May 1, 2002

THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE



In the April installment I mentioned that it was up to America to enforce a just settlement of the Mideast conflict. We boast that we are the only remaining super-power which projects its influence throughout the world, yet we allow a small country with a population of less than six million people to determine our foreign policy. Surely this should give rise to thought.

Ostensibly the fight between Israelis and Palestinians is over land which both sides regard as their own but behind it is the Bible. The conflict is at its root religious on the Jewish, Christian and to some extent the Muslim side. I am qualifying the Muslim contribution because in Palestine the struggle is for national liberation and as such still secular in its origin. Nevertheless the "martyrs" believe they will enter paradise which adds religious fervor. Even at the beginning of Zionism in the 19th century there was an alliance between secular Jewish intellectuals and Christian Protestants in German and British high society. This enabled Herzl to gain support for his dream of establishing a "Jewish homeland." The rationale for Protestant politicians to pursue a policy which more sober-minded people knew would lead to permanent bloodshed in the Mideast, was a misinterpretation of biblical prophecies, especially the one in the Book of Revelation, more commonly known as the Apocalypse.

This nightmare vision of an unknown Christian-Jewish author of the late first century is now driving decisions two thousand years later in America. If this does not stagger the minds of rational people I don't know what will. St. John the Divine, as the author of that unfortunate book is called, wrote for the people of his own time who were persecuted by a number of Roman emperors. The disasters he "foresaw" had been stock in trade for hundreds of years in Jewish apocalyptic literature. They had gained increased importance during Jesus' time because the Jews who lived under Roman occupation believed that the end-times were near. A Jewish Messiah from the seed of King David would appear, he would rout the "idolaters," the unjust world order would collapse, and the kingdom of God, with its capital at Jerusalem, would be established under Jewish rule forever and ever more here on earth.

But then came Jesus. In accord with the emotional climate of the time he was also imbued with millennial expectations and taught that the Kingdom of God was imminent. Furthermore he believed, like everyone else, that biblical prophecies were indeed forecasts of the future. He did not know, and could not have known, what Bible scholars have demonstrated during the past two centuries that these "prophecies" were not predictions of the future but the work of theologians in order to justify the past. The Bible, as we know it, was not written in the dim past but came into being some time after the Jews were allowed to return from the Babylonian exile. The earliest complete text was written in Greek, albeit based on earlier Hebrew texts, at some time around 250 B.C. in Alexandria. What has never been properly appreciated is that the biblical authors and editors had not intended primarily to write a history of their nation, although they followed the example of Homer, Herodotus and Thucydides, but to reveal God's plan for "His Chosen People." To do so the past disasters, which the Jewish people had been subjected to, had to be explained and some facts from the past were projected into the future as if the prophets had actually predicted them. In this way credibility was achieved. Thus the Bible is not only a religious, but also a political document.

Jesus had no way of knowing this. He took the prophecies at face value and so did his disciples. By applying the verses of the "Suffering Servant" from, what is nowadays called, Deutero Isaiah he believed that by his death he would usher in the kingdom of God. With other words because biblical prophecy existed it needed people to make past predictions come true This is how the Word became Flesh, to use the terminology of the fourth gospel. Jesus' little band of followers kept believing that the second coming was just around the corner and only as the decades went by without change did they feel the need to put his words on paper which became the gospels. Since the majority, if not all of them, were written after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. the words which have been put in Jesus' mouth in this respect are not necessarily historical either.

This brings us back to our own time and the imminent arrival of the apocalypse which some Christian as well as Jewish circles so ardently want to bring about. Jesus had based his prediction of the events surrounding the end-times, and the arrival of the Son of Man in glory, largely on the book of Daniel. What was not known then, and is not openly admitted to now by Evangelicals, is that this book had nothing to do with the era of Persian rule, but was written in the second century B.C. by an unknown adherent to apocalyptic thought. The events which were projected into the future reflect those which had happened previously during the reign of Antiochus IV and the Maccabean revolt. The "abomination of desolation" was the statue of that Greek ruler which had been placed in 167 B.C. on the altar of the temple. The duration of persecutions also fits precisely the actual time during which the Jewish religion had been forbidden.

