Why Did The Creator Choose the Jews?

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

(I'm glad B.W. is here. Feel free to join the conversation. Jenna and I need all the help we can get.)

The first time the "Jews" are mentioned in the bible, they are at war with Israel. (2Kings 16:1-6) This was not Jews fighting Jews. This was Israelites fighting Jews. The nation of Israel had become divided by this point, into two separate nations, with two separate kingdoms. The kingdom of Israel, with capital Samaria, and the kingdom of Judah, with capital Jerusalem.

I think you must be using the word «Jew» according to your understanding (which is heretical: tribe of Judah + elements of the tribes of Benjamin & Levi,) and I define it conventionally, that is: a person of the Israelite community, the Jewish people; a follower of Judaism.

That said, the example you offered, 2Ki 16:1-6, is unconvincing from the standpoint of my definition of «Jew,» but I can see that according to your heretical definition, it can be twisted to mean that which you wish it to mean.

Something you said a while ago caught my attention:

But for an analogy, I am an American. I live in Alabama. While all Alabamians are Americans, not all Americans are Alabamians. Some are Californians, Floridians, or Texans. The same can be said for the Jews. While all Jews are Israelites, not all Israelites are Jews. Some are Reubenites, Benjaminites, Gadites, Levites, etc.

Let me paraphrase what you said:

I am a Danite. I live in Dan. While all Danites are Jews, not all Jews are Danites. Some are Reubenites, Asherites or Judahites. While all Americans are Alabamians, not all Alabamians are Americans. Some are Texans, some Floridians, some Californians.

Do you see the faulty logic? If in the analogy Jew=American and Israelite=various states, everything breaks down. But in your heretical views, Israelite=American, Jew=various states (in your analogy.)

There, I believe, is your error.

[Cross.eyed]

Why is the tribe of Dan omitted from the book of Revelations?

Genesis 49:17

Dan will be a serpent by the roadside, a viper along the path, that bites the horses's heels so that its rider tumbles backward.

I think the key to the answer to your question can be found here, in verse 17, of the dying Jacob's prophecy to his son Dan. (The whole prophecy runs from Ge 49:16-18.)

- Throughout Scripture, the snake/serpent/viper/adder is a symbol Satan, of evil influences (see Ps 58:4, 91:13, 140:3, Mt 12:34, 23:33, Re 12:9, among others.) The tribe of Dan originally had its tribal allotment of land in central Canaan, bordering on Philistine territory. Judges 13-16 describes constant fighting between the two groups, and notes the problems with intermarriage, a practice forbidden by God.

Idolatry - perhaps aided by intermarriage - was to plague the tribe of Dan thoughout its history. Read the pathetic account of Dan's travels to conquer a different tribal homeland in Judges 18. They found an incompetent priest who had an idol stolen from his employer; they hired this guy and he accompanied them to conquor the town of Laish. They re-named Laish Dan and set up the idol to be worshipped. This pathetic rejection of the God of Israel continued for a long time and Dan-the-city became a center for pagan worship.

When the Northeren Kingdom separated from Judah (200+ years after Dan's takeover of Laish,) King Jeroboam feared the population would continue to go to Jerusalem to worship, so he promoted idolatry and had 2 golden calves made, one of them was at Dan (read 1 Kings 12.)

Fast forward another 200 years (400+ years after the Danites took Laish) and you see that idolatry is alive and well, with Dan as its center (see 2 Kings 10.)

To be continued later.

This was the conclusion that I had come to but I couldn't accept my findings of idolatry being the reason of omission. The problem is where I was not nearly as thorough as you are.

Thanks a bunch, I'm looking forward to your next post .

[jenna]

(I'm glad B.W. is here. Feel free to join the conversation. Jenna and I need all the help we can get.)

The first time the "Jews" are mentioned in the bible, they are at war with Israel. (2Kings 16:1-6) This was not Jews fighting Jews. This was Israelites fighting Jews. The nation of Israel had become divided by this point, into two separate nations, with two separate kingdoms. The kingdom of Israel, with capital Samaria, and the kingdom of Judah, with capital Jerusalem.

I think you must be using the word «Jew» according to your understanding (which is heretical: tribe of Judah + elements of the tribes of Benjamin & Levi,) and I define it conventionally, that is: a person of the Israelite community, the Jewish people; a follower of Judaism.

