|
Evangelicals and Israel
Theological Roots of a Political Alliance
By Donald Wagner
This article appeared in The Christian Century, November 4, 1998, pp.
1020-1026. Copyright by The Christian Century Foundation; used by permission.
Current articles and subscription information can be found at www.christiancentury.org.
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington this past January,
his initial meeting was not with President Clinton but with Jerry Falwell and
more than 1,000 fundamentalist Christians. The crowd saluted the prime minister
as "the Ronald Reagan of Israel," and Falwell pledged to contact more
than 200,000 evangelical pastors, asking them to "tell President Clinton
to refrain from putting pressure on Israel" to comply with the Oslo accords.
The meeting between Netanyahu and Falwell illustrates a remarkable political
and theological convergence. The link between Israelis Likud government
and the U.S. Religious Right was established by Natanyahu's mentor, Menachem
Begin, during the Carter and Reagan administrations. However, the roots
of evangelical support for Israel lie in the long tradition of Christian
thinking about the millennium.
In Luke's account of the ascension, the disciples ask Jesus, "Lord,
is this the time when you will restore the Kingdom to Israel?" The
question illustrates the early church's fascination with Israel and its
prophetic role at the end of history--a fascination that continues to this
day. Reflections on the end times draw on the Book of Daniel, Zechariah
9-14, Ezekiel 38-39 and various apocryphal books, as well as Matthew 24,
the early Pauline letters (1 Thess. 4:16-17; 5:1-11) and the Book of Revelation.
An early version of Christian eschatology, called "historic premillennialism," held
that Jesus would return and establish his millennial kingdom after the
world had been evangelized. However, by the 18th century another model
of eschatology emerged in England that emphasized the role of a reconstituted
Israel in the end times. This eschatology was rooted in three streams of
British Christianity: the piety of English Puritanism; the view that Britain
was the "new Israel," a theme that dates back at least to the
seventh century and the Venerable Bede; and a hermeneutic that interpreted
biblical prophetic texts as having a literal, future fulfillment. Among
the forerunners of this movement was Sir Henry Finch, a prominent lawyer
and member of Parliament. In 1621, Finch wrote a treatise in which he called
upon the British people and its government to support Jewish settlement
in Palestine in order to fulfill biblical prophecy.
As the year 1800 approached, several premillennial theologies emerged
as a result of the insecurity surrounding the American and French revolutions.
Among them were various utopian movements and the Millerites (a group that
later became Seventh-day Adventists). During this period John Nelson Darby
(1800-82), a renegade Anglican priest from Ireland, popularized and systematized
eschatological themes while simultaneously developing a new school of thought
which has been called "futurist premillennialism."
During 60 years of unceasing travel and preaching across the European
continent and North America, Darby converted a generation of evangelical
clergy and laity to his views. Darby held that biblical prophecies and
much of scripture must be interpreted according to a literal and predictive
hermeneutic. He believed that the true church will be removed from history
through an event called the "rapture" (I Thess. 4:16-17; 5:1-11),
and the nation Israel will be restored as God's primary instrument in history.
According to Darby, Christians must interpret history in light of seven
epochs or "dispensations," each of which reflects a particular
manner in which God deals with humanity. For example, we currently live
under the dispensation of "Grace," whereby people are judged
according to their personal relationship with Jesus Christ. This hermeneutical
method is called dispensationalism.
According to the dispensational model, a time of turmoil lies ahead, but
believers will be "raptured" away before it begins. This period
of tribulation will culminate in the final battle at Armageddon, a valley
northwest of Jerusalem. As evangelical historian Timothy Weber points out,
for premillennialists "the historical process is a never-ending battle
between good and evil, whose course God has already conceded to the Devil..
. . History's only hope lies in its own destruction."
