Scandal of Israel’s “carnal” election

The Hebrew scriptures declare that G-d’s thoughts are not our (human) thoughts and that our ways are not His (Isaiah 55:8 ). Perhaps nothing illustrates this idea better than the biblical concept of the election of the Jewish people as G-d’s very own people. It’s one of those things that has troubled the minds of many, especially and quite naturally those who found themselves among the “non-chosen”. It certainly has proven itself quite scandalous, even for many Jews themselves, and the acting out of this resentment has been quite troublesome and often very deadly for Jews over their long history.

Why has this been the case, one might ask? Among the so called “Abrahamic” religions (Christianity and Islam), the chief reason for this is no doubt jealousy. Simply put, the human mind finds it unjust that G-d, exercising His free will, would set His affection on a specific people not because they are somehow better (or larger, more refined, stronger, better looking, smarter, more “believing”, etc), but because this is what He decided to do –  to single out someone for with a special, “treasured” sort of love. A humans, we can certainly understand this emotion on a personal level when it comes to our own spouses or children, but we resent G-d making such a choice, thinking that G-d is obligated to love everyone the same, without any differentiation.

It’s precisely the humanity’s rejection of Israel’s “carnal” election by G-d that has given the rise to both Christianity and Islam. Although both of these faiths have found their initial nourishment on a rich Jewish soil and went on to claim Jewish heroes and ideas as their own, they subsequently sought to appropriate the “people of G-d” concept for themselves by declaring the Jewish people as having lost it through failure of one sort or another.

Even though both of these “daughter” religions acknowledge that Israel was “chosen”, they have sought to sidestep the Jewish people by redefining the original election by spiritualizing it, allowing anyone with a specific set of beliefs to become “chosen”, “loved”, and “treasured” by G-d. From the Jewish point of view this constitutes nothing short of a rebellion against G-d and an attempt to impose human thoughts and ways on the Almighty, to force His will. Both Christianity and Islam have sought to redefine the ultimate reason for Israel’s election itself. Christianiy argued that Abraham was a model Christian (by virtue of his “faith” in a “pre-incarnated Christ”) and Abraham’s children are those “of the spirit” by virtue of having the correct faith in Christ and not “of the flesh” (per Paul), ie. relying on the Law and the supposed “self-righteousness”. Islam, following right in the footsteps of Christianity’s supersessionism, made a very similar claim – Abraham was the first exemplary Muslim with his belief in One G-d.

Jewish theologian Michael Wyschogrod describes Israel’s “carnal election” in his book The Body of Faith: God and the People of Israel :

[Christianity taught that] whereas membership in the old Israel was bestowed by birth, membership in the new Israel [the Church] was open to anyone who embraced the message of the Church.

But this is not the nature of Israel’s election. This election is that of the seed of Abraham. A descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is a Jew irrespective of what he believes or how virtuous he is. Being a Jew is therefore not something earned. This reflects the fact that the initial election of Abraham himself was not earned. It is true that in rabbinic literature Abraham is depicted as having “discovered” the one God when it occurred to him that a complex world could not have come into being by chance. But none of this is mentioned in the Bible. We are simply told that God commanded Abraham to leave his place of birth and to go to a land that God would show him. He is also promised that his descendants will become a numerous people. But nowhere does the Bible tell us why Abraham rather than someone else was chosen. The implication is that God chooses whom he wishes and that he owes no accounting to anyone for his choices.

Israel’s election is therefore a carnal election that is transmitted through the body. And to many, this is a scandal. Is it the body that makes someone dear to God or the spirit? Shouldn’t we evaluate a person on the basis of his character and ideas rather than his physical descent? These are difficult questions to answer but we cannot evade coping with them. We must first understand that we cannot sit in judgment over God. It is not incumbent on him to justify his actions to man. It is not for us to teach God what is fair but for him to teach us. If it was his decision to make Abraham his beloved servant and the descendants of Abraham his beloved people, then it is for man to accept God’s will with obedience. (p. 176)