoiled in order to preserve Jewish supremacy, er, separatism.

I don't believe you do have a good handle on it at all. Again... it doesn't make sense to YOU because YOU don't know what they were chosen for.

AND what you are claiming doesn't make sense to me because I do know what they were chosen for.

 

[Aletheia4u]

Your second question is easier than your first. All the other races that think they are the best choose themselves. God choose the Israelites.

God is the father of all races. For a plethora of reasons, all fathers have their favorites.

Assuming you are Christian, you believe Jesus was God Incarnate, yet Jews are going to hell because they rejected Christ (God) and killed him (God). Does this make sense, that a universal God, creator of the universe, could consider his killers his favorites? The idea that a real God would have a chosen people is already absurd enough, but to be murdered by them and still be chosen is absurdity squared

Matthew 13:25
But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away.

Matthew 7:23
Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

 

[Street Juice]

"We’ve been seeing that term “particularism” quite often this month. At its root, it refers to the core Jewish belief that the Creator of the Universe also has a special and unique relationship with His chosen people." -Mosaic Magazine

Q1 - How could a universal God have a chosen people? If God has a chosen people, He isn't universal. If universal, can't have a chosen people because He stands in a different relationship to some, i.e., is a different kind of God.

Q2 - How is chosen-people-ism different from white supremacy?

The term "Chosen" is being defined by your selective use and subjective mind, but is it the context of the meaning in the Biblical sense?

Chosen to keep the laws and instructions, reflect and manifest his Essence and memory for it's time and place to be revealed.

It would be like you having a simple project with simple directions instruction panthlet, but the person you hire to put it together chucks the instructions, writes his own panthlet that says he the worker no longer has to obey the rules of wearing safety goggles and gloves that the original panthlet warned. Then they have the nerve to complain to you the boss (who knows the outcome of not following safety measures), when the rule breaker becomes blind and has his fingertips amputated for not heeding the warning and instructions. Would you not designate someone to supervise and instruct how to follow the shop rules for sake of safety not restriction or punishment.
CHOSEN workers (servants not served) to do your good deeds, preferebly ones who obey and trusts the instructions?

Leaving aside the anthropomorphic quality of your example, my objection remains that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others cannot, by definition, be a universal God. He is not the same God for all people. He is, if I may coin a term, a "biversal" God. But since all humans share the same reality, such a God can't be real.

Or it could be that your assumption that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others... is wrong.

View attachment 498362

That was the formulation as presented by one of your cohorts on this thread, to which I was responding. I don't, in fact, believe that it has any basis in reality.

I have cohorts? Who are my cohorts? Why didn't someone tell me I have cohorts?

Putting that aside, it sounds like you used an argument you don't believe to try to justify an argument you do believe? Did I get that right?

If so, you literally just invalidated your own argument because you don't believe in the argument you are making.

Not to mention you can't even begin to answer this question until you actually know what they were chosen for. Would you like for me to help you with that?

"Not to mention you can't even begin to answer this question until you actually know what they were chosen for. Would you like for me to help you with that?"

Thanks, but I think I've got a handle on it. Nothing you have said has in the slightest refuted the argument implied in my question. No real God can be the One Universal God while simultaneously having a distinct relationship with a subset of humans. It is a logical impossibility unless one is willing to go to the absurd and repugnant extreme of simply declaring some humans to be not humans--an extreme from which, in fact, some of your more vile rabbis haven't recoiled in order to preserve Jewish supremacy, er, separatism.

I don't believe you do have a good handle on it at all. Again... it doesn't make sense to YOU because YOU don't know what they were chosen for.

AND what you are claiming doesn't make sense to me because I do know what they were chosen for.

Do you claim your God is universal? Creator of the universe? Indivisibly present One in all time and all space?

 

[Penelope]

ding said "YOU don't know what they were chosen for."

I don't know either, anyone that knows is lying to themselves and the world..

The Jewish folks are not chosen, the OT is their book, and they have Jesus who is a Jew. The Christians are worshipping a Jew, and is their best friend, who is invisible.

All the NT books are wrote by a Jew. We don't know who Luke was but I suspect he was a Jew.

Paul I think is Josephus. The NT is set of books for/to Gentiles to worship to the Jews.

 

[ding]

"We’ve been seeing that term “particularism” quite often this month. At its root, it refers to the core Jewish belief that the Creator of the Universe also has a special and unique relationship with His chosen people." -Mosaic Magazine

Q1 - How could a universal God have a chosen people? If God has a chosen people, He isn't universal. If universal, can't have a chosen people because He stands in a different relationship to some, i.e., is a different kind of God.

Q2 - How is chosen-people-ism different from white supremacy?

The term "Chosen" is being defined by your selective use and subjective mind, but is it the context of the meaning in the Biblical sense?

Chosen to keep the laws and instructions, reflect and manifest his Essence and memory for it's time and place to be revealed.

