If you are a conservative or a Christian (I am both), one of the boxes you seem to have to “tick” is “pro-Israel.”
This also seems to imply, anti-Arab and anti-Muslim.
I am a great admirer of Israel. They have the best democracy and the most vital and diversified economy (from electronics to agriculture) in the Middle East.
The Israeli national anthem “Ha-Tikvah” stirs me emotionally.
The Hebrew Bible is one of my happy places. Our congregation, Robinwood Church, is preaching through the Psalms (have been at it for a year and a half).
One of my mentors, Prof. Dr. Ralph Gehrke, read Isaiah in Hebrew with me every Saturday for ages.
However, I find that some of the black-and-white pro-Israel sentiment in the circles in which I run is often un-reflected at best. Ignorant at worst.
Here are some random thoughts:
- We don’t need to “defend Israel.” They have a formidable military and a credible nuclear deterrent. We have never fired a shot in defense of Israel and have never needed to intervene to help them. They buy our arms. Fine. So do many Arab states.
- We need to focus less on the Eastern Hemisphere and more on the Western Hemisphere. We have a fixation on the Middle East. Because we import oil? Most of our imported oil comes from Canada, Mexico, and South America. We are only 4% of the world population, and the main reason for our budget deficit is our bloated “police the whole world” military. We got entangled in the Eastern Hemisphere during McKinley’s term (Philippines) and we have been messed up ever since, with very little to show for it. The Founding Fathers warned us against “entangling alliances” in the Old World. We have the resources to make the Western Hemisphere a democratic, prosperous heaven on earth.
- Although there is much overlap, biblical Israel and modern Israel are not exactly the same thing. Modern Judaism was hatched after the New Testament was written, when the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and they had to reinvent themselves. As did Christianity, Judaism had a Reformation in the 1500s (the hasidic/lurianic impulse) that still affects them to this day.
- You can’t draw a straight ethnic line between ancient Israel and the modern state of Israel. Golda Meir was born in Milwaukee. Most of modern Israel has Rhineland into Eastern European (Ashkenazi) and Spanish/Portuguese (Sephardi) bloodlines. Middle Eastern DNA roots among them are sketchy at best. You can look up Sephardi and Ashkenazi Jewish lineage on Wikipedia.
- The main tribe (of the 12) remaining somewhat intact is the tribe of Judah. From which we get the word “Jew.” The “ten lost tribes” are, well…lost. The tribe of Judah was NOT given the entire holy land, only a county-sized area around Jerusalem. The tribe of Judah can lay no biblical claim to the northern West Bank (Samaria), the area around Tel Aviv, the areas of Galilee and the Golan Heights. God never, in the whole Old Testament, gave the entire land of Israel to the tribe of Judah. The other tribes are gone, as are their claims. It’s like Texans coming back after centuries and laying claim to the whole former USA territory. Not saying that Jews all over Israel (or anywhere in the world for that matter) don’t have a right to their homes, I’m just saying that their saying “the Bible says so” is overstated. There is another tribe, Levi, from which we get the Kohenim (priests), but they were, expressly according to the Bible, to be given no land. Just for the record, I believe Jews (and all of us) have a right to own land anywhere in the world, including the West Bank and Gaza, if they want to buy it. Being a libertarian, I believe in open borders.
- There are lots of Palestinian Arab Christians. But conservative US Christians prefer non-Christian Israeli Jews over them anytime. They actually got angry when a Palestinian Christian got elected to be the head of the Lutheran World Federation. A pastor told me last week: “He’s probably really a Muslim.”
- I often hear people say “God is pro-Israel so I am pro-Israel.” It’s simply not that simple. The Israelites were the “good guys” in the Bible, so anyone who uses the label Israel today must be the “good guy.” Often, but not always. Israel was very fallible in the Old Testament, and not always the object of admiration. You could bring that line or reasoning to its breaking point by being “Pro-Ahab” because he was the king of Israel. And using the label “Israel” today, which modern Israel has more of a right to do than anyone else, does not equate you with biblical Israel. The two nations (biblical and modern) are deeply related, but not identical.
- The Bible is ambiguous as to whether Israel is a physical or a spiritual nation. Galatians 6:16 makes it clear that the two are not necessarily mirror images of each other (you can be one without being the other).
- The Bible is also ambiguous as to whether or not the promise of the land (ha-aretz) is conditional upon Israel’s faithfulness, or permanent. According to the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, only 57% of Israelis believe in a “higher power.” Israel is a much more secular nation than the United States.
Not asking anyone to be anti-Israel. The whole world should love and admire Israel. Modern Israel is an amazing nation. I tip my hat to them. I want to see them prevail. They have much to add to the world.
Just asking us to consider de-emphasizing our American fixation with the Eastern Hemisphere in general and the Middle East in particular. Had we stayed in the Western Hemisphere, our homeland, the New World; well then, Pearl Harbor and 9-11 would never have happened.
Also asking us to question the “straight line” thinking that equates ancient Israel with modern Israel. One was the mother nation of us all, at some level. The other is a different and amazing contemporary society. Sure, there are deep connections. But there are also some disconnects.
Your thoughts?
Please forward this to others…
Have a look at my other essays–80,000 recent page views.
Follow me on Twitter @RobinwoodChurch
54 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 21, 2011 at 7:12 am
James Coffman
This is a very good, overall, base level of the facts on Israel.
The key in all of this that people need to keep in mind is the fact, as you said, there is a clear distinction between Biblical Israel and modern day Israel/Judaism. That is SO crucial to understand for having a religious motive to support Israel. People need to realize this…however, it does have a significant implications for Christianity, but that’s a whole different topic…
Living here in Jerusalem for 7 months has completely changed my perception and understanding on what Israel is, what it means to support Israel/ not support Arabs, the history of American involvement in the Middle East. etc.
My thoughts and conclusion? This is one of the few things there needs to be a clear distinction between a religious motive verses a political motive for supporting Israel.
