Ed Lasky

While there has been much attention given to challenges Israel faces on college campuses, in the media, and increasingly in the halls of Congress, the historically solid and vitally important support given by Evangelical Christians towards Israel is now being threatened. How is this happening and who are the actors?

Evangelicals support Israel for a variety of reasons, among them a belief that Israel is a fellow democracy with which we share a common Western culture and that we value as a friend. Israel has been victimized by Islamic terrorism, as have we. Israel is also a strategic ally in the war against Islamic radicalism— a lone Western outpost in a faraway land that gave birth to two major religions, Judaism and Christianity, the foundation of Western civilization. However, the core reason that Evangelicals have an affection for the Jewish people and a strong desire to protect Israel is found, unsurprisingly, in the Bible.

What may surprise people is that the foundation of this support has nothing to do with end-of-days scenarios or the desire to convert the Jews. Instead, there is a belief that God has a covenant with the Jewish people and with Israel. Christians have a religious mandate to support Israel. The promise of Genesis 12:3 is that "he who blesses Israel will be blessed, and he who curses Israel will be cursed."

To people who interpret Israel to mean the Jews—such as evangelical Christians--Genesis becomes an exhortation to both Zionism and philo-Semitism.

Efforts are now underway to erode this base of support. The tactics seem to rely on a few simple but potentially perilous ideas. One avenue of attack is to question the theology behind the Biblical mandate to "bless the Jews." Another is to portray Israelis as oppressing Christians in an attempt to evoke imagery from the Bible regarding the trials and tribulations of Jesus. Those who do this are attempting to weaken the sympathy that is one of the hallmarks of Christian Zionism.

The theological argument that a bond no longer exists between God and the Jews (and by extension Israel) is known as "replacement" theology. The Jerusalem-based Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, an anti-Israel Palestinian Christian group, has been among those groups most actively promoting this spurious doctrine. Adherents believe that Jews fell from divine favor when they refused to accept Christ and that God chose the Church (Christians) to replace them. Therefore Christians have no religious obligation to support the Jewish people. Sabeel has at times gone to the next "step" and cast Israel as the new "Rome" whose government is a "crucifixion system." The head of Sabeel has called Israelis "Herods" and has linked their behavior to the acts of the Romans that killed Jesus. The Anglican Church in England seems sympathetic to this view. This might be expected since "replacement "theology has taken hold in Europe while it has been rejected so far by most American churches.

However, there are disconcerting signs that this favorable state of affairs may be changing. The old "mainline" churches such as the Presbyterians have leaders who support the Palestinian narrative. As Hugh Hewitt has noted about his own Presbyterian Church, whose leadership has been very receptive to proposals to disinvest from companies doing business with Israel, the governing body seems to be heavily influenced by key leaders who are either Palestinian Christians or have close ties to Palestinian Arabs.

Sabeel periodically gives road shows to propagate this view. The group has had some success: at a recent conference in Chicago, attendees included representatives from a clutch of organizations: Churches for Middle East Peace, American Friends Service Committee (Quakers), the Lutheran Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the Wheat Ridge Ministries. Their efforts have begun to transcend trying to spread their "gospel" beyond Church groups to lobbying Congress. An upcoming Sabeel conference will feature Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a former Democrat candidate for President.

Jimmy Carter also wants a role in trying to divide Evangelicals. His recent book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, is indeed replete with factual errors, misrepresentations, plagiarism, and outright fabrication. But what seems to have escaped the critics is that Carter is primarily speaking to a Christian audience. His narrative may resonate with them in a way that reviewers do not appreciate. For, in attacking Israel the way he chose to do, he is promoting a view that there is no longer a covenant between Jews and God that Christians are bound to honor. His book, in short, is a brief in support of "replacement theology."

How can this be so? In Carter's view, Israel fails a "religious test": it is no longer a nation of Jews. In his book, Carter describes visits to several kibbutzim and found that on the Sabbath only two worshippers appeared at the synagogue. When he asked if this was typical, the "guide gave a wry smile and shrugged his shoulders as if it was not important either way." When Carter participated in a graduation ceremony at an Israel Defense Forces training camp, he presented a Hebrew bible to each graduate, "which was one of the few indications of a religious commitment that I observed during our visit." At the end of his visit, he meets with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir. He told her that he had taught lessons from the Hebrew Scriptures and that a common historical pattern was that Israel was punished whenever the leaders turned away from devout worship of God. I asked if she was concerned about the secular nature of her Labor government." Not only does Carter seem to castigate Israel for losing its religious bearings but also he seems to call upon the wrath of God to punish her for her transgressions.

