I cristiano-sionisti

[Der Wehrwolf]

Millenarismo, Terra Santa e nuova destra statunitense.
La terra di Palestina è al centro non solo della politica internazionale, ma anche della più straordinaria costruzione mitica dei nostri tempi


«Un raggio mortale, i cui effetti sono così terrificanti che il governo americano non ne ha ancora ammesso l'utilizzo nelle proprie forze armate, deve [...] essere consegnato ad Israele. Questo accordo a sfondo tecnologico è stato firmato dal Presidente Bill Clinton e dall'allora Presidente dei Ministri Shimon Peres. Clinton contava sul sostegno degli elettori ebrei residenti in America al momento della sua rielezione, nel novembre scorso.
L'arma laser è ritenuta 'troppo inumana' da alcuni militari statunitensi e momentaneamente non deve essere ceduta alle forze militari statunitensi [...]. Essa può [...] essere utilizzata per mettere fuori combattimento truppe di migliaia di persone, accecandole irreversibilmente in pochi secondi. Gli strateghi del Pentagono sostengono che il terrore provocato dal possibile uso di questo raggio mobile silenzioso che nell'uomo ha di regola l'effetto di dissolvere i bulbi oculari, potrebbe scatenare il panico nelle truppe nemiche, costringendole a capitolare».


Questo brano si trova citato su una rivista fondamentalista evangelica, Midnight Call / Chiamata di Mezzanotte(1) nell'edizione italiana : la rivista, su carta patinata e ben illustrata, esce anche in inglese, italiano, tedesco, olandese, francese, portoghese, spagnolo, ungherese, bengali e coreano. L'opera missionaria ha diffuso "centinaia di milioni" di pubblicazioni in tutto il mondo, in particolare nell'Est europeo.
La missione trasmette i suoi programmi via radio, con antenne anche in Armenia sul Monte Ararat. Nel mondo ispanofono, essa trasmette ogni mese circa 1900 programmi tramite più di 120 ripetitori "dalla Terra del Fuoco fino agli Stati Uniti e alla Spagna".

Perché questa rivista si interessa alle più recenti armi in uso all'esercito israeliano? Non è certamente per criticare Israele: come affermava il defunto fondatore della "missione", l'unica cosa importante è che 2l'America aiuti Israele in maniera incondizionata". (2)

La rivista commenta la notizia dell'arma troppo "inumana"così: «Ci si può immaginare con grande facilità che quest'arma sarà utilizzata alla fine dei giorni, quando Israele sarà minacciato di distruzione da tutte le nazioni».

La conferma proviene da Zaccaria 14,12: «Questo sarà il flagello con cui il Signore colpirà tutti i popoli che avranno mosso guerra a Gerusalemme: la loro carne si consumerà mentre stanno in piedi, i loro occhi si scioglieranno nelle orbite, la loro lingua si consumerà nella loro bocca».

IL CRISTIANO-SIONISMO

Un aspetto poco noto del conflitto israelo-palestinese è il massiccio coinvolgimento del movimento cristiano fondamentalista, statunitense o di derivazione statunitense. Un coinvolgimento che si è intensificato con la crescente politicizzazione della "destra religiosa" a partire dagli anni '70, ma che risale a molti decenni fa: «[la creazione di Israele] semplicemente non avrebbe avuto luogo senza il sostegno e gli incessanti sforzi dei Cristiano-sionisti durante l'ultimo secolo e questo. È stato questo sodalizio che ha reso possibile lo Stato di Israele e una Gerusalemme unificata.»(3)

Benyamin Netanyahu, allora capo dell'opposizione, si rivolse con queste parole a una platea di cristiani a Gerusalemme nel 1995.

L'impegno dei cosiddetti "cristianosionisti", che raccolgono circa cinquanta milioni di simpatizzanti all'interno dell'unica potenza rimasta attualmente sulla terra, assume molte forme, dalla pressione sistematica sui candidati nelle elezioni affinché si schierino incondizionatamente a favore di Israele, al servizio volontario nell'esercito israeliano in mansioni umili per liberare soldati per il combattimento; dai gemellaggi tra chiese statunitensi e le colonie militanti impiantate da ebrei fondamentalisti e non nei Territori Occupati, a trasmissioni radiotelevisive in cui si invita non solamente alla conversione, ma all'accettazione di Israele nelle "sue frontiere stabilite da Dio", un concetto piuttosto ampio. (4)

Troviamo così (ma si potrebbero citare molti altri esempi) in un libro cristiano-sionista una menzione favorevole dell'opera del rabbino Israel Ariel, fondatore dell' "istituto del Tempio" a Gerusalemme (l'Istituto prepara la "ricostruzione" del Tempio e il rinnovo degli antichi sacrifici animali) e autore di un Atlas of the Land of Israelits Boundaries According to the Sources ("Atlante di Israele; le sue frontiere secondo le fonti"): «Un'opera progettata in quattro volumi, che sostiene che le frontiere originarie della terra promessa ad Abramo si estendono da ovest ad est da un punto nei pressi attuale canale di Suez fino al Golfo Persico, e da nord a sud dal nord della Siria lungo il fiume Eufrate fino a una linea di frontiera che va da Eilat sul Mar Rosso fino al confine con la Persia. Entro queste frontiere ricadono oggi i paesi dell'Egitto, della Giordania, della Siria e porzioni dell'Iraq e dell'Arabia Saudita. Secondo Ariel, quando il Tempio sarà ricostruito e tutti coloro che si trovano fuori dalla terra di Israele faranno ritorno, queste terre forniranno lo spazio necessario per l'aumentata popolazione.»(5)

MOON, WACO E LA POLITICA

La New Right statunitense ha le sue origini più immediate in una serie di riunioni tra Richard De Vos (fondatore del sistema di vendite piramidali Amway), gli esperti politologi Paul Weyrich e Richard Viguerie e il magnate delle assicurazioni Arthur De Moss con esponenti religiosi come Bill Bright (presidente dell'attivissima Campus Crusade for Christ), Jerry Falwell e il famoso "reverendo" Sun Myung Moon. (6)

Sarebbe ingenuo pensare che il movimento sia nato "a tavolino": possiamo parlare piuttosto di abili organizzatori che hanno saputo dotare di mezzi di espressione e di azione una grande realtà potenziale.

Ma i motivi anche concreti per cui la New Right coincide largamente con il cristiano-sionismo non devono essere trascurati. Le funzioni politiche dell'alleanza con Israele sono infatti evidenti: si doveva creare un sostegno di massa alla congiunzione tra gli obiettivi dello Stato di Israele e le esigenze dell'apparato militare e produttivo statunitense; su un piano prettamente elettorale, il cristiano-sionismo permetteva di neutralizzare il liberalismo della comunità ebraica; infine, l'appoggio allo "Stato ebraico" permetteva di spendere a destra ciò che in molti paesi è un capitale ritenuto di "sinistra": quello dello sho'ah.

Allo stesso tempo però il cristianosionismo fa leva su fattori profondi della cultura statunitense, tra cui la storica autoidentificazione come "popolo eletto": "La 'natura selvaggia' sostituiva il deserto nell'identificazione dei Pellegrini con le peripezie degli ebrei verso la 'terra promessa'[...].

Era l'inizio dell'olocausto degli indiani d'America, che vennero sistematicamente sterminati dai Puritani, i quali si ritenevano il nuovo popolo d'Israele ed erano quindi legittimati a distruggere i nuovi Cananei che attaccavano la nuova terra promessa". (7)

Ma questa identificazione è stata resa possibile anche dall'assenza di una propria credibile tradizione storica: nella cultura americana, la storia mitica non può che coincidere con quella biblica, come dimostra la diffusione della "sindrome di Gerusalemme" nel mondo evangelico: (8) la sindrome di Gerusalemme è quel peculiare fenomeno delirante che ha colpito diverse migliaia di visitatori alla Città santa negli ultimi decenni, curati in un apposito reparto dell'ospedale cittadino.

Nel 1983 ne fu colpito Vernon Howell, un chitarrista ventiquattrenne del Texas, forse predisposto dalle sue esperienze con l'LSD. Howell era membro di una piccola setta il cui fondatore era tornato a sua volta da un viaggio in Israele nel 1959, dichiarandosi il "segno" che avrebbe inaugurato l'Apocalisse. I membri credevano che al momento decisivo sarebbero stati rapiti da una mano celeste e portati in Israele. Anche Howell ebbe una "esperienza" in Israele che lo avrebbe portato, alcuni anni dopo, a prendere il controllo della setta, dandole come simbolo la bandiera dello Stato di Israele, e a proclamarsi "David Koresh", (9) il Messia ritornato. Un Messia con il monopolio delle donne del movimento, bambine comprese, e dotato di un arsenale di armi da guerra. Il maldestro tentativo dell'FBI di perquisire la sua fattoria a Waco risultò nella più grande e disastrosa operazione militare sul suolo americano dopo Custer, con oltre 80 morti (10).

LA TEOLOGIA NUCLEARE

Il dato politico e quello immaginario si razionalizzano poi tramite il dato teologico dell'imminenza della battaglia di Armageddon. Come dice il predicatore Jerry Falwell, »ad Armageddon ci saranno circa quattrocento milioni di uomini che faranno corona all'olocausto finale dell'umanità! Proprio per questo non dobbiamo mai dimenticare com'è bello essere cristiani! Noi abbiamo un futuro meraviglioso davanti a noi».(11)

Il segno teologico che scatenerà gli avvenimenti ultimi sarà il ritorno degli ebrei nella loro terra, secondo un'interpretazione particolare di diversi brani tratti sia dall'Antico che dal Nuovo Testamento. (12)

Non si tratta del millenarismo classico, pauperistico o mistico delle tradizioni europee; bensì di un momento in cui si scatena in maniera spettacolare e anche cinematografica la violenza del Giudizio, istituendo un "Regno congiunto" di cristiani rinati ed ebrei sulla terra; un "Regno" in cui le complesse contraddizioni della vita reale saranno risolte dai regnanti con "verghe di ferro".

»Messia regnerà dal trono ristabilito di Davide a Gerusalemme. Risorto, Re Davide sarà coreggente assieme a Cristo. Israele occuperà una posizione di gloria e dominio [rulership] sulle nazioni del mondo. I cristiani rinati si riuniranno a Messia e ai dirigenti di Israele nell'amministrare il regno di Dio sulla terra. Siamo in marcia verso Sion!».(13)

Nel brano citato all'inizio di questo articolo, tratto da Chiamata di Mezzanotte, vediamo i diversi elementi all'opera. Il punto di partenza è una lettura politica della cronaca, o meglio di una notizia spettacolare, e non poteva essere diversamente in una società altamente mediatizzata. Probabilmente il lettore cattolico si sarebbe aspettato un'interpretazione in senso pacifista dei pericoli costituiti da nuove armi. Invece gli autori dell'articolo trovano in questo dato un elemento esaltante, come lo trova anche il predicatore neozelandese Ramon Bennett: «Israele probabilmente utilizzerà le proprie risorse nucleari come ultimo ricorso. È risaputo che Israele possiede centinaia di missili con testate atomiche e uno dei più grandi arsenali del mondo. I suoi nemici saranno abbattuti nella piena furia di una delle armi più terribili note all'uomo. Sono passati i tempi in cui l'uomo rispettava la rettitudine, la verità e la giustizia. Oggi essi [sic] rispettano la ricchezza, il potere e la forza militare».(14)

«Le forze che odiano gli ebrei senza rendersene conto stanno preparando lo scenario per le grandi guerre bibliche dei futuro, in cui gli eserciti di molte nazioni saranno presi nel vortice di un inferno nucleare che li consumerà».

Un brano che conclude con l'affermazione: «Look up! Rejoice! Redemption draws near!» (Alza gli occhi! Gioisci! La redenzione si avvicina!).

Le armi laser vengono associate a un brano biblico; in questo caso (Zaccaria 14,12) un brano preso assolutamente fuori contesto, se è vero -come sostiene il biblista Paolo Sacchi - che si riferisce agli scontri tra gli esuli tornati a Gerusalemme da Babilonia e gli ebrei rimasti sul posto. Ma poco importa, perché la conclusione rimane predeterminata e associa da una parte lo spettacolo apocalittico alla drammatizzazione di un obbligo politico a cui è vincolata la salvezza.

Chi invece si mette dall'altra parte, cioè contro Israele, chi ha denunciato, perseguitato e accusato gli Ebrei, ha rifiutato aiuto al popolo di Dio, verrà escluso dal regno di Dio e condotto al castigo eterno. (15)

E' curioso notare come il cristianosionismo riutilizza in chiave solo apparentemente nuova il tradizionale razzismo della destra americana, che non va letto come fenomeno statico, ma come storica incorporazione di vecchie minoranze a spese di quelle nuove: il nucleo anglosassone ha così assorbito prima le altre immigrazioni protestanti, poi quelle cattoliche, mentre a partire dalla Seconda Guerra Mondiale ha accolto anche quella ebraica, creando però ogni volta nuovi nemici.

Come afferma il predicatore David Allen Lewis, «Se il sionismo è razzismo, allora Dio è razzista perché Egli è l'autore del sionismo».(16)

In un'affascinante sovrapposizione di mitemi politici, biblici e razziali, Ramon Bennett (uno dei pochi cristiani ad aver potuto ottenere la cittadinanza israeliana) associa i biblici nephilim agli arabi: «I nephilim erano infatti i sottoprodotti fisici dell'unione tra carne e spirito. E come una prova che gli spiriti di questi esseri continuano a vivere sulla terra, vorrei dire che io, personalmente, conosco un arabo musulmano che è nato con sei dita su ciascuna mano. Anche suo figlio è nato con sei dita, e così suo padre e i padri di suo padre prima di lui. Ora considerate quanto segue: "Ci fu di nuovo guerra a Gath, dove c'era un uomo di alta statura, che aveva sei dita su ciascuna mano e sei dita su ciascun piede, ventiquattro di numero; ed anche egli era figlio di un gigante (2 Samuele 21,20)".

Si, il conflitto è spirituale, e gli spiriti che si oppongono sono potenti e malvagi.» [17]

Simili affermazioni non coinvolgono l'intero mondo evangelico. Nella "esperienza" della rinascita in Gesù la teologia razionale assume una posizione del tutto secondaria. All'interno di chiese che pure si riconoscono reciprocamente, troviamo posizioni estremamente diversificate, che vanno dal millenarismo filosionista all'amillenarismo apolitico; (18) ma anche il postmillenarismo, che sostiene la necessità di costruire il Regno in terra attraverso la militanza e quindi dà scarsa importanza ai brani profetici della Bibbia.

E se esiste un continuum che va dagli "apocalittici" di Waco a predicatori amici del Presidente degli Stati Uniti, non si può parlare, almeno nella maggioranza dei casi, di veri e propri fenomeni "settari" nel senso di gruppi totalitari.

Ma come in ogni religione, l'associazione tra obiettivi politici e valori assoluti implica facilmente il rischio del passaggio da una ricerca del divino alla violenza politica, o almeno al sostegno alla violenza politica altrui, in questo caso una violenza delegata alla potenza militare di uno Stato mediorientale (19). Uno Stato paradossalmente spesso più moderato di quanto vorrebbero i suoi sostenitori. Infatti, Chiamata di Mezzanotte commenta così l'assassinio di Rabin: «Ha fatto e dato moltissimo per il suo Paese, specialmente come soldato [ ... ]. Quali grandi vittorie gli furono donate da Dio! Rabin conquistò molte terre che Dio aveva promesso al suo popolo. I nemici tremavano dinanzi all'esercito israeliano comandato da Yitzhak Rabin!

Ma cosa fece Rabin [ ... ] in questi ultimi anni? Iniziò con lo stipulare un compromesso col nemico [ ... ]. Non avviene forse lo stesso con molti Cristiani: iniziano la vita con tutte le vittorie nella fede di Gesù [ ...]. Ma improvvisamente questi fratelli e queste sorelle non conseguono più nessuna vittoria. Lo si vede dai loro volti: non riescono più a sorridere, proprio come successe a Rabin in questi ultimi anni [ ... ]. Perciò torna ora al Signore [ ... ] fintanto che sei ancora in tempo (non aspettare troppo se non vuoi ripetere l'errore di Rabin)».(20)




Miguel Martinez








--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



NOTE:

(1) Marzo 1997 p. 14 ss. Abbiamo modificato leggermente la troppo letterale traduzione dall'inglese che compare sulla rivista.

(2) Wim Malgo, Bibical Counselling, cit. in Midnight Call, dic. 1993, p.29.

(3) "Israel's Leaders Address Christian Zionists", in Christians 1996, p. v.

(4) Simili messaggi vengono propagandati come "verità cristiane" dalle radio e TV evangeliche in tutto il Vicino 0riente, con conseguenze prevedibili per le storiche minoranze cristiane.

(5) Ice e Price, pp. 105-106.

(6) Vedere l'eccellente studio di Sara Diamond, Spiritual Warfare: the Politics of the Christian Right, South End Press, Boston, 1989.

(7) Gobbi 1993, p. 202. Ovviamente è possibile una lettura esclusiva di questa elezione: è il caso dei British Israelites, che almeno nelle loro frange più estreme sono antiebraici perché credono che i popoli anglosassoni siano gli unici "veri israeliti". Attualmente però gli unici movimenti a sfondo British Israelite che abbiano la minima rilevanza (le due Chiese di Dio di Armstrong padre e figlio) sono schierati a favore di Israele.

(8) Il più noto tentativo di creare una mitologia nazionale, quello dei mormoni, lo fa portando gli antichi israeliti in America: fuori dai circoli dei nativi americani, peraltro influenzati dal New Age, è inimmaginabile una mitologia nazionale che prescinda dall'Antico Testamento.

(9) Koresh, il re Ciro, è per i cristiano-sionisti la figura del Gentile che aiuta gli ebrei a far ritorno in Palestina.

(10) Vedere Leppard 1993, in particolare pp. 57, 58 e 61.

(11) Old-Time Gospel Hour del 2.12. 84, TV Lynchburg, Virginia, citato in Giammanco 1990 p.93.

(12) Un'interpretazione oggettiva delle profezie di Daniele, almeno nella versione massoretica (il testo dei LXX dà altre cifre), conduce a calcolare la fine del mondo o verso il 240 d.C. o verso il 286 d.C. (la cronologia è contraddittoria; vedere Soggin 1987, pp. 183-4). Per attualizzare questa cronologia, i millenaristi evangelici introducono il concetto arbitrario dell’orologio che si ferma" con la morte di Gesù e riprende a battere i suoi ultimi sette anni "tra poco" se non "adesso": un "adesso" che quindi si sposta continuamente in avanti.

(13) Lewis 1994 p. 150.

(14) Questa e la citazione successiva: Bennett 1995, pp.279 e 294.

(15) Chiamata di mezzanotte, maggio 1995, p.20. Si noti come ogni critica a Israele (e la "critica" comprende persino il dubbio che le frontiere di questo Stato debbano includere l'Iraq) venga associata alle persecuzioni degli ebrei e implicitamente alla sho'ah.

(16) Lewis 1994 p. 151.

(17) Bennett 1995 p.270.

(18) Il movimento millenarista più noto oggi in Italia è quello dei Testimoni di Geova, il cui fondatore, Charles T. Russel, èstato un ardente sionista, ma che oggi si astiene da ogni opinione politica a proposito dei problemi mediorientali. Sulla rimozione del sionismo di Russel, si veda in lingua italiana il testo di Aveta e Pollina.

(19) Per non parlare di un'ingenua complicità, per cui possiamo trovare in ogni libreria evangelica testi razzisti simili quello di Bennett.

(20) «In retrospettiva: l'assasino del premier Yitzhak Rabin», Chiamata di mezzanotte, gennaio 1996, p. 8. Altrove (Chiamata di mezzanotte, gennaio 1996, p. 9, articolo a firma di C. M(algo)) la stessa rivista sostiene che «è proprio per mezzo di questo assassinio ch'Egli adempie alla sua parola profetica».



BIBLIOGRAFIA

AVETA, POLLINA Aveta Achille e Pollina Sergio, I Testimoni di Geova e la politica: martiri o opportunisti? Ed. Delioniane, Roma.

BENNETT 1995 Bennett, Ramon, Philistine: The Great Deception, Arm of Salvation, Jerusalern 1995.

CHRISTIANS 1996 AA. VV., Christians and Israel: Essays on Biblical Zionism and on Islamic Fundamentalísin, International Chrìstian Embassy, Jerusaleni 1996.

GIAMMANCO 1990 Giammanco, Roberto, L'ímmaginario al potere: religione, media e politica nell'America reaganiana. Antonio Pellicani Ed., Roma 1990.

GOBBI 1993 Gobbi, Romolo, Figli dell'Apocalisse: storia di un mito dalle origini ai nostri giorni, Rizzoli, Milano 1993.

ICE, PRICE 1992 Ice, Thornas e Price, Randall, Ready to Rebuild, Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, OR, USA 1992.

LEPPARD 1993 Leppard, David, Fire and Blood, The True Story of David Koresh and the Waco Síege, Fourth Estate Limited, London 1993.

LEWIS 1994 Lewis, David Allen, Can Israel Survive in a Hostile World?, New Leaf Press, Green Forest, AR, USA 1994.

SOGGIN 1987 Soggin, J. Alberto, Introduzione all'Antico Testamento, Paideia, Brescia, 1987 1987 (la 1° edizione 1968).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Der Wehrwolf]

Aspettando la giovenca rossa sulla via di Armageddon. L’epifania dell’immaginario cristiano-sionista

di Roberto Giammanco

da Hortus Musicus, III (2002), 11

www.hortusmusicus.com

Il 1 maggio 2002, ad Hardball, programma televisivo di grande ascolto della MSNBC, nientemeno che il leader della maggioranza al Congresso degli Stati Uniti Richard (Dick) Armey, repubblicano del Texas, ha dichiarato di non avere «nulla in contrario alla prospettiva di uno stato palestinese, però non mi piace affatto che lo Stato d’Israele debba cedere i suoi territori per creare lo Stato palestinese». Armey ha poi subito precisato che «Gerusalemme Est, la Cis_giordania e la striscia di Gaza appartengono, a tutti gli effetti, ad Israele». Ha inoltre rivelato pensieri, «che ho coltivato per anni», il più democratico e umanitario dei quali è la ferma convinzione che «i palestinesi che vivono ancora nella Cisgiordania dovrebbero essere _deportati». «Ma allora – ha chiesto Chris Mathews, il presentatore del programma – dove dovrebbe trovarsi questo stato palestinese? In Norvegia? Una volta che Israele si annette la Cisgiordania, dov’è lo spazio? E poi, vorreste forse trasportare tutti i palestinesi in una località qualsiasi che chiamereste Stato palestinese?». Risponde Armey: «Nel mondo, di spazio ce n’è tanto, molte nazioni arabe possono mettere a disposizione dello Stato palestinese migliaia di acri di terra, anche coltivabile, proprietà insomma, offrire loro molte opportunità». Con deferente ma ferma professionalità, Chris Mathews ha cercato invano di far dire ad Armey che non era sua intenzione parlare di pulizia etnica: «Ve lo ripeto, siete proprio convinto che i palestinesi della Cisgiordania debbano andarsene?». «Certamente! – risponde secco il leader della maggioranza repubblicana al Congresso degli Stati Uniti, _Richard (Dick) Armey».1

Ma questo è nulla a paragone delle letterine accluse ai pacchi dono che tanti scolaretti, dalla terza media al liceo, hanno mandato ai soldati impegnati nelle zona di Turkarem nell’offensiva «Scudo difensivo». Persino i riservisti che le hanno ricevute sono rimasti esterrefatti al punto che le hanno raccolte e spedite al Jewish _Action Center accompagnandole con «un grido d’allarme per il sistema scolastico israeliano». Alcuni esempi: «Caro soldato, ti prego, ammazza più arabi che puoi. Io prego perché tu ritorni a casa sano e salvo e ne ammazzi almeno dieci per mio conto. Lascia stare le regole e annaffiali di piombo. Il migliore degli arabi è l’arabo morto. Che i palestinesi, sia maledetto il loro nome, brucino nel profondo dell’inferno. Non è divertente sparare agli arabi? Il solo arabo di prima qualità è l’arabo morto».2

Se il leader della maggioranza _repubblicana al Congresso degli Stati Uniti Richard (Dick) Armey _sanziona la soluzione pulizia etnica, il _senatore Jim Inhofe, repubblicano dell’Okla_homa, ne aveva confermato il fondamento e coronamento in un discorso del 4 marzo 2002 dal titolo emblematico Il diritto d’Israele alla terra _d’Israele («IO SONO IO» – diceva il vecchio, arrogante Innominabile a Mosè, Esodo 3:14). Sette sono le «prove-ragioni» elencate dal senatore fondamentalista dell’Oklahoma, sette come le piaghe d’Egitto. Particolarmente dotta e convincente è la prova della «evidenza archeologica». Dimostra, si fa per dire, che «su quella terra gli israeliani sono presenti da tremila anni, il che elimina le pretese di qualunque altro popolo. I filistei sono estinti e così tutti gli altri popoli antichi. Nessuno di loro può vantare la continuità degli israeliani. Neppure gli egiziani contemporanei sono della stessa razza degli egiziani di due o tremila anni fa. Ora sono soprattutto arabi. I primi israeliti, invece, discendevano dagli israeliti originari». La quinta ‘prova’ ha tutto il sapore del coronamento del globalismo dell’IO SONO IO: «Israele deve avere tutta la sua terra perché è un alleato strategico degli Stati Uniti». Non è forse «detto nella Bibbia che Abramo prese la sua tenda e si stabilì nella pianura di Mamre e lì costruì un altare al cospetto del Signore? Hebron è in Cisgiordania ed è proprio lì che Dio apparve ad Abramo e gli disse: “Io ti dono questa terra!”, la Cisgiordania, appunto». «Questa non è una battaglia politica ma un confronto in cui si decide se la parola di Dio è vera o no». Riguardo all’attacco dell’11 settembre alle Twin Towers e al Pentagono: «Una delle ragioni per cui ritengo che siamo stati noi ad aprire la porta spirituale per l’attacco contro gli Stati Uniti è stata la politica del nostro Governo, che ha fatto pressione sugli israeliani perché non facessero _rappresaglie totali in risposta agli attacchi terroristici scatenati contro di loro». Dio ha permesso «l’olocausto delle Twin Towers» perché è stato offeso per la mancata vendetta. Come a Canaan: «nelle città di questi popoli che l’Eterno, il tuo Dio, ti dà come eredità, non conserverai in vita nulla che respiri: ma voterai a completo sterminio gli Hittei, gli Amorei, i Cananei, i Ferezei, gli Hivvei e i Gebusei» (Deut. 20:17-18).