That said, the example you offered, 2Ki 16:1-6, is unconvincing from the standpoint of my definition of «Jew,» but I can see that according to your heretical definition, it can be twisted to mean that which you wish it to mean.

Something you said a while ago caught my attention:

But for an analogy, I am an American. I live in Alabama. While all Alabamians are Americans, not all Americans are Alabamians. Some are Californians, Floridians, or Texans. The same can be said for the Jews. While all Jews are Israelites, not all Israelites are Jews. Some are Reubenites, Benjaminites, Gadites, Levites, etc.

Let me paraphrase what you said:

I am a Danite. I live in Dan. While all Danites are Jews, not all Jews are Danites. Some are Reubenites, Asherites or Judahites. While all Americans are Alabamians, not all Alabamians are Americans. Some are Texans, some Floridians, some Californians.

Do you see the faulty logic? If in the analogy Jew=American and Israelite=various states, everything breaks down. But in your heretical views, Israelite=American, Jew=various states (in your analogy.)

There, I believe, is your error.

As you have stated numerous times, that is your understanding of what a Jew is. You still have not given any scripture whatsoever to support this. The only thing you have done is to call me heretical, and say I twist scripture. Until you can find it within you to talk rationally, and provide proof within scripture, then I have nothing more to say to you.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

As you have stated numerous times, that is your understanding of what a Jew is. You still have not given any scripture whatsoever to support this. The only thing you have done is to call me heretical, and say I twist scripture. Until you can find it within you to talk rationally, and provide proof within scripture, then I have nothing more to say to you.

Frankly, I really don't think you would listen anyway. I'm quite sure that I'm not the first to have called your views heretical. So far, I have pointed out the difference between chosen [ones] and Chosen People, and that your logic is skewed.

I have dealt with heretics before and whatever lie they believe in is so strong that Truth won't make any headway through debate on Scripture.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now, let me turn my attention to Cross.eyed and his question about Dan.

Why is the tribe of Dan omitted from the book of Revelations?

Thanks a bunch, I'm looking forward to your next post .

Thank you for asking. Your question sparked me to learn all this stuff that I didn't have a clue about!

Genesis 49:17c, Dan will be a serpent by the roadside, a viper along the path, that bite's the horse's heels so that its rider tumbles backwards.

I found an interesting note about the above verse (in Boldface) by Biblical commentator Matthew Henry. According to Henry, the verse refers to Samson's (a Danite judge) sad end as a circus animal at the hand of the Philistines. In Judges 16:25-30, we read how the Philistines were partying and decided to show off the now-blind Samson, who was their prisonner. Samson grabbed two pillars and pulled the roof down, killing many more when he died than while he lived. (v30)

This is what Matthew Henry said about Samson's death:

when he pulled the house down under the Philistines that were upon the roof of it, he made the horse throw its rider.

Isn't prophecy great?! You can read Henry's commentary yourself at: ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc1.Gen.l.html ( Sorry, but I don't know how to make a link.) Scroll down the page to III Concerning Dan v.16,17.

more later

[jenna]

Actually, FL, I would be a bit more inclined to listen if you knew how to talk to people. It is true that you are not the 1st to call me heretical, and if you have noticed, the discussions end when that happens. One truly must wonder, what exactly is your motive here? To call me heretical because my views don't agree with yours? How Christian is that?

[Cross.eyed]

Thank you for asking. Your question sparked me to learn all this stuff that I didn't have a clue about!

Genesis 49:17c, Dan will be a serpent by the roadside, a viper along the path, that bite's the horse's heels so that its rider tumbles backwards.

I found an interesting note about the above verse (in Boldface) by Biblical commentator Matthew Henry. According to Henry, the verse refers to Samson's (a Danite judge) sad end as a circus animal at the hand of the Philistines. In Judges 16:25-30, we read how the Philistines were partying and decided to show off the now-blind Samson, who was their prisonner. Samson grabbed two pillars and pulled the roof down, killing many more when he died than while he lived. (v30)

This is what Matthew Henry said about Samson's death:

when he pulled the house down under the Philistines that were upon the roof of it, he made the horse throw its rider.