Michael Jacobs, writing in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution notes that Carter seems to take the same tack as the Sabeel in trying to depict Israelis as oppressors of Christians. He writes that Carter "repeatedly refers to Israeli oppression of Christians, destruction of Christian holy sites and the imprisonment of Bethlehem."

That Christians are fleeing the Holy Land should not be surprising. Tony Pearce, pastor of the Bridge Christian Fellowship, notes “the Christian Arab population within the pre-1967 borders of Israel has grown from 34,000 in 1948 to 130,000 in 2005. Ironically this is the only part of the Middle East where the Christian population is growing The main reason for the departure of Christians from PA administered territories is the religious persecution, murder and land grabs which stem from the increased Islamization of the region. This is the result of the PA adopting Muslim religious law in the territories in contrast to Israel which safeguards the religious freedom of its citizens."

Lest we forget, it was Muslim terrorists who defiled the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem in 2002. While fleeing Israeli Defense Forces, they forced their way into the Church and held clerics hostage. They knew Israel respected religious buildings more than they themselves did, and they were right. Israel eventually agreed to let these terrorists leave the Church and travel to Europe in order to avoid harm to the Church. Regardless of the deal reached with Israelis and church officials, the Church itself had been ransacked and damaged by the terrorists.

Even within Israel's pre-1967 borders, Muslims have been attacking Christians so there can be no claim that Israel's security fence is the cause of the conflict. In Nazareth, the home of Jesus and the site of many Christian shrines, Muslims have held large militant marches through the main street, shouting, "Islam will dominate the world" and exclaiming "Allah is great." Christians report attacks against Christian shops and have told stories of violence against women and men perpetrated by Muslim residents.

This pattern of oppression of Christians at the hands of Muslims is part of a widespread Middle Eastern phenomenon and has a long history which people such as Jimmy Carter and columnist Robert Novak ignore. Conversely, Christians have found Israel to be a very comforting and congenial place to live. Former Congressman Jack Kemp wrote in response to a Robert Novak column criticizing Israel for the purported effects of the security fence on Christians: “In planning the route of the barrier, particularly in the vicinity of Jerusalem, where population density, religious and international interests intersect, Israel has demonstrated particular sensitivity to Christian concerns. The route was determined and in several cases altered, after a comprehensive dialogue with representatives of the various Church denominations. The ongoing consultations and effort to accommodate denominational interests put the lie to the notion that Israel supposedly seeks to ‘destroy’ or ‘shatter’ these communities.”

All this was of little interest to Jimmy Carter, Sabeel supporters, or their allies in trying to turn Christians against Israel. Nor have they been satisfied with mere written and verbal attacks. A new front has been opened in the battle for the hearts and minds of evangelical Christians with the goal of supplanting the leaders of the evangelical community who have been strongly pro-Israel with leaders and groups who are noticeably less supportive of Israel.

For example, Jim Wallis has enjoyed a blaze of publicity lately as an Evangelical leader that Democrats in particular have tried to enlist. Wallis, who is on the left-wing of the evangelical movement, has a clearly anti-Israel history. He has written: "It's time to challenge the theology of Christian Zionism advanced by many of the American Religious Right, who are completely uncritical of Israel's behavior and totally oblivious to the sufferings (or even the existence) of Arab Christians in the Middle East." He writes in an article highly critical of Israel's activity in Lebanon (titled "The Body of Christ in Lebanon" — clearly intended to evoke the sufferings of Christ) of Arab Christians who are "certainly not supportive of the highly disproportionate military responses of Israel which now target their own families and fellow Arab Christians."

Israel "targets" Christians? Not true. Israel takes great pains to avoid harming civilians. Wallis's silence regarding Hezbollah-Muslim-oppression of these Lebanese Christians is deafening. His magazine Sojourners has long been a forum for anti-Israel voices: one article was entitled "Inside Israeli Apartheid".