Israel has an amazing history; and it shows it is completely possible to support Israel and the Arab/Palestinian states too….in fact, this is the case and desires with most Jews here in Israel.
American Christians would do themselves a lot of good to actually study the political realm of things and move beyond the religious motives. I think we, as people who do not live in the middle east, need to either remain as neutral about the argument as we are with any other country with similar situations, or we need to do some serious studying from the political history in order to draw a right conclusion.
…and if one is going to have a religious motive for support/nonsupport, then you need to study the archeology that proves or disproves the historical account here.
All of the above needs to be taken into consideration.
I find that most Americans would be better off to ignore the issue or remain neutral on it then having a strong opinion that is not factual and can’t be supported because the time to study has not been taken.
On my blog, I will be having a post up soon on issues that arose in the Middle East during WWI that are the cause of what we see happening today. It might help people have a slight understanding on what has gone on here.
Americas involvement in Israel since WWI-WWII is the result of Britain’s involvement, and is the reason why America has the position it has today; this is separate than religious ideologies that should be understood.
Fascinating topics though.
http://www.jimothys.blogspot.com
-James
March 21, 2011 at 7:15 am
Christoph Schmidt
Let’s not forget the roughly 3 billion a year of aid that US taxpayers give to Israel, much of which is tied up in subsidized arms and weapons contracts to buy our planes and missiles. By my calculations that’s about 1000 dollars from ever…y American citizen – every man, woman, and child – every year. I for one am tired of subsidizing and propping up a government that continually breaks international laws while committing atrocious human rights violations (of which I fully acknowledge Israel has experiences as well, but they are the ones holding the real economic and political power in this conflict, and two wrongs do not make a right). We are all complicit by nature of our government’s support of Israel, and we all have blood on our hands.
March 27, 2011 at 10:53 am
davepatchin
Math is a wee bit off. $3,000,000,000 (3B) is $10 from every american (300,000,000 Americans). And we give roughly $2.5 B to Egypt too. We have since the Carter Peace Accords in 1979.
March 21, 2011 at 7:58 am
Luthor Nelson
Dave I agree with many of your thoughts but disagree with a few. Even though we don’t rely heavily on middle east oil the rest of the world does. Any decrease in the overall supply does effect us immediately. If we want to grow our economy we are utterly dependent on growing supplies of oil for the time being. Keeping middle east waterways clear needs to be a world wide concern. All free countries need to participate in maintaining the free flow of oil.
In regards to the Christian Palestinians, if the Moslem trend to kill and persecute them continues, there soon won’t be any left.
In regards to “intangling alliances” those same founding fathers had to deal with this same Moslem terrorism just after our nation was born. We successfully dealt with the Barbory Pirates in two wars in the 1790’s and early 1800’s. The goal of those Moslem “lovers of shalom” was to enslave Christians for their African and middle east slave markets. They took in over one million slaves before we stopped them.
March 21, 2011 at 10:10 am
David Housholder
….to the shores of Tripoli…. (Marine Hymn)
A agree that we need to have smart relationships with the Eastern Hemisphere. We just can’t put our heart there.
We are New World people.
Everything we need is in this half.
March 25, 2011 at 12:14 pm
Ann Hafften
Luther, ask any Palestinian Christian, and I know dozens of them – they will tell you that they experience no persecution of any kind from Muslim neighbors. You must be talking about another part of the world.
March 31, 2011 at 5:21 am
David Housholder
jpeditor, I will not post your writing with that tone. You may have good points, but this is a rant-free, respect-everyone blog.
My castle, my rules. Say the same thing (all opinions welcome), use respect, and we would be glad to welcome you to this blog which had almost 100k recent page views. Great platform for all ideas.
Even passionate, heavy disagreement can be respectful.
April 1, 2011 at 10:44 am
Pat Gilbert
The Lord is not willing that anyone should perish but that all should come to repentance, including Jews (and Muslims, too). However, in the OT God has some very harsh words for his people, and in Jeremiah 3, God actually divorces faithless Israel. He chose to send His Son through Jewish blood lines-hence “the chosen people” but few of them chose to accept their Messiah. I am neither pro-Israel or anti-Israel but I believe their status as God’s chosen ended 2000 years ago and it’s time to stop dealing with them on religious grounds. I’ve been over there and seen there persecution of Palestinians up close and personal and “it ain’t pretty” proving that they are just ordinary sinners like the rest of us.
April 1, 2011 at 10:52 am
Jolene Anderson
Great blog Pat. Food for thought.
March 21, 2011 at 8:05 am
Luthor Nelson
Christoph, you failed to mention the context of that aid. It was as a result of our negotiation with them and Egypt and their willingness to give up a huge part of their land with their only source of oil. To compensate them for their loss we promised to give them and Egypt huge amounts of money. I hate all foreign aid but don’t know how we can get out of that foolish promise.
March 21, 2011 at 8:05 am
Luke Allison
Dave,
I think that the divide for a lot of Christians has more to do with dispensational premillenialism than it does with Conservative Theology. I know that many Reformed and Lutheran Conservatives have a strong sense of “covenant theology” (pejoratively described as ‘replacement theology’ by some who don’t understand it) based on Romans 9, along with many other examples throughout Scripture.
Since surveys would indicate that dispensationalism is the de facto Christian belief in America (ironic, since it’s only been around for 200 years or so) I wonder if we need to be better at deconstructing eschatological viewpoints and reconstructing a generally Biblical idea. Historic Pre, Amilliennialism, and Post are all viable viewpoints, while Preterism seems to fall in the camp of those Liberals who don’t want to deal with the physical reality of Christ’s second coming.
I like what you’re saying about Mosaic Judaism (which isn’t Judaism in any sense of the word) being something totally different than even 2nd Temple Judaism. I think Old Testament survey courses should be a given in every church, taught from a uniquely Lutheran perspective. There are far too many misconceptions out there about what exactly was going on during Jesus’ time. Even calling Him a “Rabbi” is confusing, as “Rabbis” didn’t necessarily exist in the same sense that we think of them.