Through Darby's influence, premillennial dispensationalism became a dominant
method of biblical interpretation and influenced a generation of evangelical
leaders, including Dwight L. Moody. Perhaps the most influential instrument
of dispensational thinking was the Scofield Bible (1909) which included
a commentary that interpreted prophetic texts according to a premillennial
hermeneutic. Another early Darby disciple, William E. Blackstone, brought
dispensationalism to millions of Americans through his best seller Jesus
Is Coming (1882). Blackstone organized the first Zionist lobbying effort
in the U.S. in 1891 when he enlisted J. P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller,
Charles B. Scribner and other financiers to underwrite a massive newspaper
campaign requesting President Benjamin Harrison to support the establishment
of a Jewish state in Palestine.
Similar efforts were under way in England, led by the social reformer
Lord Shaftesbury, who, like Blackstone, was so taken with Darby's eschatology
that he translated it into a political agenda. These seeds of the Christian
Zionist movement preceded Jewish Zionism by several years. Loni Shaftesbury
is also credited with coining an early version of the slogan adopted by
Jewish Zionist fathers Max Nordau and Theodor Herzl: "A land of no
people for a people with no land." Both Lord Arthur Balfour, author
of the famous 1917 Balfour Declaration, and Prime Minister David Lloyd
George, the two most powerful men in British foreign policy at the close
of World War I, were raised in dispensationalist churches and were publicly
committed to the Zionist agenda for "biblical" and colonialist
reasons.
The establishment of Israel in 1948 gave dispensationalism new momentum.
The restoration of a Jewish nation was taken as a sign that the clock of
biblical prophecy was ticking and we were rapidly approaching the final
events leading to the return of Jesus. During the cold war, dispensationalists
readily interpreted the Soviet Union and its allies as the Antichrist.
Passages such as Ezekiel 38-39 were read as predictions of an impending
Soviet attack on Israel. A ten-member confederation--often interpreted
as the European Union--was expected to join the Soviet Union in this attack.
When Israel captured Jerusalem in the 1967 war; dispensationalists were
certain that the end was near. L. Nelson Bell, Billy Graham's father-in-law
and editor of Christianity Today, wrote in July 1967: "That for the
first time in more than 2,000 years Jerusalem is now completely in the
hands of the Jews gives the student of the Bible a thrill and a renewed
faith in the accuracy and validity of the Bible."
By the early 1970s numerous books, films and television specials publicized
the premillennial dispensationalist perspective. Hal Lindsay made a virtual
industry out of his book The Late Great Planet Earth: it sold more than
25 million copies and led to two films, as well as a consulting business
with a clientele that has included several members of Congress, the Pentagon,
and Ronald Reagan.
In the mid 1970s at least five trends converged that accelerated the rise
of Christian Zionism. First, evangelical and charismatic movements became
the fastest-growing branch of North American Christianity. Mainline Protestant
denominations and the Roman Catholic Church were declining both in budgets
and attendance.
The election of Jimmy Carter; a Southern Baptist Sunday school teacher;
to the presidency in 1976 increased the visibility and legitimacy of the
once-marginalized evangelical movement. Time magazine declared 1976 "the
year of the evangelical." Still, the mainstream media seemed confused
by the various traditions and polarities within the complex evangelical
movement, failing to distinguish between the diverse political and theological
voices clamoring to claim the term "evangelical" for their particular
viewpoint.
Israel's occupation of Arab lands after 1967 created tension between many
Jewish organizations and the mainline Protestant, Eastern Orthodox and
Catholic communities. Many Jewish organizations, particularly lobbying
groups such as the American Israel Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC),
turned to the growing evangelical community for support. As Rabbi Marc
Tanenbaum of the American Jewish Committee stated, "The evangelical
community is the largest and fastest-growing bloc of pro-Jewish sentiment
in this country." AIPAC and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) added
staff to focus on relationships with evangelicals and fundamentalists.
The Israeli ministry of tourism eyed evangelicals as a major new market
for Holy Land tours and thus a source of revenue.
The fourth factor that stimulated the emerging evangelical Christian Zionist
movement's political agenda was the election of Menachem Begin as Israel's
prime minister in May 1977. Prior to Begin's election, Israeli politics
had been dominated by the secular Labor Party. Begin's Likud Party was
dominated by hard-line military figures such as Raphael Eitan and Ariel
Sharon, and supported by the increasingly powerful settler movement and
by small Orthodox religious parties. Likud constituencies used the biblical
names "Judea and Samaria" for the West Bank and employed a religious
argument to justify Israel's confiscation of Arab land for settlements:
since God gave the land exclusively to Jews, they have a divine right to
settle anywhere in Eretz Israel. Evangelicals welcomed the Likud leaders
and endorsed their political and religious agendas.