L’ingresso torrenziale in politica del linguaggio biblico dei fondamentalisti cristiani coincide con gli anni di apprendistato di Ronald Reagan e con la sua trionfale ascesa alla Casa Bianca, grazie ai voti della Destra politico-religiosa, la Moral Majority.

Già nel 1971, durante una cena in onore di Ronald Reagan, allora nullafacente ma popolarissimo governatore della California, si parlò di profezie sull’inevitabile, addirittura imminente, conflitto nucleare con l’Unione Sovietica. Furono sgranate le citazioni bibliche d’obbligo dei più famosi passi paranoici del libro di Ezechiele, di Daniele, dell’Apocalisse.

«Appena saranno finiti i mille anni, Satana sarà lasciato libero, uscirà dalla prigione per sedurre le nazioni che sono ai quattro angoli della terra, Gog e Magog, per radunarli alla guerra. Il numero di questi è come la sabbia del mare» (Apocalisse 20:8).

«In quel giorno – tuonò Jahweh – nel giorno in cui Gog verrà contro la terra d’Israele il furore mi salirà alle narici ognuno volgerà la spada contro i suoi fratelli.

E verrò in giudizio contro di lui, con la peste e col sangue e farò piovere torrenti di pioggia e grandine e fuoco e zolfo su di lui, sulle sue schiere e sui popoli numerosi che saranno con lui. Così mi magnificherò e mi santificherò e mi farò conoscere agli occhi di molte nazioni ed esse sapranno che IO SONO L’ETERNO» (Ezechiele 38:12, 21:23).

Ronald Reagan, vero e proprio mago della comunicazione pubblicitaria al minimo comun denominatore emotivo, disse «con un’intensità addirittura luminosa sul volto e nella voce»: «Ora che la Libia è diventata comunista, questo è il segno che il giorno di Armageddon non è lontano. I rossi devono andare al potere in Etiopia! È inevitabile, è assolutamente necessario perché la profezia si compia, che l’Etiopia diventi una di quelle nazioni senza Dio che si scaglieranno contro Israele».

Il Gog che allora, nel 1971, era alla guida delle «potenze delle tenebre» pronte ad aggredire Israele, l’Unione Sovietica, era già l’Impero del Male. Ma perché proprio l’Unione Sovietica?

Perché, disse Ronald Reagan con solenne convinzione, «Ezechiele ci dice che verrà da Nord e, infatti, quale altra nazione di quella potenza c’è a Nord di Israele? Nessuna. Tutto questo sembrava assurdo prima della Rivoluzione bolscevica perché la Russia era una nazione cristiana, ma ora che è diventata comunista e atea, ora che si è messa decisamente contro Dio, risponde perfettamente alla descrizione di Gog!».

In un altro dei suoi saggi di escatologia biblico-politica, al canterino gospel Pat Boone, che più volte in diretta aveva detto di preferire la morte delle sue figliolette in un olocausto nucleare piuttosto che vederle crescere sotto l’Impero del Male,3 Ronald Reagan ricordò che «gli ebrei hanno vissuto per secoli la diaspora, ma questo non vuol dire che Dio si è lavato le mani di loro». Anzi! «Prima del ritorno del Figlio li riunirà tutti in Israele. Persino i mezzi di trasporto di cui si sarebbero serviti sono stati descritti in dettaglio dal profeta! Alcuni “verranno per mare” ed altri ritorneranno “come colombe ai loro nidi”. In altre parole, o torneranno con le navi o per via aerea... Questa profezia si compì nel 1967 quando Gerusalemme fu riunita sotto la bandiera d’Israele… Già nel 1948…» E subito citò la data esatta della costituzione dello Stato d’Israele.4

Nel 1981, ormai Presidente degli Stati Uniti, a Jerry Falwell, il telepredicatore padrone di uno dei grandi imperi mediatici religiosi, Ronald Reagan dichiarò: «Jerry, lo sai che credo proprio che ci stiamo avvicinando, dico ora e non in tempi lunghi, al grande giorno di Armageddon?». Sullo sfondo del Grande Spettacolo degli anni di Reagan incombe, in versione consumistico-sionista, la Teologia fondamentalista di Armageddon, il cui Agostino è il predicatore evangelico Jerry Falwell.5

– «Anche oggi gli ebrei debbono esser considerati come il popolo eletto?»

– «Sì, senza alcun dubbio il tramite divino per l’evangelizzazione del mondo è la Chiesa cristiana ma Israele svolge un ruolo primario tra tutte le nazioni. L’età dei gentili (Luca 21:24) o è finita con la conquista ebraica di Gerusalemme nel 1967, oppure finirà in un futuro molto prossimo […]».

Israele e la Chiesa cristiana hanno scopi diversi ma tutt’e due «sono stati eletti da Dio»; «nessuno è responsabile della morte di Cristo che ha dato volontariamente la vita per lavare i peccati dell’umanità»; «L’antisemitismo è creazione di Satana che cerca tutti i mezzi per colpire il popolo eletto»; «Oggi, lo Stato d’Israele è la sede della profezia. Nel Vecchio Testamento il ruolo degli ebrei era quello di testimoniare, oggi è quello di preparare la Seconda Venuta di Cristo». Jerry Falwell integra, modificandolo, lo schema del sistema dispensazionista.

Le dispensazioni vanno dall’Innocenza prima della Caduta alla Legge consegnata a Mosè, alla Grazia, che comincia dalla morte di Cristo fino ai nostri tempi. La Seconda Venuta di Cristo porrà fine al periodo delle Tribolazioni. È solo grazie alla profezia che ogni dispensazione è legata all’altra divenendo così il filo conduttore di tutto il sistema. Tutti gli sforzi che gli uomini fanno per impedire o mutare il Disegno divino in ogni dispensazione sono inutili e, soprattutto, sono azioni suggerite da Satana. Il giorno di Armageddon, in data da destinarsi, milioni saranno inceneriti ma «proprio per questo – annunciava Falwell – non dobbiamo dimenticare com’è bello esser cristiani! Noi abbiamo un futuro meraviglioso _davanti!». Infatti, secondo l’evangelismo postmillenarista, i «rinati in Cristo» verranno «rapiti», raptured, sollevati a mezz’aria tra la terra e il cielo e lì resteranno per «tutti i sette anni delle Tribolazioni».

L’idea del ‘rapimento’, disneyana e terroristica come tutte le visioni escatologiche, è al centro del grande Revival evangelico della fine del XIX secolo che coinvolse gli strati sociali «nativisti», gli eredi della «Nazione sotto Dio», minacciati dalle crisi economiche e dalle ondate di immigranti dall’Europa. L’idea del ‘rapimento’ fu una specie di valore aggiunto alla fiducia _calvinista nell’elezione attraverso il successo economico e il dovere sociale. Nel libro dell’Apocalisse (6:19) è detto che i «rapiti saranno 12.000 per ciascuna delle dodici tribù d’Israele, per un totale di 144.000 ingressi al Regno». 144.000 ebrei o cristiani? Tanto che Mark Twain, scrivendo al Padreterno, gli chiedeva se il suo nome fosse nella lista. Per il fondamentalismo cristiano non c’erano dubbi: i rapiti erano solo i «rinati in Cristo». Ma il nuovo fondamentalismo dell’èra reaganiana ci dice, per bocca di Jerry Falwell, che «né Paolo, né Pietro, né Giovanni smisero di essere ebrei dopo aver accettato Cristo come Messia. Tutti ebbero una doppia identità. Quando Cristo ritornerà, libererà gli ebrei da tutti i loro nemici gentili e loro, come nazione, Lo riconosceranno come il Messia, l’unico. I cristiani, cristiani ed ebrei, rimarranno per mille anni con Cristo nel suo Regno sulla terra».6 Walt Disney non è mai riuscito a far meglio.

Il 5 aprile 2001 un annuncio epocale. I rabbini Menachem Makover e Chaim Richman
dichiararono ufficialmente che, in un corral top secret d’Israele, era nata la giovenca rossa.
Chi volesse ammirare l’immagine del fati_dico animale non ha che da inserirsi su: http://www.templeinstitute.org/curre...fer/index.html

Secondo il giudaismo tradizionale, un ebreo che abbia avuto contatto, diretto o indiretto, con i morti (basta aver camminato su o vicino ad una sepoltura) è impuro e gli è vietato l’ingresso nel Tempio. D’altronde è dovere divino per tutti gli ebrei praticare il culto del e nel Tempio. Ora, tutti gli ebrei sono impuri perché, in un modo o nell’altro, sono entrati in contatto con qualche morto e poi, oggi, il Tempio non c’è. L’ultimo, è ben noto, fu distrutto da Tito nel 70 d. C. Che fare? La purezza, e quindi il dovere di praticare il culto del Tempio, può essere assicurata soltanto con il sacrificio di una giovenca rossa («Dì ai figli d’Israele che ti menino una giovenca rossa, senza macchia, senza difetti, che non abbia mai portato il giogo», Numeri 19:1-10). Il testo biblico prescrive che la giovenca rossa sia sacrificata con un elaborato rituale. Dovrà poi esser bruciata e dalle ceneri impastate con aromi se ne ricaverà un’acqua con cui aspergere i fedeli che, ipso facto, saranno purificati e potranno così partecipare all’ufficio divino nel Tempio. Nel 1976, Menachem Burstin dette inizio ad una ricerca degli ingredienti da usare per i futuri sacrifici. Nel 1987, pubblicò un libro sul Techelet, tintura che sembra fosse estratta da una «creatura marina» chiamata hilazon, mentre Vendyl Jones, pastore battista del Texas, scava alla ricerca dei cocci del vasellame del Tempio distrutto nel 70 d.C. Tra i cocci dovrebbe esserci il kalal con le ceneri della giovenca rossa ultima bruciata, ceneri che non sono state (ancora) ritrovate.

Tutte queste ricerche sono finanziate dalla Jerusalem Temple Foundation, organizzazione cristiana esentasse capeggiata per anni da Terry Risenhoover, multimiliardario finanziatore delle ricerche petrolifere nei territori occupati da Israele. Alla presidenza della Jerusalem Temple Foundation i cristiano-sionisti avevano chiamato Stanley Goldfoot, noto terrorista della banda Stern, la stessa che, nel 1948, assassinò il conte Bernadotte e fece saltare in aria tutto il comando inglese all’Hotel David. È sempre la Jerusalem Temple Foundation a finanziare la Yeshiva Ataret Cohanim, la scuola ortodossa che prepara, ormai da decenni, gli aspiranti rabbini a celebrare l’ufficio divino nel Terzo Tempio quando ci sarà. Ma quando ci sarà? Il 10 marzo 1983, quattro fanatici del Gusb Emunim, il Fronte dei fedeli, finanziato dai miliardari del Texas, cercarono di collocare cariche esplosive sotto la Grande Moschea di Omar e, nel 1984, il tentativo fu ripetuto dalla banda Lifta. Da ricordare che gli ebrei ortodossi considerano il monte su cui sorge la Grande Moschea di Omar come dissacrato dai musulmani e dai cristiani. Per loro, accedervi è sacrilegio. Ma i rabbini non si sono persi d’animo: hanno stabilito che «la sua santità si estende verso l’alto, all’infinito» e per impedire che l’impurità dei passeggeri non-ebrei la contaminasse, nel 1983 fu vietato tassativamente a El-Al di sorvolare la zona.

Il fervente appoggio ad Israele dei fondamentalisti cristiani, elemento portante della Teologia di Armageddon e del controllo dell’AIPAC sul Congresso e il Senato degli Stati Uniti,7 non è una novità nell’immaginario americano. «Troveremo che il Dio d’Israele è tra di noi – predicava il puritano John Winthrop nel 1630 – farà sì che noi diventeremo lode e gloria per quelli che verranno. Dobbiamo considerarci come una Città sulla collina: gli occhi di tutti sono su di noi». Israele era stato il primo popolo scelto per il patto con Dio e, per il secondo, la scelta divina era caduta sulla Nuova Sion, la Nuova Israele. La continuità tra «il popolo eletto» e la «Nazione sotto Dio» è un tema costante dell’evangelismo americano.

La ‘passeggiata’ di Ariel Sharon sulla spianata delle moschee che ha provocato la Seconda Intifada e il genocidio ben più che ‘strisciante’ del popolo palestinese, è un evento sanguinoso e simbolico che viene da lontano. Come lo è l’assedio di fanatica crudeltà alla Basilica cristiana della Natività. In questo caso, è partita dalla International Christian Embassy, l’‘ambasciata’ dei cristiano-sionisti statunitensi che è insediata a Gerusalemme dal 20 settembre 1980, l’iniziativa di raccogliere fondi tra gli evangelici degli Stati Uniti per pubblicare inserzioni di condanna per «l’ignobile profanazione della Basilica». Naturalmente, da parte dei palestinesi.

Nell’orgia del Grande Spettacolo, i temi della Seconda Venuta di Cristo e della battaglia di Armageddon sono parte del potere di definizione dell’egemonia politica e mediatica dell’Impero. Sono assunti come l’atmosfera sublimante di un’ideologia globale del dominio che definisce i suoi «sommersi» e i suoi «salvati» per annientarli a distanza. Il suo assolutismo etico virtuale nasconde tutti gli orrori solo perché è simultaneo e dura il tempo di trasmissione.8
Pat Robertson, infaticabile telepredicatore padrone della CBN che, sull’onda del successo della Destra politico-religiosa è stato anche candidato alla Presidenza degli Stati Uniti, è solito dire che il mezzo televisivo «rappresenta di per se stesso il compimento della profezia: “Euntes docete! Andate dunque, ammaestrate tutti i popoli!” (Matteo 28: 19)». Gerard Straub, suo ex-direttore di produzione, rivelò che, sin dal 1979, Pat aveva un progetto segreto, il God’s Secret project di cui erano stati discussi tutti i dettagli tecnici e finanziari. Si trattava delle riprese televisive della Seconda Venuta di Cristo. «Il più grande spettacolo del mondo era lì davanti a noi – ricordava Straub –; io mi chiedevo dov’era meglio piazzare le nostre cineprese. Gerusalemme era il posto più ovvio. Discutemmo persino se l’aureola di luce di Gesù avrebbe potuto pregiudicare la riuscita delle riprese e come avremmo affrontato quel problema tecnico. Ma ve l’immaginate noi della troupe che diciamo a Gesù: “Signore, per favore, riducete un po’ la vostra luminosità. Abbiamo problemi di contrasto. Non vogliamo correre il rischio di sfondare il negativo!”».

Riuscirà davvero l’universo mediatico a organizzarci anche la Seconda Venuta?

www.hortusmusicus.com

NOTE

1 Il testo completo si può cercare su: comgroups.yahoo.com/group/togethernetwork.

2 Yedioth Ahronoth, 7 maggio 2002. Recentemente, il professor Daniel Bar-Tal dell’Università di Tel-Aviv ha analizzato 124 libri di testo per le scuole elementari, medie e superiori d’Israele. Fino a tutti gli anni Ottanta si tendeva ad esaltare le glorie dell’antico Israele «riscoperto» perché «risorto grazie al movimento sionista». Nei libri di testo di tutto quel periodo gli arabi venivano descritti come «inferiori», «fatalisti», «improduttivi», «apatici», «tribali», «vendicativi», «assassini», «disonesti», «criminali». I libri di testo contemporanei usano meno questa terminologia ma danno per scontato che non esiste alcuna identità palestinese, né antica né moderna. I libri di testo per gli arabo-israeliani, che sono un quinto della popolazione d’Israele, sono sì in lingua araba ma vengono scritti e pubblicati dal Ministero dell’Istruzione d’Israele. Tra i dipendenti del dicastero solo l’1% sono arabi e nessuno di livello medio o superiore. Non ci sono università per gli arabi. An Ugly Face in the Mirror, dello scrittore israeliano Adir Cohen, è uno studio sulla percezione che i giovani arabi israeliani, gli ebrei israeliani e i palestinesi hanno gli uni degli altri. Il 75% degli studenti ebrei descrive gli arabi come, nell’ordine, «assassini», «criminali», «terroristi», «rapitori di bambini», «parassiti» e «inferiori» sotto ogni aspetto. L’arabo è «un essere sporco dalla faccia feroce». Il 90% degli studenti ebrei era d’accordo che agli arabi «non si dovesse concedere alcun diritto». «Le descrizioni umilianti e negative contenute nei libri di testo – scrive Cohen – puntano deliberatamente a stabilire una base culturale che giustifichi atteggiamenti e comportamenti degli studenti ebrei nei confronti degli arabi e consolidi per sempre l’identità egemonica ebraica». «Non esiste un popolo palestinese, non è come se noi fossimo venuti qui a cacciarli e a impossessarci del loro paese. I palestinesi non esistono». (Golda Meir in un’intervista al Sunday Times del 15 giugno 1969).

Il 15 ottobre 1971, ai giornalisti di Le Monde, la stessa Golda Meir dichiarava: «Israele esiste come la realizzazione di una promessa fatta da Dio. Sarebbe ridicolo chiedergli conto della sua legittimità».

3 Better Dead than Red, meglio morto che rosso, fu il paranoico slogan che funestò le cronache e i sonni di un paio di generazioni di americani. In Europa non entrò nel discorso pubblico, salvo qualche rara eccezione, tra cui Giuseppe Pella che si disse pronto a veder morire la prole in un olocausto atomico piuttosto che saperla vivere sotto i rossi.

Quello slogan ebbe anche la sua teologia, come del resto è successo durante le recenti guerre «umanitarie» e/o «giuste» della Iugoslavia, dell’Afghanistan e come sarà per le tante altre a venire. Una martellante propaganda terroristica teneva alta la tensione emotiva con la prospettata necessità di colpire per primi (la teoria del First Strike) e migliaia di americani si rivolsero alle loro chiese per avere risposta a quesiti come questi: «Se i nostri vicini tentassero di ripararsi nel rifugio che basta a garantire la sopravvivenza dei soli membri della nostra famiglia, sarebbe lecito e moralmente giustificabile sparare su di loro?»; «quando le provviste stessero per esaurirsi, sarebbe lecito gettar fuori gli invalidi e i meno utili per consentire ai bambini e ai più giovani di vivere qualche giorno di più?»; «se qualcuno, subito dopo l’inizio dell’attacco, battesse alla porta del rifugio e chiedesse di esservi accolto, sarebbe lecito non aprire se ciò fosse indispensabile per non fiaccare il morale di chi è già dentro?». Padre L.C. McHugh S.J. rispose così sulla rivista America (30 settembre 1961): «In nessun luogo della tradizione morale cattolica si legge che Cristo, nel consigliare la non resistenza al male, abbia escluso il diritto all’autodifesa che è di origine naturale ed è riconosciuto dal diritto delle genti […]. Perciò ritengo assolutamente insensato affermare che l’etica cristiana imponga, o anche solo permetta, che ci si debba esporre al fallout per lasciar entrare nel rifugio dei vicini sprovveduti. Inoltre, dubito che qualsiasi teologo cattolico condannerebbe chi si servisse di tutti i mezzi a sua disposizione per respingere aggressori terrorizzati che cercassero di forzare la porta con sbarre di ferro, chi usasse la forza per cacciare fuori dal rifugio, costruito per sé e per la propria famiglia, chiunque vi si chiudesse dentro al posto dei legittimi proprietari» [i corsivi sono miei]. Di rincalzo al teologo gesuita, il dottor Paul Ramsey, teologo presbiteriano: «L’etica cristiana non ci impone di morire tutti per il solo fatto che tutti non possiamo sopravvivere». Cfr. Roberto Giammanco, Dialogo sulla società americana, Einaudi, Torino 1964; La Nuova Italia, Firenze 1995.

4 Roberto Giammanco, L’immaginario al potere. Religione, media e politica nell’America reaganiana, Pellicani editore, Roma 1990, pp. 87 ss.

5 Il termine ‘fondamentalista’ deriva da The Fundamentals. A Testimony of the Truth, il titolo di una collana pubblicata tra il 1910 e il 1917, «contro ogni teoria laica, materialista, scientifica, socialista […]», in parallelo con la grande offensiva cattolica «contro il modernismo». La fede evangelica è riassunta in 5 articoli: nascita di Cristo da madre vergine, resurrezione in corpore e sua Seconda Venuta, redenzione grazie alla sua morte sacrificale, infallibilità letterale della Bibbia, autenticità dei miracoli delle Scritture. La base sistematica del fondamentalismo evangelico è la Scofield Reference Bible, opera di tutta la vita di Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921). Partendo dalla premessa che tutta la Bibbia è parola divina, Scofield sostenne che si debba dividerla «scientificamente» nelle sue parti. «Compito dell’interprete non è di valutarle per generi letterari, allegorie e metafore isolate, idee scelte alla rinfusa». Occorre «un’accurata e oggettiva classificazione che coordini i passi in categorie, dispensazioni, ognuna delle quali è un momento del Disegno divino». Il sistema dispensazionista è un ingegnoso meccanismo che sottrae il materiale delle Scritture ad ogni approccio storico o allegorico e ne garantisce un’interpretazione assolutamente letterale.

6 Cfr. il mio L’immaginario al potere, cit., cap. II.

7 L’American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) è il maggior gruppo di pressione pro-israeliano, con 60.000 iscritti che organizzano campagne volte a influenzare i membri del Congresso persino nelle circoscrizioni elettorali dove scarsa o nulla è la popolazione ebraica (per es. lo Stato dell’Oklahoma di cui è senatore Jim Inhofe). Ha un bilancio ufficiale di quindici milioni di dollari. Fino al 1999 era considerata la seconda lobby dopo quella dei pensionati e prima di quella dei sindacati. Dal 2000 è la prima in assoluto. L’AIPAC si occupa dei membri del Congresso così bene da far dire a William Quando, membro del National Security Council sotto Nixon e Carter, che, oggi, «il 70-80% dei membri del Congresso si comportano nelle delibere su argomenti importanti per Israele secondo le indicazioni che ricevono dall’AIPAC» (Tages Anzeiger, 22 aprile 2002). Gli interessi di Israele presso il Governo degli Stati Uniti sono invece curati dalla Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, una lega di 51 organizzazioni ebraiche.

8 Nel 1994, da un sondaggio dell’U.S. News and World Report (11 dicembre 1994) risultava che sei americani su dieci credevano nella fine del mondo, un terzo entro pochi anni o decenni; il 61% erano convinti che Cristo ritornerà sulla terra e il 44% che, a breve scadenza, ci sarebbe stata la battaglia di Armageddon. Due terzi degli intervistati erano Born again, «rinati in Cristo». Nell’anno 2000, un analogo sondaggio ha dato su per giù gli stessi risultati con un aumento al 72% dei convinti nella Seconda Venuta di Cristo, mentre il 53% degli intervistati si è detto persuaso che il Terzo Tempio d’Israele sarebbe stato costruito entro pochi anni, al massimo un decennio.

[Der Wehrwolf]

I FANATICI DELL'APOCALISSE

Ultimo assalto a Gerusalemme

di Maurizio Blondet

Ed. il Cerchio iniziative editoriali

pag. 171 € 15,00



recensione di Doriana Leonardi
Il libro di Blondet, giornalista del quotidiano L'Avvenire, prende avvio da una domanda in apparenza esclusivamente religiosa: chi sono i seguaci della setta ebraica "I Fedeli del Tempio", che sembrano alacremente lavorare perché si avverino le profezie bibliche sull'Apocalisse?
Potrebbe sembrare una domanda che poco ha a che fare con l'attualità, ma se l'obiettivo dei Fedeli del Tempio è di ricostruire il Tempio di Salomone sul suo luogo originario, ovvero la Spianata delle Moschee a Gerusalemme, allora il tutto diventa di drammaticamente attuale.


Dato l'argomento, Blondet fa continui riferimenti biblici, che non possono essere evitati parlando di un popolo che riconosce se stesso solo ed esclusivamente in chiave religiosa, e si deve ammettere che lo sguardo dell'autore è decisamente religioso, mentre cerca di dimostrare che gli ebrei israeliani sono l'unico popolo in grado di commettere il sacrilegio ultimo (la costruzione del Tempio e la ripresa del sacrificio rituale) che avrebbe il potere di scatenare l'arrivo dell'Anticristo e quindi l'Apocalisse. Ma poi il sacro si mischia con il profano, e la lettura si fa quindi interessante anche per chi non crede, quando iniziano a svelarsi prima i vecchi legami fra la politica americana e inglese e gli affaristi ebrei, e in seguito come tutto converga dentro lo stato d'Israele, dove le linee guide "dell'unica democrazia mediorientale" sembrano essere dettate dalle scuole rabbiniche (forse non è un caso che Uri Avnery abbia definito coraggiosa la dichiarazione di laicità del candidato laburista Mitzna). Degne di attenzione, in questo caso, le citazioni tratte da Israel Shahak sulla sempre più forte influenza che ha la religione sulla vita israeliana, fino all'appropriazione di citazioni bibliche riservate a Dio per applicarle ad Israele stesso.

Il saggio analizza la storia ebraica e spiega come popolo e religione sono diventati tutt'uno, e l'origine della frattura tra loro, "popolo eletto", e gli altri. Dall'antico regno di Giuda, passando attraverso la diaspora, il sionismo, la rivoluzione russa e la proclamazione dello stato d'Israele, assistiamo al crescere dell'influenza dei finanzieri ebrei, prima sull'Inghilterra e poi sugli Stati Uniti; la massoneria, zona d'ombra dov'è impossibile indagare; l'azione delle lobby a favore di Israele.