Keep on keepin’ on.
March 21, 2011 at 8:55 am
Saint Rodney
I’m in complete agreement with each and every point made. Why does the United States feel that they need to be every little guy’s big brother? It seems that we always push our way to the front lines of every major conflict. I wonder what would happen if we stepped back and let the rest of the world stick up for the little guy for once? When was the last time the United States, or Israel were in an age of peace without war. In the bible this usually happens only when we as a nation are doing ” What is right in God’s eyes”.
March 21, 2011 at 9:35 am
David Beriss
Interesting perspective. As you might expect, I have to quibble with a few points.
First, invoking “DNA” in assessing the Jewish roots of the population in Israel is a little odd. The idea that ethnicity is mostly a matter of descent is central to American racial thinking, but has no grounding in science. In fact, the whole idea of race as a useful way of classifying people is not accepted by most serious scientists these days (check this out for a good overview: http://www.understandingrace.org/). Identity is far more complicated than that. What makes people Jewish or Israeli is neither affiliation with an ancient tribe nor DNA.
About Israeli demographics: A majority of Israelis today are actually native-born. As for origins, until the 1990s the majority of Israeli Jews were Sephardic, mostly from the Middle East and North Africa (not Spain and Portugal, even if they too would be Sephardic). Sephardim remain a majority, but the influx of Russian Jews in the 1990s reduced the size of that majority. These numbers do not, however, tell you very much about the complexity of actual cultural debates, the influence of European nationalist philosophies, differences in religious practices, cuisine, etc. Middle Eastern and North African roots are VERY significant in the culture and daily life of Israel.
The tribal stuff? If you want to fall down the rabbit hole of trying to establish legitimacy through that kind of history, you are going to be gone for a long time. My people are Jews, descendants of the ancient people of Israel. Can we prove it definitively? There is no way to do that. But let me ask you this: why would anyone claim to be Jewish if they could just as easily, over the last couple thousand years, disappear into the non-Jewish masses and be done with being persecuted, massacred, ostracized and all the rest?
Zionism is (and always has been) a modern nationalist ideology, rooted in the same set of 18th and 19th century philosophies that were used to create every nation-state from the U.S., to France, Germany, Italy, etc. It draws on putative ancient symbolism and claims, as they all mostly do (including the U.S.: just look at the architecture of monuments and buildings in DC). Israel is as legitimate a nation-state as any other country today, as much as France, Italy, Russia, Germany, Egypt…or any of the other post-colonial nation-states like India that came into existence around the same time. The question is really about whether or not the time for the nation-state, with a putative “culture” of its own has passed. For a very thoughtful and provocative perspective on this, read this essay by the much-regretted Tony Judt: http://bit.ly/d9I8Bw.
I think you ought to rethink your set of questions about support for Israel in terms of justice and peace. What kind of support would achieve those goals for Israelis and Palestinians alike? Put your efforts behind that and we will be getting somewhere worth going.
March 21, 2011 at 9:48 am
Kati
Good points. And I feel a little less ignorant now. Good article.
March 21, 2011 at 12:38 pm
James
People are making bold statements on here.
Everyone who is not Palestinian or Israeli needs to come live here for awhile if they want to make claims about Middle Eastern issues. It is as simple as that.
There is WAY too big of a gap between ways of thinking and cultures for people in the West to say what they say without understanding the people in the East who are in the heart of it.
This matter has deep, deep roots in history that are not addressed, understood, or even realized need to be understood by most of the people who want to have a say or establish a mindset on Israeli/Palestinian issues.
And Luke Allison, not to single you out for there has been so much said by a lot of people that have positive and negative results, but what you have said needs attention. To say that understanding the Old Testament from a uniquely Lutheran perspective is as great a mistake as a person could make when reading the Bible. The only way to understand the Bible is to attempt to understand the authors, but that requires much, much more than just the text; you need archeology, and social-anthropological-cultural studies of the Levant from their time periods and before to really get to the heart of it all; and that leaves no room for any understanding of the text from any other perspective, including Lutheran, Baptist, Buddhist, Jewish or Atheist.
That is thin piece of ice to walk on, I urge caution and farther study.
All I can say is seriously say to anyone is study study study study if you want a legitimate claim to any issue really. There is no room for ignorance.
If you don’t want to do such a thing, then don’t establish an opinion…that shuns our capability to love.
March 25, 2011 at 10:04 am
Craig Nissen
James, are you saying the Old Testament texts can hold no meaning except for the people who wrote them, or for those who lived in generally the same time and place, or those who followed shortly after? Is the only way to appreciate the text to (attempt to?) understand the mindset of ancient Hebrews?
I am of course being sarcastic, and don’t think that is precisely what you’re trying to say, but would appreciate clarification. I appreciate that there is much we can gain from study of archeology, sociology, and generally the study of how the O.T. scriptures were understood at various times in Israel’s history. I frequently try to take advantage of the writing of those who have dedicated themselves to gaining insight through these studies, in order to pass them on to theologians, Bible translators, pastors, etc. (David Bivin in particular, and all those contributing at “Jerusalem Perspective” and “En-Gedi Resource Center”)
I tend to fall back on something an undergraduate religion prof (J. Holstein) taught: “We will always be guided by the modest assumption that the biblical text under examination is intelligible; that is, that it is understandable because the writer and/or editor knew what he wanted to convey and had the artistic resources to convey it.”
March 21, 2011 at 2:11 pm
Matthew Feig
David, the core of your article seems to be the distinction between Biblical Israel and modern Israel. That distinction makes a lot of sense to me and could certainly affect the way Christians view America’s role in current events. That’s my big picture thought. However, there are a couple other, less central, distinctions you make that I haven’t heard raised before. I don’t know if they all work.
