No, Christians shouldn’t give unconditional support to Israel

The actions of October 7th, 2023, brought the Israeli-Palestinian conflict into the cultural zeitgeist in a way that it hasn’t been for a long time. While acts of terror from Hamas – or any actor – should be clearly and consistently rebuked, many Christians analyze the situation with a poor grasp of history, ambivalence towards concepts of blowback, and an incorrect biblical interpretation of modern-day Israel. Rather than viewing the international stage as if there are always objectively moral and uniquely evil actors, the informed Christian should recognize that political leaders typically act out of self-interest and that mainstream media/state narratives rarely paint an accurate picture. This, along with a fair inspection of the current theological role of Israel, should allow for a more informed perspective of the Israel-Palestine conflict. 

After attending an event at Liberty University (founded by Jerry Falwell) featuring former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, I felt called to write on the topic of Christians supporting Israel, as Bennett earned at least half a dozen rounds of applause and a standing ovation at the end of his half-hour speech.

Bennett spoke specifically on October 7th about the resilience of the younger generations in Israel. During the allotted time, he gave a breakdown of the “facts” surrounding the Israel-Gaza conflict and urged students to support Israel when their peers or co-workers are “confused.” Unfortunately, the facts he presented were either completely incorrect or had vital missing context. The university has not hosted speakers with alternative views on the subject thus far and has not responded to comment. 

I had the opportunity to interview a few students after the event, with hopes that some were critical of at least some of what Bennett said, or were interested in learning more. Professors at Liberty University would surely prefer that their students be educated on such important topics, and thus exposed to varying points of view. 

Few students were aware of alternative Christian points of view on Israel despite having strong opinions on the topic. Part of the fault of this should lie at the feet of the university, which exists to educate Christian students as they prepare to enter the world. 

There is no reason that young Christians should be ignorant of different eschatological schools or different theological views of Israel, especially when Israel is in the global spotlight. Most evangelical Christians who support Israel unconditionally are dispensationalists. Dispensationalism is not the historic theological system most Christian writers or apologists hold. The term “dispensationalism” was first coined in the book, ‘The Gospel of the Kingdom,’ and the Scofield Bible popularized this view that God has had different relations with humans throughout history. With this lens came a view that emphasized a coming apocalypse and future tribulation and that most prophecies are currently unfulfilled, or “futurism.” Hal Lindsey’s ‘Late Great Planet Earth’ popularized this view in the late 1970s and 1980s, and the popular book and later film series, ‘Left Behind’ popularized and even sensationalized this view moving forward. 

Beyond cultural influence, many Christians in the political world advocated for a certain aggressive foreign policy in part due to this interpretation of Israel and the end times. Jerry Falwell Sr, leader in the self-proclaimed “moral majority” movement which sought to increase political action amongst right-leaning Christians, visited Israel and advocated that the United States support the nation in the late 70s and 80s. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush Jr. would reference biblical apocalyptic language and themes when justifying their support for Israel or War on Terror. 

Apocalyptic language in the Bible is admittedly tricky to understand in its proper context. Literal language is primarily a modern proclivity, while ancient and especially apocalyptic literature is usually symbolic and allegorical. Rather than reading scripture literally, a studious Christian should attempt to understand not only what the canon says, but also what God meant to convey through it, and who it was directed towards. 

Alternative Christian views to futurism and dispensationalism abound, even for Christians who view scripture as God-breathed. Some who hold to a partial preterist view believe that most of the apocalyptic language in scripture has already occurred, except for Revelation 20-22. Passages in Daniel and the Olivet Discourse reference the coming destruction of Jerusalem, with the Beast being Nero. There is language to support a judgment that is “coming soon”, and Jesus says in Mathew, “truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened” when discussing a tribulation and destruction of Jerusalem. The temple was indeed destroyed in AD 70. (Mathew 24:34)

In terms of the fulfillment of prophecies, it is consistent to believe that most, or all of the Old Testament prophecies surrounding Israel were fulfilled by Christ, as he came through the line of David as a way to bless the world and deliver first the Jew, and also the Greek. (Romans 1:6). 

Additionally, Romans 9:6 says, “for they are not all Israel who are of Israel,” indicating that not all ethnic Jews are part of the “true” Israel, which most Christians should believe refers to the church. Even those who are not convinced that Israel is fully replaced by the church should at least recognize that state actors can lie, the modern state of Israel does not necessarily represent all Jews or biblical Israel, and that the millions of innocents caught up in these conflicts are image-bearers, regardless of their ethnicity or religion.

All of the facts of the current conflict can be hazy, as different sources typically highlight facts supporting the side of the conflict they take. Despite this, it is clear that the level of death and displacement in Gaza should not be accepted and that it will likely lead to further radicalization and destabilization in the region. 

The reported death toll is at least 44,500 Palestinians and around 1,200 Israelis since Oct. 7th, 2023. These numbers, combined with the hundreds of thousands displaced from Gaza, should paint a picture that one side has a clear advantage, even if the current round of fighting began because of the actions of Hamas terrorists. 

The situation in Gaza has been dire for decades now. After Hamas took control of the strip in 2007, Israel placed an indefinite blockade, even counting calories, resulting in a “starvation plus” diet for Palestinians in Gaza. British Prime Minister David Cameron called Gaza an “open-air prison” in 2010, and this was largely because Israel controlled the movement, food imports, and even electricity of all Gazans while not officially claiming sovereignty. Additionally, current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and members of his Likud party funneled money and resources to Hamas as a way to keep the Palestinian people divided, as the more moderate Palestinian Authority controls the West Bank. 

50% of Gaza’s population was below the age of 18 before the most recent assault. This means that at least 50% of the population has only ever known occupation, as Israel has had de facto or de jure control over the strip since 1967. Children who grow up seeing their family struggle to survive or be subject to IDF violence are prone to radicalization. This isn’t to justify acts of terror but to point to the apparent lessons of blowback that Israel (and Washington) never seem to learn. 

Concerning the current situation, many world leaders and global organizations have either called for a cease-fire in Gaza, have issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu – and other members of the Likud and Hamas – or labeled the displacement and assault as ethnic cleansing, including former Israeli defense minister, Moshe Yaalon 

The humanitarian crisis in the strip is undeniable. 1.8 million Gazans face extreme hunger, 90% of the population is displaced, and most sanitation facilities are destroyed, as are hospitals and schools. At least 17,000 children have been killed, which works out to one killed every half-hour. 

Christians should view this as nothing but an assault on human life, with the United States as a financial backer. From a strategic standpoint, this unconditional backing hurts America’s global reputation and leaves us open to acts of blowback in the form of terrorism. From a moral standpoint, Christians should view all humans as created beings with inherent dignity and equality under God, even if other actors do not share this perspective. Rather than supporting continued aid sent to Israel, American Christians should pray for an end to violence and the salvation of all involved.