Interessante la "convergenza di interessi", descritta da Blondet, che dal 1982, negli Stati Uniti unisce due gruppi che fino a quel momento si erano praticamente ignorati, se non trovati su opposti fronti: la comunità ebraica (di solito liberal) e i protestanti conservatori dell'America rurale. Un intero capitolo è usato per spiegare la strategia dell'avvicinamento fra i due gruppi quando l'invasione del Libano, i massacri di Sabra e Chatila, l'annessione di Cisgiordania e Gaza, portano un gravissimo danno "all'autorità morale" di Israele e l'AIPAC deve correre ai ripari per non perdere sostenitori in America. La sinistra, i comunisti che perseguitano Israele, è il grimaldello usato per scardinare i cuori, e i portafogli, dei protestanti; poi inizia l'avvicinamento religioso, e rabbini e predicatori scoprono di avere molte cose in comune: dall'interpretazione letterale della Bibbia all'attesa per il Messia (su ci? che accadrà dopo l'avvento del Messia le opinioni divergono, ma questo è un altro discorso). Dopo l'opera di convincimento la destra americana, i cosiddetti cristiano-sionisti, appoggia senza riserve la costruzione del Tempio, evento centrale senza il quale è impossibile l'arrivo del secondo Messia. Ovviamente, nel saggio non sono dimenticati i coloni, parte importante della strategia dei Fedeli del Tempio.

Il libro è stato scritto nel 1992 e molti avvenimenti sono diventati di pubblico dominio, come la scelta forzata di Israele per gli ebrei russi che volevano espatriare, ma Blondet aggiunge spiegazioni e lega avvenimenti apparentemente scollegati fra di loro, come appunto l'espatrio degli ebrei russi e la tempesta attorno al passato nazista di Kurt Waldheim, candidato alle elezioni presidenziali austriache.

Una seconda edizione è stata presentata nel 1995, poco dopo l'assassinio di Rabin, con una prefazione che commenta sia gli accordi di Oslo (pessimi per i palestinesi, afferma l'autore), sia quella morte, che ha rivelato al mondo ci? che Israele non voleva si sapesse: l'esistenza di un fondamentalismo ebraico. La terza edizione è del maggio 2002 e la prefazione è veramente interessante (secondo me, vale da sola il costo del libro). Blondet era a New York come inviato per il suo giornale dall'11/9/01 e racconta la sua esperienza, ci? che accadde dopo gli attentati e le informazioni che raccolse. Ad esempio, ci svela che alla Casa Bianca si era subito pensato ad un attacco interno e non a terroristi giunti da fuori, oppure leggiamo della sessantina di israeliani arrestati dall'FBI durante le indagini e di come tutto sia stato messo a tacere, e puntando anche l'attenzione sulle dichiarazioni del governo israeliano,.

In appendice, l'autore ci fa conoscere meglio i Kazari, il popolo da cui discendono gli ebrei dell'est, e (sublime!) una breve ma esauriente biografia di Ariel Sharon, in cui si ricorda come il fondatore del Likud, Jabotinski, fosse amico di Mussolini (!).

Commovente, suggestiva e amara, alla luce di ci? che vediamo tutti i giorni durante il TG o leggiamo sui quotidiani, la domanda che si pone Blondet sulle crociate: e se fossero state un'ordalia, un giudizio del Signore per stabilire chi fra i due contendenti era il più meritevole di difendere i Luoghi Santi?

La domanda non ha risposta, come non hanno riscontro altre domande che si fa Blondet. Ad alcune, nella prefazione all'edizione del 2002, non dà volutamente risposta e si capisce il perché (domande pericolose, le definisce). Nemmeno per un altro quesito ha la soluzione: perché Hussein di Giordania rinunci? alla sovranità sulla Spianata delle Moschee, prerogativa della sua casata, che comporta un dovere preciso, la custodia dei Luoghi Santi islamici e la loro difesa ad oltranza?

In conclusione, questo libro potrebbe interessare i visitatori di Arabcomint?

Io credo di s?, perché le cose che racconta vanno oltre la visione religiosa di un giornalista che si dichiara cristiano e credente. Potremmo stare giorni a discutere se credere alle Sacre Scritture e aspettarci l'Apocalisse, nel caso il Tempio fosse ricostruito, oppure se ridurre tutto a mito, ma non è questo il problema. Il punto centrale che il saggio affronta è che oggi, in Israele, qualcuno ci crede e ha enormi appoggi politici e finanziari, sia in patria sia fuori. E che questi appoggi si traducono, per la Palestina, in una progressiva, forzata, perdita del carattere multiculturale di Gerusalemme, che nel silenzio del mondo sta diventando sempre più ebraica; in uno stillicidio continuo, inarrestabile di vite palestinesi sacrificate; in minacce per niente vaghe di transfert: via tutti i palestinesi, che danno fastidio con questa presenza che vive, si difende, lotta... anche per i Luoghi Santi.

S?, il libro è attuale. E se ci fermassimo a pensare un momento, potrebbe cambiare anche l'angolazione nel vedere la guerra contro l'Iraq. Dopo l'11/9/02, Richard Perle scrisse una lettera aperta a Bush jr. chiedendo: guerra in Afghanistan per catturare Bin Laden; rovesciare Saddam Hussein; scatenare misure appropriate contro Siria e Iran; applicare sanzioni ai palestinesi, fino a quando "Arafat non arresterà tutti i terroristi". Sembra "l'elenco della spesa" di Tel Aviv, vero? Forse il petrolio è la spiegazione più valida per ci? che accade in Medioriente, ma è anche una buona scusa per non vedere oltre.

[Der Wehrwolf]

Chi controlla chi?



Gli avvenimenti che si sono susseguiti negli ultimi due anni, hanno ben dimostrato chi guidi il gioco nella strana relazione tra USA ed Israele. Non e' certo Bush!
La voce del padrone
L' inesplicabile relazione tra gli USA ed Israele, evidenziata dal totale e cieco supporto degli USA allo stato ebraico, ha portato molti analisti politici del Medioriente a ricercare le cause di tale anomala relazione in maniera che esse incontrino le tesi poltiche che ciascuno porta avanti.

In generale, possiamo dividere queste tematiche politiche in due scuole di pensiero: una, che sostiene Israele sia il bastione dell'imperialismo occidentale nella regione, pronto a servirne gli interessi; l'altra, che tende a spiegare questa poco santa alleanza con l'enorme influenza che le lobby sioniste hanno in tutto il mondo occidentale.


Recentemente e' venuta fuori una terza scuola di pensiero, la quale sostiene che il sionismo internazionale sia diventato parte integrante dell'imperialismo occidentale.
L'obiettivo, qui, non e' quello di coinvolgere il lettore in un certo tipo di ricerca accademica, ma quello di sottolineare l'appropriato approccio al problema reale. Non si puo' minimizzare l'importanza di cercare la verita' su un problema che, da 55 anni, causa lutti e devastazioni in tutto il mondo arabo, specie in Palestina. Qual e' la verita'?

Ognuna delle correnti di pensiero ha ragioni molto logiche che supportano la sua posizione. Coloro che sostengono Israele sia il bastione dell'imperialismo americano ed occidentale spiegano la loro analisi sottolineando il fatto che Israele sia stata artificialmente impiantata nell'area per servire gli interessi economici e strategici dell'occidente, minimizzando le future, possibili influenze russe o cinesi nella regione, e che tale supporto, da parte americana, si conforma al sistema "morale e democratico" praticato negli USA.
Israele manterrebbe il mondo arabo diviso, permettendo all'imperialismo occidentale di controllare la regione secondo la regola del "dividere e conquistare", affermano i sostenitori di questa scuola. Sostengono inoltre che Israele sia un alleato affidabile, ben piu' degli instabili regimi arabi, mentre le continue guerre nell'area consentirebbero alle industrie belliche, negli USA, di operare a pieno ritmo, con profitti da capogiro. La presenza di Israele, poi, aiuterebbe a mantenere ininterrotto il flusso di petrolio verso l'occidente ancora per un lungo futuro.

Tale razionalizzazione spiegherebbe facilmente il supporto pubblico americano verso lo stato ebraico.
La credibilita' di queste affermazioni dovrebbe essere spiegata secondo i criteri che si evolvono nella regione dagli ultimi cinquant'anni.
I paesi arabi sono stati divisi dal colonialismo anglo-francese ben prima della creazione di Israele, anzi, oserei dire che proprio questa creazione e' stata un fattore di tentata unita' da parte del mondo arabo. Per quello che concerne l'interesse strategico e petrolifero, si puo' solo obiettare che i confini molto limitati di Israele sono ben poca cosa rispetto ad un mondo arabo che si estende dal Golfo Arabico all'Oceano Atlantico. L'America non puo' supportare Israele a causa della sua pretesa di essere una democrazia, semplicemente perche' Israele non lo e' e non potrebbe mai esserlo a causa del suo carattere ebraico. In realta', il sistema semi-teocratico di Israele contravviene alla Costituzione USA, che non consente alla religione di interferire con il processo di uguale trattamento di fronte alla legge.

La moralita' e la legalita' non sono motivazioni da prendere seriamente in considerazione, dal momento che Israele ha infranto ogni codice morale nel suo trattamento degli indigeni di Palestina, mentre, dal punto di vista legale, Israele viola, a tutt'oggi, tutte le regole della legalita' internazionale, incluse decine di risoluzioni ONU riguardanti il conflitto in Medioriente.

Riguardo poi il fatto che Israele sia appoggiato perche' ritenuto un alleato affidabile, vi sarebbero decine di esempi da fare, dalla vendita di armi alla Cina, allo spionaggio in grande stile negli USA. Basta sottolineare, invece, che Israele e' l'unico stato sul pianeta che puo' dire agli americani, senza perifrasi, di farsi i loro affari e non interferire negli affari di Israele. Non si puo' dimenticare, a questo proposito, la arrogante lavata di capo fatta dall'allora primo ministro Shamir al presidente Reagan quando questi oso' proporre una pace in Medioriente seguente all'invasione israeliana in Libano, nel 1982. E come dimenticare la figuraccia rimediata da Bush figlio quando, durante l'assedio di Jenin, parlo' agli israeliani dalla TV pubblica, chiedendo loro di ritirarsi "immediatamente, ed intendo dire ORA", dalla Cisgiordania e fu pubblicamente snobbato da Sharon, ed in seguito duramente attaccato da lui?

Anche se ammettessimo che Israele sia un obbediente servo degli americani, gli USA sanno molto bene che i regimi possono cambiare e, con essi, la loro attitudine verso quelli che prima erano amici. Basti citare gli esempi di Libia ed Iran, in cui i repentini e rivoluzionari cambiamenti di regime hanno significato una drastica inversione di tendenza verso gli USA, proprio a causa del cieco supporto di questi verso Israele.

Il supporto americano ad Israele e' costato ai contribuenti USA piu' di 140 miliardi di dollari negli ultimi cinquant'anni, ed altrettanti miliardi sono ritornati nelle casse americane per merito di rapporti economici con il mondo arabo. Gli USA dovrebbero sapere che i loro interessi nell'area sono piu' che altro subordinati ai governi dei paesi interessare, che un giorno potrebbero anche cambiare, travolti dalla furia repressa e contenuta delle masse arabe. Il supporto ad Israele, dunque, non serve gli interessi nazionali USA. Ma cos'e' dunque che istiga un tale, irreale, anacronistico ed ingiusto supporto? Dare la colpa alla sola lobby ebraica e' riduttivo. Studi piu' profondi sul tema rivelano piu' di una ragione che forzano gli USA a supportare ciecamente Israele:



Il controllo sionista sui media

L'AIPAC (lobby ebraica) e la sua organizzazione piramidale nei cinquanta stati dell'Unione

La lobby Cristiano-Sionista rappresentata dal movimento evangelico.

Non vi e' oggi maggior potere di quello ottenuto manipolando la pubblica opinione usando i mezzi di comunicazione di massa, come TV, radio, giornali, cinema, riviste e libri. Nel momento in cui tale potentissimo giocattolo cade tra le mani di gruppi con determinati interessi politici, puoi essere certo che le informazioni che otterrai saranno quelle che soddisfano gli interessi e gli obiettivi di tali gruppi.

Negli USA, il 90% dei mezzi di comunicazione di massa sono nelle mani di organizzazioni sioniste. Se questo sembra assurdo, suggerisco al lettore serio di fare ricerche per conto suo.
Prendiamo ad esempio i tre maggiori quotidiani statunitensi, il New York Times, il Washington Post ed il Wall Street Journal. Essi sono rispettivamente posseduti e controllati da Arthur Sulzburger, Eugene Meyers e Peter Kann, tutti e tre sionisti dichiarati. Non solo, ma ognuno dei tre giornali in questione controlla decine di stazioni TV e centinaia di altri piccoli quotidiani.

Simili ricerche in TV, industria cinematografica, editoria porteranno alle stesse conclusioni.

Il successivo fattore decisivo che rende la politica americana totalmente succube di quella israeliana e' l'efficiente lavoro della lobby sionista, o AIPAC.
L'ex-senatore Fullbright l'ha definita il piu' potente gruppo d'interesse nella storia degli Stati Uniti, che e' riuscito ad allineare circa l'80% del Senato verso il supporto incondizionato di Israele, anche quando tale supporto contravvenga agli interessi USA.

L'ex-senatore Paul Findley chiese una nuova intifada in entrambe le Camere di Capitol Hill per liberarle dell'influenza dell'AIPAC. Pat Buchanan defini' il Parlamento americano "territorio occupato".
L'ex senatore Adlai Stevson terzo dichiaro' alla CBS che, a causa dell'AIPAC, il ministro degli esteri israeliano ha piu' influenza negli USA sugli affari mediorientali che in Israele e sicuramente piu' potere del ministro degli esteri USA.

L'AIPAC non e' un team pro-Israele che lavora solamente a Capitol Hill, ma e' una vera e propria corporazione, forte di 60.000 membri in tutti gli USA. Se qualche rappresentante osa criticare Israele, state pur certi che ricevera' centinaia di chiamate ed un numero simile di fax che gli impongono di seguire una linea piu' filo-israeliana. Cio' viene realizzato attraverso un processo chiamato Azione "allarme" che coinvolge tutta la struttura piramidale. Il codice "allarme" viene usato per allertare simultaneamente ed immediatamente tutti i membri dell'AIPAC in ogni stato. I deputati eletti negli USA sono molto sensibili a questo tipo di pressioni, che sono in grado di distruggere politicamente chiunque.

Thomas Moorer, Capo di Stato maggiore USA nel 1973, commento' una volta che, se gli americani scoprissero la devastante influenza dell'AIPAC, probabilmente prenderebbero le armi contro il loro stesso governo.

Naturalmente non bisogna trascurare l'influenza dei Cristiano-sionisti, le cui credenze religiose li spingono verso il Likud nello spettro politico israeliano, poiche' essi credono che la creazione di Israele ed il suo sostegno siano l'adempimento dell'Alleanza divina e delle profezie bibliche, sicche' il loro supporto verso lo stato ebraico non e' motivato ne' da considerazioni di interesse nazionale ne' dalla moralita' del comportamento di Israele. Jerry Fallwell, Pat Robertson e Jimmy Swaggert sono solo alcuni di questi fanatici, ma essi hanno il controllo su circa sessanta milioni di americani, che allineano alle posizioni pro-israeliane.

A meno che non si intervenga attivamente per limitare l'influenza sionista negli USA, e' pressocche' impossibile che l'americano possa liberarsi da questa formidabile trappola israeliana. Per adesso gli USA non hanno altra scelta se non quella di supportare acriticamente Israele ed i suoi progetti espansionistici. E' auspicabile che i gruppi arabo-americani parlino direttamente ed attivamente con il pubblico USA, per spiegargli cosa sta accadendo alle sue spalle. Oggi, dopo gli attentati dell'11 settembre, questi gruppi stanno gradualmente perdendo ogni peso politico e devono essi stessi difendersi. Hanno, in un solo giorno, perduto la forza che avevano costituito in decenni di vita negli USA. E neanche questo e' un caso.

Dichiarare che Israele serve agli interessi americani nella regione e' un travestimento con cui gli i dirigenti USA giustificano il loro supporto verso Israele. Dopotutto, essi pensano per giustificare il loro parziale tradimento verso gli interessi dello stato, se Israele serve agli interessi americani, non e' patriottico supportarla anche se venissero violate moralita' e legalita'?

[Der Wehrwolf]

Scott Thompson e Jeffrey Steinberg

Il 25° anniversario del "Matrimonio d’armi"
tra il Likud d’Israele e i Fondamentalisti USA



Il Jerusalem Report magazine, ha pubblicato il 18 novembre una lunga riflessione di Gershom Gorenberg, che attacca coloro che in Israele stanno promuovendo un’alleanza con i “Fondamentalisti cristiani” americani, come il Rev. Pat Robertson e il Rev. Jerry Falwell. Gorenberg ha messo sull’avviso che "l’ ‘amore’ dei conservatori evangelici per Israele affonda le radici nella loro teologia.... Esso vede gli Ebrei come spiritualmente ciechi per il rifiuto di Gesù. Ma rispetta anche l’esistenza di Israele in quanto annunciatore della fine dei tempi—in cui gli Ebrei moriranno o almeno si convertiranno e Gesù farà il suo ritorno." Gorenberg ha individuato il sindaco di Geruralesemme Ehud Olmert, seguace di Jabotinsky, ed il Rabbino Yechiel Eckstein come due tra i principali promotori del connubio della destra radicale israeliana con i fondamentalisti cristiani americani. Olmert ha fondato una serie di nuove organizzazioni, molte delle quali servono da collettori dei fondi cristiano-sionisti verso l’apparato del partito Likud di Gerusalemme. L’organizzazione Gerusalemme Una, la Fondazione Nuova Gerusalemme e la Squadra Preghiera di Gerusalemme non sono che tre dei gruppi sponsorizzati personalmente da Olmert, da quando è stato eletto sindaco della città. Il referente locale di Gerusalemme per Olmert in tutti questi sforzi è il Rabbino Eckstein, che ha lavorato per decenni nella Anti-Defamation League del B'nai B'rith (ADL), prima di fondare l’International Fellowship of Christians and Jews negli anni 1980. Il problema di questo condotto che porta denaro sporco alla destra radicale d’Israele è particolarmente pressante ora, con le elezioni alla Knesset (parlamento) fissate per il 28 gennaio 2003. In una recente discussione con un giornalista americano, Gorenberg ha confermato che i cosiddetti "filantropi" forniscono un veicolo per flussi illegali di moneta estera nella campagna elettorale. I donatori delle opere pie sono spesso "sfruttati" per fornire fondi aggiuntivi ai candidati elettorali. Gorenberg ha riferito che, anche se la pratica è illegale in Israele, essa è comune come la vendita di alcolici a Chicago in pieno Proibizionismo. Nessun “bravo ragazzo” può essere eletto in Israele senza farsi un’immersione nel denaro estero, ha lamentato.

La Squadra di Preghiera di Gerusalemme, Keyes e i Moonies

Nel suo pezzo del Jerusalem Report, Gorenberg ha sparato a zero sulla Squadra di Preghiera di Gerusalemme, i cui membri guida comprendono Robertson, il Rev. Mike Evans e Tim LaHaye, autore dei racconti di successo "Left Behind" circa la vita sulla Terra dopo l’Estasi, in cui gli Ebrei sono sottoposti ad un nuovo Olocausto o alla conversione al Cristianesimo. Secondo Gorenberg, "il libro di Evans Gerusalemma Tradita afferma che si avvicina un’apocalisse, nella quale fiumi di sangue scorreranno in Israele—e raccomanda ai lettori di pregare per quello che accade." In contraccambio per avere aperto le porte di Gerusalemme a questa gang di eretici, Olmert è stato profumatamente pagato. Il 15 ottobre 2002, secondo il calcolo di Gorenberg, Olmert ha partecipato ad una cena di raccolta fondi a San Diego, organizzata dalla Mission Valley Christian Fellowship. Olmert se n’è andato con 500.000 dollari frutto di una cena da 1.000 dollari al coperto. Nello stesso tour USA, Olmert si è dapprima fatto vedere a Washington per un incontro revival della Christian Coalition presso il Convention Center, che è culminato con un appello di “Solidarietà cristiana con Israele”, rivolto da Olmert, Robertson, Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), Rep. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) e l’ex Ambasciatore Alan Keyes. La presenza di Keyes al raduno di Robertson è stata di particolare significato, dato che egli è stato per anni profondamente implicato nell’apparato della Chiesa dell’Unificazione del Reverendo Moon, che come recentemente rivelato da EIR, è il canale principale di denaro sporco per l’intero network mondiale della destra radicale—compresi i seguaci di Jabotinsky in Israele. Gorenberg ha concluso il suo saggio con un avvertimento: "Ho contattato al telefono a San Diego Zvi Raviv, direttore generale della Fondazione Nuova Gerusalemme. Ha detto di essere tornato in città per sanare il contrasto tra la comunità ebraica e la chiesa. Ascoltandolo, ho dovuto rispettare la sua dedizione per il bene di Gerusalemme. Ma quando ha detto, 'Per quel che ne so, Pat Robertson non ha oggi una connotazione controversa,' anch’io ho dovuto concludere che c’è di più di quel che egli ha bisogno di sapere. E quello che sanno Ehud Olmert o, su quell’argomento, alcuni leaders ebraici americani, va preso in considerazione più che l’immediata contropartita, prima che essi compaiano sugli stessi scenari o siglino le stesse propagande della Destra cristiana. Questa storia non è stata scritta in paradiso."

Matrimonio in stile Likud

Il matrimonio, infatti, non è stato celebrato in paradiso. Ma si sta rapidamente avvicinando al 25° anniversario. Dal momento in cui il governo del partito del Likud prese il potere in Israele nel 1977, una massima priorità degli eredi di Jabotinsky fu quella di forgiare una partnership strategica di lungo termine con i principali fondamentalisti cristiani d’America che si erano profilati come suscettibili di una fanatica teologia pro-Israele. Nel 1978, il Ministro israeliano per gli Affari Religiosi sponsorizzò la pubblicazione di un libro, Fondamentalismo americano e Israele: La Relazione delle Chiese Fondamentaliste con il Sionismo e lo Stato d’Israele, di Yona Malachy. Il libro era un profilo approfondito delle quattro principali denominazioni fondamentaliste cristiane d’America—gli Avventisti del Settimo Giorno, i Testimoni di Jehovah, i Pentecostali ed i Dispensazionalisti Premillenari (Darbyiti). Non è chiaro se Malachy, che nel frattempo è deceduto, fosse consapevole che stava producendo lo studio del profilo che avrebbe lanciato un’alleanza venticinquennale tra i più fanatici sostenitori di destra del Grande Israele—seguaci di Vladimir Jabotinsky, che il Primo Ministro fondatore d’Israele David Ben-Gurion denunciò come "Vladimir Hitler"—ed un’accolita di Cristiani fondamentalisti americani, la cui teologia era promotrice dello sterminio degli Ebrei. Malachy documentò chiaramente l’ideologia dei Darbyiti, citando John Walvoord, che fondò nel 1924 il loro Seminario Teologico di Dallas e, nel 1962, scrisse nel suo libro, Israele nella Profezia, che "sembra che Israele sia l’oggetto speciale di odio satanico." Dopo "Le tribolazioni di Giacobbe" (i.e., Armageddon o, in nel linguaggio darbyita, la guerra di Gog e Magog), "solo 144.000 Ebrei sopravviveranno.... Straziante da vedere, il popolo d’Israele che sta ritornando alla sua antica terra, si sta collocando all’interno del vortice di questo futuro cataclisma che distruggerà la maggior parte di chi vive in terra di Palestina." Il progetto Malachy aveva in vista di insediare nuovamente il governo Likud del Primo Ministro Menachem Begin che, subito dopo la pubblicazione del libro, invitò il Rev. Jerry Falwell in Israele, nella prima di molte visite. Alcune figure guida dell’ala sionista dell’establishment americano aiutarono sottotraccia il lavoro di Malachy. Fondi per lo studio giunsero dal Fondo Jacob Blaustein per gli Studi americani, una delle cinquanta maggiori fondazioni degli Stati Uniti esenti da imposte. La Fondazione Jacob e Hilda Blaustein è uno dei maggiori finanziatori del Centro Tannenbaum per La Comprensione Interreligiosa, che ammovera tra le corporations sue sponsor: Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, la ditta di liquori fondata e posseduta dalla famiglia Bronfman che ha radici nel crimine organizzato; e il Soros Fund Management del mega-speculatore George Soros. Dopo una serie di visite in Israele nel 1979 e 1980, Jerry Falwell divenne uno dei principali sostenitori dell’alleanza politica tra la destra radicale israeliana e i fondamentalisti cristiani americani. Come ringraziamento per il suo impegno a lavorare per l’annessione permanente ad Israele di "Giudea, Samaria e Galilea" (cioè., la West Bank) e per la ricostruzione del terzo tempio di Salomone sul Monte del tempio a Gerusalemme—dove si trovano ora due tra i più santi luoghi dell’Islam—Falwell ricevette il "dono" di un jet Lear dal governo Begin. Harry Zvi Hurwitz, oggi a capo del Begin Center a Gerusalemme, fu sin dagli inizi un difensore del love affair Begin-Falwell, sulla base che Begin gli aveva detto nel 1981, che Israele "non aveva troppi amici."