1) Distinguishing between the nation of Israel and the tribe of Judah. “The other tribes [besides Judah] are gone, as are their claims.” But the original promise is to Abraham to give his descendants the entire land of Canaan. That promise existed and was repeated by God for hundreds of years before the twelve tribes appear and are given specific inheritances within the land, right? Also, I know the word ‘Jew’ comes from the name Judah, but I always thought the term Jew was simply generalized (probably by Gentiles) to refer to all Hebrews. Does an official in Rome care whether you are from the tribe of Dan or Reuben? No, you’re a native of Judea, then you’re a Jew. Paul identifies himself as being of the tribe of Benjamin, but he doesn’t reject the label of Jew based on that. (Are the tribes of any other New Testament characters mentioned?) So if the label was already being applied to all descendants of Abraham (not just members of the tribe of Judah) 2000 years ago, it doesn’t make any sense to reverse that now and assume that all modern Jews are members of the tribe of Judah.
2) Distinguishing between American involvement in the world and American involvement in the Western Hemisphere. People tend to be either isolationist (“let’s keep to ourselves and deal with our own problems”) or globalist (“what happens in other places affects us so we have to be involved, or at least not passive”). You split the difference and say get involved in half the world but not the other half! I’ve never thought of that approach. My question is: with the global nature of the world today, is that possible? Could you ever hold the line between involvement in South America and involvement in Africa? Or the line between dealing with Somali immigrants and dealing with Somalia? Sounds tough. Also, I had to smile when you referred to the Western Hemisphere as ‘our homeland’ and ‘the New World’ in the same sentence, which are kind of opposite names.
Sorry the reply got so long. Thank you for the article!
Matt Feig
March 21, 2011 at 4:13 pm
Luke Allison
“And Luke Allison, not to single you out for there has been so much said by a lot of people that have positive and negative results, but what you have said needs attention.”
It usually does.
“To say that understanding the Old Testament from a uniquely Lutheran perspective is as great a mistake as a person could make when reading the Bible.”
But it beats a premillennial dispensationalist perspective, doesn’t it? What would you perceive as a distinctly Lutheran perspective of Scripture? And why would it be a great mistake?
I grew up in the Jewish Roots movement. My family was involved with Israeli-American affairs for a long time, and have run in circles with people like David Bivin, Dwight Pryor, Marv Wilson, and Clarence Wagner for years.
So I’m not a stranger to the concept of studying Scripture from a Jewish perspective. But, I also believe that Scripture has a certain perspicuity which allows young people, old people, princes, paupers, priests, plowmen and kings to understand it without any knowledge of Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek. Remember that Jesus never accused the Law and the Prophets of being hermeneutically difficult, He accused the people for not understanding its simplicity. Scripture is a never-ending fountain of wisdom, Truth, and discovery, but it also has a simple side to it which means brainy folks never get to stand in judgment over people like my 94-year-old Grandma who has read it every day without a single lexical or extra-textual resource. But she knows it’s God’s Word. The world is full of people just like her.
Now, I’m happy that you are a young man of passion who seeks to understand the Scriptures. Keep doing so.
March 22, 2011 at 4:56 am
James
Luke, that was the best response anyone has given me to such a topic.
I completely agree with you: ” I also believe that Scripture has a certain perspicuity which allows young people, old people, princes, paupers, priests, plowmen and kings to understand it without any knowledge of Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek. Remember that Jesus never accused the Law and the Prophets of being hermeneutically difficult, He accused the people for not understanding its simplicity.” and “But it beats a premillennial dispensationalist perspective, doesn’t it?”
True that! 109%!
As far as what is/is wrong with a distinctly Lutheran perspective on scripture: it isn’t so much whatever the understanding or perspective is…it’s the idea of saying that God’s Scriptures need to be understood in light of man’s theologies or understandings (Such as Luther) rather then what God has already clearly shown in His Word.
We place a middle man between us and God by doing so, and that is not what God desires.
I think to say that “”I also believe that Scripture has a certain perspicuity which allows young people, old people, princes, paupers, priests, plowmen and kings to understand it without any knowledge of Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek” and then say we need to understand Scripture from a uniquely Lutheran perspective is contradictory.
However, if you believe what was said above IS the Lutheran Perspective on Scripture, I myself don’t have a problem with that. But I will say then labeling it as a perspective in the name of some man is completely unnecessary. Truth is Truth and it is from God….again, we don’t need the middle man: Christ is our Mediator.
If we are all understanding God and Scripture the way He intended, and if we both agree on what that entails, then simply put, that is not a “distinctly Lutheran perspective” but rather a distinctly God perspective” (at least in our minds and understandings). I just urge we not put all of our understandings of truth as the result of mans pre-defined systems of theology. Putting Lutheran, or Baptists, or Buddhist or Jewish (etc.) after “distinctly” and before “perspective” in that sentence really limits the full extent of what God is/always has been trying to do with humanity; starting with Scripture. God has already shown us His will and His way in His Word. I agree with you, it is rather simple.
…and right back to you too Luke! Keep seeking His truth!
March 22, 2011 at 5:22 am
Duane Larson
I am in league with you Hous, and Christoph and Patrick on this topic. Well thought and well-expressed. Further, it is non-sensical to think that advocating for Palestinian rights means an automatic “defriending” of Israel. Can’t friends speak truth, including criticism, in love? Especially Christians? There is also a unique logic that Christians of the Lutheran type have called the Theology of the Cross. One of its implications is that God is on the side of those who don’t get to choose sides. And that can apply to victims of anti-semitism and Islamophobia and other oppressed all together all at the same time. Beyond (or below) and within that, Hous, your real-politik is spot on.
March 22, 2011 at 11:28 am
Dan Skogen
A little warning. As Lutherans we need to be very carefull of what we say, especially noting the hateful and anti-Semitic words of our namesake, Martin Luther. So I would not be so quick and vocal to tell Jews that they are not really Jews. I am pretty sure there are many scholars that would debate that with you. Also, this is true for those that claim Jews are no longer “God’s chosen people,” but we Christains are.
March 22, 2011 at 8:58 pm
David Housholder
Luther was wacko on this topic. I totally condemn everything he wrote on the Jews. Without reservation or excuse.
