Why do Christians Have Different Attitudes to Israel?
Christians agree on almost everything. I have found some have different attitudes on the death penalty, a few on abortion, and some on the method of baptism, but basically we agree on everything – except in our attitudes to Israel. Why is this so?
The church over the centuries has been ambivalent towards Israel. This includes the dreadful era when the church persecuted Jews in retaliation of early Christian persecution, and the holocaust in Europe under Hitler when the church in Germany was silent. Today for some Christians, Israel is part of God’s great plan for the end of the world, and we must do all we can to help the Israeli nation grow in an aggressive world where Islam is on the march. In fact, they argue we should celebrate the Jewish military victories because they will bring the return of Christ to Earth sooner, and that we must join in Jewish feasts and practices. Where did these ideas come from?
Other Christians believe Israel was the cradle of the Christian church, but when the Jews rejected the opportunity of recognising the Messiah, and in fact aided in his rejection and death, they forfeited that special privilege of being God’s chosen people. The argument therefore continues that today Israel is like every other nation in desperate need of repentance and obedience to faith in Jesus Christ.
A third belief is that the Jewish faith is just like Buddhism, Islam, and every other faith – correct for those who believe it.
These various ideas are important when they guide or direct the political and financial support of countries towards Israel because of the specific belief of a Christian President or Prime Minister. That is the case today. The change of ideas about the nation state of Israel came about because of the rise of new eschatological viewpoints during the last century or so, and the decision by the United Nations after World War Two, to give the Jews who had suffered so much in Europe their own homeland in the middle of Palestinian-occupied territory. This land covering much of the area promised to Abraham and when Israel became a nation in 1948 it was a moment of unbelievable rejoicing.
The big change came in the mid-nineteen century with one man’s theology of the end times, and its incorporation by a Bible publisher into his range of Bibles. Rev J. N. Darby was an Irish Anglican clergyman who proposed godly living, devotion to study of the Scripture, simple worship, churches without clergy, missionary zeal, and a new understanding of the end times according to millennial dispensationalism. He organised Bible teaching conferences and conventions and his followers became known as the Plymouth Brethren. Although never claiming to be a denomination they have influenced world Christianity in the twentieth century more than any denomination.
In the later part of the nineteenth century he shifted to the United States where he had profound impact on many popular preachers, including the great evangelist D. L. Moody, and the Bible institutes which produced most of the American overseas missionaries.
One of those institute teachers in Dallas was a congregational minister Rev Cyrus Scofield who codified human history and the Bible into seven time periods, or dispensations, each with different Biblical responsibilities. The last one will involve the return of the Jews to Israel, the rapture of the church, the rise of superpowers that will go to war with each other, the fulfillment of prophecy, the return of Christ, His thousand year reign on earth, and then the eternal new heaven and earth. Scofield put his timeline on charts so people could easily follow them.
Often church meetings would display the enlarged charts running across their stages and around the walls. They were also published in 1909 and included in Scofield Bibles which became immensely popular. For the most part the theory depended upon a translation of the Bible that was 400 years old. Broadly speaking, this dispensational premillenialism swept through the Bible colleges and institutes of America. These organisations trained most of the pastors for American fundamentalist churches and overseas missionaries. Hence wherever they went and wherever Bible institutes were established this form of teaching became predominant.
It was severely critiqued in all mainstream churches and theological seminaries. Hence while pastors from Bible institutes followed this teaching, ministers trained in seminaries and universities did not. There are no mainstream denominations in the UK, USA or Australia, expect for the Baptists, who follow dispensational millennialist teaching. In most other parts of the world, it is not even an issue.
Essential to the dispensational millennialist teaching is the return of the Jews (all of them) to Israel, conflict that will involve the world’s greatest nations over the Middle East, and finally culminating in the Battle of Armageddon before the Return of Jesus and His thousand year reign on Earth. If this form of doctrine is believed by international presidents (such as Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush) it is easy to see how they would support Israel’s supply of arms and massive military response to Palestinian aggression.
Victory could even hasten the return of Christ. It does not seem to matter that among the Palestinians there are large numbers of Christians, and among the Lebanese, Marionite Christians are a significant group.
Hence we have Western Christians supporting a secular Israeli state attacking Christians whose ancestors lived where they live for the past thousand years. These Christians pray for the peace of Israel, support atheist Israeli leaders, and ignore Christian bothers and sisters in Palestinian areas and Lebanon.
The church is composed of Christians who hold different views on issues like the method of baptism and the details of the fulfillment of prophecy. On these matters of difference it is important we not present one view only. We are composed of pastors who have been trained in Institutes and Ministers trained in Seminaries, and members from independent fundamentalist churches and mainstream denominations. We hold differing views on a few subjects. On those matters we should understand the history of our viewpoint, appreciate the views of others and show acceptance and love to others who may disagree. Above all we should seek peace on the Middle East for all and an equitable distribution of land and other resources among all who live there.
GORDON MOYES