Benedizione cristiana per i massacri di Beirut

Nel 1981, due emissari di Begin, Joseph Churba e il Rabbino David Z. Ben-Ami, combinarono una serie di incontri tra il Primo Ministro israeliano e i principali fondamentalisti cristiani americani. . Secondo il Rabbino Ben-Ami, che oggi è a capo del Forum Americano per la Cooperazione Ebraico-Cristiana con sede ad Harrisburg in Pennsylvania, egli e Churba interpellarono Falwell, il Rev. Pat Robertson e Terry Riesenhoover, capo della Fondazione americana del Monte del Tempio, e organizzarono degli incontri tra i tre cristiano-sionisti e il Primo ministro Begin. Durante la stessa visita negli Stati Uniti, Begin ebbe un incontro separato con 20 cristiani evangelici nel Texas, ospite dal pentecostale Rev. Mike Evans, che esercita il ministero Mike Evans a Euless, nel Texas. Lo stesso anno, Begin fece la prima di numerose apparizioni all’Ambasciata Internazionale Cristiana di Gerusalemme. Egli aveva aiutato il lancio di questo avvampo cristiano-sionista fornendo l’ex edificio dell’ambasciata cilena di Gerusalemme ad un gruppo di evangelici americani ed europei, guidato da Jan Willem van der Hoeven, ex collaboratore olandese dei Nazisti durante la guerra (vedi EIR del 15 nov. 2002, "L’Ambasciata Internazionale Cristiana a Gerusalemme e le sue connessioni terroristiche"). In una manifestazione dell’Ambasciata Cristiana a Gerusalemme, Begin si rivolse ad un uditorio di 1.000 evangelici al Diplomat Hotel. Nel settembre 1982, quando l’allora ministro della Difesa israeliano Ariel Sharon spedì I mezzi corazzati in Libano ed orchestrò il massacro dei campi profughi palestinesi di Sabra e Shatila, Begin fece in modo che Falwell guidasse una delegazione di cristiani evangelici americani al fronte. Ancora, Hurwitz, collegamento di Begin con i sionisti cristiani, difese la decisione come necessaria per controbilanciare la "propaganda negativa" che i massacri avevano generato negli Stati Uniti e in Europa. L’intera iniziativa tra Begin ed i sionisti cristiani ebbe la piena benedizione del Rabbino Eckstein e dell’ADL. Nel 1983, Eckstein lasciò il suo posto all’ADL e formò a Chicago la Compagnia Internazionale di Cristiani ed Ebrei. Ma il Rabbino Ben-Ami ha confermato in una recente intervista che l’impegno dei primi anni 1980 per coniugare il Likud con l’apparato “cristiano” di Falwell in America era incentivato da Eckstein, che continua ad esserne oggi un protagonista cardine—con base a Gerusalemme. Lo stesso Eckstein ha confermato di aver lanciato il connubio tra i sionisti cristiani americani ed il Likud alla fine degli anni 1970, mentre Jimmy Carter era ancora Presidente, organizzando alcune delle prime vere visite di evangelici americani in Terrasanta. Negli anni 1980, Eckstein diresse l’ "Operazione Brainstorm," che comportò una serie di visite in Israele dei principali “predicatori televisivi cristiani." Nel 1985, i Predicatori cristiani—i televangelici che tengono audience su televisioni e radio confessionali in tutti gli Stati meridionali e occidentali degli USA—avevano lanciato la preghiera annuale del breakfast per Israele a Washington, D.C.
Il Rabbino Eckstein ha confermato che, alla fine degli anni 1980, aveva forgiato una profonda alleanza con Pat Robertson e con il direttore della Coalizione Cristiana di Robertson, Ralph Reed. Oggi, Eckstein e Reed co-presiedono il fronte "Stand Up for Israel" (In Piedi per Israele). Esso mobilita l’apparato evangelico americano per sostenere le politiche espansionistiche dei gruppi più radicali del Likud e di altri partiti israeliani ancora più estremisti, come il Moledet, che propugna l’annessione e la “pulizia etnica” da tutti i Palestinesi della West Bank e della Striscia di Gaza. Nel 2000, Eckstein si è mosso permanentemente in Israele, sebbene egli mantenga ancora molti legami con gli evangelici americani. Nel 1994, egli ha svolto un ruolo centrale nella fondazione di un altro fronte sionista cristiano, la National Unity Coalition for Israel (NUCI), che mette insieme gli elementi più a destra della comunità ebraica degli States e i network evangelici di Falwell-Robertson-Evans. Il fondatore della NUCI è Esther Levins di Kansas City in Missouri. Levins sostiene che la NUCI consiste in oltre 200 gruppi ebraici ed evangelici—tutti uniti dietro l’idea dell’annessione permanente della West Bank e di Gaza, per formare il biblico "Grande Israele." Fino alla sua nomina di Assistente Segretario della Difesa per la Politica nella corrente Amministrazione Bush, Douglas Feith ha prestato servizio come direttore della NUCI.

Il ricatto al Presidente

EIR ha rivelato in esclusiva che il NUCI ha organizzato il 31 luglio 2001 un meeting alla Casa Bianca dei principali sostenitori americani del Likud e dei Sionisti cristiani, con il collegamento ufficiale del Presidente Bush alle comunità religiose, Tim Goeglin. Goeglin ha ottenuto il suo osto alla Casa Bianca grazie a Gary Bauer, una delle figure principali della rete dei sionisti cristiani. La delegazione della NUCI comprendeva rappresentanti di Falwell, Robertson, del Rev. Elwood McQuaid, del Rev. Ed McAteer, il capo della Zionist Organization of America Morton Klein ed il capo degli Americani per la Salvezza di Israele Herb Zweibon. Il gruppo ha minacciato apertamente di inscenare una rivolta evangelica contro il Presidente Bush, se egli avesse tolto il suo sostegno al 100% alle spalle del Primo Ministro israeliano Sharon e dei suoi crimini di guerra in serie contro i Palestinesi. Incredibilmente, giusto prima della sessione alla Casa Bianca, la delegazione aveva pranzato all’Ambasciata israeliana, dove aveva concordato sua strategia con l’Ambasciatore d’Israele. Diverse settimane dopo, la NUCI inscenava una manifestazione al Circolo Nazionale della Stampa di Washington, in cui venivano distribuiti brani tratti dal libro di Samuel Huntington Lo Scontro Di Civiltà, che propugnano una guerra mortale tra le civiltà occidentale, islamica e confuciana—una nuova guerra religiosa dei Trent’anni, da innescare nell’heartland dell’Eurasia; e film di propaganda di Steven Emerson che attaccavano la comunità musulmana negli Stati Uniti come terrorista. Il Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kans.) è comparso come ospite all’evento della NUCI, accanto a Frank Gaffney, capo del Centro per la Sicurezza Nazionale, organizzazione succeduta all’International Security Council di Joseph Churba, dopo la morte di questi nel 1996. Il 14-15 ottobre 2002, il “raduno per Israele” della Coalizione Cristiana a Washington, a cui ha partecipato il Sindaco di Gerusalemme Olmert, era un segnale che il ricatto alla Casa Bianca rende. Il Presidente Bush ha inviato i suoi saluti ufficiali alla manifestazione, che è stata caratterizzata dalla partecipazione di oratori che denunciavano l’idea di qualsiasi tipo di Stato palestinese nella West Bank o nella Striscia di Gaza. Questo, sebbene ufficialmente l’Amministrazione Bush sia la prima amministrazione Americana ad approvare formalmente l’idea di una soluzione “a due stati” per il conflitto israelo-palestinese. Mentre si svolgeva il raduno, la Casa Bianca stava approvando un documento politico di sei pagine, che abozzava un "percorso stradale" per la creazione di uno stato palestinese a piena sovranità per la fine del 2005. Questo veniva denunciato ad alta voce da parecchi degli oratori della manifestazione:
* Olmert: "Come tutti sanno, ci troviamo nel pieno di una guerra molto violenta e brutale condotta da Yasser Arafat e la sua gang contro persone innocenti nel cuore della nostra città."
* Pat Robertson: "Noi non dovremmo chiedere ad Israele di ritirarsi dai territory occupati, dovremmo stargli vicino e combattere. Gerusalemme è la capitale eterna, indivisibile dello Stato d’Israele e non deve essere divisa."
* Rep. Tom DeLay, nuovo capogruppo municipale: "I pericoli di fronte ad Israele sono enormi. L’ho visto di persona. Sono stato a Masada. Ho girato in Giudea e in Samaria. Ho camminato per le strade di Gerusalemme e mi sono trovato sulle Alture del Golan.... E sapete una cosa? Non ho visto alcun territorio occupato. Quello che ho visto era Israele."
* Il membro della Knesset Benny Alon, del partito razzista Moledet, legge dal Libro dei Numeri: "Quando voi [Mosè e gli Ebrei] avete attraversato il Giordano nella terra di Canaan, dovevate scacciare tutti gli abitanti del paese prima di voi.... Se voi non avete scacciato gli abitanti del paese prima di voi, allora quelli che avete graziato saranno punte nei vostri occhi e spine nel vostro fianco."

Una preparazione all’elezione?

Fonti in Israele confermano che il "Principe del Likud" Olmert, il quale ha di recente approvato la candidatura di Ariel Sharon per il Likud alle primarie del 28 novembre—in cambio di un posto superiore nel governo—l’anno scorso ha trascorso quasi metà del suo tempo negli Stati Uniti, raccogliendo fondi per la destra israeliana. Il 10 giugno 2002, Olmert ha parlato a Irving nel Texas ad un summit di Preghiera per Gerusalemme, a fianco di Robertson, Evans, e Tim LaHaye. Come tempo fa, il 9 aprile 2000, il Jerusalem Post aveva riferito che la Fondazione Nuova Gerusalemme di Olmert non si era registrata come opera pia in Israele, in violazione della legge. Membri dell’opposizione del Consiglio cittadino di Gerusalemme dissero al Jerusalem Post di "temere che il Sindaco stesse usandola ... per raccogliere fondi per le proprie spese politiche." Lo stesso articolo riferiva che Olmert aveva dichiarato che la Fondazione Nuova Gerusalemme aveva raccolto 4,5 milioni di dollari, che erano stati depositati in “banche cittadine”. Egli non specificava come i fondi fossero stati spesi, oltre ad ammettere che c’erano 80 progetti finanziati da donazioni, tutte provenienti dall’estero. Infatti, la Fondazione Nuova Gerusalemme è stata registrata al Servizio Interno Americano delle Entrate come una organizzazione esentasse 501(c)3, dal dicembre 1999! L’organizzazione USA è registrata nello Stato del New Hampshire, ma non ha alcun indirizzo negli Stati Uniti, alcun ufficio e nessun consiglio che la governi. Tutto il denaro confluisce direttamente negli uffici dei gruppi del fronte di Olmert a Gerusalemme. Sono in realtà queste opere pie "Jerusalem" delle condutture per il contante che dagli Stati Uniti giunge al Likud? C’è una forte prova che lo indica precisamente. Il 9 gennaio 2001, il Jerusalem Post riferiva che il Revisore dei Conti dello Stato d’Israele Eliezer Goldberg accusava il Likud di violazione delle leggi israeliane sul finanziamento della campagna elettorale, organizzando nominalmente riunioni benefiche collegate ad un certo "partito o candidato." Goldberg si riferiva ad un raduno del giorno prima a Gerusalemme—sponsorizzato dal Fondo di Olmert Gerusalemme Una. Gli oratori, accanto al Sindaco, comprendevano; Natan Sharansky, che sarebbe presto diventato un ministro di gabinetto nel governo Sharon; Ron Lauder, erede della fortuna dei cosmetici Estée Lauder, allora Presidente della Conferenza dei Preasidenti delle Maggiori Organizzazioni Ebraiche Americane, ed uno dei principali finanziatori di Sharon; e Yehiel Leiter, direttore di Gerusalemme Una ed ex portavoce dello Yesha Council, l’organizzazione governativa degli insediamenti ebraici nei territori occupati. L’evento era chiaramente una riunione a sostegno dei coloni ed è stato interamente finanziato da fondi d’oltreoceano. Ma esso è stato in realtà una flagrante riunione propagandistica per Sharon, che veniva eletto Primo Ministro meno di un mese dopo. La trattazione del fatto di gennaio 2001 da parte del Jerusalem Post ha anche messo in luce un’altra “opera pia” israeliana non registrata collegata alla destra radicale—il Fondo Israele Uno. Anche un’opera pia registrata come 501(c)3 negli Stati Uniti, il Fondo Israele Uno raccoglie denaro esentasse in America, destinato all’acquisto di giubbotti anti-proiettile ed altri equipaggiamenti “salva-vita” per i coloni ebraici.

Mostrami il Mooney (*)

Fonti in Israele e a Washington hanno di recente confermato a EIR che l’apparato di Sharon sta facendo di tutto per mettere insieme decine di milioni di dollari in fondi esteri, per sostenere la campagna elettorale del Likud. Una fonte USA ci ha riferito che l’intero apparato sionista cristiano è preparato a rompere gli indugi per una vittoria del Likud—particularmente da quando le primare del 19 novembre del Partito Laburista hanno nominato il Magg. Gen. Amram Mitzna (della Riverva), attuale Sindaco di Haifa, presidente del partito e candidato guida alle elezioni del 28 gennaio. Mitzna has giurato di concludere un accordo di pace con l’Autorità Palestinese entro un anno dale elezioni oppure il ritiro unilaterale di tutte le forze israeliane dalla Striscia di Gaza e da quasi tutta la West Bank, realizzando una "pace attraverso la separazione." Egli chiuderebbe gli insediamenti ebraici se le Forze di Difesa Israeliane venissero ritirate. Questo naturalmente alla faccia del fanatismo del Grande Israele Biblico dei Sionisti cristiani in America e degli emuli di Jabotinsky in Israele. Tenterà il Likud di truccare le elezioni tramite una massiccia infusione di denaro illegale proveniente dalle sue profonde tasche americane? Questo fa sorgere un’altra questione vitale, posta nel numero di EIR del 15 novembre: il denaro della Chiesa dell’Unificazione —"Moonie"—sarà usato per per rubare le elezioni israeliane per Sharon o Netanyahu? Indagini continue da parte di un gruppo d’inchiesta di EIR hanno confermato che la Chiesa dell’Unificazione ed il suo vasto network globale di compagnie di copertura, strutture di riciclaggio del denaro e facciate “benefiche, si aggirano furtivamente sin dall’inizio dietro le quinte ed il primo piano dell’alleanza tra seguaci di Jabotinsky e Darbyiti. Furono i Moonies in primo luogo a combinare il collegamento Israele-fondamentalisti. Joseph Churba ed il Rabbino David Ben-Ami—i due emissari del Primo Ministro Menachem Begin, che organizzarono i primi veri meetings in America tra Begin, Falwell, Robertson e Riesenhoover—erano entrambe sul libro paga di Moonie, quando prepararono il lavoro per il leader israeliano. Il Consiglio per la Sicurezza Internazionale di Churba era una facciata di Moonie, parte dell’operazione internazionale CAUSA del direttore di Moon, Col. Bo Hi Pak. Lo stesso dicasi per il Forum Americano per la Cooperazione Ebraico-Cristiana del Rabbino Ben-Ami. Ben-Ami è stato un componente regolare nel circuito del gruppo di facciata di Moon, perlomeno dai suoi impegni del 1981 a vantaggio di Begin. Come di recente, il 14 settembre 2002, il Rabbino Ben-Ami è stato uno degli oratori principali alla “Cerimonia interconfessionale musulmano-cristiana per la Redenzione e la Riconciliazione” sponsorizzata da Moonie, un matrimonio di massa del Rev. Sun Myung Moon al Manhattan Center di New York City, "a commemorazione dell’anniversario dell’11 settembre." Il 3 luglio 2002, il Rabbino Ben-Ami è stato uno dei protagonisti dell’evento "Sosteniamo la Famiglia, Salviamo la Nazione, Salviamo la Prossima Generazione" allo Sheraton National Hotel di Washington, sponsorizzato dalla Federazione Interreligiosa ed Internazionale per la Pace nel Mondo di Moonie (IIFWP). I continui legami tra i Moonies, con il loro incessante flusso di denaro sporco offshore, e la destra radicale d’Israele, si muovono ben più in profondità dei legami di Ben-Ami e Churba. L’intero apparato sionista cristiano—da Falwell a Bauer a LaHaye—è ora sussidiario dell’impero finanziario Moon, risalendo all’aiuto finanziario di Richard Viguerie di fine anni 1980 e al rilevamento nel 1994 da parte di Moon dell’impero completo televisivo e di “educazione cristiana” di Falwell. L’IIFWP ha sponsorizzato una conferenza a Córdoba in Spagna, il 19-22 agosto1999, su "Incontri ebraico-musulmani." Tra gli oratori vi era il Col. Yigal Carmon, che i volantini Moonie descrivevano come "Presidente dell’Istituto di Ricerca sul Medio Oriente, Ex Consigliere del Primo Ministro d’Israele." Infatti, Carmon è un ex governatore civile-militare dei territori della West Bank alle dipendenze dell’allora Ministro della Difesa Sharon, una carriera di ufficiale nell’intelligence militare di Israele e un intimo collaboratore di Steve Emerson, Daniel Pipes, Meyrav Wurmser e dell’ex Vice-Direttore del FBI Oliver "Buck" Revell. Il MEMRI di Carmon è un fronte di propaganda per l’intelligence di Israele, che distribuisce traduzioni di materiale selezionato e scottante dai media arabi, al Congresso USA, all’Esecutivo e dai media.

(*) Gioco di parole tra il cognome del rev. Moon ed il termine money (denaro) – N.d.T.

Questo articolo compare sul numero del 29 novembre 2002 di Executive Intelligence Review.

[Der Wehrwolf]

La paura del collasso finanziario alimenta
la marcia verso la guerra irakena

di Muriel Mirak Weissbach

Quando il 15 luglio, con il mercato azionario a capofitto, il Presidente George W. Bush ha proclamato che "la nostra economia è fondamentalmente forte," la stampa internazionale è stata svelta a far notare che Bush stava ripetendo quasi alla lettera quanto detto da Herbert Hoover il 25 ottobre 1929, "Il business fondamentale del paese, che è la produzione e la distribuzione di beni, è su basi sane e prosperose." La tragicomica dichiarazione di Bush è stata amplificata il giorno successivo, dalle chiacchiere del Direttore della Federal Riserve sul boom permanente della spesa al consumo americana, alimentata dai prezzi dei beni reali saliti alle stelle. Ma le quotazioni delle azioni sono precipitate ulteriormente dopo il discorso del Presidente e sono sopravvissute alle Idi di luglio solo grazie al massiccio intervento della “Squadra di Protezione dal Crollo” di Washington-New York. Più che dalla stessa deposizione di Greenspan che fa fatto seguito al Senato.

Come sono crollati i mercati mondiali, anche il dollaro è stato scambiato alla pari con l’euro per la prima volta dall’inizio del 1999 e in seguito è andato al di sotto. La quotazione mondiale della moneta scivolava nei confronti del franco svizzero, dello yen giapponese e della sterlina britannica. Il Governatore della Banca Giapponese Masaru Hayami ha dichiarato alla stampa il 17 luglio che “la possibilità di un cambiamento mondiale per scaricare il biglietto verde è abbastanza elevata," come spieghiamo dettagliatamente nella nostra sezione economica.

Quella crisi del dollaro che era stata prevista da Lyndon LaRouche, come segnale della caduta globale del mondo finanziario, monetario e delle strutture economiche, incombe ora sui banchieri centrali e sui governi nazionali. La via di uscita tenuta d’occhio dall’oligarchia finanziaria colpita dal panico, è la guerra. La loro premessa profondamente sbagliata è che, una volta scatenato un attacco militare contro l’Iraq, gli investitori istituzionali si precipiteranno ad acquistare dollari come rifugio sicuro contro la susseguente crisi. Essi commettono il fatale errore di presupporre di poter consolidare attraverso mezzi militari quell’ “impero” i cui fondamenti finanziari stanno crollando.

Il più diretto è stato il neo-conservatore di punto John Podhoretz, in un articolo sul New York Post dal titolo "Sorpresa ad ottobre, per favore!" Podhoretz, portavoce dei Cristiano-Sionisti guerrafondai e della "lobby del Likud," la mette giù bruscamente: "Lei si trova inguaiato in politica interna, Sig. Presidente. Ha bisogno di cambiare argomento. Lei ha a sua disposizione il più grande cambiamento. Lo usi.... C’è una succosa doppia trappola iniziando la guerra prima possibile, Sig. Presidente. I suoi nemici sono in delirio esaltandosi con gli scandali sull’avidità delle corporations.... Se lei mette le sue truppe rapidamente in campo, essi andranno su tutte le furie." Due settimane prima, l’ "economista" fascista Lawrence Kudlow aveva detto a Bush che solo una guerra con l’Iraq avrebbe salvato i mercati e l’economia USA, alzando di 2.000 punti il mercato azionario.

La mobilitazione di truppe

Mentre il pubblico dibattito sulla guerra contro l’Iraq ha regolato il suo orario per “l’inizio dell’anno prossimo”, è evidente che con il sopraggiunto crollo del dollaro e del mercato, si stanno approntando le condizioni per una mossa in tempi più ravvicinati. Lo scenario militare per una guerra irakena, è stato fatto trapelare con crescente frequenza e maggiori dettagli dalla stampa USA e britannica nel mese di luglio. Ad esempio, il 5 luglio il New York Times ha divulgato la notizia di un “piano militare che mobilita forze aeree, terrestri e navali per attaccare l’Iraq da tre direzioni—nord, sud e ovest—in una campagna per rovesciare il Presidente Saddam Hussein, secondo una persona che ha visto il documento."

I piani prevedono "l’invasione di decine di migliaia di Marines e soldati, probabilmente dal Kuwait," come "centinaia di velivoli da guerra con base in almeno otto paesi, possibilmente compresi la Turchia e il Qatar," che "scatenerebbero un enorme assalto aereo contro migliaia di obiettivi.... Forze per operazioni speciali o personale operativo coperto della CIA colpirebbero depositi o fabbriche dell’Iraq sospettate di detenere o costruire armi per la distruzione di massa e i missili per lanciarle."

Pur ponendo tutto ciò puramente nella fase di piano preliminare, il documento ha aggiunto: "Nondimeno, vi sono parecchi segnali che i militari stiano preparando una grande campagna aerea e un’invasione di terra," tra i quali abbiamo i seguenti: "Migliaia di Marines della prima forza di spedizione di Camp Pendleton, California, l’unità marine designata per il Golfo, hanno intensificato le loro esercitazioni di modelli di assalto, ha detto un consigliere del Pentagono. I militari stanno allestendo basi in diversi stati del Golfo Persico, compreso un grande aeroporto nel Qatar chiamato Al Udeid. Migliaia di soldati americani sono già stanziati nella regione." In più, "il Pentagono ha affermato di avere incrementato la produzione di munizioni critiche. L’Air Force sta immagazzinando armi, munizioni e parti di ricambio, come dispositivi per aerei, nei depositi degli Stati Uniti e del Medio Oriente." Altre descrizioni sulla stampa, anche se presentano delle varianti, concordano che l’operazione è in corso. Il 16 luglio, ad esempio, il Wall Street Journal ha raccolto una precedente storia riguardante un altro piano di guerra di “media dimensione”, che vedrebbe il dispiegamento di solo 50-75.000 soldati ed una massiccia forza aerea. Questa versione, richiederebbe solo due settimane per concentrare le forze in Kuwait.

Le voci di effettive mobilitazioni di truppe sono state separatamente confermate da fonti regionali. Tra i dispiegamenti citati vi sono la concentrazione di truppe nella base aerea turca di Incerlik, e l’introduzione di un numero limitato di special forces in Giordania, dove le basi sono state rese disponibili per le forze USA. Sebbene il governo giordano abbia immediatamente negato la cosa, la speculazione è stata alimentata dall’apparizione dell’ex principe ereditario Hassan ad un ben pubblicizzato meeting di ex ufficiali dell’esercito irakeno a Londra, nel corso del weekend 13-14 luglio.

Il gruppo di 60-90 ex ufficiali ha discusso sul come attuare il “cambio di regime” a Baghdad. Guidati dal Brig. Gen. Najib al-Salihi, hanno dibattuto sul tipo di governo che potrebbe avere un Iraq post-Saddam, e non hanno trovato un accordo. Najib al-Salihi ha previsto il collasso dell’esercito irakeno in caso di attacco USA; Saddam Hussein si troverebbe isolato e tenterebbe di fuggire; e con la copertura aerea USA, le truppe ribelli sul campo potrebbero prendere Baghdad. Egli ha sollecitato gli Stati Uniti a chiarire di puntare solo su Saddam Hussein, per evitare "due eserciti uno di fronte all’altro." Un comitato di 15 ufficiali, in rappresentanza di tutti i gruppi religiosi ed etnici, è stato costituito per pianificare l’operazione completa.

Un meeting spettacolo

Secondo esperti regionali ben informati, il branco raccolto a Londra non rappresenta un’alternativa militare praticabile, più di quanto l’ Iraqi National Congress a guida di Ahmed Chalab reppresenti un’alternativa politica. Qualsiasi paragone con le capacità militari e l’esperienza del Fronte Unito Afghano (esso stesso non in grande forma), sarebbe minacciato dal ridicolo. Il significato del meeting di Londra non è stato militare, ma politico e psicologico: esso ha semplicemente reso molto pubblico - grazie alla presenza in massa dei media britannici— che è avviata un’operazione per rimuovere Saddam Hussein.

La presenza dell’ex principe ereditario e zio del re giordano Abdullah II, ha destato enorme attenzione nel mondo arabo. Come riferisce Brian Whitaker, sul London Guardian, il principe Hassan ha camminato fino in capo alla hall, per prendere posto vicino a Sharif Ali bin al-Hussein, cugino dell’ultimo re dell’Iraq. Il principe Hassan ha detto ai reporters di essere lì come "osservatore," aggiungendo che egli sostiene "il diritto dell’Iraq di vivere in democrazia, in sicurezza e in pace."

Il giorno dopo, il Ministro giordano dell’Informazione, Mohammad Advan, ha negato che il governo sapesse della partecipazione, "che non è conforme alle posizioni di principio giordane di fraternità con l’Iraq." Anche il Re Abdullah II è intervenuto per valutare l’impatto dell’apparizione di Hassan, ribadendo con enfasi in un’intervista alla NBC News, che non esiste alcuna intesa tra Giordania e Stati Uniti per un attacco contro l’Iraq. Il Re ha anche avvertito che qualsiasi azione militare aggraverebbe le frustrazioni arabe, isolerebbe internazionalmente gli Stati Uniti e accenderebbe la violenza in tutto l’Iraq.

Non si conoscono i fatti che stanno dietro le azioni del Principe Hassan. Può essere che sotto la massiccia pressione americana esercitata sulla Giordania, con il bastone della potenza militare e la carota dell’aiuto finanziario, alcune forze del Regno stiano flirtando con l’opzione di accettare segretamente le mosse USA. È stato riferito che altre nazioni arabe sono state ragguagliate dagli Stati Uniti che “questa volta” l’operazione sarà chirurgica, veloce, efficace e che chiunque non voglia affiancarla si troverà in seguito egli stesso sulla graticola. Coloro che scelgono di adeguarsi, potrebbero raccogliere i benefici di un ridisegno della carta dell’intera regione.

Gli scenari in circolazione includono l’opzione di un’azione israeliana per espellere i Palestinesi verso la Giordania una volta iniziato l’attacco all’Iraq, secondo la strategia del Primo ministro israeliano Ariel Sharon per cui "la Giordania è Palestina." In questa eventualità, la dinastia hashemita verrebbe ricollocata verso un Iraq suddiviso o verso un’Arabia Saudita con un analogo destino, con l’attribuzione di nuovi poteri. Un piano d’azione che il Vicesegretario alla Difesa Wolfowitz avrebbe discusso con i governi della regione, compreso quello turco, prevede la suddivisione dell’Iraq, con un meridione sciita, una Bagdad sunnita (con presenza degli Hashemiti), un settentrione “turco” attorno a Mosul e a Kirkuk, ed una regione montana kurda.