But truth is truth. And over-correction leads to other over-corrections down the line.
We need to have an unusually stubborn attempt to think clearly on difficult issues; otherwise, the problems just continue….forever.
The truth is out there.
Let’s find it.
March 23, 2011 at 8:32 am
David Beriss
Dan’s point is very much worth noting: there is nothing so tiresome as Christians giving Jews lessons on who is a Jew or on Jewish history. Actually, the popes used to haul Jews in Rome into Church at Easter in order to do just that. I guess it beats a pogrom.
As for your point about the truth being out there:
1) Truth about what, exactly? Because if you are trying to “prove” who is a Jew or who can legitimately claim Israel, you have started out in the wrong direction. If it is a matter of finding a Christian basis for looking for justice and peace in the Middle East, there is no one “truth.”
2) As the article by Tony Judt that I linked to above indicates, the questions about how to arrive at some sort of just settlement in the Middle East is a vast debate. Lots of people have spent (and continue to spend) their careers on this. Resorting to theology won’t advance the discussion at all (and may hinder it, given that there is already enough religion involved in the area, thank you very much). But a little serious research into the issues that do matter might be very helpful indeed. Read the article.
I recommend a nice falafel with that, by the way. Of maybe some hummus and chicken schwarma. Food may get you to some sort of unity faster than religion. Everyone has to eat, after all.
David
March 23, 2011 at 1:25 pm
David Housholder
Only Jews can decide who Jews are.
But even that is not so simple.
Mormons say they are Christians and most all other Christians (right and left wing) say: That would be no.
There may be nothing more complex than being Jewish. It is an interesting religious/spiritual/ethnic/national tribe-ish sort of group unlike any other.
This article, obviously, is not aimed at Jews. It starts out addressing the overlap of two groups: Christians and Conservatives.
It addresses the misconceptions rampant where those two groups intersect. Some of those conceptions are outright bizarre.
For those of you, like you David B, who don’t hang out all day with Christian Conservatives as I do, you really have no idea how bad it can get. They “straight line equate” biblical Israel with modern Israel, believe God wants them to displace all of the Palestinians, believe a lot of bizarre apocalyptic things about rebuilding the temple, etc., and categorically reject everything Palestinian and Arab, even faithful Palestinian Arab Christians. This line of thinking is very real and held by tens of millions of Americans.
I think it’s a problem.
So I wrote the essay.
March 24, 2011 at 7:40 am
Luke Allison
“They “straight line equate” biblical Israel with modern Israel, believe God wants them to displace all of the Palestinians, believe a lot of bizarre apocalyptic things about rebuilding the temple, etc., and categorically reject everything Palestinian and Arab, even faithful Palestinian Arab Christians. This line of thinking is very real and held by tens of millions of Americans.”
And I’m saying that problem is called dispensational pre-milliennialism, which is the de facto eschatological stance of the average Christian American. To many people, this is the only way to interpret how the Old Testament interacts with the New. So my original comment was intended to address how we as Lutherans can maybe help alter that. The solution, I believe, would be a “Covenant class”, exploring the main themes of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation, and showing what exactly it means to be a part of God’s covenant people. Election was a Jewish concept long before it became a Christian one.
March 25, 2011 at 9:37 am
Ron Amundson
I’m not convinced that dispensational pre-millienialism has to lead to the above views. I doubt that Darby or Schofield would reject Palestianian Christians, rather it is more likely they would rejoice over them.
My guess is the “left behind” commercial industrial complex has corrupted the founders theology so badly, that said views have become the norm. I do however agree that folks who ascribe to such also view there interpretation as the only way to OT/NT connection. Furthermore, I think one of the reasons such discussions raises dialog heat levels, as mere thought that any of the beliefs, even the bizarre ones are in error starts swaying said individuals entire faith structure. As such, serious push back will occur as has happened here and elsewhere.
If my premise is correct about the errant path folks have been sent down with the “left behind” industry, perhaps the solution is to counter their message in a similar fashion somehow.
March 25, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Luke Allison
“If my premise is correct about the errant path folks have been sent down with the “left behind” industry, perhaps the solution is to counter their message in a similar fashion somehow.”
Now that is a great idea. But amillennialism doesn’t exactly make for exciting TV, right? 🙂
I do believe the Left Behind books sparked a rather thoughtless wave of DPMism, but there was plenty of that kind of thought floating around before Tim and Larry unleashed the giant locust-men. My mother used to frequently attend “friends of Israel” Christian gatherings (Netanyahu was at a few of them, and I believe Joel Rosenberg was a keynote speaker one year! Yikes) and you would have been hard-pressed to find anybody who held a high view of Arabs in general, Palestinians in particular. There was definitely an undercurrent of anti-Arab sentiment (and almost an idolatrous love for Israeli soldiers, politicians, and “stuff” in general) floating through those gatherings. These were gatherings with thousands of people in Washington DC, so not Fred Phelps podunk land. Many well-known conservative politicians and personalities were in attendance, giving it all a certain sense of legitimacy. But in the grand scheme, this was a gathering of people who wanted to see Israel defended because they were afraid of God’s curse coming upon America, but who also spoke giddily about escalating violence because it might be signaling the 2nd coming. Strange and mysterious, but definitely fueled by a DPM eschatology. It may not have been perfectly aligned with Darby, but we may have him to blame for it. Which doesn’t discredit Darby at all.
March 25, 2011 at 12:20 pm
Ann Hafften
For a good analysis of the “Left Behind” phenom, see Dr. Barbara Rossing’s book: The Rapture Exposed: The Message of Hope in the Book of Revelation.
March 25, 2011 at 5:30 pm
David Housholder
I know Barbara, Ann (sounds like a Beach Boy song).
Once gave it to a very intelligent non-theological member of my church (a higher math teacher).
His comment:
“Is she saved?” He agreed with much of her analysis–he was just concerned about her lack of spiritual vibe.