The sudden prominence of Wallis is just one indication that forces are at work to shift the allegiance of Evangelicals. Recently, Jimmy Carter (along with Bill Clinton) has announced a new effort to bring together moderate Baptists in a "robust coalition" that would serve as a counterweight to the conservative Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). It had its springboard launch at the Carter Center in Atlanta. (The Carter Center is heavily-funded by Arab Muslims: will Arab oil wealth be used to influence evangelicals against Israel?) The invited churches have a combined membership of more than 20 million, outnumbering the SBC. Dr. Richard Land, head of the SBC's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, probably spotted Carter’s goal in forming the coalition. In noting that there would be areas of disagreement with the group being assembled by Carter and the Southern Baptist Convention, he wrote in a Washington Post article "...one of the areas where there would be significant disagreement would be our view towards Israel, as highlighted by President Carter's new book." That certainly is a prophetic comment.

Is it a coincidence, given the deliberately provocative use of the word "Apartheid" in the title of his book, that many of the church groups behind Carter’s coalition are historically black churches (among the fastest-growing evangelical populations in America and the world)? Did Carter hope by charging Israel with "apartheid" to turn African-Americans against Israel? Will he attempt to lobby against Israel among the evangelicals in his new coalition? Why not? He has everywhere else.

Clearly, Israel enjoys strong support within the evangelical movement. Groups such as the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews (founded by pioneered in fostering close ties between the Jewish community, Israel and the evangelicals. Former Presidential candidate Gary Bauer has also been a leader in mobilizing evangelicals to support Israel. More recently, Pastor John Hagee formed Christians United for Israel to serve as a lobbying group for Israel. The superb recent book by Michael Oren, Power, Faith and Fantasy; America in the Middle East 1776 to the Present, illuminates the fact that affection for the Jewish people is part of the DNA of America's religious and civic culture, and predates the rise of evangelicals.

However, history has taught the Jewish people that complacency is perilous. The belief that there is a covenant between God and the Jews that must be honored by Christians has only recently (when considering the grand scope of Christian history) enjoyed the prominence that it does now. Efforts to convince Christians that this covenant has been broken will erode Christian support for Jews and for Israel, as will spurious accusations that Israel harms Christians in the Middle East.

What can we do to help ensure that the evangelical and Jewish communities remain friends during this time of worldwide anti-Semitism and existential threats to Israel?

Friendships need to be appreciated and nurtured. Yet there are still many Jews who are wary of this embrace by Christians. The reasons commonly given for this reluctance are fear of Christian anti-Semitism, a misunderstanding regarding the motives for Christian support, and differing domestic agendas.

In fact, Christian anti-Semitism has been a primarily European phenomenon. Evangelical Christians are probably the most philo-Semitic group in the world today. Evangelicals do not support Israel for end-of-days or for conversionary motives. .

Lastly the differing domestic agendas should not unduly bother American Jews. We are both heirs to a grand Western Judeo-Christian heritage and share many common values. We are both groups under attack from the forces of Islamic extremism. In the words of Pastor Hagee, "...what we have in common is far greater than the differences we have allowed to divide us."

Evangelicals have not asked Jews to promote their policies; there is no quid pro quo (or political trading of favors) involved in their support for Israel which, for them, is a biblical mandate that predates the concept of democracy. Perhaps the best prescription to reduce anxiety might be to remember this phrase: be not afraid.

Zev Chafets (a Jewish American who made aliyah to Israel years ago) has written a new book on the relationship between American Evangelicals, Jews and Israel, A Match Made in Heaven: American Jews, Christian Zionists and One Man's Exploration of the Weird and Wonderful Judeo-Evangelical Alliance. He also is mindful of their different domestic agendas.

His response? So what? In a time of turmoil when Israel faces peril as never before, the affection and support that evangelicals extend to Jews and to Israel should be cherished and appreciated for what it is: a gift from God.

Will Jimmy Carter and his allies rend asunder what God hath joined together? Only time will tell.

Ed Lasky is the news editor of The American Thinker. This is an edited version of an article that appeared there on January 30, 2007.