Now preparing for its fourth season of a projected seven, the series The Chosen aims to portray the life of the founder of Christianity as told in the gospels. Faydra Shapiro admits that when she first became aware of the show, she assumed that it would at best be “cheesy” and at worst an all-too-typical “Christian evangelistic tool that ends up making the Jews out to be the bad guys, the dramatic foil for some new message, the ones responsible, the persecutors.” Then the producers asked her to serve as a Jewish adviser for upcoming episodes, and she watched those already aired:

To my complete surprise, The Chosen presents the most intensely Jewish Jesus . . . we’ve ever had. Now look, don’t misunderstand me. As an educated Jew watching it, undoubtedly some of it strikes me as a bit kitschy. Some of it is anachronistic. Some of it is just plain wrong. But all that pales in the face of its value for building understanding between Jews and Christians.

There is an unfortunate tendency for many Jews to think that the New Testament is kind of threatening, that it is foreign, that it has nothing to do with us. That it belongs to “them.” Much of this is no doubt aided by well-meaning Christians seeking to shove it down our throats.

I wish that Jews could understand that the New Testament is thoroughly Jewish—replete with Jewish categories and Jewish practices, Jewish controversies, Jewish scripture, and brimming with Jews—I think we could reclaim some of our own history. Because, let’s face it, if we want to understand something about the Judaism of our ancestors in this specific period, the New Testament has some real value.

The Chosen will, I believe, alter how a whole generation of Christians envisions and connects to the Jewishness of Jesus. And as such, it has the potential to have a radical impact on how Christians encounter their Jewish neighbors, friends, and co-workers. At a time of rapidly rising anti-Semitism in the West, this is no small thing.

On Tuesday, a Hizballah drone attack injured three people in northern Israel. The next day, another attack, targeting an IDF base, injured eighteen people, six of them seriously, in Arab al-Amshe, also in the north. This second attack involved the simultaneous use of drones carrying explosives and guided antitank missiles. In both cases, the defensive systems that performed so successfully last weekend failed to stop the drones and missiles. Ron Ben-Yishai has a straightforward explanation as to why: the Lebanon-backed terrorist group is getting better at evading Israel defenses. He explains the three basis systems used to pilot these unmanned aircraft, and their practical effects:

These systems allow drones to act similarly to fighter jets, using “dead zones”—areas not visible to radar or other optical detection—to approach targets. They fly low initially, then ascend just before crashing and detonating on the target. The terrain of southern Lebanon is particularly conducive to such attacks.

But this requires skills that the terror group has honed over months of fighting against Israel. The latest attacks involved a large drone capable of carrying over 50 kg (110 lbs.) of explosives. The terrorists have likely analyzed Israel’s alert and interception systems, recognizing that shooting down their drones requires early detection to allow sufficient time for launching interceptors.

The IDF tries to detect any incoming drones on its radar, as it had done prior to the war. Despite Hizballah’s learning curve, the IDF’s technological edge offers an advantage. However, the military must recognize that any measure it takes is quickly observed and analyzed, and even the most effective defenses can be incomplete. The terrain near the Lebanon-Israel border continues to pose a challenge, necessitating technological solutions and significant financial investment.