La sostanza di cui sono fatti gli incubi

Nessuno degli scenari e delle strategie di guerra americani e britannici funzionerà secondo i piani, come già mostrato in dettaglio da EIR (“Non vi sarà una II Desert Storm”, EIR del 29 marzo). In base alle attestazioni di militari di professione, qualsiasi serio tentativo di rovesciare il governo irakeno richiederebbe una forza d’invasione di 250.000 uomini, che non è prontamente disponibile. È una chimera che le forze kurde a nord ed i gruppi sciiti a sud possano unirsi per combattere una guerra efficace, raccogliendo un massiccio sostegno popolare. I leaders kurdi hanno ripetutamente insistito di non ambire ad essere i burattini degli USA in un gioco che potrebbe distruggere la relativa autonomia economica e politica di cui essi godono. Qualsiasi aggressione da parte dei gruppi shiiti metterebbe in moto altri ingranaggi, dal momento che alcuni di essi sono spalleggiati dall’Iran, una delle potenze principali del Golfo Persico che nessuno a Washington vuole accrescere.

Lyndon LaRouche ha sottolineato in un’intervista dell’8 luglio alla radio nazionale iraniana, che una simile guerra contro l’Iraq non può essere vinta, perché con l’attacco degli Stati Uniti, l’Israele di Sharon si muoverà verso la sua “soluzione finale” di espellere i palestinesi e, molto probabilmente, attaccherà l’Iran. L’Iran, in questo caso, non rimarrebbe fermo. Non si può sapere il tipo di reazione dell’Iraq, ma esso resisterebbe. La Turchia si troverà nel pieno di rivolgimenti. Il Vicesegretario alla Difesa Wolfowitz ha cercato di rassicurare gli ufficiali turchi che gli Stati Uniti non tollererebbero il sorgere di un’entità kurda dal conflitto; ma ogni frantumazione dell’Iraq darebbe l’avvio alla guerra civile, i cui effetti ricadrebbero sulla Turchia.

Che la guerra accenda malcontento e conflitto in tutto il mondo arabo e islamico è, non a caso, uno degli obiettivi dell’intera operazione. Un caos proprio di questo tipo, che sta minacciando i governi in Africa del Nord, Medio Oriente, nel Golfo Persico e in Asia Centrale, favorisce l’imposizione militare di un nuovo controllo imperiale.

Ma questo ipotetico impero è al collasso; un simile caos intende (senza successo) salvare gli squali del mercato azionario di un sistema finanziario fallito.



Questo articolo compare sul numero del 26 luglio 2002 di Executive Intelligence Review.

[Der Wehrwolf]

Il Tempio di Gerusalemme, dopo duemila anni di riposo nel mondo della mitologia, diventa il fulcro simbolico del dramma palestinese, grazie a un dinamico movimento di cabalisti ebrei che ne propone la ricostruzione, per reintrodurre i sacrifici prescritti dall’Antico Testamento e accelerare l’avvento del Messia. Ma anche il vasto movimento fondamentalista protestante degli Stati Uniti – circa il 40% della popolazione dell’unica potenza rimasta sul pianeta - sogna nella ricostruzione del Tempio l’evento che innescherà le guerre apocalittiche, l’avvento dell’Anticristo e l’imposizione sulla terra del "Regno". Questo articolo anticipa una parte degli argomenti che saranno trattati nel libro che spero - God willing - di pubblicare tra breve sull'argomento.
Miguel Martínez


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



"Ad Armageddon ci saranno circa quattrocento milioni di uomini che faranno corona all’olocausto finale dell’umanità! Proprio per questo non dobbiamo mai dimenticare com’è bello essere cristiani! Noi abbiamo un futuro meraviglioso davanti a noi".

Così predicava – e prediceva - una quindicina di anni fa Jerry Falwell, il padre della New Right che portò Reagan al potere e oggi multimiliardario imprenditore politico-religioso.

Scrivo all’inizio di marzo del 2002, a sei mesi dall’esordio della Guerra Infinita del Bene contro il Male; e il gioioso augurio di Falwell sembra incarnarsi negli eventi che avvengono in tre città sante – la Mecca, Ayodhya e Gerusalemme.

Alla Mecca, i pellegrini, abbigliati nell’antico ihram che come la veste di Gesù non conosce cuciture, appena scendono dall’aereo vengono schedati con un apparecchio che registra l'immagine dell'iride e le impronte digitali di ogni musulmano che compie il suo dovere religioso.(1) Un lavoro di schedatura planetaria iniziato quando, dopo giorni e giorni di bombardamenti, i tecnici dell’esercito americano sono entrati nelle grotte di Tora Bora in Afghanistan per tagliare via un dito a ogni morto, in modo da controllarne il DNA.

In India i capi del potente movimento fondamentalista indù si stanno preparando per le ore 141 del 15 marzo, come stabilito dagli astrologi, quando le schiere degli "amanti di Rama" guidati da ingegneri laureati in Occidente e attrezzati con cinque gru, un bulldozer e duecentocinquanta carretti trainati a mano inizieranno a costruire un tempio al dio Rama sulle rovine della moschea musulmana di Ayodhya, smantellata dagli estremisti nel 1992. I due capipopolo che allora guidarono la sommossa – che portò a tremila morti – sono oggi rispettivamente ministro dell'interno e ministro dell'istruzione dell’India.

La Mecca e Ayodhya sono luoghi per noi poco familiari. Il centro del nostro mondo è casomai la Terra Santa. Il centro della Terra Santa, a sua volta, è Gerusalemme; e il centro di Gerusalemme è un luogo che viene chiamato il "Monte del Tempio", perché duemila anni fa, era la sede del santuario in cui gli abitanti della Giudea conducevano un complesso ciclo di sacrifici animali e vegetali. Non si sa esattamente dove fosse il Tempio; anzi, in quella zona sorge oggi la Cupola della Roccia, un monumento che appartiene a una cultura del tutto diversa. Proprio sotto la Cupola, si trova il cuore del cuore del mondo: un recinto attorno a una misteriosa pietra grezza.

Qualunque libretto introduttivo alla Bibbia racconta in modo arido, ma sostanzialmente corretto, la storia del Tempio. Il Primo Tempio fu costruito verso il 960 avanti Cristo, si dice da Salomone; fu poi profanato dai babilonesi verso il 586.

Il Secondo Tempio fu riedificato verso il 515 e distrutto dai romani nel 70 dopo Cristo. Esso scompare quindi dalla storia più o meno quando compare il Colosseo.

La storia successiva non è la storia del Tempio, ma solo la storia della zona dove il Tempio era esistito precedentemente. Nel 637, Gerusalemme venne conquistata dai musulmani. Nel 691 fu inaugurata la Cupola della Roccia e poco dopo una seconda moschea, quella di al-Aqsà. Entrambe si trovano in un’ampia zona recintata ed elevata, la Spianata delle Moschee o il Monte del Tempio, amministrata da un ente islamico autonomo, legato all’autorità nazionale palestinese.

Queste scarne informazioni non ci dicono né cosa fosse il Tempio anticamente, né perché oggi il suo fantasma costituisca il simbolo del conflitto cruciale dei nostri tempi.

I teologi tendono a guardare il Tempio retrospettivamente, attraverso gli occhi, se non di Gesù, almeno del giudaismo posteriore. Mentre basta liberarsi delle aggiunte successive per cogliere alcune cose sorprendenti. Sorvolando sui tanti punti controversi, si può ad esempio dire che il Tempio era un luogo di culto non solo a YHWH, ma per lungo tempo anche alla sposa del dio d’Israele. Era simile in tutto ai tanti templi dei popoli circostanti scoperti dagli archeologi. Gli ebrei poi avevano almeno un paio di altri templi. Il culto univa il popolo in un banchetto condiviso con il dio e i sacerdoti erano in sostanza i macellai che garantivano questa commensalità.

Questa era la religione degli abitanti d’Israele e di Giuda, o almeno quella ufficiale dei re. Certamente non aveva molto a che fare con Noè, Abramo o Mosè, non esaltava stirpi elette e non puniva nessuno: i racconti che ci sono così familiari nascono molto dopo. Con la distruzione del Tempio, finisce la religione tradizionale; e dai racconti nascono due religioni gemelle, il cristianesimo e il giudaismo.

Trombe, sacrifici e soldati

Il 28 settembre del 2000, in un periodo di relativa calma, Ariel Sharon è salito sulla Spianata. Sharon aveva vissuto abbastanza a lungo per sapere che dal 1928 tutti gli scontri più sanguinari del conflitto israelo-palestinese – eccette le vere e proprie guerre - erano sorti attorno al controllo di questo luogo simbolo. Questa volta la provocazione era assicurata: l’uomo che aveva devastato il Libano, che aveva coperto le stragi di Sabra e Shatilla, si recava sul terzo luogo santo dell’Islam accompagnato da un’enorme schiera di soldati. Infatti scoppiò subito dopo la viscerale, tragica reazione dei palestinesi, che permetterà, in una forma più o meno estrema, la soluzione finale del problema posto dall’esistenza dei nativi della Terra Santa.

Il gesto politico di Sharon si innesta su un diverso fenomeno: l’esistenza di un piccolo movimento ebraico che mira alla costruzione di un Terzo Tempio sulla Spianata. Le leggi giudaiche presuppongono in teoria un Tempio funzionante; ma per la maggior parte degli ebrei religiosi, la sua realizzazione è demandata al Messia. Il movimento che opera per la costruzione del Tempio è quindi una forma del tutto moderna di estremismo politico-religioso. A ogni principale festività ebraica, i Fedeli del Monte del Tempio compiono una marcia verso la Spianata, accompagnati da un camion che porta la pietra angolare del futuro edificio; e da cinque anni un gruppo di coloni a ogni Pasqua sacrifica un agnello nei pressi del Tempio. Due ex-hippy americani, intanto, hanno preparato le prime trombe che i 38.000 leviti del Tempio dovranno suonare a turno. Con tavolini piazzati per strada, il Centro per i Kohanim cerca di convincere i cittadini israeliani che ritengono di avere sangue sacerdotale a donare campioni di materiale genetico ricavato dalle guance, per determinare se abbiano o meno l'aplotipo YAP DYS19B del tipo previsto.

Di cruciale importanza è il paradosso della Giovenca Rossa. I morti ebrei emanano ciò che i greci avrebbero chiamato un miasma, che rende impuri non solo chi li tocca, ma persino chi passa nelle loro vicinanze; e l’impurità si estende come un contagio, da vivo a vivo, fino a contaminare l’intera comunità. L’unico rimedio per questa impurità della comunità era costituita, all’epoca del Tempio, dalle ceneri di una giovenca rossa, sacrificata e bruciata, e poi impastate con acqua. Con la distruzione del Tempio, tutti gli ebrei diventano impuri secondo la loro stessa legge. Essi non devono contaminare il sito del Tempio; e quindi non potrebbero nemmeno ricostruirlo. Occorre perciò trovare una vacca completamente rossa, senza un solo pelo bianco. Ma chi la potrà uccidere, se nessuno è abbastanza puro da compiere il sacrificio? I tentativi in corso per risolvere questo dilemma fondamentale si svolgono in maniera romanzesca tra ingegneria genetica, truffatori, archeologi improvvisati e il bizzarro intervento di un allevatore pentecostale statunitense.







Nella primavera del 2002, questa ignara giovenca è stata dichiarata idonea per svolgere il ruolo della Vacca Rossa


Il movimento ricostruzionista è vissuto come un elemento pittoresco della variegata società israeliana, fino al fatidico anno 5761. Secondo la legge ebraica, la massa d'acqua necessaria per un bagno purificatore è pari a quella spostata da 5.760 uova. Fu quindi, sostengono alcuni cabalisti, nell'anno 5.761 del calendario ebraico - iniziato un paio di giorni dopo la visita di Sharon alla Spianata - che doveva cominciare la purificazione della Terra dai gentili.

E in effetti poco dopo, mezzo milione di israeliani, laici compresi, giurarono di mantenere il dominio su tutta Gerusalemme in una spettacolare manifestazione. E quando i Fedeli del Tempio marciarono sulla Spianata il 13 febbraio 2002, per festeggiare il primo spicchio della luna di Adar, in testa alla manifestazione c’era addirittura il sindaco di Gerusalemme, Ehud Olmert, assieme a diversi membri del parlamento israeliano. Ciò non deve sorprendere. Infatti, i fondamentalismi non sono un ritorno al Medioevo, come sostiene spesso un secolarismo superficiale. Ce lo dimostra il fenomeno quasi inedito in Italia dei "cristianisti", delle persone che pretendono di usare il crocifisso come una clava e che sostengono, certo non esplicitamente, che Lepanto sia un luogo più importante del Golgota.

La situazione oggi resta sospesa, ma forse non per molto. In passato, le persone di ogni fede e nazionalità potevano recarsi liberamente sulla Spianata, certamente il luogo più bello di Gerusalemme, a condizione che non pregassero. Da quando Sharon ha compiuto la sua incursione, l’accesso a vietato ai non musulmani; ma anche alla maggioranza dei musulmani, visto che possono entrare solo quelli residenti a Gerusalemme, e devono aver compiuto i quarant’anni. Sharon ha promesso di aprire la Spianata a breve non solo alle visite ma anche alle preghiere degli ebrei, senza ovviamente allentare il divieto per i musulmani: un gesto che cambierà per sempre lo status della zona.

I cristiano-sionisti

Sharon può contare sul sostegno di un alleato impensabile. Pochi italiani sanno che circa cinquanta milioni di cittadini degli Stati Uniti - gli evangelici cosiddetti dispensazionalisti - credono che gli ebrei devono ritornare in Terra Santa. Essi sostengono che guerre, carestie e malattie decimeranno l'umanità; l'Anticristo diventerà dittatore dell'Europa e permetterà la costruzione del Terzo Tempio per farvisi adorare. Arabi, russi, comunisti, neonazisti e seguaci della New Age attaccheranno a centinaia di milioni l'attuale Stato d'Israele; ma tutti costoro saranno sterminati dalle schiere di Gesù ad Armageddon, nel nord della Palestina. Sorgerà allora il Regno la cui sede sarà forse il Quarto e ultimo Tempio. Il cuore del racconto è quindi l'attuale Stato di Israele, che deve in parte la propria esistenza all'aiuto di questi autodefiniti cristianosionisti (Christian Zionists).

Una parte sproporzionata di questa fantasia è concentrata sulla speranza che gli ebrei ricostruiscano il Tempio e riprendano a sacrificarvi animali. Scrive Hal Lindsey, cristianosionista e uno degli autori più venduti di tutti i tempi:

"Con la nazione ebraica rinata in Palestina, l'antica Gerusalemme è di nuovo sotto totale controllo ebraico per la prima volta in 2600 anni e si parla della ricostruzione del Tempio, il segno più importante del prossimo ritorno di Cristo. È come se si fosse trovato il pezzo chiave di un puzzle. Per tutti coloro che confidano in Gesù Cristo, si tratta di un momento elettrizzante."

Questa fantasia esalta numerosi avventurieri e visionari, da un giovane operatore cimiteriale australiano che molti anni fa diede fuoco alla moschea di al-Aqsà per accelerare l’avvento del Messia, a un infermiere statunitense che si vanta di aver scoperto non solo l'Arca di Noè ma anche la tomba di Gesù e il sito della crocifissione e direttamente sotto, una grotta contenente l'Arca.

La presenza di simili figure marginali fa però dimenticare che stiamo parlando di un movimento di massa nell’unica potenza rimasta sulla terra.

Le dimensioni di questo movimento sono enormi. Un sondaggio di Newsweek, condotto nel 1999, rivela che il 40% degli americani crede che "il mondo finirà come predetto dalla Bibbia, in una battaglia ad Armageddon tra Gesù e l’Anticristo"; mentre la stessa percentuale chiede che si vieti l’insegnamento dell’evoluzione a scuola. Ma il culto della Bibbia, il mito dell’elezione americana e il sogno del Regno influenzano certamente anche quel 79% di americani che ritiene che " i miracoli descritti nella Bibbia sono veramente accaduti". Forse è giusto parlare, come fa Harold Bloom, di un’unica Religione Americana che pervade tutta la società.



La Religione Americana è pragmatica. Centinaia di organizzazioni propongono forme concrete di sostegno a Israele. Alcune mandano volontari cristiani per lavorare gratuitamente nelle retrovie, liberando soldati israeliani per meglio vessare i Territori Occupati. Ci sono congregazioni in tutto il paese che "adottano" colonie, inviando aiuti. Esiste una vera e propria lobby politica cristianosionista, fondata dall’ex-direttore delle vendite della Colgate-Palmolive, che minaccia di sottrarre il voto dei cristiani fondamentalisti a quei congressisti che si dimostrano poco sensibili agli interessi dello Stato d’Israele. Imitando la prassi dell’epoca di McCarthy, decine di comitati seguono i media per denunciare ogni possibile tentazione di obiettività. Potenti stazioni radio e TV trasmettono il messaggio cristianosionista a tutti i paesi del mondo. Un gran numero di movimenti raccoglie fondi per prenotare voli charter che portino ebrei dalla Russia in Israele: le profezie infatti richiedono che tutti gli ebrei si radunino in Terra Santa per la battaglia finale. Ma forse l’aspetto fondamentale del cristianosionismo è il turismo in Terra Santa, che finanzia sia i predicatori americani – liberi imprenditori che non possono contare su alcun otto-per-mille – sia lo Stato d’Israele; e permette di indottrinare milioni di semplici credenti.

Il fondamentalismo ebraico

Per secoli, la Terra Santa e il Tempio sono esistiti come entità mistiche per gli ebrei, come mistica era l’attesa del Messia. Per secoli, gli ebrei di tutto il mondo si sono recati in Terra Santa senza alcuna intenzione aggressiva. Ci è voluto un giornalista austriaco indifferente alla religione, Theodor Herzl, per pensare di trasformare questo antico mito nel fatto politico del sionismo.

Negli anni Venti e Trenta, i rabbini Kook, padre e figlio, hanno reinterpretato in maniera politica alcune antiche riflessioni cabalistiche, sostenendo che l’inizio della redenzione fosse costituito dalla conquista israeliana della Terra. Gli ebrei ortodossi hanno bruciato in effigie Kook padre, per aver profanato in questo modo gli insegnamenti giudaici. Kook figlio, ormai anziano, fu scoperto nel 1967 da alcuni giovani militari di destra, ansiosi di giustificare la loro ideologia nazionalista – all’epoca viveva in ristrettezza, circondato da pochissimi discepoli.

Il fondamentalismo ebraico – in questo senso politico, che ha ben poco a che vedere con l’ortodossia – è stato fortemente influenzato dalla mentalità americana. Nel febbraio del 2002, sul sito di destra www.usajewish.com, Yori Yanover raccontava di aver telefonato a un amico in Israele, subito dopo un attentato palestinese nella colonia di Karnei Shomoron:

"Alla fine della nostra conversazione, dissi a Ploni che l’unica maniera corretta di rispondere a questo omicidio era questa – tutti gli uomini dovevano prendere le loro auto e i loro fucili e pistole e dare fuoco al villaggio arabo lì accanto. Poi dovevano uccidere chiunque scappava dalle case in fiamme. Nel 1954, un guerriero di nome Meir Har Zion perse la sorella a un gruppo di stupratori beduini nei pressi di Gerico. Har Zion, che assieme ad Ariel Sharon aveva fondato la mitica Unità 101, andò al villaggio beduino da cui provenivano gli assassini e uccise ogni uomo, donna e bambino che vi abitava. Ne seguì un lungo periodo di pace e di collaborazione tra i beduini e Israele.

[] Se vogliamo sperare nella pace con gli arabi di Eretz Israel, dobbiamo vendicarci subito e versare molto sangue. Altrimenti li dovremo trasferire tutti."


Più vicino a noi, vale la pena di riportare un istruttivo messaggio sul newsgroup it.cultura.religioni di "Bart Simpson", un brillante postatore con cui mi sono trovato spesso d’accordo.

Cittadino italiano, pronto a violare un cardine della religione dei suoi avi ebrei sposandosi con una ragazza di provenienza latinoamericana, sta per trasferirsi negli Stati Uniti, dove avrà quindi una seconda casa e una seconda patria. Ma guai a chi gli tocca la terza casa, quella in Israele: per difenderla è disposta a distruggere il mondo intero con un Armageddon nucleare.(2)

Egli scrive infatti:

In israele il suicidio/martirio e' inaccettabile, non pero' il "muoia sansone con tutti i filistei". E questa volta per fortuna abbiamo duecento testate atomiche pronte. Pensate quello che volete, ma se ci sara' la distruzione di Israele questa volta il mondo finisce davvero, indipendentemente dalle cazzate religiose, visto che il sottoscritto e' ateo. Bart

Ovviamente sui newsgroup vige la libertà di esagerare. Comunque è interessante notare come Bart voglia credere che i sassi, i vecchi fucili e qualche kamikaze possano minacciare seriamente il secondo esercito più potente del mondo. E come non gli sfiori l’idea che ci sono invece persone che di case ne hanno una sola; o ne avevano, prima che venisse distrutta per far posto alla sua terza casa.

Soprattutto, però, vediamo come il mito apocalittico possa trarre forza, non da una fede religiosa sentita, ma da ben altri sentimenti.

Il mondo intero è Palestina

La grande Guerra del Bene contro il Male viene condotta per imporre un dominio unico pianeta e la visione neo-Conservative che sposa il darwinismo sociale alla benedizione calvinista della ricchezza: il materialismo peggiore con il fideismo peggiore. Un’ideologia che viene riassunta perfettamente nel proclama degli Scarlet-to-Snow Ministries del Texas:

"Dappertutto vediamo le prove che il popolo palestinese è stato maledetto. Si trova senza lavoro e senza reddito. È profondamente disperato. Dentro il suo stesso campo, non riceve giustizia. È un popolo disperato, pronto a tutto pur di salvarsi la faccia. Non è colpa d’Israele, è colpa sua. Conoscete abbastanza bene la Bibbia per sapere che quando un popolo è oppresso, ciò è dovuto in genere al peccato."

Gerusalemme, "città degli specchi" – come l’ha chiamata in un bellissimo libro l’autore israeliano Amos Elon – è un simbolo eccezionale delle scelte storiche. E riflette implacabilmente la nostra vera natura, come dimostrano due citazioni contrapposte.

La prima proviene dalla International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem, un organismo al cui vertice troviamo il pastore pentecostale americano David Allen Lewis e Willem van der Hoeven, predicatore sudafricano e sostenitore storico dell’apartheid. Ecco come descrivono il mondo postapocalittico per cui lavorano assiduamente:

"Messia regnerà dal trono ristabilito di Davide a Gerusalemme. Risorto, Re Davide sarà co-reggente assieme a Cristo. Israele occuperà una posizione di gloria e dominio sulle nazioni del mondo. I Cristiani rinati si uniranno a Messia e ai dirigenti di Israele nell'amministrare il regno di Dio sulla terra. Siamo in marcia verso Sion!"

La visione opposta è quella descritta da Israel Shamir, giornalista e saggista di Haifa nato in Siberia:

Dobbiamo avere gli stessi diritti. Ebrei e non ebrei dovrebbero essere protetti dalla legge allo stesso modo, avere lo stesso diritto di voto e, ancora più importante, lo stesso diritto di bere acqua. Tutto questo sembra molto estremista. Ma gli eventi in Palestina assumono un significato così importante perché c'è un legame magico tra la Terra Santa e il mondo. Se rendiamo questo un mondo di eguaglianza, l'eguaglianza si realizzerà in tutto il mondo(3)."

NOTE

(1)"Alla Mecca fra misure di sicurezza: in banca dati impronte digitali e l'immagine dell'iride" La Libertà, Piacenza, 26.02.02.

(2)Soggetto:Re: Ma gli evangelici sono anti palestinesi?, it.cultura.religioni, data:2001-12-06 0429 PST

(3)Israel Shamir, "Sharon non piange, ringhia", Il Manifesto, 29.09.01.

[Der Wehrwolf]

L’Israele Britannico



Nel 1587, in una lettera datata 27 aprile e indirizzata a John Foxe, Sir Francis Drake scrive: <<Che Dio sia glorificato, la sua Chiesa e la sua Regina preservate, i nemici della verità vinti e che possiamo avere ininterrotta pace in Israele>>. Che significato può avere tutto ciò? La questione si riallaccia alla bizzarra credenza dell’anglo-israelismo in relazione alle tribù perdute di Israele. Morto Salomone, narra la Bibbia, le dodici tribù di Israele si divisero in un regno del Nord (di Israele), che riuniva dieci tribù, e in un regno del Sud (di Giuda) - con capitale a Gerusalemme – che riuniva le tribù di Giuda e di Beniamino. Nell’VIII° secolo gli Assiri occuparono il regno di Israele e deportano le dieci tribù del Nord. Che ne fu delle dieci tribù del Nord? Gli storici, quasi unanimamente, sono convinti che esse si siano disperse, verosimilmente assimilate dai popoli presso cui erano state deportate.

Questo svolgimento dei fatti non è stato accettato da tutti ed ecco sorgere le teorie più strane, in particolare dal Seicento in poi. La più importante di queste afferma che gli anglosassoni, in particolare modo gli inglesi, sono i discendenti diretti delle "tribù scomparse". Da queste ed altre astruse credenze e interpretazioni si origina una dottrina segreta, che non è affatto da sottovalutare e, più avanti, ne vedremo il perché. La setta impregnata di questa ideologia occulta esprime chiaramente il convincimento che l’Inghilterra fosse stata la nazione prediletta da Dio e cova una forte ostilità verso la Chiesa cattolica. Nel 1594 John Napier, insigne matematico (inventò i logaritmi), pubblicò il libro "Chiara rivelazione dell’intera apocalisse di San Giovanni", nel quale, rivolgendosi ad Edoardo VI, annunciava: <<Il gran giorno, nel quale piacerà a Dio chiamare la vostra Maestà, o i vostri eredi o gli altri principi riformati, a quella grande universale riforma e distruzione di quella città e di quel trono anticristiano, Roma>> (C. Hill, L’Anticristo nel Seicento inglese, Milano 1990, pag. 25). Lo scienziato Isaac Newton era ugualmente certo che il papa fosse l’Anticristo.