The final development that accelerated the alliance between Likud and
the Religious Right was Carter's March 1977 statement that he supported
Palestinian human rights, including the "right to a homeland." Likud,
when it came to power just two months later; immediately reached out to
Christian evangelicals. Likud's strategy was simple: split evangelical
and fundamentalist Christians from Carter's political base and rally support
among conservative Christians for Israel's opposition to the United Nations'
proposed Middle East Peace Conference.
Within weeks, full-page advertisements appeared in major U.S. newspapers
stating, "The time has come for evangelical Christians to affirm their
belief in biblical prophecy and Israel's divine right to the land." Targeting
Soviet involvement in the UN conference, the ad went on to say: "We
affirm as evangelicals our belief in the promised land to the Jewish people
. . . . We would view with grave concern any effort to carve out of the
Jewish homeland another nation or political entity."
The ad was financed and coordinated by Jerusalem's Institute for Holy
Land Studies, an evangelical organization with a Christian Zionist orientation.
Several leading dispensationalists signed the ad, including Kenneth Kantzer
of Christianity Today and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, singer Pat
Boone, and dispensationalist theologian and Dallas Theological Seminary
president John Walvoord.
The advertising campaign was one of the first public signs of a Likud-evangelical
alliance. A former employee of the American Jewish Committee, Jerry Strober,
who had coordinated the campaign, made the political connection in a statement
to Newsweek: "[The evangelicals] are Carter's constituency and he
[had] better listen to them... The real source of strength the Jews have
in this country is from the evangelicals."
At times the new alliance was uncomfortable for Jewish leaders. On one
such occasion, the president of the Southern Baptist Convention, Bailey
Smith, stated that "God does not hear the prayers of the Jews." Within
weeks, the AIC took Smith on a trip to Israel and corrected his views.
While Christian Zionists and Jewish organizations agree on many points,
the Christian Right's enthusiasm for evangelizing Jews remains an unresolved
point of tension.
Evangelicals, major Jewish organizations and the pro-Israel lobby supported
Ronald Reagan in the 1980 election. Carter's loss of the evangelical vote
played a significant role in his defeat. Likud policy was aggressively
represented by AIPAC both on Capitol Hill and within the Reagan administration.
For example, when Israel decided to invade Lebanon in the spring of 1982,
Begin sent Ariel Sharon, his defense minister, to Washington to enlist
the Reagan administration's support. By late May, Sharon was reportedly
given the green light by Secretary of State Alexander Haig. Within days
of the June invasion, full-page ads appeared in leading newspapers requesting
evangelical support for the invasion.
Begin developed a unique relationship with Reagan and many fundamentalist
leaders, especially Jerry Falwell. Falwell and his Moral Majority had long
supported Israel. In 1979, Grace Halsell reports, Israel gave Falwell a
Lear jet and in 1981 gave him the prestigious Jabotinsky Award during an
elaborate dinner ceremony in New York. When Israel bombed Iraq's nuclear
plant in 1981, Begin called Falwell before he called Reagan. He requested
that Falwell "explain to the Christian public the reasons for the
bombing."
In March 1985, while speaking to the conservative Rabbinical Assembly
in Miami, FaIwell pledged to "mobilize 70 million conservative Christians
for Israel and against anti-Semitism." He also takes credit for converting
Senator Jesse Helms (R., N.C.) into one of Israel's staunchest allies.
Helms soon became chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
The Reagan administration regularly conducted briefings and seminars for
its Christian Right supporters, briefings in which the pro-Likud lobby
(Americans for a Safe Israel and AIPAC) participated. Among the approximately
150 Christian fundamentalist leaders invited to each event were Hal Lindsay,
Jimmy Swaggart, Jim and Tammy Bakker; Pat Robertson and Tim and Bev LeHaye.
