Anyone concerned that there are 70 million religious people influencing the Presidents foriegn policy?The Christian right is supposedly haveing a strong influence on the White House these days. "Falwell began to detect just that in April 2002 when President Bush called on Israel to withdraw its tanks from Palestinian towns on the West Bank. So Falwell shot off a letter of protest to the White House, which was followed by a hundred thousand e-mails from Christian conservatives. Israel did not move its tanks. Mr. Bush did not ask again. 60 Minutes

I'm an evangelical and Falwell doesn't really speak for me. I happen to believe that the Tribulation is a futuristic event and Israel being back in the land is a fulfillment of prophecy. I've tried to cross reference my Bible with the News and its strangely relavant. I don't think I would insist that Israel occupy the West Bank with tanks based on religious conviction. Has religion oversteped its bounds here? There are clear reasons why we should support Israel, not the least of which is the fact that they may well be the only allies we have in the Middle East. I wonder if these religious convictions so common in this country are more of an influence then we think.

Is our support of Israel based on religious doctrines?

I doubt it. Bush knows full well that Israel does what it pleases when it comes to their security. There is no proof of cause and effect here.
Where do you get the number 70 million?

Actually the 70 million is the number of Evangelicals that Falwell claims to speak for."“It is my belief that the Bible Belt in America is Israel’s only safety belt right now,” says Rev. Jerry Falwell, one of the leaders of the Christian Right. That’s the bulk of Evangelical Christians; Falwell claims to speak for all of them.

“There are 70 million of us,” he says. “And if there’s one thing that brings us together quickly it’s whenever we begin to detect our government becoming a little anti-Israel.” Thats from the article I cited. Its a lot like his Moral Majority rhetoric.

Clearly some of the support for Israel by some Americans is based on religious beliefs. Here in Chattanooga there are large billboards with a telephone number to call to tell the President to support Israel, with a large Bible quote. No attempt is made to defend this position on secular grounds; the only message of the billboard is that God has granted the land to the Chosen People.

However, there is also secular support for Israel by many Americans. Some wish to support one of the few representative governments in the region. Some wish to stand up against actions taken against Israel. (Just as some Americans wish to stand up against actions taken against Palestinians.)

Although I cannot read his mind, I would suspect that the President's support for Israel is a combination of all these factors.

Mr. Falwell is deluding himself. I doubt he could come up with a tenth of that.

i dont, i think it is probally more then that to. things will only get worse before they get better, i think i saw that somewhere. you support one side, you make the other an enemy, i dont see where people get confused over that.
palistien is a terrorist state, and isreal has made an attack on one of our navy ships and even ran over a young american girl form olympia washington. and yes, i can turn on the t.v to some religious channel and watch christians in the state of isreal talk about stuff along the lines of gentials and jews. i find it very scary and wish it would stop.

That 70 million number seems incorrect to me.

According to the CIA World Factbook, the current population of the U.S. is 280,562,489 and the religious breakdown is as follows: Protestant 56%, Roman Catholic 28%, Jewish 2%, other 4%, none 10%

Statistics are always a little bit fuzzy to work with, but according to these numbers, approximately 45% of Protestants would have to be Evangelicals to make that statement accurate. I'm not sure if Evangelicals consider themselves to be Protestant or not, but either way, the numbers don't really seem to work out.

Moving along...

I think that the religious right certainly has some influence on politics, but I don't think that religion is the main reason for our government's support of Israel. I think there are a number of factors involved, including Israel's strategic location and their form of government.

I think you are dead wrong. I think Falwell is closer to the truth. Our destructive policy supporting the Israeli occupation is mainly held in place by the evangelical Christian right. The survival of Israel and their democracy is not an issue here. Illegal occupation is. Even Elon, Sharon's minister of tourism, who thinks Israel should annex all the West Bank and declare Jordan the Palestinian state said he considers himself a dove in comparison to these evangelical maniacs(my characterization, not his).

It's a shame. The West Bank occupation has been a lose, lose, lose ball game all the way around. But it's an important Biblical marker for the bring on Armaggedon crowd. That's what happens when you start thinking you speak for God.

I would like to think that our policy regarding Israel is not inherently religious, but I must admit I have some doubts. If nothing else, I think religious convictions do have a mentionable role in our Israel related policies.

Looking back it seems to me that religion played a large role in previous administrations and their approach to Israel. Reagan seemed to have a particular interest in Israel as it pertained to end times, perhaps influencing some of the actions relating to the country.

Evangelicals and Israel
Christians, politics and the apocalypse

While there may be some in the administration who would keep any religious interests in the region in check, I imagine there are others around Bush who would only encourage religious considerations when dealing with Israel. If somebody believes whole heartedly enough in prophecy and religion, it stands only to reason that they would take actions to promote such events.