Cromwell, all’inaugurazione del nuovo parlamento inglese, il 4 luglio 1653, nel suo discorso inaugurale, pronunciò con enfasi queste parole: <<In verità voi siete chiamati da Dio a governare con Lui e per Lui... Confesso che mai avevo sperato di vedere un giorno come questo, in cui Dio ci desse tale testimonianza... la vostra è una chiamata dall’alto... possa essere, questa, una porta aperta alle opere che Dio ha promesso e profetizzato... Noi conosciamo coloro che saranno gli alleati dell’Agnello nella guerra contro i suoi nemici. Essi devono essere un popolo chiamato, eletto e fedele... Io sono sicuro che qualcosa ci attende, che ci troviamo su di una soglia... e qualcuno di noi ha pensato che fosse nostro dovere porci su questa strada e non considerare invano quelle profezie di Daniele e dell’Apocalisse, e il regno non verrà affidato ad un’altra nazione>> (G. Vola, Il millennarismo nella rivoluzione inglese: i quintomonarchisti, <<Annali della Fondazione Einaudi>>, Torino 1973, pag. 92).

Esaltazioni incredibili portarono altri a credersi nientemeno che il Messia: "William Franklin, Arise Evans, che aveva detto al Deputy Recorder di Londra di essere il Signore Dio suo, Theaureaujohn, Re degli Ebrei; Mary Gadbury era la sposa di Cristo, Joan Robins e Mary Adams credevano di essere sul punto di dare alla luce Gesù Cristo" (C. Hill, op. cit., pag. 238). La tesi dell’"Israele britannico" fu esposta, nel secolo scorso, dal medico inglese John Wilson, che nel 1840 diede alle stampe un curioso volume dal titolo "Our Israelitish Origin" (La nostra origine israelita) e da George Moore (1861) nel libro "The Ten Tribes" (Le dieci tribù). Paradossalmente Wilson asseriva che gli inglesi discendono in linea diretta dalla tribù di Efraim. Nel suo secondo libro "The Millennium", pubblicato due anni dopo, arriva alla conclusione dell’imminenza del ritorno di Cristo sulla Terra. Fin qui si potrebbe obiettare che sono solo fantasticherie di menti esaltate. I nostri scrittori inglesi, invece, ebbero dei seguaci che seguirono le loro orme.

Il reverendo Glover, nel 1861, scrisse, tra l’altro, di aver trovato connessioni tra il leone inglese e quello della tribù di Giuda. Edward Hein di Manchester, nel 1870, diede alle stampe un altro capolavoro di assurdità che intitolò "The English Nation Identified with the Lost House of Israel by Twenty-seven Identifications" (La nazione inglese identificata con la tribù persa d’Israele tramite ventisette elementi d’identificazione). In quest’opera assicurava: <<E’ del tutto impossibile che l’Inghilterra venga mai sconfitta…>> (vol. II, pag. 71). In una successiva edizione del 1874, che vendette fino al 1910 ben 405.000 copie, vennero inseriti altri nuovi venti dati identificativi. Egli sosteneva, similmente a Wilson, un ritorno di Gesù imminente. Hein si disse convinto che: <<Armageddon si profila in distanza. Sarà il tempo quando quasi l’intero mondo si radunerà in battaglia contro di noi, e dobbiamo essere pronti>> (E. Hein, Our Israelitish Origin, pag. 97). Con ciò si affermava la superiorità della casta inglese che, appunto perché, come essi credevano, "vero Israele", acquistava un ruolo di supremazia sul mondo.

Queste idee si rinforzarono nel contesto dell’età vittoriana; l’impero britannico era al vertice della sua grandezza. Quando questo periodo d’oro ebbe termine, un seguace della strana dottrina affermò che tutto ciò era finito perché l’Inghilterra si era inimicata Dio e spiegò: <<La misura della nostra disgrazia e della nostra abiezione è la misura della nostra lontananza da Dio Onnipotente>>. Hein, tuttavia, trovò presto una alternativa; se era vero che l’Inghilterra si era inimicata Dio, non si poteva dire ugualmente dell’America e, ribadendo che l’America aveva avuto origine da anglosassoni bianchi e protestanti, concluse che, perciò, era questa nazione che discendeva dalla tribù di Manasse.

E’ utile sottolineare che <<Lo storico dell’arte fabiano John Ruskin, alla fine dell’800, entusiasmava la gioventù aristocratica predicando la superiorità anche razziale della casta signorile britannica, a cui come ‘vero Israele’ era offerto il dominio del mondo: una missione morale, poiché il mondo andava incivilito estendendo ad esso, volente o nolente, i benefici del superiore umanesimo britannico>> M. Blondet, Complotti - I fili invisibili del mondo - 1. Stati Uniti, Gran Bretagna,Milano 1995, pag. 49).

A proposito del termine "vero Israele", Arnold Toynbee nel suo libro del 1934: "A Study of History", scrive: <<Fra i protestanti di lingua inglese si trovano ancora alcuni fondamentalisti che si reputano "il popolo eletto" nel senso letterale del termine, quale viene usato dal Vecchio Testamento. Questo ‘Israele Britannico’ fa fiduciosamente risalire il suo ceppo fisico alle scomparse Dieci Tribù>> (A. Toynbee, Panorami della storia, Milano 1954, vol. II, pag. 53). Il convincimento che la monarchia inglese fosse l’erede del regno di Israele concedeva ratificazione biblica all’imperialismo britannico. Toynbee parrebbe l’unico storico a sapere dei British-Israelites; a questo punto potrebbe essere interessante il fatto che egli collaborò con l’Intelligence Service e ciò potrebbe spiegare la sua conoscenza approfondita della questione.

Sono vitali ancora oggi queste dottrine occulte? Maurizio Blondet ci informa: <<nel 1991, mentre ero a Washington (infuriava la Guerra del Golfo), mi capitò... di constatare che i British Israelites esistono tuttora. Conservo un loro curioso libretto che pubblicarono allora, The Prophetic Expositor, che è una summa delle loro credenze>>. Blondet si dilunga sulle loro convinzioni: <<Presto tornerà il Messia e instaurerà il Regno di Dio, che sarà ‘un regno concreto e materiale, con territorio, leggi, popolo e trono’. Sarà ovviamente la Casa Reale Britannica, ‘discendente da Davide’, a occupare quel trono>> (M. Blondet, op. cit., pagg. 87, 90).

Anche il primo ministro britannico Tony Blair ha parlato agli inglesi con uno strano linguaggio, che è sembrato simbolico e, per certi versi, settario. Ecco come il "Corriere della Sera" (1 ottobre 1997), ha dato la notizia: <<Toni messianici al congresso nel discorso del premier acclamato come il più popolare del secolo. Blair: "Torneremo i migliori" - l’inviato del Corriere prosegue - Tony Blair ha tenuto a Brighton il più millenaristico discorso a un congresso di partito che i veterani della politica britannica ricordino. (...). Aveva visto giusto ieri il Daily Telegraph a prevedere dal premier laburista "un misto di rivoluzione culturale maoista e di predicazione da tele-evangelista">>.

Vi sono fondati motivi per credere che <<l’ideologia che l’opuscolo The Prophetic Expositor esprime in modo così ridicolmente estremo, sia una sorta di dottrina segreta coltivata nella cerchia interna dei fedelissimi alla Corona, e intimamente legata alla religione di Stato britannica, l’Anglicanesimo. ...in tempi a noi vicinissimi (nel 1952) Sir Oliver Locker-Sampson, alto esponente conservatore... intervistato sui motivi della costante politica inglese a favore del Sionismo e dello Stato d’Israele... rispose: "Winston (Churchill), Lloyd George, Balfour e io siamo stati allevati come protestanti integrali, credenti nell’avvento di un nuovo Salvatore quando la Palestina ritornerà agli ebrei". Di fatto, non è facile spiegare razionalmente, in termini di Realpolitik, l’ostinazione della politica britannica a favore del Sionismo>> (M. Blondet, op. cit., pag. 92).

Abbiamo visto che il ruolo "divino" era stato perso dall’Inghilterra a causa del suo comportamento e che ben presto fu rimpiazzata da un Israele americano. Non è assurdo credere, a questo punto, che <<Benjamin Franklin obbediva alle stesse suggestioni quando, come membro del ‘Triumvirato’ incaricato di disegnare il sigillo degli USA, proponeva nel 1776 di raffigurarvi ‘Mosé che divide il Mar Rosso mentre il Faraone e i suoi armati sono sommersi dalle acque>> (Ibidem, pag. 96).

Stupirà ancora di più sapere che il simbolo dell’aquila poi adottato come suggello dell’America, secondo David Austin, derivava proprio dall’Apocalisse: <<che ne è divenuto dell’aquila sulle cui ali la donna perseguitata (Ap., 12,14) fu portata nella wilderness americana, non si potrebbe rispondere che essa si è posata sul sigillo civile degli Stati Uniti?>> (S. Bercovitch, America puritana, Roma 1992, pag. 175).

Scrive lo storico Romolo Gobbi: <<Dello stesso parere fu Samuel Sherwood che, invocando lo stesso passo dell’Apocalisse, lo collegò ad altri brani del Vecchio Testamento: "Voi avete visto cosa ho fatto agli egiziani, e come vi ho portati su ali d’aquila (...). Per questo adesso (...) voi sarete per me una nazione santa" (Es., 19, 4-6) e "con le ali salirete in alto come le aquile" (Is., 40, 31). (...). Il fatto stesso di aver raggiunto l’indipendenza nazionale rilanciò il mito del popolo eletto, della <<Nazione Redentrice>>: così, ad esempio, si espresse il colonnello David Humphreys, aiuto e protetto del generale Washington, nella premessa al suo Poema sulla Futura Gloria degli Stati Uniti d’America: "L’America, dopo essere stata nascosta per molti anni dal resto del mondo, fu probabilmente scoperta, nella maturità del tempo, per diventare il teatro in cui rivelare i più illustri disegni della Provvidenza, nei suoi doni alla razza umana">> (R. Gobbi, Figli dell’Apocalisse, Milano 1993, pagg. 220-221).

Queste sono le assurde premesse sulle quali si fonda il fondamentalismo americano che vede ogni sua guerra come una sorta di crociata. L’ex presidente USA, Ronald Reagan, abbracciò questa dottrina segreta e pronunciò discorsi dai toni messianici infuocati: <<Tutte le altre profezie che si dovevano realizzare prima di Armageddon sono avvenute. Nel trentesimo capitolo del profeta Ezechiele si dice che Dio raccoglierà i figli di Israele dalle lande pagane dove sono stati dispersi per riunirli di nuovo nella terra promessa. Dopo 2000 anni, questo momento è finalmente giunto. Per la prima volta nei tempi, ogni cosa è pronta per la battaglia di Armageddon e il secondo avvento di Cristo>>. E, ancora, rivolgendosi ai soldati americani, l’ex presidente Ronald Reagan tuonò: <<Voi oggi state respingendo le forze del male che vorrebbero estinguere la luce che noi abbiamo custodito per 2000 anni>> (Le due frasi di Ronald Reagan sono citate da Majid Valcarenghi e Ida Porta, in "Operazione Socrate", Firenze 1995, pagg. 101-102).

Il giornalista Ronnie Dugger in un lungo articolo, pubblicato nel 1984, sul "The Guardian", si chiese: <<Gli americani potrebbero giustamente chiedersi se il loro presidente... sia personalmente predisposto dalla teologia fondamentalista ad attendersi un qualche Armageddon che inizi con una guerra nucleare in Medio Oriente. (...). Se in Medio Oriente insorgesse una crisi e minacciasse di trasformarsi in un confronto nucleare, il presidente Reagan potrebbe essere incline a credere di assistere all’arrivo dell’Armageddon deciso dalla volontà di Dio?>> ("The Guardian", 21 aprile 1984. L’articolo fu pure pubblicato sul "Washington Post").

La strana religione è più diffusa di quanto si possa immaginare. Sul "Sunday Times" (5 dicembre 1982) Simon Winchester racconta quanto ebbe a dirgli il segretario di un importante politico americano: <<Decine di giovani uomini e donne in Campidoglio, nel Pentagono, nei diversi ministeri, sostengono che noi siamo la generazione che avrà la grande fortuna di vedere il ritorno di Cristo>>. Lo stesso Clinton ha ribadito il ruolo preminente dell’America e dunque le scelte del presidente USA <<vanno tutte nella direzione di valorizzare il ruolo guida degli Stati Uniti nel mondo>> ("Avvenimenti", 18 dicembre 1996) e ha sottolineato, come riportava S.S. Rosenfeld sull’I. H. Tribune (28/10/96), che gli Stati Uniti sono un Paese: <<indispensabile per il mondo>>.

E’ evidente la sopravvivenza di tendenze apocalittico-millenaristiche nella cultura contemporanea degli USA. Tendenze piuttosto evidenti anche nella politica estera americana. Scrive ancora Gobbi che l’America ha combattuto: <<Soltanto in questo secolo... "battaglie finali" contro il fascismo, il comunismo e, più recentemente, contro il fondamentalismo islamico; e soprattutto sono ancora fondamentalmente convinti di essere un "popolo eletto", una "Nazione Redentrice">> (R. Gobbi, op. cit., pag. 223).





Giuseppe Cosco

[Der Wehrwolf]

Chapter 1: Introduction: Christian Zionism Defined

At its simplest, Christian Zionism has been defined as 'Christian support for Zionism.'1 In Der Judenstaat, published in 1896, Theodor Herzl forcefully articulated the aspirations of Jewish Zionists for their own homeland, although the Zionist dream was largely nurtured and shaped by Christian Zionists long before it was able to inspire widespread Jewish support in the 1940's.2

At the First Zionist Congress which Herzl convened a year later in Basle, the Zionist aspiration was formulated in a call for a, 'publicly secured and legally assured homeland for the Jews in Palestine.'3 At the 27th Zionist Congress held in Jerusalem in 1968, Zionism was defined in terms of five principles:

1) the unity of the Jewish people and the centrality of Israel in Jewish life; 2) the in-gathering of the Jewish people in its historic homeland, Eretz Israel; 3) the strengthening of the State of Israel; 4) the preservation of the identity of the Jewish people; and 5) the protection of Jewish rights.4

Sharif understands political Zionism to be '...the ideological instrument for mobilizing international support for an exclusively Jewish state in Palestine.' She observes how in 1975, the United Nations General Assembly passed resolution 3379 (XXX) defining Zionism as, 'a form of racism and racial discrimination.'5 It was no longer politically correct to view Zionism as merely another national liberation movement, in this case for Jews. Uri Davis has written probably the most critical book on the realisation of the Zionist goal, entitled, Israel, an Apartheid State.6 Contemporary Christian Zionism is in part a reaction to this world-wide criticism.

So, for example, in 1967, following the passing of U.N. Resolution 242 in protest at Israel's occupation of the West Bank, and Palestinian Jerusalem, when the entire international community closed their embassy's in Jerusalem, the International Christian Embassy moved to Jerusalem expressly to show solidarity with Israel. They and other Christian Zionists believe that the modern State of Israel, and Zionism in general, are divinely mandated, the fulfilment of God's promise to Abraham. 'I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.' (Genesis 12)7 So, Hal Lindsey could assert, 'The center of the entire prophetic forecast is the State of Israel."8

Christian Zionists see themselves as defenders of, and apologists for, the Jewish people, and in particular, the State of Israel. This support involves opposing those deemed to be critical of, or hostile toward Israel.9 It is rare therefore to find Christian Zionists who feel a similar solidarity with the Palestinians.

The most well known and influential Christian Zionist organisations include the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem (ICEJ); the Church's Ministry Among Jewish People, also known as The Israel Trust of the Anglican Church within Israel (CMJ or ITAC); Christian Friends of Israel (CFI); Intercessors For Britain (IFB); Prayer Friends of Israel (PFI); Bridges for Peace (BFP); The American Messianic Fellowship (AMF); The Messianic Jewish Alliance America (MJAA); Jews for Jesus (JFJ); the Evangelical Sisterhood of Mary; and the Council of Christians and Jews (CCJ). These organisations, in varying degrees, and for a variety of reasons, some contradictory, are part of a broad coalition, which is shaping the content of the Christian Zionist agenda today.

Contemporary British Christian leaders such as Derek Prince10, David Pawson11, Lance Lambert12, Walter Riggans13, along with Americans like Jerry Falwell14, Pat Robertson15, Hal Lindsey16, Mike Evans17, Charles Dyer18, John Walvoord19, Dave Hunt20, and the German, Basilea Schlink21, have had considerable influence in popularising an apocalyptic premillennial dispensational eschatology and Zionist vision among Western Christians.

That their teachings warrant the description 'Armageddon Theology'22 is evident from the provocative titles of many of their most recent publications.23 The beliefs and practices of the most influential of these organisations and individuals will be examined in depth in later chapters. This introduction attempts to map out the main historical and theological facts that have given shape and definition to the term.

Louis Hamada traces what he sees as the correlation between Jewish and Christian Zionism.

The term Zionism refers to a political Jewish movement for the establishment of a national homeland in Palestine for the Jews that have been dispersed. On the other hand, a Christian Zionist is a person who is more interested in helping God fulfil His prophetic plan through the physical and political Israel, rather than helping Him fulfil His evangelistic plan through the Body of Christ.24

While this definition may be true of agencies such as Bridges for Peace (BFP) and the International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem (ICEJ); other organisations such as Jews for Jesus and the Church's Ministry Among Jewish People (CMJ) are committed to both evangelistic witness as well as political restoration. CMJ, founded in 1809 under the name 'The London Society for Promoting Christianity amongst the Jews' was the first Christian Zionist organisation in Britain. The less accurate description of 'London Jews' Society' (LJS) eventually proved more popular.25 At its inception LJS had a fourfold mission agenda.

1) declaring the Messiahship of Jesus to the Jew first and also to the non-Jew; 2) endeavouring to teach the Church its Jewish roots; 3) encouraging the physical restoration of the Jewish people to Eretz Israel - the Land of Israel; 4) encouraging the Hebrew Christian/Messianic Jewish movement.26

The Rev. Louis Way, who directed the London Jews Society (LJS) from 1809, forcefully articulated Christian Zionist views some ninety years before the World Zionist Congress.27 During the last Century, in response to changing attitudes toward the Jews, LJS modified its name several times, first to 'Church Missions to Jews'28, to 'The Church's Mission to the Jews', then, 'The Church's Ministry Among the Jews'29, and finally in 1995 to 'The Church's Ministry Among Jewish People.'30 Their promotional literature now indicates a more subtle and less explicit three-fold strategy,

The aims of CMJ are:

Evangelism: To be workers with God in his continuing purpose for the Jewish people, both in Israel and world-wide, especially in seeking to lead them to faith in Jesus the Messiah as their only Saviour.

Encouragement: Supporting Jewish believers in Jesus in all possible ways.

Education: To help Christians to appreciate the biblical, Jewish roots of the Christian faith.31

This third aspect of their ministry was further modified in 1995 to emphasise not merely the Jewish roots of the Christian faith, but its living abiding relevance now, together with their concern, like that of the Council for Christians and Jews (CCJ), to confront anti-Semitism. The third 'aim' therefore now reads, To help Christians to appreciate the biblical, Jewish roots of the Christian faith and life. The concern to combat anti-Semitism.32

Whether this justifies defending the State of Israel from criticism for its continued occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is a controversial and sensitive point within CMJ. Material obtained in 1990 from Emmanuel House in Jaffa indicates that the commitment of some members of CMJ leadership to 'restorationism', that is, the active encouraging of Jewish people to move to Eretz Israel, including the Occupied Territories, appears to remain an important, if not explicit or well publicised aspect of their ministry. Their leaflet explaining the ministry of Emmanuel House states,

ITAC, as the London Jews Society is known today, has always believed, proclaimed and worked towards the return of the Jewish people to Zion. This policy is rooted in a firm belief in the message of biblical prophecy which has accurately foretold these things.33

In the 1996 Annual Report of CMJ, its General Director, Walter Riggans, explicitly and unequivocally identifies CMJ with restorationism and with support for the State of Israel. 34

Not to be out done by Christian Zionist organisations preoccupied with the fulfilment of biblical prophecy in Israel during what are regarded as the 'End Times', Riggans, under the section of the Report, outlining 'CMJ Issues', and in the context of the primary tasks of evangelism and encouragement, writes,

Within this focus we need to be aware that God's concern is with the Jewish people the world over. In our day there seems to be in some Christian circles a restriction of interest to the State of Israel and to the significance of various events for the unfolding of Biblical prophecies relating to the end times. CMJ has always been at the forefront of teaching about God's restoration of the Jewish people to and in Israel, and we are continually excited by, and watchful of all that is happening. We are humbled by what the Lord is doing among Israeli believers. In other words, our prayerful interest in the State of Israel is as constant and committed as ever.35

Perhaps this is why Walter Riggans defines the term 'Christian Zionist' in an overtly political sense as '...any Christian who supports the Zionist aim of the sovereign State of Israel, its army, government, education etc.; but it can describe a Christian who claims to support the State of Israel for any reason.'36

In a 'Resource Pack' produced in 1996 for group study as well as to answer objections to the work of CMJ, material is included under the bold heading, 'The State of Israel: Why should we support it?'37

Christian Friends of Israel (CFI) likewise insists on the unconditional necessity of 'Standing with Israel' and bringing blessing to her as a nation, though in their case, primarily through prayer and humanitarian projects rather than by evangelism.

We believe the Lord Jesus is both Messiah of Israel and Saviour of the world; however, our stand alongside Israel is not conditional upon her acceptance of our belief. The Bible teaches that Israel (people, land, nation) has a Divinely ordained and glorious future, and that God has neither rejected nor replaced His Jewish people.38

Bridges For Peace (BFP), founded in 1976 by Clarence H. Wagner similarly affirm, 'Through programs both in Israel and world-wide, we are giving Christians the opportunity to actively express our biblical responsibility before God to be faithful to Israel and the Jewish community.'39

The Council of Christians and Jews (CCJ) may also be regarded as a Zionist organisation. While prohibiting proselytism of Jews by Christians associated with CCJ, its members, nevertheless, show more concern to defend the actions of the Israeli Government than with the claims of Christ. For example, when Said Aburish's The Forgotten Faithful was published in 1993, Beryl Norman wrote an intemperate rebuttal in the Church Times, criticising him for being,

'...part of a major campaign now being waged to win over Christians in the West to the Palestinian cause, and ensure that Israel loses Western Christian support.'40

When invited to elaborate in correspondance, she did not substantiate these claims, but made further allegations. In response to a request for evidence she claimed that,

'Militant Palestinian groups - PLO, Hamas - are using the churches. It is very easy to identify this - same vocabulary, same phrases, same stories. Our friends in Israel see this at first hand.'41

AMF International, formerly the American Messianic Fellowship (AMFI), was founded as the Chicago Hebrew Mission in 1887 by William E. Blackstone (1841-1935). Blackstone was a colleague of D. L. Moody and was also deeply influenced by J. N. Darby's brand of premillennial dispensationalism.42 He subsequently wrote 'Jesus is Coming' in 1908, which by 1916 had already been translated into 25 languages and is apparently still in print.43

AMFI is, according to its own literature, a 'conservative evangelical ministry committed to seeing the Lord's purposes fulfilled by building bridges of understanding between Christian and Jewish Communities'.44 Their Articles of Belief defines those 'purposes' to include a scenario of the future which is pre-tribulational, premillennial dispensationalism.

We believe that the blessed hope is the Lord Jesus' personal, imminent return to rapture the Church and then introduce the millennial age, when Israel shall be restored to their own land and the earth will then be full of the knowledge of the Lord.45

The Messianic Jewish Alliance of America (MJAA) claims to be the largest association of Messianic Jewish believers in the world, founded in 1915, with affiliations in 15 countries, 250 Messianic Synagogues, and 350,000 Messianic Jews world-wide. They insist they are 'the leading representative organisation for American Jews who believe in Messiah Yeshua' 46 Their simple statement of belief is made up of four short paragraphs. The fourth states,

We believe in G-d's eternal covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. We, therefore, stand with and support the Jewish people and the State of Israel and hold fast to the Biblical heritage of our forefathers.47

MJAA provides a wide range of ministries designed to 'service the needs of the Jewish revival.' These include the MESSIAH Conference, 'The world's largest annual international conference on Messianic Judaism' held each summer with over 2,000 participants, the Young Messianic Jewish Alliance (YMJA); the International Alliance of Messianic Congregations and Synagogues (IAMCS); the Russia Committee; the International Relations Committee (IRC) which publishes the 'prestigious' quarterly, the Messianic World Report; and the Messianic Jewish Israel Fund (MJIF) which helps meet the financial needs of Messianic Jews in Israel and with lobbying for 'the right for Messianic Jews to emigrate to Israel as Jews.'48 In 1992 a MJAA position paper was published in the Israeli newspaper HaAretz entitled, 'Messianic Jews Say: "The Land Belongs to Israel"'49 In it, MJAA expressed their conviction that Eretz Israel has been given to the Jews by God and that they will 'repossess the regions of Judea, Samaria, Gaza and the Golan Heights.'50

Jews for Jesus (JFJ) was founded in 1973 by Moishe Rosen51 to 'proclaim the message of Messiah to all people.' They claim to be,

'...the largest and best-known of the non-denominational Jewish evangelistic agencies with missionaries in ten countries'.

In addition to their 15 branches and 60 chapters, JFJ sends out evangelistic teams such as the emotively named 'Liberated Wailing Wall.'52 Their Doctrinal Statement asserts belief in the continuing existence of two parallel but separate covenants for Israel and the church.