Reagan himself was a committed Christian Zionist. His support for Israel
derived from both strategic political concerns and a vague dispensationalist
perspective. He told Tom Dine, AIPAC's executive director; "I turn
back to your ancient prophets in the Old Testament and the signs foretelling
Armageddon, and I find myself wondering if we re the generation that is
going to see that come about." The remark was published by the Jerusalem
Post and widely distributed by the Associated Press.
Netanyahu's 1996 defeat of Shimon Peres brought Likud back to power. During
his years as Israel's representative at the UN, Netanyahu spoke regularly
on the Christian Bight's "Prayer Breakfast for Israel" circuit
and similar venues. Within a few months of his election, in conjunction
with the Israeli ministry on tourism, he convened the Israel Christian
Advocacy Council. Seventeen American evangelical and fundamentalist leaders
were flown to Israel for a tour of the Holy Land and a conference at which
they pledged support for what was essentially a Likud agenda. Included
in the delegation were Don Argue, president of the National Association
of Evangelicals; Brandt Gustavson, president of the National Religious
Broadcasters (an organization that oversees approximately 90 percent of
Christian radio and television broadcasting in North America); and Donald
Wildmon, president of the American Family Association. The evangelical
leaders signed a pledge expressing the hope that "America never; never
desert Israel."
Several members of the Advisory Council backed the pro-Israel advertisement
in the April 10, 1997, New York Times. Titled "Christians Call for
a United Jerusalem," the ad may have been a direct response to a December
1996 Times ad sponsored by Churches for Middle East Peace, calling for
a "Shared Jerusalem."
The Christian Zionist ad claimed that its signatories reach more than
100,000 Christians weekly and called for evangelicals to support the Likud
position on Jewish sovereignty over Jerusalem. Using several familiar dispensationalist
themes, the ad claimed: "Jerusalem has been the spiritual and political
capital of only the Jewish people for 3,000 years." Citing Genesis
12:17, Leviticus 26:44-45 and Deuteronomy 7:7-8, it spoke of Israel's biblical
claim to the land. The ad was signed by Pat Robertson of the Christian
Broadcasting Network; Ralph Reed, then director of the Christian Coalition;
Ed McAteer of the Religious Roundtable; and Falwell, among others. Voicing
one of Netanyahu's themes, the ad asked that Israel "not be pressured
to concede on issues of Jerusalem in the final status negotiations with
the Palestinians."
Likud also turned to evangelical and fundamentalist Christians to offset
the decline in contributions for Israel from the American Jewish community.
In response to the increasing power of the Orthodox parties in Netanyahu's
government and the second-class status these parties assigned to non-Orthodox
Jews, Reformed and Conservative Jewish communities cut back their usual
generous contributions to the Jewish National Fund and other agencies in
the U.S. that support Israel. But the International Fellowship of Christians
and Jews, led by Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein of Chicago, raised more than $5
million for the United Jewish Appeal, almost all of it from evangelicals
and fundamentalists.
In a separate initiative, John Hagee, pastor of the Cornerstone Church
in San Antonio, Texas, and a signer of the Christians for a United Jerusalem
Statement, announced in February of this year that his church was giving
more than $1 million to Israel. He claimed that the money would be used
to help resettle Jews from the former Soviet Union in the West Bank and
Jerusalem. "We feel like the coming of Soviet Jews to Israel is a
fulfillment of biblical prophecy," Hagee stated. When asked if he
realized that his support of Israel's Likud policies was at cross-purposes
with U.S. government policy and possibly illegal, Hagee retorted: "I
am a Bible scholar and a theologian and from my perspective, the law of
God transcends the law of the United States government and the U.S. State
Department."
While the U.S. and European governments in 1997 were pressing Netanyahu
to negotiate with the Palestinians, the prime minister's public relations
specialists developed another strategy involving the cooperation of Christian
Zionist organizations in Jerusalem. The initial phase of this strategy
was launched in an October 22, 1997, report on Israeli Radio (Kol Israel)
News, a report claiming that the Palestinian National Authority (PA) was
persecuting Christians.