I think she is more deconstructive of a system (which needs to be deconstructed) than constructive of another one.
Don’t know what to make of this exchange, but it is interesting.
March 26, 2011 at 4:34 am
Luke Allison
In the grand scheme of things, I know very little about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict outside of the most basic stuff. But I like to study sociology and theology and see how those two interact, and I see a lot of the de facto “pro-Israel” stances which you point out in the initial post as stemming from a particular theological strain. I probably should say a particular eschatological strain, but in the case of DPMers, their eschatology colors their theology, not vice versa.
March 24, 2011 at 10:09 pm
kfkfj
Go educate yourself on the Levi tribe and Cohens.
Your desire to disassociate Jews from their ancestry is about as charming as Helen Thomas foaming at the mouth. Tribal designations are meaningless. The people of the book, the chosen people, those Jews, are the same Jews, and the diaspora, and your ignorance do not change that.
The denial of a Jewish lineage is deeply offensive, and denies history, and science which is proven. If you’re not anti-Jewish, than it’s peculiar why you feel the need to deny Jews are a nationality and deny them a right of self determination. One need not do that if they simply are choosing not to support or even involve themselves in the conflict.
March 25, 2011 at 6:02 am
David Housholder
What makes you think I know nothing of the Levi/Cohen thing? Besides, read your Bible. They were given no land.
Not denying Jewish lineage. More like “curveage.” It’s not a straight line. Just sayin’.
And not denying Jewish nationality. But that too, you must admit, is about as complex as anything on this earth gets. My wife has Jewish blood from both sides of her family. Just a trickle. Does that count? Does that make my son Jewish?
All I am saying is that oversimplification does not lead to truth. Only truth will bring peace.
March 25, 2011 at 6:12 am
David Housholder
ALERT. Lots of haters trying to post.
Two (opposite) groups:
1) Those accusing me of anti-semitism.
2) Those who hate Jews and call them names. They think my essay coddles Jews.
I love Israel and I reject Jew-haters, so these two “strains” will not be posted.
The first group claims that unless I hate Muslims and/or have a simplistic view of God’s intention for a modern Jewish state, I must be anti-semitic, and I’m probably a Nazi :-).
The second group is calling the Jews Christ-killers that I should forcefully reject. I won’t even comment on that. Good Lord.
I will not post either of these lines of thinking. As you know, I don’t allow rants on my blog.
My castle. My rules.
March 25, 2011 at 10:06 am
Jim Allmann
Amen, for getting out of the “World Police” role. If we cut out Pentagon budget down to 1/3, cut our Military Academies down to 1/3, and bring all of our troops back home to become a “Home-Guard”, our monetary deficit would be abolished and we might be closer to World peace. Keep preaching the word, Dave.
March 25, 2011 at 11:05 am
Marty
Jim said,
“Amen, for getting out of the “World Police” role. If we cut out Pentagon budget down to 1/3, cut our Military Academies down to 1/3, and bring all of our troops back home to become a “Home-Guard”, our monetary deficit would be abolished and we might be closer to World peace.”
Would that that could be true.
We don’t live in the Western Hemisphere alone. Today, everything is globally related.
I thought we learned our lesson about isolationism once or twice already.
Isolationism is costly in both blood and treasure.
March 25, 2011 at 12:27 pm
David Housholder
I can’t speak for Jim, who has a great mind AND heart, but I can say that I am not in favor of isolation.
Just think we need to change our focus.
We need to stay engaged in the Eastern Hemisphere–it’s one world.
But the truth is, we are 4% of the world’s population, and have been 20% of the world’s economy for 110 years (minus the “fluke” after WW2 in the 50’s when the rest of the world’s industry was bombed into the stone age).
Thus, we can patrol, keep safe, and help develop (sustainably) 20% of the world. Population and economy wise, that would correlate perfectly with the Western Hemisphere.
If we over-reach beyond that, we will make our homeland poor (Sun Tzu–“The Art of War” 2nd Century AD).
We had to do it in the 50’s because the rest of the world was rebuilding. It stopped working in the 60’s (remember Vietnam?), and has not been working ever since.
I think we need a new, positive Monroe Doctrine. We need to pull our troops and fleets out of the entire Easter Hemisphere.
We need to build a huge Dubai-style airport hub in Central America. Today’s Panama canal. All North-South air traffic would flow through it and fan out in both directions.
All Western Hemisphere children should learn English or Spanish as a second language.
A rail link should connect Alaska with Chile.
All young people should give two years of volunteer service somewhere in the Americas.
The borders should eventually come down and labor should flow freely to capital.
Our main embassies should be in Ottawa, Mexico City, and Brasilia. Not London, Berlin, and Tokyo.
The Middle East has caused us nothing but heartache, and we have nothing to show for it.
A bold vision…for a New World.
March 27, 2011 at 11:36 am
davepatchin
Fact Check: 2010 Defense spending was $664B.
2010 Budget Deficit was $1,300 B (or $1.3 Trillion)
The three military academies together spend less than $1B year. (Amazing that with federal spending $1B is 0.0035 of federal spending)
So if we cut the pentagon budget to 1/3 ($222 B) we save $442 Billion. All that savings still leaves more than $850B deficit each year. Even if we spent nothing on defense, our budget deficit would still be over $630 B annually.
Your claim that this would eliminate our monetary deficit is fiction. The deficit each year is about double what we spend on defense.
March 27, 2011 at 6:37 pm
David Housholder
Fact check.
There have only been less than a handful of years in US history since 1945 where the military budget was smaller than the deficit.
You can look up a year by year for the deficit (which is not the same as accumulated debt). You can look up a year by year of military spending.
The military spending for most years is usually multiples of the annual deficit.
Sorry.
There are exceptional years where the deficit is bigger than the military budget. One time Jimongous bank bailouts are not going to happen every year.
Curtailing 60% of the military budget and pulling out of the Eastern Hemisphere, militarily, would have a MASSIVE effect on our ability to balance the budget.