I'm not sure any of us can say exactly what role it has in this administration. I would like to hope it plays only a small one, but I'm not sure. Regardless how big a role, I think it wise that we take such convictions into consideration when evaluating U.S. policies in Israel and the surrounding region.

I've heard the current reports about end times and the joy the people who believe this way have over the coming world destruction.

Seems this has been going on since the state of Israel was created, which was before my birth, and that is to say all my life.

Evangelicals have been harping on this all along. I've carefully considered the arguments and dismissed them as being based on myth.

I'd hope our leaders have done the same.

The most ridiculous argument I've heard runs like this: Israel should not give up occupied territories because doing so would go against biblical prophecy. No nation has successfully done this.

Right. Maybe. The prophecy is up for interpretation. But the logic is revealing: Because Israel needs to be first established, then destroyed, this points to the absolute selfishness of the interpretation. "Sacrifice Israel to save my sorry spiritual butt" is my interpretation of the logic.

Anyway, I don't think the administration is foolish enough to go along with Falwell--but then I've been amazed at the moves this administration has made. Guess I'm back to hoping because I just don't know.

It would be a shame though if the questionable desires of 70 million trump peace, and I mean "shame" in the biblical sense.

Israel being back in the land is prophetic, the boundries prescribed in the Old Testement are authoritive to most Evangelicals and all Zionists. Most of the end-time scenerios follow a very familar pattern. At the begining Israel enters what is called 'the covenant of death', probably with Egypt which instals this antichrist guy as some kind of a protector. World War III (IV, V, VI... ) breaks out in Europe. Half way through this period the antichrist instals an idol (of himself of course), the Jews had been thinking this was the Messiah and he want them to worship an idol. They flee south and a slaughter of roughly 2/3 of their population results from the fighting.

Dont ask me what any of this has to do with political Israel. I dont know how these prophetic events will come about and I've had little luck forming political ideals based on them. One theme is important. The idea of 'peace peace when there is no peace' Jesus even said when they say peace and safty then shall come sudden destruction. Its not the fighting that got me worried, its all this talk of peace. I can see Bush standing on the steps of Air Force One with a paper that reads Peace in the Middle East. Two week later war breaks out in the Middle East and cascades thoughout Europe.

Evangelicals have very sketchy beliefs about the end-times and like I said it doesn't translate well into political ideals. I thinks this is apple and oranges.

Anarchy Praxis,

I totally agree with you. We are living in the end times. I can't remember off the top of my head, which is sad, but in the old testament, either Isiah or Jeremiah or one of the old prophets. ANYWAY, it says that after the Jews were scattered that they wouldn't reclaim their promise land untill the end days, something to the effect of "That generation shall not pass before My return", I'm badly paraphrasing here. Israel was established in 1948. That generation is the baby boomers roughly. It's very conceivable that there will never be peace in the middle east, infact the Bible says there won't be. There will be seven years of peace and then literally all hell will break loose. The rapid advance of technology, the UN, the Euro dollar all of this is in the Bible.

I guess I would answer 'yes' to the question. If you take religion out of the existence of Israel there is not much left to Israel. Support from the US logically must be in response to the religion reasons for Israel.

I would think most Arabic citizens would answer 'yes' to the question. They do not like being treated second class to Israel based on religion. Hence, they have a poor opinion of the US.

Strangely, the stated goals of Hamas, the PLO and a wide variety of other Arab powers in the region have made it clear that the survival of Israel is an issue here. It is their stated goal to destroy Israel. They have consistently worked towards that goal.

1948 - The Arab nations attempted to destroy the nascent Jewish state, and failed.

1956 - They try again, and fail.

1967 - Once again, they invade Israel, and fail.

1973 - Israel, facing an impending invasion after a long period of "border incidents", preemptively strikes.

Both the Golan Heights and West Bank had been used by the Arabs to launch their attacks from, both were lost to them.

The occupation is not illegal. The amazing thing is that, considering the circumstances, Israel hasn't simply declared the "occupied territories" to be theirs, forfeit by the Arab states because of their aggression.

Now, I would likely be considered evangelical, but I don't consider the end-times to be at all relevant to my support for Israel, support which predates my salvation. I support Israel because they're a democracy, and because they are fighting to survive while surrounded by murderous thugs.

I've said elsewhere that I think America's support for Israel is mainly cultural - Americans identify with Israelis not because of religion, or democracy, but because they are descended from a persecuted minority (like the Puritans, Irish, and many of the other peoples that have made America) and are trying to build a nation in hostile territory. I take the analogy a little further in the linked thread.

I think it is a somewhat simplistic interpretation both of the Arab-Israeli situation and your own history, but I think it goes some way to explain why American feelings are, in the main, so visceral and so pro-Israeli.