Isn't prophecy great?! You can read Henry's commentary yourself at: ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc1.Gen.l.html ( Sorry, but I don't know how to make a link.) Scroll down the page to III Concerning Dan v.16,17.

more later

Hey FL, thanks again. Especially for the time you've spent searching and posting.

I too have been searching different bibles and from what I can find you hit the nail squarely on the head!
It seems that the tribe of Dan never recovered from idolatry-in 1 Kings 13:33..."After all this Jeroboam did not repent of his evil way but again set up priests from every class of people for the high places. Whoever so desired it, he ordained,and they became priests of the high places. For the house of Jeroboam, this was the sin that caused it to be wiped out and annihilated from the face of the earth." The Apologetics Study Bible, Holman Bible Publishers.

The comment from M. Henry is one I haven't heard-yes prophecy is great!

( I hope we haven't hi-jacked this thread.)

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

Actually, FL, I would be a bit more inclined to listen if you knew how to talk to people.

I don't have diplomacy skills, you are right on that. Hey, I drive a truck to earn my living; I don't sit in an office and develop my interpersonal skills! Like it or not, what one does moulds one and colors one's personality.

It is true that you are not the 1st to call me heretical, and if you have noticed, the discussions end when that happens.

If several Christians have called you heretical, then you should listen and begin to question what you have learned.

One truly must wonder, what exactly is your motive here?

My motives are to have you question the notion that you are an Israelite; to have you understand that the Jews - who are the only Israelites - are the Chosen People; to incite you to study the Bible.

To call me heretical because my views don't agree with yours? How Christian is that?

Insulting you is not a motive of mine. Pointing out the very serious error in your understanding of the Bible, is. The un-Christian thing to do would be to say «your opinion is as good as mine.»

The other two herecies I mentiond - The Rastafarians and the Raí«lians - also have weird notions. A Rasta man I worked with for 6 months told me that the Jews were originally Africans, and that a true Jew can only be Black... Moses' burning bush was biblical code for marijuana...He claimed to be of the tribe of Judah. A Raí«lian woman who worked with my wife and has been a frequent visitor in our home, sat across the kitchen table from me and told me that she was a true Jew, not like those imposters, «I am more Jewish than the Jews,» she said. This woman is blonde, blue-eyed and quite white.

How can one understand an Alabama Gentile who thinks she's an Israelite, a Rasta who thinks real Jews are Black, and a white girl who never set foot in a synagogue but says she is more Jewish than Jews?

The only answer I offer is that all three have fallen victim to a Lie.

[B. W.]

jenna,

See this article from: http://www.religioustolerance.org/anglo_is.htm posted below:

History:

The principal belief of Anglo/British Israelism is that the British (and by extension Americans, Canadians, Australians, and others) are the spiritual and literal descendants of the ancient Israelites.

Anglo-Israelism has a long history. The Puritan colonists in America also viewed themselves as spiritual descendants of the ancient Israelites. However, it was not until 1840 that John Wilson published "Lectures on our Israelitish Origin" and first proclaimed that the British people were the actual genetic descendants of God's chosen people.

The Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) records how a schism occurred among the ancient Hebrews, separating the land into:

-The Southern Kingdom of Judah which included the tribes of Benjamin and Levi, and
-The Northern Kingdom of Israel which included the remaining ten tribes.

About 721 BCE, the latter was captured by the Assyrians. According to historians and archaeologists, its population was taken into captivity, and assimilated. Non-Hebrews were imported in the region and the Northern Kingdom ceased to exist. However, British Israel writers developed the belief that these "ten tribes" were able to retain their identity and cohesiveness, became lost to history, and wandered far from the Middle East. They concluded that the stone used in the coronation of King David was transported to the British Isles where it exists today as the Stone of Scone. The latter stone is still used for the coronation of British queens and kings. The writers promoted the belief that divine authority was transferred from ancient Israel to England along with the stone. In reality, the origin of the Stone of Scone has been traced to rock outcroppings in Scotland using standard geological analysis methods.

British Israelism was quite popular during the ascent of the British Empire, but quickly lost favor as the Empire was converted into a Commonwealth of Nations. In the early years of the 20th century, Charles Parham and John Allen were the main teachers of British-Israelism in the United States. Parham later went on to be a major influence in the Pentecostal movement. Allen's book "Judah's Scepter and Joseph's Birthright" spread the concept through the Adventist and other churches.

