Jerusalem, politics, and Christianity: not a good combination

Almost anything President Trump says these days will be met with a mixture of outrage and glowing support. That was definitely the case in this week’s announcement supporting Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, eventually moving the US embassy there from Tel Aviv.

Trump’s announcement follows through with a bipartisan bill passed by Congress in 1995 that instructs the president to begin construction of an American embassy in Jerusalem. President Clinton allowed the bill to become law without signing it, but presidents ever sense have delayed action … until Trump’s announcement.

Why the controversy? It’s complicated, but there’s reason for Christians to pay attention.

Israeli soldiers outside of the Muslim Dome of the Rock
following the 1967 Six Day War

A brief history. When Britain seized control from the Ottoman Empire in 1917, it brought an end to 400 years of Muslim control of Jerusalem. Until the state of Israel was created in 1948, Jerusalem was considered an international city, respecting the historic ties of three major world religions, Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Israel claimed the city’s western half, claiming the eastern half after the next Arab-Israeli war, in 1967. East Jerusalem had a population that was then entirely Palestinian, but Israel claimed it as its undivided capital and began constructing settlements that have brought thousands of Jews there. The settlements have been widely condemned by the international community, including the United States, and have been a major reason why diplomats have consistently said that the city’s status must be determined in negotiations, not unilateral action. 

Until now, most embassies have been located in Tel Aviv, in hopes that a peaceful solution over Jerusalem will be negotiated. Trump’s announcement is unmistakably unilateral, frustrating Palestinians, the Arab community, and leaders around the world.

A Christian response? It’s not uncommon for the one with the loudest voice to get heard. The loudest voice in the Christian community these days is coming from those who believe that American support of Israel is prophetic, a kind of support that will ultimately lead to Christ’s return. Leading the charge are folks like Pat Robertson and John Hagee and their massive broadcast empires. The late Tim LaHaye popularized the movement through his Left Behind books, which made him a multi-millionaire.

In a nutshell, they interpret the Old Testament – especially prophecies in Ezekiel – as a call for the return of Jews to Israel, a return that would lead to the rebuilding of the Temple and spark a series of cataclysmic events that would culminate in a Battle of Armageddon, humanity’s last great war, after which Christ would return for a 1,000-year reign. Formally it’s called Dispensational Pre-millennialism (DP). And it would all begin in Jerusalem.

Problems and more problems. There are several problems with this approach:

1. Dispensational Pre-millennialism is a relatively new idea, popping up in the writings of John Nelson Darby in the 1820s. Darby, who never studied theology, embraced an errant translation of 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 regarding the rapture and developed his theory of the end times. The errant translation – from Jerome’s Vulgate in the 5^th century – has been corrected by the church and does not appear in any “authorized” translation since … until Cyrus Scofield embraced Darby’s theory and included it in his study Bible in 1909. The Scofield Bible was the first “study Bible” of its kind and became very popular among a growing movement of fundamentalists and Pentecostals. The theory became even more popular with the publication of Hal Lindsay’s The Late Great Planet Earth (1970) and LaHaye’s Left Behind books (1995-2007) and movies dramatizing the rapture. Of note, Liberty University, Bob Jones University, and Dallas Theological Seminary, three very popular evangelical schools, along with the Mormon church, have been strong advocates of Dispensational Pre-millennialism (DP). They claim that the DP theory follows a literal translation of Scripture, but at best it’s a pick-and-choose literalism that drives their conclusions.
2. Despite its commercial popularity, DP theory is widely dismissed by most theological streams of thought, and Darby’s line of thinking isn’t found in any of the works of the Protestant reformers, Luther, Calvin, or Wesley. The Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, and Orthodox churches reject the theory, as well, which effectively means that the vast majority of the world’s Christians don’t see eye-to-eye with Darby or Robertson or LaHaye, et al, regarding the end times.
3. DP assumes that God’s promise about the earth’s future is rooted in death and destruction, rather than a covenant relationship that never ends. No doubt, God promises judgement and a new heaven and earth, but that doesn’t mean that God will destroy the earth that he loves. Some will point to signs of destruction in Revelation, but astute readers of scripture will notice that details of the “end times” are rich and varied. Even Jesus warns us against trying to figure out the details (Matthew 24:36) and makes no reference to the restoration of land inheritance (i.e., Israel). His only reference to the rebuilding of the Temple was regarding his own sacrifice on the cross – when “the Temple will be torn down and rebuilt in three days” -- implying that his sacrifice was sufficient for all.
4. What to do with Ezekiel’s prophecy that Jews must return to Israel, at which time there will be a radical new beginning, infused by the Holy Spirit? Most Christian scholars conclude that Ezekiel was referencing the return of Jews from exile in Babylon and that the Holy Spirit’s infusion – breathing life into “dry bones” – occurred at Pentecost.