It would be like you having a simple project with simple directions instruction panthlet, but the person you hire to put it together chucks the instructions, writes his own panthlet that says he the worker no longer has to obey the rules of wearing safety goggles and gloves that the original panthlet warned. Then they have the nerve to complain to you the boss (who knows the outcome of not following safety measures), when the rule breaker becomes blind and has his fingertips amputated for not heeding the warning and instructions. Would you not designate someone to supervise and instruct how to follow the shop rules for sake of safety not restriction or punishment.
CHOSEN workers (servants not served) to do your good deeds, preferebly ones who obey and trusts the instructions?

Leaving aside the anthropomorphic quality of your example, my objection remains that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others cannot, by definition, be a universal God. He is not the same God for all people. He is, if I may coin a term, a "biversal" God. But since all humans share the same reality, such a God can't be real.

Or it could be that your assumption that such a God, who has an "owner-supervisor" relationship with some humans and an "owner-supervised" relationship with the others... is wrong.

View attachment 498362

That was the formulation as presented by one of your cohorts on this thread, to which I was responding. I don't, in fact, believe that it has any basis in reality.

I have cohorts? Who are my cohorts? Why didn't someone tell me I have cohorts?

Putting that aside, it sounds like you used an argument you don't believe to try to justify an argument you do believe? Did I get that right?

If so, you literally just invalidated your own argument because you don't believe in the argument you are making.

Not to mention you can't even begin to answer this question until you actually know what they were chosen for. Would you like for me to help you with that?

"Not to mention you can't even begin to answer this question until you actually know what they were chosen for. Would you like for me to help you with that?"

Thanks, but I think I've got a handle on it. Nothing you have said has in the slightest refuted the argument implied in my question. No real God can be the One Universal God while simultaneously having a distinct relationship with a subset of humans. It is a logical impossibility unless one is willing to go to the absurd and repugnant extreme of simply declaring some humans to be not humans--an extreme from which, in fact, some of your more vile rabbis haven't recoiled in order to preserve Jewish supremacy, er, separatism.

I don't believe you do have a good handle on it at all. Again... it doesn't make sense to YOU because YOU don't know what they were chosen for.

AND what you are claiming doesn't make sense to me because I do know what they were chosen for.

Do you claim your God is universal? Creator of the universe? Indivisibly present One in all time and all space?

It's not a claim. God is.

Here's what Huston Smith has to say on this subject:

The idea that a universal god decided that the divine nature should be uniquely and incomparably disclosed to a single people is among the most difficult notions to take seriously in the entire study of religion.​

​

The Jews did not see themselves as singled out for privileges. They were chosen to serve, and to suffer the trials that service would often exact.​

​

Isaiah's doctrine of vicarious suffering meant that the Jews were elected to shoulder a suffering that would otherwise have been distributed more widely.​

​

It is the doctrine that God's doings can focus like a burning glass on particular times, places, and peoples - in the interest, to be sure, of intentions that embrace human beings universally.​

​

07 Judaism

 

[ding]

ding said "YOU don't know what they were chosen for."

I don't know either, anyone that knows is lying to themselves and the world..

The Jewish folks are not chosen, the OT is their book, and they have Jesus who is a Jew. The Christians are worshipping a Jew, and is their best friend, who is invisible.

All the NT books are wrote by a Jew. We don't know who Luke was but I suspect he was a Jew.

Paul I think is Josephus. The NT is set of books for/to Gentiles to worship to the Jews.

Per Huston Smith... The Jews did not see themselves as singled out for privileges. They were chosen to serve, and to suffer the trials that service would often exact.

 

[Penelope]

ding said "YOU don't know what they were chosen for."

I don't know either, anyone that knows is lying to themselves and the world..

The Jewish folks are not chosen, the OT is their book, and they have Jesus who is a Jew. The Christians are worshipping a Jew, and is their best friend, who is invisible.

All the NT books are wrote by a Jew. We don't know who Luke was but I suspect he was a Jew.

Paul I think is Josephus. The NT is set of books for/to Gentiles to worship to the Jews.

Per Huston Smith... The Jews did not see themselves as singled out for privileges. They were chosen to serve, and to suffer the trials that service would often exact.

No one chose the Jews, it was and is self identity. They are arrogant and have Christians worshipping a Jew.

 

[surada]

ding said "YOU don't know what they were chosen for."

I don't know either, anyone that knows is lying to themselves and the world..

The Jewish folks are not chosen, the OT is their book, and they have Jesus who is a Jew. The Christians are worshipping a Jew, and is their best friend, who is invisible.

All the NT books are wrote by a Jew. We don't know who Luke was but I suspect he was a Jew.

Paul I think is Josephus. The NT is set of books for/to Gentiles to worship to the Jews.

Paul was Saul before his conversion on the road to Damascus. Josephus was born after the crucifixion.

 

[justinacolmena]

The Torah is abundantly clear that being God's "Chosen People" is not the basis of special favors or immunity from the consequences on their actions.

That "law" from Leviticus 12 etc. isn't going get anybody to heaven.

 

[hobelim]

"We’ve been seeing that term “particularism” quite often this month. At its root, it refers to the core Jewish belief that the Creator of the Universe also has a special and unique relationship with His chosen people." -Mosaic Magazine

Q1 - How could a universal God have a chosen people? If God has a chosen people, He isn't universal. If universal, can't have a chosen people because He stands in a different relationship to some, i.e., is a different kind of God.