March 27, 2011 at 7:02 pm
James
War brings in the gold.
March 26, 2011 at 4:31 am
James
Finally got my post up:
http://jimothys.blogspot.com/2011/03/23-beginning.html
This whole topic- everything being discussed, is way too big for online discussions.
I have so, so much I would like to say in regards to what people have discussed and talked about on here, but it is simply put, not simple at all. Whole books could and are written on such topics.
March 27, 2011 at 1:07 pm
James
Oh, and being it has been brought up multiple times already:
the billions of dollars that the USA throws into Israel and Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East initially started not because USA wanted to give up money to these countries for the heck of it.
Rather it was negotiations with Britain and France that forced us to do such things.
People, you need to understand how WWII and the Cold War plays into the reasons WHY America has been interested in Israel and Egypt…it’s got nothing to do with religion.
The Cold War has only been over for 20 years. That is not even one generation. The effects of it (negotiations from the 40’s, 50’s, etc.) are going to be around for a long, long time.
If you don’t understand Russia’s interests in the Middle East throughout the second half of the 20th century , how can you understand why America forced itself into supporting countries like Israel and Egypt, not to mention deals we had to make with Britain and France just for being Allies????
There is history here that can’t be overlooked if you have an opinion on American interests in the Middle East. If you wanted the Cold War to end the way it did, then be aware of the effects that caused such events: Americas need for the existence of Israel and Egypt is undeniable.
and yes, I understand that has nothing to do with Palestinian/Jewish conflicts, which is more of what this blog is about….but its a packaged deal if you are an American with interests in the Middle East.
It’s funny to me that people argue and discuss topics over Israel that the people over here don’t even care about or concern themselves with…they have an completely different understanding and motive then Americans…and amazingly, I myself have found that the more one understands the people over here… Jewish or Palestinian..the more ridiculous the things are that the Americans think are important about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict…
I mean, do you really think discussing who is or who isn’t a Jew…from not just an Americans perspective, but even more from a Christian perspective….do you really think that is going to solve anything? What a pointless conversation.
March 28, 2011 at 4:00 am
Kevin Bergeson
We have been here (Jerusalem) since end of January, and all I can say is: complicated. We’ve prayed at the Western Wall, we’ve been to some schools in Bethlehem, we’ve seen Lebanon from Metulla and dodged landmines in the Golan.
Everyone has a story; ever heard of Sabeel (the liberation theology center, http://www.sabeel.org)? Like you said, I can simply imagine those conversations with pastors who feel there are no Arab Christians left in the Holy Land (www.elcjhl.org); and the way the tour buses roll thru the checkpoints, you’d think in the USA’s mind the Holy Land is already a Jesus-theme park (with Jesus-junk to bring home for the kiddies). I have met the Living Stones of Palestine and I am changed; even with the recent bombing in Jerusalem (and the fear in people’s eyes when a car backfires), I pray for God’s Spirit to cover this city.
1. You can’t have an opinion on these issues until you’ve been to both Israel and the West Bank (Sarah Palin’s pilgrimage did not include Bethlehem, nor anywhere near the separation wall). It’s about relationships; we must be incarnational in the Holy Land and at the Holy Land deli around the corner from where you live. What’s one way to “help:” come and see.
2. As everyone has already said, the multitude of factors involved here begs for prophetic humility. As an American, I can only be in the peanut gallery on this one, but that also means I can speak (witness) about Allah’s love for all people, try to live the Shema everyday (by the power of the Spirit) and tell the truth about what I see with my eyes (witness). There’s a big cement wall here: it cuts off families from families and it treats people like cattle. Check out a non-neutral (!) article from the New Yorker:
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2011/03/21/110321taco_talk_remnick
3. Books, not bombs, people. You can help right now by filling the shelves at the local Christian schools in Bethlehem; they’re empty. The very fact you can form an intelligent opinion and argument is based (in part) on the schools that taught you. Why not give that same opportunity over here? http://visualpreacher.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/books-books-books/
April 7, 2011 at 11:00 am
Ann Hafften
Thanks for your comments, Kevin. FYI, the recent Sabeel International Conference in Bethlehem generated some interesting news. The topic: Challenging Empire – God, Faithfulfull and Justice. Here’s a link to reports: http://www.fosna.org/news
See “Jesus Challenges Empire,” “God is Love, Not Empire,” “Archbishop Thabo Makgoba at Sabeel Conference, Bethlehem: “God, Faithfulness and Resistance,” and the conference statement. (I’ve got to get these better organized.)
April 1, 2011 at 10:49 am
Jolene Anderson
I am a Jewish sympathizer, deluxe. But for several reasons, some not mentioned in prior comments. Jews are a people but they are also an example for Christians to follow. By this I mean the Bible. When Christ died for us, we Christians became one as the Biblical Jews…one with God, no matter what your birth rite. Until my understanding of the Bible became clear, I thought they were the “chosen ones.” Jesus changed that.. like the Samaritan woman @ the well. I feel as chosen to be God’s as any people on earth because I’m Christian. The Old Testament set guidelines for Godly living which we tend to ignore; Jews were made examples of many times over as how we should not act or believe. I sympathize with them that after all they have been through in history/Biblical history that so many of them still don’t get it right. But many of us have those issue’s to a certain extent. I detest that so many nations want to see them destroyed or eradicated. It is time to drop the astigmatism we have of the Old Testament in which they were considered God’s chosen people since Christ changed all that. I do admire their faith in some of the rituals & observances that were set forth in the Bible & wish we would adhere to them better. As Christians, we are also asked to stop atrocities to the helpless & less fortunate… thus I feel the need to be in the Middle-East…absolutely NOT for oil. Once again, when is enough…enough? We cannot police the entire world, or can we? With God’s help we certainly can.