Falwell is delusional. There may possibly be 70 million Evangelical Christians in the US, but most of them don't pay much attention to him.

The stated goal of some Zionists is to incorporate the entire West Bank and force the Palestinians into Jordan. There are hot heads on both sides. The road map is to achieve an enforceble peace that neither side is going to be entirely happy with. Probably an outside multinational force will have to be brought in to assure any signed agreement is honored. What more can you ask for?

In addition if some hostilities continue Israel could more easily defend itself at the 1967 borders than in the present occupied territories. Members of the IDF have stated that. No, the present intransigence of Israel over withdrawing from the occupied territories has nothing to do with the survival of Israel. They are armed to the teeth thanks to the largess from this country. On the contrary as Tom Friedman of the NY Times has stated "the occupation threatens the whole Zionist interprise." Just consider the demographics for starters.

Right now it is lose, lose, lose. The fundi-imperialist wing of the Zionists and the prophetic fundi Christians, like Falwell and Robertson, are taking us all to hell. It's hard to believe a friend of Israel would wish such a situation on them when a full withdrawal as part of a comprehensive negotiated settlement could bring them real peace.

BD, your history time line is skewed in a typically partisan way. That's strictly preaching to the choir stuff. It suggests you haven't spent an ounce of brain power trying to see the issue from the other side. By the way Israel was not invaded in 1967.

Billy Jean

The phrase about this generation shall not pass away is in Matthew 24. The prophecies about the end times are thematic. The cross is an endtime event, the truth is the tribulation was supposed to follow the crucificition. In dispensational theology we have been on a holding pattern ever since the Jews rejected their Messiah. Supposedly the clock starts ticking again when the Antichrist is revealed because what is called the covenant of death. Actually its a secret treaty that makes him invincible. Appearntly he has either supernatural weapons of conventional armies that make him invincinble by human force. The bloodshed is global in its scope and the cheer of those who follow him is 'who is like the beast, who can make war with the beast? It has lead some more modern scholars to speculate that its the revival of the Roman Empire, ie the European Common Market that is now the Eurpean Union. This is not without merit from a Biblical perspective but there is nothing conclusive out there to substantiate the claim.

One thing is clear. Israel being back in the land is a key fullfillment of prophecy. The Islamics are aware of this which is why they bricked up the eastern wall in Jerusalem. They think this will prevent the prophecy that the Messiah will walk into the city of Jerusalem through this gate. One key to the prophetic scenerio would be the rebuilding of the temple. Thats why the Palestinians are so up in arms over Jerusalem being controled by the Jews, they might start building. Thats also why there is a Mosque there.

I love debateing politics and religion but I'm at a loss for combining the two in a systematic way. Theology, philosophy, and semantics are compatable but dont confuse them as being interchangable. I hope that is not too far off topic

AP, what kind of psychological payoff do you get for believing all this prophetic flim flam. People can go into the Bible and come up with a 100 different interpretations of the same passage and they have. Lots of peoples lives are being lost because some prophecy oriented Christians have gone political and boxed in two parties to a bloody conflict so these fundis can fulfill some mythic narrative interpretation of the end times.

It's incredible that a subjective interpretation of a religious book that goes back 2000 years(The Old Testament even longer) and is full of factual error should be one of the main engines driving this tragic conflict. Incredible doesn't go far enough; it's spiritually sick, violates humanity and is devoid of reason.

Ditto Dingo, ditto.

AP says

Yup. And it led some less modern scholars to conclude the same thing about the "revival of the Roman Empire" that was represented by the Napoleanic Empire, or the European dominance of Nazi Germany. They were grasping, too.

The thing that should worry the Israelis about their fundie American "friends" is that, according to the Biblical "prophecies" once the Jews have their Temple back, they have to be converted to Christianity before the second coming.

I'm sure they'll love it when Falwell & Co's future inheritors try to get them to convert - at gunpoint if necessary. After all, rightwing Christo-fascists are bound to succeed where two centuries of the Inquisition and countless pogroms and gas chambers and what-not failed, because THEY will be doing God's work.

Yeah, right! (Two positives can make a negative.)

I would like to point this out. I checked the world fact book and have found this out Protestant 56%, Roman Catholic 28%, Jewish 2%, other 4%, none 10% (1989) This is nearly 13 to 14 years ago. Since then many different christian religions have rose over that. Furthermore My support for Israel is religious and non religious. My baptist religion supports the israeli cause and I support it for that, However i also support israels doings because these palestinians are destroying and killing MORE INNOCENT PEOPL THEN ISRAEL IS.

Would you like to elaborate on what you mean by your church supports the Israeli cause? What is the Israeli cause? Is occupation of other peoples land a part of your church's doctrine? Do you personally ever question your church?



The Israelis have killed more Palestinian civilians than vice versa, more than twice as many. You are getting bad information.