I'm devilish they tell me
In praying for Israel on God TV the otherweek, the station's founder, Rory Alec, seemed unconcerned about the suffering people of Lebanon but assumed that God was using Israel to defeat the evil that was bent on its destruction. God TV echoed what many evangelical Christians believe. It refuted that “Devilish Replacement Theology”, which states that Christians are now “the seed of Abraham”, not the Jews. Rory Alec's words appear to mean that I and many other Christians are in league with the Devil and that's not a comfortable thought.
When I criticise the State of Israel's actions against the Palestinians (and now against Lebanon), more often than not I'm accused of anti-Semitism; not a comfortable position to be in, especially in a small town like Helsinki. Maybe someone reading this might assume that I hate Israel (which I don't) simply because I dare to question its actions. They will tell me that I should bless Israel, whatever Israel does, otherwise God can't bless me, no doubt interpreting my every mishap as proof of their belief. But I can find no understanding of “bless” that doesn't imply approval or praise or wishes the “blessee” well in his endeavours. Can I bless an Israel that seems intent on what may be war crimes?
I don't enjoy being uncomfortable so I must do some homework to see whether or not I should recant of my so-called devilish theology. I want to be sure, or at least inform my conscience as best I can. Are there good grounds for my position? I start with some history; then a bit of theology.
After the suffering the Jews experienced for 2,000 years they surely deserved to have a homeland and where better than the land from where they were driven. Ironically, in 1840, Turkey informed the British that a return of the Jews to Palestine would bring both wealth and stability to the Middle East, and many Jews did emigrate. But a century later, after the Second World War, was it realistic to assume that a Jewish State could be established in this “twice promised land” (to the Jews and the Arabs) without turmoil?
Throughout World War 2, Jewish terrorists, including the infamous Stern Gang attacked the British who ruled Palestine under a League of Nations mandate. I say 'infamous' because the Stern Gang offered an alliance with Nazi Germany. The Gang would fight the British in return for Hitler's allowing Germany's Jews to emigrate to Palestine. There's no record of any answer from Hitler.
After the gang's leader, Avraham Stern, was killed by the British, the terrorist group re-formed as 'Lehi' under a leadership that included Yitzhak Shamir. Shamir later became Prime Minister of the new state of Israel. (The Lehi Ribbon was later inaugurated for those members of Lehi who would like to show their links with the past.) A Lehi newspaper set the tone of the determination that forced the British out of Palestine:
“Neither Jewish morality nor Jewish tradition can negate the use of terror as a means of battle.”
The present state of Israel was born in violence and has had to fight for its very existence. It has gained much admiration for its courage and military successes. Rightly so. But I am among those who are troubled by the country's refusal to accede to UN resolutions and recognise the pre-1967 borders, and by today's greater occupation of land protected by “the Wall”. I can't ignore the suffering of the Palestinians, which is surely at the root of the whole Middle East turmoil. Hence, Hamas and Hetzbollah and their often violent resistance to the Israeli occupation of what they see as Palestinian land. Now we see Lebanon 'bombed into the Stone Age', as King Abdullah of Jordan said on BBC, by a ruthless Israel. But neither Hetzbollah nor Israel could fight were they not financed and supplied with arms by Iran/Syria or the USA.
When I hear Christians supporting the state of Israel I note that they almost exclusively quote the Old Testament, rarely the New, to underpin their position. They quote prophecy but usually ignore the general rule of studying the Bible that the Old Testament should be read in light of the New. They admit that they do not approve of everything that Israel does. But they refuse to admit that Israel today is a secular state with only a tiny minority of practising Jews, and that Israel's actions are so often at variance with the commands of God to His people. If the present day State of Israel is God's chosen people, it seems to me that they are acting more like the Israel described in the Bible as deserving the exiles that befell them.
I know that many will quarrel with my interpretation of the Bible; such is the theological dilemma.
First, the requirement to bless Israel, regardless of its actions. Some writers claim that Britain lost its Empire because of its opposition to the establishment of Israel. They also ignore the fact that the USA agreed with Britain. But, the question here for me is, do God's words to Abram about others blessing Israel refer to other nations or individuals today? I think not. The promises about the land are repeated but not the warning in Genesis that we will be cursed if we do not bless Israel. (Genesis12:3.) My detractors usually ignore the requirement that Israel should be a blessing to others. Countless Jews are a blessing in very many fields throughout the world. But can that be said of the State of Israel? Has it a special relationship with God?
Peter, in the New Testament, says that those who reject Jesus as Messiah will cease to be God's people. (Acts 3:23). Paul calls Jesus the 'seed of Abraham', as are those who follow Him. Paul also says that God's blessing depends on whether or not the Gentiles respond to Jesus; not on how they treat the Jews (Galatians 3).
There are many Christians who feel it's more important to get Jews into Israel than to see them converted to Christianity. One woman, supported by Finnish Christians, travels in North Africa, Russia and China searching out Jews and encouraging them to emigrate. Of course, Jews have no right of entry if they convert, but it's also true that they are much less likely to convert later.
But what about the land God promised Abram; is there any argument about this?
Argument there is and plenty to be read that can't be distilled here. I can only state the conclusion I've come to as a result of my reading.
Whenever God promises something, it is always conditional. The land is God's not Israel's, and the Jews are tenants (Leviticus 25:23). When I see what devastation and loss of life Israel is causing I wonder at the words of the prophet Ezekiel: ”This says the Lord God of Israel: You shed blood, yet you would keep possession of the land? You rely on your sword, you do abominable things...yet you would keep possession of the land.”(“Ezekiel 33:25-26).
The meek, not some particular nationality, says Jesus, will inherit the earth, not just some tiny part of the Middle East. The New Testament speaks of the people of God, the new Israel, as being those Jews and Gentiles under Christ who are together in His Church.
As I understand the Bible, I can only conclude that God's "chosen people" have been replaced by the Church, as one of Jesus's parables foretells (Matthew 21:33-46).
My reading:
Who Owns the Land – Stanley A. Ellisen, Multnomah 1991.
The Church is Israel Now - Charles D. Proven, Ross House Books 1987
The Land of Promise - Philip Johnston & Peter Walker(ed) IVP 2000
The Jews, People of the Future – Ulf Ekman 2003
Christian Zionism – Stephen Sizer IVP 2004
Dispensationalism – Keith A Mathison R6R publishing 1995
