For some time I've debated, in my head at least, as a Christian how much support I owe Israel. The basic question of my argument is whether or not the nation-state of Israel that we know is the same as the nation of Israel spoken of in the Bible. Has God's special care for Israel been completed or at least diminished by the fact that we live in a post-incarnation/resurrection world? I go back and forth between these questions. In Romans the apostle Paul seems to indicate that God still has a special place for Israel, but that it is in some way different than it was pre-incarnation. All this leads into the question of how much support should we give to the nation-state of Israel? I tend to be pro-Israel largely because I don't think they get a fair shake internationally, but should we hold them to a higher standard because they are Israel? I don't know that there's a clear cut answer to any of these questions, but I'm certain that it's not the clear cut answer some of the most pro-Israel Christians would have us believe.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I tend to come down on the side that says that the Isreal or Sons of Abraham that Paul speaks about means the "new Isreal"... i.e. those who accepted Christ, whether Jew or gentile. It's a more reformed view.
So my support for Isreal depends on their actions and the actions of those around them. They tend to be more interested in peace, and they are a democracy more or less, so I tend to come at things from their side.
I think a lot of the knee jerk support for Isreal among Christians is somewhat harmful to the region. There are many Palestinian and Arab Christians who end up getting thrown under the bus because of it.
The current situation in Hamas is a hard case. On the one hand, Israel's response clearly is not proportional. On the other hand, Hamas has shown themselves willing to exploit innocents and to kill anyone/anything to advance their cause. And my own intuition is still that the timing of the attack had more to do with Ehud Barak's political future than about a real need on the ground.
At the same time, we need to understand what Israel is. They are our ONLY reliable ally in the region. They are the only long-term democracy in the region (Iraq is too young to count). We need to support them, in general, and err on the side of our ally.
Overall my opinion is that Mideast Peace is not an achievable goal with the current Arab leadership. The Palestinians who lead have no interest in ending the war, because it is the war that brought them to power. The outer Arab states have no interest in peace, because the war serves as a distraction and safety valve for the concerns of their own people. As long as they are demonstrating against Israel, there is no time to demonstrate for democratic reforms or improved economic conditions. Until there is a real Arab Gandhi, ready to talk peace because he/she values peace for its own sake, Mideast Peace is a pipe dream.
I tend to believe there will never be peace in the middle east until the Anti-Christ comes. That is my reading of scripture.
Even if you don't believe that, until the Palestinians accept Israel's right to exist, there can be no peace.
I agree with Nomad's cogent analysis of the current situation:)
I agree with Nomad that we need to support them as western allies because of their democratic principles. However, the blind allegiance that the American evangelicals/fundamentalists have for Israel is not supported in the Bible as far as I'm concerned.
We should be their allies, and yes they are in a tough spot. And yeah, we helped put them there. But just the same, are we really being "good" allies if we never challenge them to change? The peace talks are, and have been, a joke. While my theology doesn't include an anti-Christ in the way that crchair mentions, I still think that peace is probably about as likely to come to the region as he does, at least certainly in this generation or the next.
Post a Comment