At times I consider them role models & others, examples of what not to do. My very close Jewish friend loaned me the book “The Case for Israel.” An outstanding read. But my friends’ question to me was “What would your Jesus do about the land if He came here tomorrow?” I answered I felt He would not war over the territory…He would make a way for all to live together peacefully. My friends reply? Exactly. So not all Jews are in favor of the Gaza strip conflict. After many years thought on this very subject I’m at the point where I want to be dedicated, ritualistic, and steadfast in my belief as many Jews are…I just happen to believe in Christ which is the clear difference to me. Their persecution by Hitler sticks in my throat like cotton. Another holocaust is unthinkable. We must look at the past to prevent future mistakes. By the way, ask a soldier why he is in the Middle-East. Most of them believe in freedom for these people…simple freedoms we take for granted. I truly feel God is on the march here. May he bless our troops.
April 2, 2011 at 4:33 am
Patti Smith
thank you for your blog. I always say I am pro Isreal and my thoughts and prayers on are Isreal because they seem to always be in the cross-hairs of history. Hitler tried to rid the world of the jews, and the muslim nations in particular Iran wants Isreal destroyed. Jews have been the brunt of joke, and anti-semitism still rears its ugly head all around the world. God loves everyone, jew and gentile. There is so much turmoil in the middle east, how can we not focus attention there. Isreal is a light of democracy amonst the darkness of oppression – so, I say L’Chaim to Isreal and may God save you.
April 2, 2011 at 7:25 am
rqsmith55
We often forget that God is the one who wants Israel to occupy the land. Nehemiah 1:9 “but if you return to me and obey my commands, then even if your exiled people are at the farthest horizon, I will gather them from there and bring them to the place I have chosen as a dwelling for my Name.” It’s the place GOD has chosen as a dwelling for HIS name. I agree with Dave that the tribal thing has become rather scrambled over the years but God keeps his word, even if it’s for only a few people (Elijah and the 7000). Isaiah 49 as a whole and verse 16 in particular “See, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands; Your walls (Jerusalem) are continually before Me.”
If you look at it from purely worldly (political) view, the reason Israel exists today is politics out of post WWII Europe. Many of the jews living in Israel come from the areas devestated by WWII and Israel was looked upon as a solution to “what to do about the jews”. If you look at it from a purely spiritual side, God’s plan is still in effect to restore his relationship with mankind and Israel.
April 4, 2011 at 12:53 pm
James
“He chose to send His Son through Jewish blood lines-hence ‘the chosen people’ but few of them chose to accept THEIR Messiah. I am neither pro-Israel or anti-Israel but I believe their status as God’s chosen ended 2000 years ago and it’s time to stop dealing with them on religious grounds.”
This type of things scares me. To suggest that the Israelites loose their status because of the Messiah is extremely contrary to Scripture. Such a thing only promotes the idea to a Jew that Christ really was a false prophet, if not anti-messiah. I urge you to seek out the truth of this matter. For example: Deuteronomy 18. Walk up to any Jew and say what you have said on here, and explain how it does not go against everything the Torah and the Tanakh says about the coming Messiah (because the logic of Christianity is that Christ somehow makes Torah negligible).
Good luck. The fact is, it can’t be done with Scripture. This study completely changed my life. To suggest that one’s belief in Christ means you are now chosen over the Israelites means, from a complete Biblical and scriptural fact- you have to put yourself under the same requirements and desires God had for Israel. There is no way to get around this fact.
On a different note:
Dave, you influenced me to write up some random facts and thoughts on the whole Conflict issue:
http://jimothys.blogspot.com/2011/04/some-facts.html
April 7, 2011 at 8:51 pm
David Housholder
Totally ‘nother topic. But Jesus did not have any bloodlines from the tribe of Judah, if you want to be picky. If you believe in the virgin birth, as i do, then Joseph (from the tribe of Judah) was not his bloodline father. His mother (Mary) was a Levite (close family with inside-circle priests). In the general sense of “Jewish” expanded to mean all 12 tribes of Israel, Jesus is Jewish. But in the narrower sense, genetically, he was a Levite. Jewish is an English term for Jehudah (tribe of Judah), a tribe to which Jesus has no DNA. Unless you believe Joseph was his physical father.
April 7, 2011 at 10:34 am
Ann Hafften
Dave, I think I asked permission a couple weeks ago to share your blog post via my own blog. Finally got it posted: http://voicesforpeace.blogspot.com/2011/04/david-housholder-being-pro-israel.html
Ann
April 7, 2011 at 8:46 pm
David Housholder
Bless you, Ann. Thanks!
April 7, 2011 at 10:54 am
Ann Hafften
Dave, I think I asked permission a couple weeks ago to share your blog post via my own blog. Finally got it posted: http://voicesforpeace.blogspot.com/2011/04/david-housholder-being-pro-israel.html
May 16, 2011 at 4:53 am
Ro
I kind of want to give my two cents in.
All I know is God made an EVERLASTING covenant with the PEOPLE of Israel. God definitely has a plan for them. And replacing anything Israel with the spirit of Israel or believers [or something else] .. May be dangerous. We see in the Bible, Israel has frequently turned away from God, but repented [which sounds like us as well]. I think we also need to focus more on telling our Jewish brothers and sisters about their Mashiach. From them came out the Messiah in which we are blest, we should bless them back! Romans 11 starting at 12 says this:
“But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring! I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them.” [Chapters 9 – 11 of Romans are a good read]
May 16, 2011 at 9:44 am
David Housholder
Is there any chance you are oversimplifying things a bit?
Does any group calling itself “Israel” get that everlasting covenant automatically? Or should we try to discern what all of the complexity surrounding this issue really means? My wife and son have a tiny fraction of Jewish blood. Does that count? Anyone with DNA going back to Jacob? That would include tens of millions who have no idea they are “Jewish.”
Most Americans (you may not be American) tend to avoid thinking when it gets hard.
What I am proposing here is an unusually stubborn attempt to think clearly on this issue.
Not settling for simplistic answers.
June 20, 2013 at 12:50 pm
Private Guided Tours In Israel
Way cool! Some extremely valid points! I appreciate you penning this
article plus the rest of the site is extremely good.