The purpose of the book of Daniel had been to bring hope to the Jews of Greco-Roman times and the same applies to the Apocalypse of St. John the Divine The churches in Asia Minor had been persecuted under Domitian and needed to be strengthened. Babylon the "mother of harlots . . . drunken with the blood of Saints" equaled Rome and the beast whose number was 666, or in some early manuscripts 616, was Nero, depending upon how the name and his title were spelled when Hebrew letters were used as numbers. The author's vision was couched in classical Jewish apocalyptic language so that any interpretation of other details is limited only by the fantasy of the reader.

How did these ancient "prophecies" become popular in our age? In 1998, the fiftieth anniversary of modern Israel's birth, Timothy Weber explained the situation in an article for Christianity Today "How Evangelicals Became Israel's Best Friend." It is available on www.christianitytoday.org. The article is quite long but deserves to be printed and read carefully. The intervening years, and especially the current situation, have only strengthened Weber's analysis. He pointed out that not only do evangelical Christians love the land of Israel because this is where Jesus lived and died, but also because of the anticipated end-game in which Israel plays a pivotal role. In order to reconcile the conflicting ideas of who was going to rule the post-apocalypse world: Jesus or an as yet unnamed Jewish terrestrial king, an Englishman, John Nelson Darby, came up in the mid 1800's with the ingenious idea that the Lord had two distinct plans. One for the "earthly people" (Israel) and another for the "heavenly people" (the church). This idea which has been called dispensationalism means that some prophecies apply to one and some to the other group. For both groups the return of the Jewish exiles from the Diaspora is essential. For this reason Protestant Christians were initially far more eager to embrace the Zionist idea, than even Jews themselves because the ingathering of the dispersed was the fundamental sine qua non to fulfill God's plan. Dispensationalism began to be popular in the U.S. during the 1870's but the real success had to wait until the 1920's and especially until after 1948 and the 1967 Six-Day war.

The dispensationist belief system includes:

1) After the "times of the Gentiles" are finished and the Jews have returned to the Holy Land civilization as we know it will unravel. Moral standards, including those of the clergy will suffer irreversible setbacks. Wars, political and economic unrest, natural disasters including catastrophic weather changes will abound and whatever is done to reverse the situation is doomed to failure.

2.) Since God had decided to work with only one of the two mentioned groups at a time there will then occur during these times of trial what has been called the "Rapture." Jesus will physically remove his faithful from earth to heaven so that God can then concentrate on the Jews.

3) After the rapture of the church a charismatic leader - the Antichrist - will appear and head a confederation of ten European states. Israel will join and rebuild the temple.

4) In spite of the Antichrist's inordinate power and the help of a False Prophet other nations will rise up against his coalition and eventually he will be defeated at the battle of Armageddon. During the battle Jesus and his saints will arrive and ensure the final victory. The surviving Jews will accept him as the Messiah and he will then rule from Jerusalem for a thousand years.

I have omitted several details which can be found on the mentioned website but it suffices to show the mind-set of a segment of Christians who devoutly believe these prophecies and who now devote their best energies to make them come true at the soonest possible time. One may argue that evangelical Christians are a minority in the United States, just as the six million Jews, but this would seriously underestimate their superb organization and the resulting political clout. For evangelicals, just as for Jews, the Palestinians stand in the way and have to disappear somehow. A peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians is unthinkable because it would run counter to God's plan. There can only be one state of Israel which encompasses all the biblical lands. This has also always been the goal of the Likud party and is why Netanyahu told an audience of predominantly evangelical Christians in April of 1998, "We have no greater friends and allies than the people sitting in this room." This occurred during the Clinton era and President Bush is expected to toe the line also. If he goes against these combined Jewish, neo-conservative and Christian coalition votes he is being told, by his advisors, that he might as well forget about reelection. Members of the House and Senate receive the same message that their chances in the upcoming midterm November elections are quite dim unless they resolutely support the policies of the Jerusalem government.