We believe Israel exists as a covenant people through whom God continues to accomplish His purposes and that the Church is an elect people in accordance with the New Covenant, comprising both Jews and Gentiles who acknowledge Jesus as Messiah and Redeemer.53

Their statement regarding the Second Advent is somewhat more enigmatic. 'We believe that Jesus the Messiah will return personally in order to consummate the prophesied purposes concerning his Kingdom.' 54 JFJ does not spell out what those 'prophesied purposes' are. It is true that JFJ have generally been critical of the International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem, for taking a political position and for refusing to engage in Jewish proslytism. However in a JFJ Publications Page review of a book by David Larsen,55 Leslie Flynn summarizes and affirms the author's treaties that,

"The Jews are God's timepiece," the author says. They are the key to history and prophecy...God's unconditional covenant with Abraham, which includes the promise of the land, a seed to rule over the land and the blessing his offspring will be to all humankind...the regathering of Israel and her central place among the nations, seem to go far beyond anything that Israel has yet experienced historically...that are to be literally fulfilled in the personal reign of Christ on earth.56

Of all the Christian Zionist organisations, the International Christian Embassy (ICEJ) is probably the most influential and controversial. ICEJ was founded in 1980, specifically in Jerusalem, as an attempt by Zionist Christians to reverse the effect of the decision by the international community to vacate their embassies in Jerusalem protesting Israel's continued occupation of the West Bank. Ironically ICEJ is housed in the confiscated home once belonging to the family of Dr Edward Said. Their promotional literature states,

When the vision of the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem was first given it was expressed in the following concerns; to care for the Jewish people, especially for the new-born State of Israel which includes standing up for the Jews when they are attacked or discriminated against, and for Israel to live in peace and security....to care that the world wide body of Christ will be rightly related to Israel in comfort, love and prayer for her well-being, to care for the nations whose destinies will be increasingly linked to the way in which they relate to Israel, the care and preparation for the coming of the Lord.57

At the Third International Christian Zionist Congress held in Jerusalem 25-29 February, 1996 under the auspices of ICEJ, some 1,500 delegates from over 40 countries unanimously affirmed a proclamation and affirmation of Christian Zionism including the following beliefs,

2. God the Father, Almighty, chose the ancient nation and people of Israel, the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to reveal His plan of redemption for the world. They remain elect of God, and without the Jewish nation His redemptive purposes for the world will not be completed.

6. The modern Ingathering of the Jewish People to Eretz Israel and the rebirth of the nation of Israel are in fulfilment of biblical prophecies, as written in both Old and New Testaments.

7. Christian believers are instructed by Scripture to acknowledge the Hebraic roots of their faith and to actively assist and participate in the plan of God for the ingathering of the Jewish People and the restoration of the nation of Israel in our day.

8. The Lord in His zealous love for Israel and the Jewish People blesses and curses peoples and judges nations based upon their treatment of the Chosen People of Israel.

10. According to God's distribution of nations, the Land of Israel has been given to the Jewish People by God as an everlasting possession by an eternal covenant. The Jewish People have the absolute right to possess and dwell in the Land, including Judea, Samaria, Gaza and the Golan.58

In an amplification of those resolutions, the religio-political agenda of ICEJ is made quite explicit.

Further, we are persuaded by the clear unction of our God to express the sense of this Congress on the following concerns before us this day,

1. Because of the sovereign purposes of God for the City, Jerusalem must remain undivided, under Israeli sovereignty, open to all peoples, the capital of Israel only, and all nations should so concur and place their embassies here.

2. As a faith bound to love and forgiveness we are appreciative of the attempts by the Government of Israel to work tirelessly for peace. However, the truths of God are sovereign and it is written that the Land which He promised to His People is not to be partitioned... It would be further error for the nations to recognise a Palestinian state in any part of Eretz Israel.

3. To the extent the Palestinian Covenant or any successor instrument calls for the elimination of Israel or denies the right of Israel to exist within secure borders in Eretz Israel, it should be abolished.

4. The Golan is part of biblical Israel and is a vital strategic asset necessary for the security and defence of the entire country.

C. The Islamic claim to Jerusalem, including its exclusive claim to the Temple Mount, is in direct contradiction to the clear biblical and historical significance of the city and its holiest site, and this claim is of later religio-political origin rather than arising from any Qur'anic text or early Muslim tradition.

7. While Gentile believers have been grafted into that household of faith which is of Abraham (the commonwealth of Israel), replacement theology within the Christian faith, which does not recognise the ongoing biblical purposes for Israel and the Jewish People, is doctrinal error.

8. Regarding Aliyah, we remain concerned for the fate of imperilled Jewish People in diverse places, and seek to encourage and assist in the continuing process of Return of the Exiles to Eretz Israel. To this end we commit to work with Israel and to encourage the Diaspora to fulfil the vision and goal of gathering to Israel the greater majority of all Jewish People from throughout the world.59

It is significant that many of the staff working for the International Christian Embassy apparently worship at the Anglican, Christ Church, near the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, which, coincidentally, is the headquarters of the Church's Ministry Among Jewish People (CMJ) in Israel. Ray Lockhart, the vicar of Christ Church, when invited to comment on the work of ICEJ, refused to express any criticism of it.60

In what is a useful summary, Walter Riggans, General Director of CMJ, claims Christian Zionists generally agree on three cardinal beliefs, allowing for a wide diversity of views as to their theological significance eschatologically, as well as their implications for Christian practice.

The return of Jews to the land in the last 100 years and the establishment of the State of Israel should be (or can be) interpreted as a fulfilment of Old Testament promises and prophecies concerning the land, or at the very least as signs of God's continuing mercy and faithfulness to the Jewish people. 'For many Christians today the greatest visible sign of God's faithfulness is the survival of the Jewish people. God has preserved them, cared for them, directed them, against all the odds. And so, in a sense, the greatest sign of all is the State of Israel, and Jewish sovereignty over Eretz Israel; such is a classic Christian Zionist position....

The establishment of the State of Israel has special theological significance because of what it means for the Jews, or because of what it means in the sequence of events leading up to the turning of the Jewish people to their Messiah and the second coming of Christ.

Christians should not only support the idea of a Jewish state, but (at least in general terms) support its policies. '...in the most modest of ways I would suggest that Christians as Christians must give support in principle to the State of Israel as a sign of God's mercy and faithfulness, and as a biblical mark that God is very much at work in the world...' 61

In qualifying this definition, Colin Chapman argues that an important distinction needs to be made between 'Christian Zionism' and 'Biblical Zionism'. He recognises that Biblical Zionism could accept the existence of the State of Israel, and be willing to work and pray for its security on political or humanitarian grounds without needing to do so on theological grounds.

Christian Zionism, is however, rooted, in varying degrees, in the theological conviction that the Bible mandates a restoration of the Davidic kingdom as the focus of God's rule on earth. In broad terms therefore they see in contemporary events, the hand of God protecting his chosen people, the Jews. The founding of the State of Israel in 1948 is regarded as the fulfilment of Biblical prophecy. Eretz Israel, not always well defined geographically, is nevertheless seen as theirs by unconditional divine right given under the Abrahamic covenant. Jerusalem is inevitably seen as the eternal and undivided capital of the Jewish State.62

Christian Zionism has, in general terms, arisen from within Evangelicalism, and Fundamentalism in particular. Within that narrower circle, Christian Zionism is invariably associated with, although not exclusively, a dispensational reading of Biblical history and a premillennial eschatology. It would be useful therefore to amplify the meaning of these four theological terms.

1.1 Evangelicalism

The term 'Evangelicalism' denotes a broad spectrum of theological opinion arising out of the Reformation, Puritanism and Revivalism. Tertullian was one of the first to use the term around 200 AD. in his defence of biblical truth against Marcion. Martin Luther used the term to describe John Hus, but it was Thomas More who introduced the word to the English language. In a 'vitriolic attack' on William Tyndale in 1532, More referred to those 'evangelicalles'.63 The distinctive doctrines of Evangelicalism include a belief in the supreme authority of scripture over tradition (sola Scriptura); in the literal interpretation of scripture; adherence to the historic creeds; the need for a personal faith in Jesus Christ for salvation and holiness; and a belief in the imminent, visible and personal return of Jesus Christ. Differences exist between 'open' and 'conservative' evangelicals as to the relative importance of such doctrines as infallibility and inerrancy. Evangelicalism is represented, and generally accepted, within all the main Protestant denominations and in Britain an increasing number of senior ecclesiastical posts are now held by evangelicals including Archbishop George Carey.64

Evangelicalism has become a popular subject for analysis, not least among proponents. 'The overwhelming majority of them present the picture of a Christian movement which is sweeping all before it, triumphing over both liberalism and ritualism.'65

1.2 Fundamentalism

Within Western evangelicalism there are many strands defined by adherents as much as by opponents. These include those of fundamentalist, conservative, open and liberal. This spectrum has sometimes been simplified into the three categories of right, centre and left.66 The fastest growing and most influential of these is fundamentalism, also known in the United States as the 'Evangelical Right'. Fundamentalism draws its support primarily from the Baptist, Pentecostal and Independent Bible churches associated with individuals such as Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Hal Lindsey and Mike Evans.67

The term 'fundamentalist' derives from a series of tracts entitled 'The Fundamentals' published from 1910 onwards in an attempt by American conservative evangelicals to defend the basis of historic Christianity and repudiate what they saw as 'modernism' and theological liberalism. The term 'fundamentalism' was first used by Curtis Lee Laws, the editor of the Baptist Watchman Examiner, in 1918 to describe the movement within Baptist circles dedicated to such a position.68

Much valuable research has already been undertaken into the nature of Christian fundamentalism,69 including the correlation between evangelical fundamentalism and anti-Semitism.70

Christian fundamentalism is the most active, exclusive, intolerant, and conservative wing of evangelicalism, both theologically and politically.71 The popularity of what is also known as the New Christian Right (NCR) is, in part, due to its near monopoly of Christian satellite, television and radio stations and programmes; the espousal, within its charismatic wing, of a success oriented 'health and wealth' gospel; and its propensity to provide simplistic, infallible, biblical panaceas for the world's problems.72

The sympathies of the NCR for Israel and Zionism are compounded by an implacable antagonism toward communism and Islam. Donald Bridge, for instance, in describing the significance of Jerusalem to Jews, Christians and Moslems, claims,

Jews world-wide mark their calendars with events that took place here. Muslims world-wide are eager to engage in holy wars here... Arab feeling soon runs high here, and is expressed in anti-Christian and anti-Jewish frenzy. Mullahs shouting over the minarets' loudspeakers can turn a congregation into a rampaging mob within minutes.73

In the words of Gerald Butt, fundamentalism essentially, 'offers an outlet for frustrated ambitions.'74 Similarly, Michael Saward has compared some aspects of fundamentalism in its style to the culture of facism.75 Martin Marty succinctly describes fundamentalists as 'angry evangelicals.'76

Fundamentalist Christian Zionists are often outspoken and tend to advocate the annexation of the entire West Bank by Israel; support the lobby for other nations to return their embassies to Jerusalem as the undivided and eternal capital of the Jews; are committed to the building of the Third Jewish Temple and the re-institution of the priesthood and temple sacrifices as a precursor to the return of the Messiah.77 They have also helped facilitate the return or 'restoration' of Jews from around the world to Israel, especially those living in Russia and Eastern Europe, and deliberately encouraged their re-settlement in the Occupied Territories.78

There is a large and growing number of books written by evangelical and fundamentalist Christian Zionists presenting a largely pro-Israel yet apocalyptic scenario.79 Within contemporary Christian fundamentalism the most influential theological interpretation of history is known as premillennial dispensationalism.

1.3 Premillennialism

Traditionally there have been three mutually exclusive interpretations of the references to a millennial reign of Christ in Revelation 20 depending on whether it is understood literally or figuratively. These are amillennial, postmillennial, and premillennial.80 Premillennialists hold to the belief that Christ will return prior to the millennium. Premillennialists are themselves divided on the question as to when the so called 'rapture' will occur.81 Four distinct, mutually exclusive, positions have and continue to be held, the cause of some rather acrimonious disagreement within premillennialist circles.

1.3.1 Pre-Tribulationists

J. N. Darby82 influenced by Edward Irving83 and followed by C. I. Scofield84 and the early dispensationalists such as Lewis S. Chafer85 and Charles Ryrie86 held to this position. Ryrie describes pre-tribulationism as 'normative dispensational eschatology' and 'a regular feature of classic dispensational premillennialism'.87 Gerstner acknowledges that virtually all Dispensationalists are also Pre-tribulationists.88

Pre-tribulationist premillennialists believe that Jesus Christ will return at any moment to secretly 'rapture' the church before the Tribulation begins on earth. After seven years of tribulation, Christ will return with His saints to overcome the Antichrist and his forces and establish God's millennial Jewish kingdom on earth. One popular exponent of this position is Tim LaHaye.

Are you ready for Christ's return? Do you believe that at any instant you could find yourself hurtling through the skies to meet your Lord face to face? Are you confident that God will spare you and your loved ones the horrifying judgment of the Tribulation... Are you living your life as if each moment could be your last on earth?89

Lindsey is even more colourful in his depiction of what events on earth will be like,

There I was driving down the freeway and all of a sudden the place went crazy... cars going in all directions... and not one of them had a driver. I mean it was wild. I think we've got an invasion from outer space.90

At the late 19th Century Niagara Prophetic Conferences attended by men like D. L. Moody and C. I. Scofield, alternative views of the chronology of the rapture, already present in the increasingly sectarian Brethren circles, emerged there also and caused considerable internal division within dispensational circles. This came to be known as the 'Rapture-Rupture' 91

1.3.2 Mid-Tribulationists

Mid-tribulationists assert instead that Christians will experience the first half of the Tribulation, that is three and a half years of persecution, and then at the midpoint of the Tribulation they will be raptured. Those who argue for such a position do so on the basis of Daniel 7:25 and Revelation 12:4 which include the phrase "time, times and half a time." This is taken to mean a period of three and a half years of tribulation, before the rapture.92

1.3.3 Post-Tribulationists

Authors such as J. Barton Payne, George Ladd and R. H. Gundry are classical premillennialists and not dispensationalists. They believe the church will experience seven years of tribulation before Christ returns.93 Unlike Pretribulationists, they regard the references to the suffering of the 'saints' in Revelation as referring to Christians and not Jews who have come to believe in Messiah after the church has been raptured.94

1.3.4 Pre-Wrath Tribulational

Marvin J. Rosenthal has literally incurred the 'wrath' of some pre-tribulationists95 because of his controversial book, 'The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church'96. In this Rosenthal insists, based on his ultra-literalist hermeneutic, that the seven year period during which the Antichrist will supposedly arise, also known as the seventieth week of Daniel 9:24-27, must be separated into three not two.

The Bible teaches that there are three major sections to the seventieth week: the beginning of sorrows (Matt. 24:8), the Great Tribulation (Matt. 24:21), and the Day of the Lord (Matt. 240-31)97

Rosenthal therefore argues the church will endure the Tribulation, but escape the wrath of the Day of the Lord immediately prior to Christ's return. Like most other premillennial dispensationalists however, he insists,

The Bible teaches that at Christ's return, a surviving remnant of Jews will be regathered to Israel and saved. God's covenant promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will be literally fulfilled (Matt. 241; Rom. 11:25-26).98

Rosenthal's views are influential in so far as he has been the executive director of The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, and editor of the journal, Israel, My Glory, for sixteen years. He is now the executive director of Zion's Hope, an international mission agency and editor of Zion's Fire, an evangelical magazine.99

1.4 Dispensationalism

John Nelson Darby is regarded as the father of dispensationalism100, although William Kelly Edward Irving played no small part in the restoration of premillennial speculations out of which Darby's dispensationalism arose.101 It was C. I. Scofield, however, that brought Darby's eccentric theology into mainstream evangelicalism.

The publication of the Scofield Reference Bible in 1909 by the Oxford University Press was something of a innovative literary coup for the movement, since for the first time, overtly dispensationalist notes were added to the pages of the biblical text. Others before Darby and Scofield had used the term 'dispensation' to describe the progressive revelation of God's purposes in biblical history. What distinguished Darby's innovative scheme was the conviction that these dispensations were irreversible and progressive.102 While such a dispensational chronology of events was largely unknown prior to the teaching of Darby and Scofield103, the Scofield Reference Bible became the leading bible used by American Evangelicals and Fundamentalists for the next sixty years.104

The 'proof text' of dispensationalism is the Authorised translation of 2 Timothy 2:15, in which the Apostle Paul calls upon Timothy to, '... rightly divide the word of truth.' Scofield took this as the title for his first book which is a defence of this novel way of 'dividing' Scripture into discrete dispensations.105

Following Darby and Scofield, dispensationalists claim to find in Scripture evidence of seven distinct dispensations106 during which mankind has been tested in respect of specific revelation as to the will of God. In each, mankind, including in the sixth dispensation, the church, has failed. These dispensations began with Creation and will end, it is claimed, in an exclusive Jewish kingdom on earth. Ryrie offers the clearest outline of dispensationalism.107

The Dispensations


Name
Scripture
Responsibilities
Judgment(s)

Innocency
Genesis 1-3:6
Keep Garden...
Curses...

Conscience
Genesis 3:7-8:14
Do Good
Flood

Civil Government
Genesis 8:15-11:9
Fill earth...
Forced scattering..

Patriarchal Rule
Genesis 11:10-Exodus 18:27
Stay in Promised Land
Egyptian bondage..

Mosaic Law
Exodus 19:1 - John 140
Keep the Law...
Captivities

Grace
Acts 2:1- Revelation 19:21
Believe in Christ...
Death...

Millennium
Revelation 20:1-15
Believe & Obey...
Death...



These dispensations are seen by proponents as 'providing us with a chronological map to guide us'108, leading the more fundamentalist to insist that the world is about to end.109 Gerstner concedes that the church has always understood biblical revelation to be progressive. However,

Unlike traditional interpreters, dispensationalists "divide" these sections sharply such that they virtually conflict with one another rather than enfold from one another... sharply divided from one another rather than integrated with one another. They conflict rather than harmonize. Even the word divide is a sharper term than Paul's original requires but the dispensationalists have made it sharper still.110

Dispensationalism the source of the most virulent and pervasive form of Christian Zionism today because it is based on an arbitrary division of the Bible into dispensations. Darby and Scofield taught, as a consequence, that God has two separate but parallel means of working, one through the church, the other through Israel, the former being a parenthesis to the later.111 Thus there is, and always will remain, a distinction, 'between Israel, the Gentiles and the Church.'112 It was Darby who first insisted that, 'The Jewish nation is never to enter the Church.'113 Likewise Scofield elaborated,

Comparing then, what is said in Scripture concerning Israel and the Church, we find that in origin, calling, promise, worship, principles of conduct and future destiny all is contrast.114

In its classical form, Charles Ryrie insists the sine qua non of Dispensationalism to be:

1. A dispensationalist keeps Israel and the Church distinct...

2. This distinction between Israel and the church is born out of a system of hermeneutics that is usually called literal interpretation...

3. A third aspect... concerns the underlying purpose of God in the world... namely, the glory of God... To the normative dispensationalist, the soteriological, or saving, program of God is not the only program but one of the means God is using in the total program of glorifying Himself.115

Lewis Sperry Chafer, the founder of Dallas Theological Seminary, elaborates further on this dichotomy between Israel and the church,

The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.116

For Chafer, 'Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne'117 so that in eternity, '...never the twain, Israel and church, shall meet.' 118 Ryrie even concedes the conclusion of his critic Daniel Fuller in stating that the,

...basic promise of Dispensationalism is two purposes of God expressed in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity.119

Certain implications follow the unconditional nature of the Abrahamic covenant. For dispensationalists, logically, Israel can do no wrong.

Even though Israel should fall into sin, and should seem no longer to be a recipient of God's blessing, it would still be true that God has promised that those who bring blessing to His earthly people will themselves be blessed, while those who curse His earthly people will themselves suffer the results of God's displeasure. All history is full of examples of this fact... The fate of the nations that have injured Israel is a terrible warning that God never goes back on His promises. From Haman to Hitler, history shows how dangerous it is to hate His chosen people.120

Hal Lindsey goes as far as to accuse those who refuse to accept dispensationalism of encouraging anti-Semitism for denying a role for the State of Israel in God's future purposes, '...the same error that founded the legacy of contempt for the Jews and ultimately led to the Holocaust of Nazi Germany.' 121

Not surprisingly, dispensationalists refute the supposition inherent in all other non-dispensational theologies, and especially reformed covenantalism, that the ethical law of the Pentateuch applies as much now as then, and that God has one purpose for all people, namely their salvation through Jesus Christ, bringing both Jews and Gentiles into one people, the church, and that in and through Him the earthly will be transformed into the heavenly. Chafer, in particular, criticises non-dispensational theology for giving a spiritual interpretation to what he sees as earthly realities.122

This is probably the most basic theological test of whether or not a person is a dispensationalist, and it is undoubtedly the most practical and conclusive. The one who fails to distinguish Israel and the church consistently will inevitably not hold to dispensational distinctions; and one who does will.123

Dispensationalism is based on a hermeneutic in which all Scripture, and especially the prophetic, must always be interpreted literally. Darby's hermeneutic might be summed up in this sentence in which he admitted, 'I prefer quoting many passages than enlarging upon them.'124 Scofield, who popularised and synthesised Darby's theology, taught,

Not one instance exists of a 'spiritual' or figurative fulfilment of prophecy... Jerusalem is always Jerusalem, Israel is always Israel, Zion is always Zion... Prophecies may never be spiritualised, but are always literal.125

Ryrie similarly asserts,

To be sure, literal/historical/grammatical interpretation is not the sole possession or practice of dispensationalists, but the consistent use of it in all areas of biblical interpretation is.126

Dwight Pentecost goes as far as to insist that,

Scripture is unintelligible until one can distinguish clearly between God's program for his earthly people Israel and that for the Church.127

One is left in no doubt that a literalist interpretation is the only consistent one for evangelicals. Perhaps wondering how the universal church coped before 1830, Gerstner observes,

...that without pretribulational, premillennial Dispensationalism, the Scripture is "unintelligible"... Even if a person were a traditional premillennialist, without this other element by means of which Israel is distinguished from the church, Scripture would remain a mystery and confusion would reign.128

James Bear makes this assessment of dispensational hermeneutics.

[They] ...are content to reiterate the catch-phrases which set forth their distinctive principles, supporting them by reference to Bible passages of which they do not stop to show the validity. They usually do not attempt in their books to follow out their principles to their logical conclusions, and one often wonders if many who call themselves 'Dispensationalist' have ever actually faced the conclusion which must flow from the principles which they so confidently teach.129

Nevertheless based on such an interpretative principle, dispensationalists hold that the promises made to Abraham and through him to Israel, although postponed during the church age, were nevertheless eternal and unconditional and therefore await future fulfilment since they have never yet been literally fulfilled in their entirety. So, for example, it is an article of normative dispensational belief that all Israel will be literally saved; that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants will be literally instituted; and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on Jerusalem. In such a scheme the church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis130, '...a sort of footnote or sidetrack in contrast to God's main mission to save ethnic, national Israel.'131

It is for this reason many Christian Zionists are happy to disavow evangelism among Jews believing 'all Israel will be saved' when or after Christ returns,132 and why the International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem, proudly welcomes the Israeli Prime Minister to speak at their annual gatherings. It also explains why dispensationalists such as John Walvoord, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson have in the past been happy to attend joint worship services with Jewish Rabbi's since both Jews and Christians are seen as 'descendants of Abraham' and 'chosen under the terms of [God's] covenants.'133

Sandeen observes that dispensationalism has, 'a frozen biblical text in which every word was supported by the same weight of divine authority.'134 Bass goes further insisting that,

No part of historic Christian doctrine supports this radical distinction between church and kingdom. To be sure they are not identical; but dispensationalism has added the idea that the kingdom was to be a restoration of Israel, not a consummation of the church.135

In the light of this principle, it is legitimate to ask whether dispensationalism is not orientated more from the Abrahamic Covenant than from the Cross. Is not its focus centred more on the Jewish kingdom than on the Body of Christ? Does it not interpret the New Testament in the light of Old Testament prophecies, instead of interpreting those prophecies in the light of the more complete revelation of the New Testament?136

Notwithstanding such serious criticisms, dispensationalism increasingly came to replace the simpler form of historic premillennialism.137 Writing in 1958, Norman Kraus could observe how,

...the dispensationalists had won the day so completely that for the next fifty years friend and foe alike largely identified dispensationalism with premillennialism.138

Today, premillennial dispensationalism still dominates American evangelicalism and fundamentalism. R. C. Sproul concedes that dispensationalism is now '...a theological system that in all probability is the majority report among current American evangelicals.'139 Gerstner adds,

Most leading evangelists have been teachers or followers of Dispensationalism. Earlier in this century, the radio broadcasts of dispensationalists such as D. G. Barnhouse, Charles E. Fuller, and M. R. DeHaan attracted a wide audience. Today, most of the noted 'electronic' evangelists, including Rex Humbard, Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, James Robison, and Billy Graham are dispensational.140

Leading dispensationalists who are also overtly Zionist include Charles Ryrie141, Dwight Pentecost142, John Walvoord143, Eric Sauer144, Charles Dyer145 and Hal Lindsey.146 Christian Zionism, although latent within 19th Century dispensationalism, has grown in popularity within evangelical circles, particularly in America and especially since 1967, coinciding with the Arab-Israel Six Day War and a few years later in 1970 with the publication of Hal Lindsey's 'The Late Great Planet Earth.'147

Tracing the development of Christian Zionism from the mid-19th and early 20th Century, the premillennial dispensationalist preoccupation with a distinctly Jewish millennium preceded by a pre-tribulation rapture of the church and an end-time gathering of the remnant of Israel, came to replace the simpler form of historic premillennialism.148

...the dispensationalists had won the day so completely that for the next fifty years friend and foe alike largely identified dispensationalism with premillennialism.149

There has also been some constructive dialogue between contemporary dispensationalists and reformed covenantal theologians on the relationship of the church to Israel, although primarily still as a theoretical and academic, theological question.150 Furthermore, a new generation of younger dispensationalists among the faculty of Dallas Theological Seminary have attempted to redefine their movement as 'progressive dispensationalism'.151 They distance themselves from what they regard as the 'naïveté' of the founder's vision, 152distinguishing the traditional dispensationalism of Lewis Sperry Chafer and Charles Ryrie153 from 'Scofieldism',154 as well as from 'the popular 'apocalyptism' of Lindseyism'.155 They regard themselves as 'less land centred' and less 'future centred'.156

Ryrie is sceptical, unwilling to concede to such revisionism. He prefers to describe the position of theologians such as Blaising and Bock as 'neo-dispensationalist' or 'covenant dispensationalist', for holding, for instance, to a 'slippery' hermeneutic.157 Ryrie similarly insists on distinguishing normative dispensationalism from 'Ultradispensationalism'. This is rooted in the teaching of Ethelbert W. Bullinger (1837-1913) and his successor Charles H. Welch, who, according to Ryrie, have merely carried dispensationalism to its 'logical extremes'. Ultradispensationalists hold for instance, that the church did not begin at Pentecost but in Acts 28 when Israel was set aside; the Great Commission of Matthew and Mark is Jewish and therefore not for the church; the Gospels and Acts describe the dispensation of the Law; only the Pauline prison epistles, that is Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians, relate to the church Age; water baptism is not for the church Age; and Israel, not the church, is the Bride of Christ.158 Their teachings are perpetuated today by the Berean Bible Society, Berean Expositor, Berean Publishing Trust159 and Grace Mission.