 What does this all have to do with Jerusalem. A lot, as it turns out.

The evangelical community maintains a decidedly one-sided, pro-Israel position because of Dispensational Pre-millennialism. Evangelical leaders are strong advocates of efforts to return Jews to Israel and the establishment of Jerusalem as the recognized capital. Stripping Palestinians of East Jerusalem and building Jewish settlements throughout the West Bank are consistent with DP theory in order to hurry along the return of the Messiah. Once Jews have returned – no clue how we’ll measure that one – I suppose DP advocates will begin holding God’s feet to the fire in order to move along the end-times train.

Is the president a Dispensationalist? Of course not … but he surely understands the evangelical community’s strong political support. 81 percent of evangelicals voted for Trump in the last election. There’s no way he comes close to winning without their vote. And their message is clear: American support of Israel is necessary if we are to honor Old Testament prophecy and thereby hurry along the Messiah’s return. It doesn’t matter that the vast majority of theologians and Christian churches around the world think otherwise; the loudest voices with the deepest pockets have the president’s ear, and that’s who he has chosen to listen to. Period.

It almost goes without saying that many American Jews are celebrating President Trump’s decision, as well, especially Zionist Jews who claim that Jerusalem has been the eternal, undivided capital of Israel since the time of King David. Palestinians agree that it’s a capital, but a capital for ancient Palestine, not present-day Israel.

What about Palestinian Christians? There is a voice in this conversation that continues to get  overlooked: the Christian community in Palestine. Once a strong presence in Israel, especially in places like Bethlehem, Palestinian Christians are being marginalized and oppressed, many choosing to leave the area altogether. Not long ago, Bethlehem and Nazareth were majority Christian cities. Today, the cities are less than 15 percent Christian.

What do they have to say about President Trump’s decision? In a chillingly symbolic statement, Christians in Bethlehem turned off the lights to the Christmas tree outside the Church of the Nativity, the traditional birthplace of Jesus. In a joint letter to the president, the recognized leaders of the various Palestinian Christian communities wrote that the decision “will yield increased hatred, conflict, violence, and suffering in Jerusalem and the Holy Land and cause irreparable harm.” 

Munib Younan, Lutheran bishop of Jordan and the Holy Land, writes that the decision "abandons the manger for the sake of the empire." Pope Francis called for the status quo, and Anglican priests insisted that the decision would have “profound ramifications on the peace process.”

In a statement quoted in the Washington Post, Mitri Raheb, a Lutheran pastor in Bethlehem,writes that “the Palestinian people are once again being sacrificed at the altar for imperial politics.”

Those are all harsh words, but it’s incredible that American politicians rarely seek out the opinion of the Christian community in Palestine. For years they have been overlooked, oppressed, and forsaken. Their land has been stolen, homes destroyed, and economy suppressed while American politicians and, let’s be clear, the evangelical community look the other way.

The Holy Land deserves better than that. The 2,000-year-old Christian community in Palestine deserves better than that.

Quite frankly, the Jerusalem decision was not necessary, except that it intentionally stokes political fires in Palestine in order for the president to gain political and financial support at home.

That’s no way to form foreign policy. And it’s no way to treat our sisters and brothers in the land of Christ’s birth.