British Israelism formed a main part of the foundation of Herbert W. Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God.

Please read this web site link for more detials on the Ten Tribes:

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/History_o ... m_Examined

Also please read quote below from this web site:

http://www.bible.ca/pre-british-israeli ... strong.htm

The house of Israel was in Judah during the personal ministry of Christ.—Matt. 10:56.

"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel

Here Jesus commanded the twelve to "go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." If "lost" in this passage means that the tribes were physically lost, how could the twelve disciple "go" to them? And if the Jews were "not in the house of Israel," since it is claimed that the ten tribes were not in Judea, but were lost, to whom did the disciples "go," and to whom did they preach? They were specifically told not to go to the Gentiles, and not to go to the Samaritans, so if they did not go to the Jews, to whom were they sent? But if they did go to the Jews, since those to whom they went were the "lost sheep of the house of Israel," it certainly follows that the Jews were "in that house" in fact, the Jews were that house.

Again, if "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" were the ten tribes only, as asserted, then the disciples did not belong to the "house of Israel" themselves, and were therefore forbidden to preach to their own tribe! Of course, "lost sheep" does not mean literal sheep, hence they were not literally lost. The expression "lost sheep of the house of Israel" denotes their spiritual condition. F.E Wallace

-
-
-

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

Thank you, B.W., for a most informative post.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

( I hope we haven't hi-jacked this thread.)

I think we have...but for a good cause. This will be my last post on the question of why the tribe of Dan isn't included in the 144,000 Jews in Rev. 7:4-8. We have both come to the conclusion that the exclusion is due to Dan's idolatry in ancient days.

During my studies on this question, I found something interesting about Dan in what some call the Millenial Kingdom. Ezekiel chapters 40-48 speaks of & describes a «New Temple,» one that - according to the description - wasn't Herod's Temple. In chapter 48:1, the tribe of Dan is given an allotment of land next to what is now Israel's northern border with Lebanon. If you read the whole of chapter 48, you'll see that the tribal allotments are different from what they were in biblical times. The future allotments seem to be stacked like a wedding cake...that is, parallel strips. Also, the Levites are given an allotment at this future time.

Happy reading!

[Cross.eyed]

Thanks again, you are a Brother and a friend.

Many blessings, Roger

[YLTYLT]

I am not sure it this was the main subject of this was ever determined. It looks like the dicussion took a different direction.

But.... Why Did The Creator Choose the Jews?.....

1 Corinthians 1:27
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;


But also realize that Israel is a very blessed nation. Although they are relatively very small in comparision (only about 18 million jews in the world), Israel is the 4th most powerful nation on Earth.(millitarily and monetarily). I have heard it reprted that there are untapped oil reserves there.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

It looks like the dicussion took a different direction.But.... Why Did The Creator Choose the Jews?.....

Your quote, from 1 Corinthians, is another nail in the coffin of British-Israelism:

But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

The USA, the UK, Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand are hardly «foolish» and «weak,» at least in worldly terms.

1 Cor 1:27 also agrees with Deuteronomy 7:7-8,

The Lord did not set his affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples. But it was because the Lord loved* you and kept the oath he swore to your forefathers that he brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the land of slavery, from the power of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

Thanks for your input!

*Though 1 Cor 13:4-7 is often used in weddings (including mine,) it is more appropriately a description of God's love. Read it to grasp Dt. 7:7-8.

[YLTYLT]

Your quote, from 1 Corinthians, is another nail in the coffin of British-Israelism:

Wow, I had never heard of British-Israelism. But I googled it and your right it is absurd....

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

I really do not understand your post, Nobible. What does this mean:

the Bible was intended to be a book of divine inspiration, so the idea of Jews being the "chosen people" was always figurative, not factual.

I looked up «figurative» in Webster's Third New International Dictionary and still can't figure out what you mean. So please tell me.

When you look at outside and more credible...historical sources, you'll see that the Bible has many discrepancies.

Which sources are you speaking of? Name them so I can have a look. (I have many, many books.)

If I wanted to study faith or obtain spiritual enlightenment, I'd mainly read the Bible and a few other religious books.

A strange choice! Reading the Bible and «a few other religious books» will only confuse you spiritually. Have you ever read the Bible completely? What other «religious books» have you read? Why ?

FL