Evangelical Leaders Challenge Unconditional Support for Israel

Evangelical leaders including a former ethics professor at a Southern Baptist seminary issued an open letter to President Bush challenging the notion that all American evangelicals are uncritically pro-Israel.

Signed by leaders including Glen Harold Stassen, a professor at Fuller Theological Seminary who formerly taught at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, the letter addresses a “serious misperception” that American evangelicals oppose a two-state solution in the Middle East and a new Palestinian state that would include the majority of the West Bank.

The letter, addressed to the president but also aimed at other U.S. policy makers, came a week-and-a-half after a second-annual gathering of Christians United For Israel convened by San Antonio, Texas, preacher John Hagee. The meeting brought 3,500 evangelicals to Washington to hear from politicians including Sen. Joseph Lieberman, House Minority Whip and Southern Baptist Roy Blunt and Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain.

At the gathering, Hagee labeled former President Jimmy Carter Israel’s “enemy in America” and demanded the former president reveal sources of pro-Arab funding for his humanitarian Carter Center. Carter’s recent book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid drew criticism from Jewish groups alleging it was biased against Israel.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, * International News & Commentary, * Religion News & Commentary, Evangelicals, Middle East, Other Churches, Religion & Culture

4 comments on “Evangelical Leaders Challenge Unconditional Support for Israel

  1. Jeffersonian says:

    What a great idea: another fanatical, kleptocratic, sociopathic, jihad-crazed terror squat is just what we need in the Mideast, especially on Israel’s borders. Somewhere that [url=http://www.zeenz.nl/images/uploads/294859.jpg]Farfour[/url] and his equally homicidal cousin, Nahoul The Bee, can murder the Zionists in peace and tranquility.

  2. physician without health says:

    It is important to remember that among Palestinians are Christians. Also, Israel is not the totally benign regime that it appears from the media; the government there are not too terribly keen on Christian missionaries evangelising in their country. And God forbid you are a Jew who has been converted to the Christian faith (many of these folk have been threatened physically, according to reports I hear sporadically from Evangelicals). OTOH, Islamic militancy is a huge concern, and Israel is of vital strategic importance. If Israel were to go away, be defeated, or whatever, there would be a huge blood bath in Palestine, with widespread massacres of both Jews and Christians. And there would be no peace, as Hezbollah (Shiite) and Hamas (Sunni) fight each other over control of the land. The whole place is a mess, and the answers are not simple. I do not see anything in the NT which clearly calls for a State of Israel as a matter of doctrine (I am willing to be educated here), but would like to see us continue to support it (nudging it where necessary) as it has been a largely dependable ally to the US. There is an Anglican ministry in Jerusalem, I believe Christ Church, wholly orthodox and founded to serve as an outreach to the Jewish population there. They deserve our prayers. Sorry for rambling on…

  3. Cousin Vinnie says:

    I, for one, generally support Israel, but I am not uncritical of Israel. Just for example, I think the land for peace idea was a huge mistake. Rather, every time Israel is attacked by parties operating from Palestine, Israel should take a piece of land, level it and not give back. They could name each tract for the illegal Palestinian act of war that prompted the Israeli response. (It is not like the terrorists are rogue elements: the Palestinians elected Hamas.) Israel should have a plan for taking incrementally the most militarily significant territory, until the Palestine authorities either eliminate terrorism against Israel, or Palestine disappears. It would not be the first time a group of people has lost territory as a result of an ill considered war. This is legal, military reprisal and legitimate protection against acts of war launched from hostile territory.

  4. libraryjim says:

    Vinnie,
    That’s what they did after the ’68 war, and how they got Jerusalem. And they DID give back the Sinai Pennisula to Egypt, due to Jimmy Carter’s Peace Plan.

    But anything they do will be seen as wrong in the eyes of the anti-Israeli crowd.