But this is not all. The American public at large must be indoctrinated that Israel is in mortal danger unless the Palestinians become either adjusted to perpetual Israeli sovereignty or are eliminated in some form or another. This propaganda has been remarkably successful because even pillars of the community such as Jeane Kirkpatrick and William Bennett keep repeating the mantra that Arafat has rejected the most generous peace offer ever, and that Israel must be supported in the battle for its very life. President Bush also seems to have accepted this propaganda ploy. After the visit of Crown Prince Abdullah he announced that America will not allow Israel to be "crushed." But let us look at the facts. How can some desperate suicide bombers "crush" a country which is armed to the teeth with nuclear and conventional weapons? It is the Palestinians who are getting crushed. As of mid-April the death count was 440 Israelis versus 1620 Palestinians and by the end of the month their civilian infrastructure lay in ruins. But this toll of human suffering does not seem to concern our "Christian" evangelicals

This brings me to the problem of terrorism. When an army of a duly constituted state creates havoc upon the civilian population of a conquered territory by imposing unreasonable strictures on everyday life this is acceptable. When some of the oppressed, who have no heavy weapons with which they could resist, resort to suicide attacks on Israeli citizens they are terrorists. It is argued that they attack innocent civilians while soldiers limit themselves to military targets. That this is clearly not the case has been shown recently by the events in Jennin and elsewhere on the West Bank. Why do Palestinians use suicide tactics? I believe that if they had bazookas they would prefer to disable Israeli tanks and other military equipment but that option is not available. Since they cannot get to military installations they go after the civilian population. But let us not forget that WWII forever obliterated the distinction between military and civilian targets. The carpet bombing of entire cities affected the civilian population much more than the war effort. An airman who releases bombs from a height of thousands of feet upon cities is regarded as a hero, even if there are no enemy planes or antiaircraft guns to hinder him. On the other hand desperate, disgusted individuals who try to draw attention to the plight of their people by blowing themselves up in an attempt to take as many as possible of their enemies with them are regarded as murderers. Let me emphasize that I do not condone suicide bombing but I can understand why people resort to it and they should not be forced to persist in this behavior by misguided U.S. policies, which clearly favor Israel.

Let us now look at the result of Sharon's reoccupation of the West Bank. The declared goal was to remove the infrastructure of terrorism. But to produce suicide belts one does not need an infrastructure. They can readily be made in basements or garages. Hamas, Islamic Jihad or the Al Aqsa brigade also won't have to worry any more about recruiting for suicide missions. Enough hatred has been generated to fill their ranks for years to come. Furthermore let's look at the demographics. Of the 6 million people who live within the pre 1967 Israeli borders there are about 5 million Jews and the rest are Arabs. The occupied territories of the West Bank and Gaza contain an estimated 3.2 million people and their birthrate exceeds by far that of secular Israelis. But even today the 5 million or so Israeli Jews are confronted with somewhat over 4 million Arabs who are thoroughly exasperated. What Sharon and people who think that a military solution is the only way for Israeli security don't seem to realize is that Israeli Arabs may soon join their Palestinian brothers and sisters, with far better weapons than are now available in the occupied territories. Sharon seems to be impervious to this simple fact and he may well continue to extend his destruction of "terrorist infrastructure" to the Gaza strip at the earliest pretext, thereby creating even more hatred. This is precisely the reason why this strategy must be resisted and Israel must be made to pull back now if she wants to have peace.

We have at present in the U.S.this incredible unholy coalition of secular Jewish Zionists, Jewish religious fanatics and Christian evangelicals. The basis is a promise God was supposed to have made to Abraham in the distant past and biblical prophecies which can be interpreted in any way one wants. Although the evangelicals, in their idealism, envision a different final outcome, Jews whose feet are firmly planted on this earth are happy for their support. Once all the land is theirs they are not going to be unduly worried about Jesus and his heavenly host. I would like to strongly urge our Evangelical Christians to visit www.noahide.com in order to get a better perspective on some orthodox Jewish thoughts.

President Bush is now in the unenviable position that he must choose between a policy which demands equal justice for both sides of the conflict, and the pressures from Jewish as well as Christian groups who tell him that he must stick with Sharon no matter what. This accounts for all the zig-zags of the President's public utterances during the past month which make our foreign policy so totally ununderstandable to the rest of the world.

There is nothing holy about what is going on in the Holy Land right now and all the parties to the conflict Jews, Christians and Muslims are using the Lord's name in vain when they pursue earthly material goals rather than moral improvement. During the election campaign President Bush told us that his "favorite philosopher" was Jesus, but the essence of Jesus' message, which might be summed up in the Golden Rule, seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle. American policy should neither be based on biblical prophecies nor on concerns about elections but on a rational approach which benefits all rather than some.
 
 
 
Feel free to use statements from this site but please respect copyright and indicate source. Thank you.
 
 

Please E-mail this article to a friend

Return to index!