Two days later the Jerusalem Post published an article charging that,
according to a new Israeli government report, "the few Christians
remaining in PA-controlled areas are subjected to brutal and relentless
persecution." The report alleged that "'Christian cemeteries
have been destroyed, monasteries have had their telephone lines cut, and
there have been break-ins to convents.'" Moreover; the Palestinian
Authority "has taken control of the churches and is pressuring Christian
leaders to serve as mouthpieces for Yasser Arafat and opponents of Israel"
A month later; Congressman J. C. Watts (R., Okla.) reiterated these charges
in the Washington Times, blaming Arafat and the PA for the Christian exodus
from the Holy Land and calling into question the $307 million in grants
the U.S. has given the PA.
Palestinian Christian leaders were quick to respond. Said Bethlehem mayor
Hanna Nasser, a Christian: "Our churches have complete freedom, and
I've never heard that they've been under pressure." Mitri Raheb, pastor
of Bethlehem's Lutheran church, challenged the Israeli report as pure propaganda.
He noted that while Bethlehem was under Israeli occupation, his house had
been robbed and his car stolen twice; but "there have been no robberies
since the Palestinian Authority has taken over. On the contrary, there
is a greater sense of security now than there was under occupation."
Last May, Evangelicals for Middle East Understanding and Open Doors International
sent a 14-member team to the Holy Land to investigate the allegations of
persecution. The delegation interviewed more than 60 spokespersons in Israel
and the Palestinian territories, including a number of Christian leaders;
Uri Mor, director of the Israeli Ministry of Religious Affairs in the Department
of Christian Communities; and several Christian Zionist leaders.
The delegation concluded that though there were isolated incidents of
discrimination and increased tension between Christian and Muslim communities
in certain areas, there were no cases that could be characterized as persecution
in the territories under the Palestinian Authority. Four converts from
Islam to Christianity had experienced pressure from their families and
communities. One or two who had criminal backgrounds had been pressured
by the PA. But in neither case could the context and reasons for the pressure
be construed as persecution. Furthermore, though some Christian Palestinians
are concerned that if Islamic law (Shari'a) becomes the law of the Palestinian
areas, the religious freedom of Christians maybe restricted in the future,
no evidence of this development is present.
The investigative team found "disturbing indications of political
motivations behind [the] recent publicity about Christian persecution." The
team learned that a Christian Zionist group, the International Christian
Embassy--Jerusalem, had cooperated with the office of David Bar-llan, Netanyahu's
chief spokesman, in exaggerating accounts of Christian persecution and
circulating them to the international press. A staff member of the U. S.
consulate in Jerusalem interviewed Mor; the Israeli religious affairs official,
who stated that the report was intended to be an internal document, but
Bar-llan's office leaked it to the Christian and secular media.
Asked why the prime minister's office would do such a thing, Mor noted
that Bar-llan uses such information as his "bread and butter" in
the Israeli propaganda war against the PA. Clearly, there was no attempt
by either the Israeli government or the Christian Embassy to note the criminal
status of some claiming to be persecuted, or to distinguish between persecution
and understandable pressure from families or communities opposing a member's
conversion to another faith.
It is true that Palestinian Christians are leaving the Holy Land. But
it is not because of Muslim persecution. They are leaving because of the
brutality of Israeli occupation and because Israel's resistance to negotiating
a just peace with the Palestinians makes them despair about the future.
At this juncture, it appears that the hardline Likud position has the
backing of both houses of Congress, the major Jewish lobbies, and the Christian
Right. President Clinton and those who advocate the Israeli Labor Party
peace formula, or the Oslo Accords, have little leverage with Likud. Palestinian
Christians and their supporters fear that the Christian Right's alliance
with Likud may in the end serve as a self-fulfilling prophecy, heightening
tensions in the region and leading to a new round of conflict in the Holy
Land, which the Christian Zionists will readily interpret as "the
final battle."
Donald E. Wagner teaches at North Park University in Chicago. He is the
author of Anxious for Armageddon (1995) and Dying in the Land
of Promise: Palestine and Palestinian Christianity from Pentecost to 2000, (revised
edition, 2003).
|