Q2 - How is chosen-people-ism different from white supremacy?

God chose the Jewish people to make his name known in the world, to bring order, light, into this world where chaos and superstition reigned and life had always been exceedingly pointless, "the world was without shape or form and void."

White supremacists got their instructions from Hitler to subjugate all other races and nations through fascism..

Your question is like asking whats the difference between sanity and madness.

Stupid.

 

[hobelim]

The Torah is abundantly clear that being God's "Chosen People" is not the basis of special favors or immunity from the consequences on their actions. They were punished time after time, even at times directly by g-d, which clearly demonstrates that there is no great benefit to being the Chosen People.

God chose the Jews to be the vehicle by which the divine message is conveyed to mankind, through the Torah.

If they were chosen because of their "supremacy," it was merely their demonstrated talent for communication, which continues to this day. Unfortunately, many if not most of the remaining "sons of Abraham" have forgotten the Message that they were commissioned to convey.

Scripture makes it clear that the Jewish people were not chosen for any merit of their own.

 

[ding]

The Torah is abundantly clear that being God's "Chosen People" is not the basis of special favors or immunity from the consequences on their actions. They were punished time after time, even at times directly by g-d, which clearly demonstrates that there is no great benefit to being the Chosen People.

God chose the Jews to be the vehicle by which the divine message is conveyed to mankind, through the Torah.

If they were chosen because of their "supremacy," it was merely their demonstrated talent for communication, which continues to this day. Unfortunately, many if not most of the remaining "sons of Abraham" have forgotten the Message that they were commissioned to convey.

Scripture makes it clear that the Jewish people were not chosen for any merit of their own.

They were chosen for their propensity to pass down traditions orally.

 

[ding]

ding said "YOU don't know what they were chosen for."

I don't know either, anyone that knows is lying to themselves and the world..

The Jewish folks are not chosen, the OT is their book, and they have Jesus who is a Jew. The Christians are worshipping a Jew, and is their best friend, who is invisible.

All the NT books are wrote by a Jew. We don't know who Luke was but I suspect he was a Jew.

Paul I think is Josephus. The NT is set of books for/to Gentiles to worship to the Jews.

Per Huston Smith... The Jews did not see themselves as singled out for privileges. They were chosen to serve, and to suffer the trials that service would often exact.

No one chose the Jews, it was and is self identity. They are arrogant and have Christians worshipping a Jew.

Huston Smith disagrees with you. And so do I.

 

[HaShev]

The Torah is abundantly clear that being God's "Chosen People" is not the basis of special favors or immunity from the consequences on their actions.

That "law" from Leviticus 12 etc. isn't going get anybody to heaven.

Olam Habah means "world to come"
So the future to come depends on a lawful society to be Stable (Shalem), if it is lawless it becomes like the trash heap outside the kingdom, proof are liberal lawless run cities.

 

[hobelim]

The Torah is abundantly clear that being God's "Chosen People" is not the basis of special favors or immunity from the consequences on their actions. They were punished time after time, even at times directly by g-d, which clearly demonstrates that there is no great benefit to being the Chosen People.

God chose the Jews to be the vehicle by which the divine message is conveyed to mankind, through the Torah.

If they were chosen because of their "supremacy," it was merely their demonstrated talent for communication, which continues to this day. Unfortunately, many if not most of the remaining "sons of Abraham" have forgotten the Message that they were commissioned to convey.

Scripture makes it clear that the Jewish people were not chosen for any merit of their own.

They were chosen for their propensity to pass down traditions orally.

Thats just dumb. Damn.

Every nation passed down their traditions orally.

The specific reason stated was that God loved them and took pity on them and so gave them clear instructions about how to live a peaceful prosperous and abundant life by standing guard over the sanctity of their own minds reflecting the image and likeness of a Holy God in a wilderness full of other nations that reflected the image and likeness of wild animals, vile and loathsome beasts and birds..

 

[ding]

The Torah is abundantly clear that being God's "Chosen People" is not the basis of special favors or immunity from the consequences on their actions. They were punished time after time, even at times directly by g-d, which clearly demonstrates that there is no great benefit to being the Chosen People.

God chose the Jews to be the vehicle by which the divine message is conveyed to mankind, through the Torah.

If they were chosen because of their "supremacy," it was merely their demonstrated talent for communication, which continues to this day. Unfortunately, many if not most of the remaining "sons of Abraham" have forgotten the Message that they were commissioned to convey.

Scripture makes it clear that the Jewish people were not chosen for any merit of their own.

They were chosen for their propensity to pass down traditions orally.

Thats just dumb. Damn.

Every nation passed down their traditions orally.

The specific reason stated was that God loved them and took pity on them and so gave them clear instructions about how to live a peaceful prosperous and abundant life by standing guard over the sanctity of their own minds in a wilderness full of other nations that reflected the image and likeness of wild animals, vile and loathsome beasts and birds..

No. Not every nation did. There's been nothing like this before.