Despite these attempts to redefine and reshape the dispensationalism of Darby and Scofield, many remain unconvinced.160 As an outsider, James Barr insists in all its variations, 'Dispensationalism is a totally fundamentalist scheme.'161

Following Darby and Scofield's literalistic hermeneutic and rigid distinction between Israel and the church, most contemporary dispensationalists regard the founding of the State of Israel as evidence of divine intervention, that the Jews remain God's 'chosen people'; having a divine right to the Middle East in perpetuity. Crucial to the dispensationalist reading of biblical prophecy is the conviction that the period of tribulation is imminent along with the secret rapture of the church and the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount. This will signal the return of the Lord to restore the Kingdom to Israel centred on Jerusalem. This pivotal event is also seen as the trigger for the start of the war of Armageddon in which large numbers of Jews will suffer and die.162

Clearly such views, whether promulgated by academics from respectable Christian theological institutions like Dallas Theological Seminary and the Moody Bible Institute, or by Jewish fanatics such as Baruch Ben-Yosef and the Temple Mount Yeshiva,163 the consequences could be devastating as these fundamentalists have considerable political influence seeking the endorsement of their divinely ordained and predetermined apocalyptic visions of the future. Karen Armstrong traces the pervading legacy of the Crusades on the contemporary Middle East, claiming Christian Zionists, 'have returned to a classical and extreme religious crusading.'164

Ominously, Charles Colson, the former senior aide to president Richard Nixon, claimed in 1988 that the United States Government had contingency plans for a scenario in which Jewish fanatics would capture the Temple Mount, destroy the Dome of the Rock and rebuild the Jewish Temple, caught live by American Christian television channels based in Jerusalem. Based on State records, Colson speculated that if Israeli military forces refused to intervene to maintain the existing status quo, the United States would be forced to do so.165

1.5 Reasons for this research

Kenneth Leech offers this critical assessment of Christian fundamentalism and also some grounds for its evaluation.

Biblical fundamentalism has normally been accompanied by manifestations of bigotry, intolerance and violence... Fundamentalism of this kind is a serious danger to Christian spirituality as well as to the health of any community in which it is present. It is a pathological growth upon the Christian movement and calls for very serious and thoughtful responses.166

The Palestinian Christian community has, especially since 1948, suffered isolation, discrimination and persecution in a way that some describe as a form of apartheid or 'ethnic cleansing'. They are presently caught between three forms of religious fundamentalism, a Moslem fundamentalism which regards them as traitors to the Arab cause; a Jewish fundamentalism which perceives them as a 'fifth column' and impediment to the realisation of a 'Greater Israel'; and a Christian fundamentalism which is infatuated with Zionism and is, in the words of Don Wagner, 'Anxious for Armageddon,'167 unable to comprehend why Christian Palestinians do not support the State of Israel against the perceived threat of Islam.

They have experienced as a people, how,

"Fundamentalism represents a narrowing of vision, a closing of doors, a diminishing of human beings, and a backward force in human history..."168

The plight of the Palestinian church is made worse by the fact that they are ignored by the majority of Christian pilgrims and tourists, of all traditions, who visit the Holy Land primarily to see the sites associated with the Bible. The author's previous research has shown that their itineraries tend to follow a predictable pattern determined more by the strategies of the Israeli Government Ministry of Tourism than the needs of the indigenous Christian communities for contact and fellowship.169

As a consequence, a significant number of Palestinians continue to leave their homeland out of desperation, fear and intimidation. The very real danger is the creation of what Archbishop George Carey once described as 'an empty Christian Disney World.' At this critical time there is a newly emerging and distinctive Palestinian theology, distinct from other forms of Liberation Theology, which is offering an alternative, indeed a contrary reading of the Scriptures to that of Christian Zionism. It is reflected in the writings of Naim Ateek, Audeh Rantisi, Riah Abu El-Assal, Elias Chacour and others.170

While evangelicalism and Christian fundamentalism, in particular, have attracted a considerable amount of attention in academic circles,171 their influence upon the rise of Christian Zionism appears to have escaped serious consideration apart from a few notable exceptions.172 Indeed Marsden concedes that,

Even most of those neo-evangelicals who abandoned the details of dispensationalism still retained a firm belief in Israel's God-ordained role. This belief is immensely popular in America, though rarely mentioned in proportion to its influence.173

In the light of an extensive survey of published literature there appears to have been little research so far into the historical origins, theological basis and political ramifications of contemporary Christian Zionism nor an assessment of its impact on the indigenous Christian community of Israel/Palestine. Regina Sharif, for example, explores the influence of the Reformation, Puritanism and Millennialism on the rise of Zionism, although she concentrates more on political Zionism and the developments prior to 1945.174

The traditional terms 'Gentile' or 'Christian' Zionism are misleading since they now suggest a Christian enthusiasm for Zionism motivated essentially by Biblical or theological reasoning. But it is the political motivations of non-Jewish protagonists of Zionism which have above all today come to make up an integral part of the non-Jewish Zionist matrix... It is precisely this unique phenomenon on non-Jewish Zionism that we propose to analyse here.175

It is the conviction of this author that the influence of Christians upon Zionism has been consistently underestimated and is much more pervasive and influential than has previously been thought. It is for this reason that this research was initiated. The aims are threefold:

1. To assess the main historical, theological and political factors in the rise of contemporary Christian Zionism.

2. To examine and classify discrete types of contemporary Christian Zionism distinguished on the basis of their historical roots, theological perspective, ecclesiastical loyalties and political ramifications, in particular, with regard to the indigenous church of Israel/Palestine.

3. Specifically to discover how Christian Zionist organisations justify biblically and theologically their support for the State of Israel, as demonstrated in their views as to Israel's legitimate international borders; justification of Israel's continued illegal occupation of the West Bank; claim to Jerusalem as their eternal undivided city (the status and extent of Jerusalem); aspirations regarding the Temple Mount (hopes for the rebuilding of the Third Temple); and their attitude toward the continued denial of Palestinian aspirations to autonomy, self determination and statehood.

The theological presuppositions upon which this research is based are reflected in the following sentiment,

I hold to the representative view of Israel's future, neither anti-semitic nor zionist. First, according to this position, Israel maintains a special place in the plan of God. It is greatly loved by God. Because of its unique role in the conversion of the Gentiles, it is to be evangelised, not exterminated. It is to be called back to the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph, not excluded from a place in the world. It is to be cherished by the Church, the New Israel, not excoriated as a "Christ-killer": remember, the whole world crucified Christ, for above His head were written in all the major languages of Jew and Gentile: "King of the Jews." But second, the representative or covenantal view is not nationalistic. It does not believe there is magic in being a political unit, a nation. Just because Israel has become nationalized has little or nothing to do with its becoming "covenantalized"; in fact, being politicized has always stood in its way of accepting Christ as Savior and more importantly, Lord.176

The second chapter will appraise the main historical influences upon the rise of contemporary Christian Zionism.

Revised 31 August 1998

12,600 words



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1 Colin Chapman, Whose Promised Land, Israel or Palestine? rev. edn. (Oxford, Lion, 1992), p.277.

2 Sharif, Non-Jewish, back cover.

3 Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish, p. 1.

4 Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 7; see also Uri Davis, The State of Palestine (Reading, Ithaca, 1991), p. 28.

5 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 1 & 120.

6 Uri Davis, Israel, An Apartheid State (London, Zed, 1987)

7 Rob Richards, Has God Finished with Israel? (Crowborough, Monarch, 1994), p.177.

8 Cited in 'The Church and Israel' by Michael Horton, Modern Reformation (May/June 1994), p. 1.

9 Hal Lindsey, The Road to Holocaust (New York, Bantam, 1989). Lindsey accuses those who oppose dispensationalism of anti-Semitism, '...the same error that founded the legacy of contempt for the Jews and ultimately led to the Holocaust of Nazi Germany.' (back page).

10 Derek Prince, The Last Word of the Middle East (Fort Lauderdale, Derek Prince Ministries International, 1982); The Destiny of Israel and the Church (Milton Keynes, Word, 1992).

11 David Pawson, Jerusalem-The Next 1,000 Years (audio tape DP.1115, Ashford, Anchor Recordings).

12 Lance Lambert, The Battle for Israel (Eastbourne, Kingsway, 1975); The Uniqueness of Israel (Eastbourne, Kingsway, 1980).

13 Walter Riggans, Israel and Zionism (London, Handsell, 1988); The Covenant with the Jews: What's So Unique About the Jewish People? (Tunbridge Wells, Monarch, 1992).

14 Merrill Simon, Jerry Falwell and the Jews (Middle Village, New York, Jonathan David, 1984).

15 Pat Robertson, The New Millennium, 10 Trends That Will Impact You and Your Family By The Year 2000 (Dallas, Word, 1990); The Secret Kingdom: Your Path to Peace, Love and Financial Security, rev. edn. (Dallas, Word, 1992).

16 Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (London, Lakeland, 1970); The 1980's Countdown to Armageddon (New York, Bantam, 1981); Israel and the Last Days (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House Publishers, 1983); The Road to Holocaust (New York, Bantam 1989); Planet Earth 2000 A.D. Will Mankind Survive? (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front. 1994); The Final Battle (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front. 1995).

17 Mike Evans, Israel, America's Key to Survival (Plainfield, New Jersey, Haven, n.d.); The Return (Nashville, Thomas Nelson, 1986).

18 Charles Dyer, The Rise of Babylon, Signs of the End Times (Wheaton, Illinois, Tyndale House, 1991); World News and Biblical Prophecy (Wheaton, Illinois, Tyndale House, 1993)

19 John Walvoord, Israel in Prophecy (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1962); The Nations in Prophecy. (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1967

20 Dave Hunt, The Cup of Trembling: Jerusalem and Bible Prophecy (Eugene, Origen, Harvest House, 1995)

21 Basilea Schlink, Israel, My Chosen People, rev. edn. (Basingstoke, Marshall Pickering, 1987); Israel at the Heart of World Events (Darmstadt-Eberstadt, Evangelical Sisterhood of Mary, 1991).

22 Donald Wagner, Anxious for Armageddon (Scottdale, Pennsylvania, Herald Press, 1995)

23 Notably, Hal Lindsey, The 1980's Countdown to Armageddon (New York, Bantam, 1981); The Road to Holocaust (New York, Bantam 1989); The Final Battle (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front. 1995); Mike Evans, Israel, America's Key to Survival (Plainfield, New Jersey, Haven, n.d.); John F. Walvoord, Armageddon, Oil and the Middle East Crisis (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1990); Moishe Rosen, Beyond the Gulf War, Overture to Armageddon (San Bernardino, Here's Life Publishers, 1991); Dave Hunt, Peace, Prosperity and the Coming Holocaust (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House, 1983).

24 Louis Bahjat Hamada, Understanding the Arab World (Nashville, Nelson, 1990), p. 189.

25 George H. Stevens, Go, Tell My Brethren: A Short Popular History of Church Missions to Jews (London, Olive Press, 1959), 13

26 Kelvin Crombie, For the Love of Zion: Christian witness and the restoration of Israel (London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1991), p. 3.

27 Dean Hugh M'Neile was a colleague of Louise Way. See his The Collected Works: Volume 2. The Prophecies Relative to the Jewish Nation (London: Christian Book Society 1878), first published 1830.

28 Stevens, Go., p. 13.

29 Crombie, For., p. 260.

30 Church's Ministry Among Jewish People (CMJ), Shalom, 3 (1995), p. 1.

31 CMJ, Shalom, 3 (1994), p. 1.

32 CMJ, Shalom, 3 (1996), p. 1.

33 Israel Trust of the Anglican Church, Immanuel House, Tel Aviv 1866-1990 (Tel Aviv, ITAC, 1990)

34 The Church's Ministry Among Jewish People. General Director's Annual Report 1996 (CMJ, St Albans, 1996).

35 General Director's Annual Report 1996 (CMJ, St Albans, 1996)

36 Walter Riggans, Israel and Zionism (London, Handsell, 1988), p. 19.

37 The Church's Ministry Among Jewish People, Always be Prepared to Give an Answer Resource Pack (CMJ, St Albans, 1996)

38 Christian Friends of Israel, Standing with Israel, information leaflet, n.d.

39 Clarence H. Wagner, 'Who are we?' Bridges for Peace, Jerusalem, September 1996.

40 Beryl Norman, 'The Churches in the Middle East' Church Times, 18 June 1993.

41 Beryl Norman in correspondence, following her letter to the Church Times, 1993.

42 Harold R. Cook, 'William Eugene Blackstone' The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, ed. J.D. Douglas (Exeter, Paternoster, 1974), p. 134.

43 William E. Blackstone, Jesus is Coming (Chicago, Fleming Revell, 1916)

44 American Messianic Fellowship International, 'What is AMF' Internet: http://www.mjaa.org. obtained, 29 October 1996.

45 American Messianic Fellowship International, 'Articles of Belief' Internet: http://www.mjaa.org. obtained, 29 October 1996.

46 The Messianic Jewish Alliance of America (MJAA), 'What is the MJAA?' Internet: http://www.mjaa.org. obtained, 29 October 1996.

47 MJAA, 'What does MJAA believe?' Internet: http://www.mjaa.org. obtained, 29 October 1996.

48 MJAA, 'What are the ministries of MJAA?' Internet: http://www.mjaa.org. obtained, 29 October 1996.

49 MJAA Position Paper, 'Messianic Jews Say: "The Land Belongs to Israel!"' published in HaAretz, 20 March 1992. MJAA. Internet: http://www.mjaa.org. obtained, 29 October 1996.

50 MJAA, 'Messianic.,'

51 Moishe Rosen, Overture to Armageddon? Beyond the Gulf War (San Bernardino, California, Here's Life Publishers, 1991)

52 Jews for Jesus (JFJ), Jews for Jesus Briefing Bulletin, '"Billy Graham was Misunderstood" Says Jews for Jesus Leader', Internet: http://www.jews-for-jesus.org, obtained 29 October 1996.

53 JFJ, Doctrinal Statement, Internet: http://www.jews-for-jesus.org, obtained 29 October 1996.

54 JFJ, Doctrinal.,

55 David L. Larsen, Jews, Gentiles, and the Church: A New Perspective on History and Prophecy (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Discovery House Publishers, 1995)

56 JFJ, Publications Page. obtained, 29 October 1996.

57 MECC, What, p. 11.

58 International Christian Zionist Congress Proclamation, International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem. 25-29 February 1996.

59 International Christian Zionist Congress Proclamation, International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem. 25-29 February 1996.

60 Interview with Ray Lockhart, vicar of Christ Church, Jerusalem, 1994.

61 cited in Chapman, Whose., p. 278.

62 Lance Lambert, 'The Eternal Significance of Jerusalem.' Out of Zion: 2nd Quarter, 1996. Christian Friends of Israel.

63 Mark Thompson, 'Saving the Heart of Evangelicalism.' The Anglican Evangelical Crisis ed. by Melvin Tinker (Fearn, Ross-shire, Christian Focus, 1995), p. 29.

64 D.W. Bebbington, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain, A History from the 1730's to the 1980's, (London, Unwin Hyman, 1989), pp. 1-19; Kenneth S. Kantzer & Carl, F.H. Henry eds, Evangelical Affirmations (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1990).

65 Mark Thompson, 'Saving'., p.28. For example: Clive Calver, He Brings us Together: Joining Hands Where Truth and Justice Meet (London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1987); Alistair E. McGrath, Evangelicalism and the Future of Christianity (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1994); Derek J. Tidball, Who are the Evangelicals? Tracing the Roots of Today's Movements (London, Marshall Pickering, 1994)

66 Richard Quebedeaux, The Worldly Christians (New York, Harper & Row, 1978)

67 Wagner, Beyond., p. 3.

68 Bruce Shelley, 'Fundamentalism', The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, ed. J.D. Douglas (Exeter, Paternoster Press, 1974), p. 397.

69 Two important international and inter-cultural studies are, Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby, Fundamentalists Observed (Chicago, University of Chicago, 1991), and Bruce B. Lawrence, Defenders of God, The Fundamentalist Revolt Against the Modern Age (San Francisco, Harper & Row, 1989). The most important accounts of American Protestant fundamentalism have been written by George M. Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture, The Shaping of Twentieth Century Evangelicalism 1870-1925 (New York, Oxford University Press, 1980); and Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1991); Ernest Robert Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism, British and American Millenarianism 1800-1930 (Chicago, Chicago University Press, 1970); Nancy Ammerman, Bible Believers, Fundamentalists in the Modern World (New Brunswick, Rutgers University Press, 1987);. For a British perspective, see also James Barr, Fundamentalism (London, SCM, 1981); Escaping from Fundamentalism (London, SCM, 1984); Kathleen C. Boone, The Bible Tells Them So, The Discourse of Protestant Fundamentalism (London, SCM, 1989); and Martyn Percy, Words, Wonders and Power: Understanding Contemporary Christian Fundamentalism and Revivalism (London, SPCK, 1996).

70 David A. Rausch, Communities in Conflict, Evangelicals and Jews ((Valley Forge, Trinity Press International, 1991); Fundamentalist Evangelicals and Anti-Semitism (Valley Forge, Trinity Press International, 1993).

71 Michael Lienesch, Redeeming America: Piety & Politics in the New Christian Right (Chapel Hill, North Carolina, University of North Carolina Press, 1993); Garry Wills, Under God: Religion and American Politics (New York, Simon and Schuster, 1990); Steve Bruce, 'The Moral Majority, The Politics of Fundamentalism in Secular Society.' In Studies in Religious Fundamentalism ed. Lionel Caplan (London, Macmillan. 1987), pp. 177-194; The Rise and Fall of the New Christian Right, Conservative Protestant Politics in America 1978-1988 (Oxford, Clarendon, 1988);

72 Steve Bruce, Pray TV, Televangelism in America (London, Routledge, 1990);

73 Donald Bridge, Travelling Through the Holy Land (London, Christian Focus, 1998), pp. 55-56, 70.

74 Gerald Butt, 'The glory and the dream' Church Times, 1 November 1996, p. 8.

75 cited in the Independent on Sunday, 13 January 1991.

76 Martin E. Marty & R. Scott Appleby, Fundamentalism Observed (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1991), p. 1.

77 Thomas Ice & Randall Price, Ready to Rebuild, The Imminent Plan to Rebuild the Last Days Temple (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House, 1992); Winkie Pratney & Barry Chant, The Return (Chichester, Sovereign World, 1988), p. 180-191.; Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Basingstoke, Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1971), p. 55f.

78 Riggans, Israel., p. 19.

79 Notably, Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (London, Lakeland, 1970); The 1980's Countdown to Armageddon (New York, Bantam, 1981); Israel and the Last Days (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House Publishers, 1983); The Road to Holocaust (New York, Bantam 1989); Planet Earth 2000 A.D. Will Mankind Survive? (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front. 1994); The Final Battle. (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front. 1995); Charles C. Ryrie, The Final Countdown (Wheaton, Illinois, 1982); Mike Evans, Israel, America's Key to Survival (Plainfield, New Jersey, Haven, n.d.); Walter Riggans, Israel & Zionism (London, Handsell, 1988); Lance Lambert, The Uniqueness of Israel rev. ed. (Eastbourne, Kingsway, 1995); John F. Walvoord, Armageddon, Oil and the Middle East Crisis (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1990); Moishe Rosen, Beyond the Gulf War, Overture to Armageddon (San Bernardino, Here's Life Publishers, 1991); Kelvin Crombie, For the Love of Zion, Christian witness and the restoration of Israel (London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1991); David Dolan, Israel, The Struggle to Survive (London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1992); Thomas Ice and Randall Price, Ready to Rebuild, The Imminent Plan to Rebuild the Last Days Temple (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House Publishers, 1992); Rob Richards, Has God finished with Israel? (Crowborough, Monarch, 1994); Dave Hunt, Peace, Prosperity and the Coming Holocaust (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House, 1983).

80 Robert G. Clouse, (ed) The Meaning of the Millennium (Downers Grove, Illinois, IVP, 1977); Stanley J. Grenz, The Millennial Maze: Sorting Out Evangelical Options (Downers Grove, Illinois, IVP, 1992)

81 J.N. Darby, 'The Rapture of the Saints and the Character of the Jewish Remnant,' Collected Writings Prophetic. I, Vol. II, pp. 153-155; John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question rev. edn. (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1979); Hal Lindsey, The Rapture (New York, Bantam Books, 1983)

82 J.N. Darby, 'The Rapture of the Saints and the Character of the Jewish Remnant,' Collected Writings Prophetic. I, Vol.II, pp. 153-155.

83 Unconvincingly denied by John Walvood in The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1975), p. 48, but corroborated by Iain Murray, The Puritan Hope (Edinburgh, Banner of Truth, 1971), p. 200; and F. Roy Coad, A History of the Brethren Movement (Exeter, Patrernoster, 1968), pp. 128ff.

84 Joseph M. Canfield, The Incredible Scofield and his Book (Vallecito, California, Ross House Books, 1988), pp. 126ff.

85 Lewis S. Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936)

86 Charles Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today (Chicago, Moody Press, 1965); Dispensationalism (Chicago, Moody Press, 1995)

87 Ryrie, Dispensationalism., (1995), p. 148.

88 Gerstner, Wrongly., (1991), p. 18.

89 Tim LaHaye, No Fear of the Storm, Why Christians Will Escape All the Tribulation (Sisters, Oregon, Multnomah, 1992), back cover. See also John Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1975); The Blessed Hope and the Kingdom (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1976); The Rapture Question (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1979); John L. Bray, The Origins of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching (Lakeland, Florida, J.L. Bray Ministries, 1982)

[Der Wehrwolf]

Chapter 2: The Historical Origins of Christian Zionism

Introduction
2.1 Early Christian Attitudes toward the Jews
2.2 Early Christian Attitudes Toward the Holy Land
2.3 The Middle Ages and the Impact of the Crusades
2.4 The Reformation and Puritan Attitudes toward the Jews
2.5 Prophetic and Revivalist Premillennial Adventism
2.6 The 19th Century Resurgence of Interest in Palestine and Zionism
2.7 British Colonialism and the Restoration of Jews to Zion
2.8 Anglican Israel and the Influence of Episcopal Church in Palestine
2.9 American Arabists and Changing American Attitudes to Israel
2.10 Orientalism and European Cultural Imperialism
2.11 The 20th Century Revival of Christian Zionism
2.12 The Coalition of Religious and Political Zionism
2.13 A Preliminary Critique of Christian Zionism


An analysis of the history of Western Christian attitudes toward the Jews and the Holy Land lies beyond the scope of this study. Others however have done so comprehensively.1 Furthermore the development of non-Jewish Zionism, and especially its early origins in Puritanism and Millenarianism has also already been ably researched.2 This chapter will focus on those specific historical events and theological developments that appear to have been determinative in the rise of contemporary Western Christian Zionism.

Critics as well as proponents of Christian Zionism have traced the movement as far back to the Montanist controversy in the 2nd Century, to the Protestant Reformation, to the Jewish mystical Kabbalist movement and, in particular, the Revivalist, Millennialist and Apocalyptic writings which were popular between the 17th and 19th centuries in Europe and America. Proponents insist, however, that Christian Zionism is mandated in both Old and New Testaments which, they claim, is the source of their motivation.3

It must be acknowledged at the outset that the theological interpretation of historical events, especially those since the founding of the State of Israel in 1948, is made exceedingly complex and controversial since two peoples, Jews and Palestinians, each claim the same land, endowing the same locations with different place names and religious significance, while at the same time promoting rival and contradictory histories of the same events. It is consequently hard to remain neutral and not take sides, especially when visiting the Holy Land as tourists or pilgrims. As Glen Bowman points out,

Most tourists, in accord with the Israel Ministry of Tourism, call the land 'Israel', but in United Nations terminology the land is 'Israel and the Occupied Territories'. This variance in nomenclature reflects a deeper issue of identity; Israel and the area it occupied in the 1967 'Six Day War' constitute a deeply, and violently, divided country.4

Zionists clearly see the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 as highly significant, signalling the end of 2000 years of exile. Christian Zionists and some Jewish religious groups also equate this as another 'Exodus', a return to the 'Promised Land' in fulfilment of biblical prophecy and Divine blessing. Hal Lindsey is regarded as the 'Father of the Modern-Day Bible Prophecy movement'5 and representative of Christian Zionists generally.

Obstacle or no obstacle, it is certain that the Temple will be rebuilt. Prophecy demands it... With the Jewish nation reborn in the land of Palestine, ancient Jerusalem once again under total Jewish control for the first time in 2600 years, and talk of rebuilding the great Temple, the most important sign of Jesus Christ's soon coming is before us... It is like the key piece of a jigsaw puzzle being found... For all those who trust in Jesus Christ, it is a time of electrifying excitement.6

Palestinians, however, regard this traumatic experience rather differently. They see it as the violation of their fundamental human rights to exist autonomously in the land of their birth and forefathers. Since 1948 therefore, each community has disputed the grounds under which the other may remain. Examples of these contested and contradictory histories include those of Palumbo,7 Antonius8 and Said9 who give a Palestinian view point, and Zionist's such as Tuchman10 and Peters11 who offer an alternative perspective. The tension is particularly focused on the mutually exclusive claims over Jerusalem. Little has changed since Kenneth Cragg wrote,

Jerusalem... is still bitterly the symbol of confronting defiance and dismay, its centrality to both parties ensuring that the obdurate loyalties it commands continue to forbid the peace to which its name is dedicated. All visions of a federal constitution, a mutual destiny, a bi-communal possession, have thus far been fruitless. The city remains the indivisible, inalienable Jewish symbol Zionism cannot allow itself to share, except in the free access of tourism and the tolerance of religious devotion. It is, therefore, a painful sign of irreconcilability - and steadily more so as the years pass.12

2.1 Early Christian Attitudes toward the Jews

The post-Apostolic Church Fathers believed that the Jews ceased to be God's 'chosen people' when they rejected Jesus Christ. Instead they understood the church to be the new Israel.

Until the close of the New Testament period, the church claimed to be Israel and wrote to the synagogues of the Dispersion accordingly... After circa A. D. 100 there was less of a tendency for Christians to claim to be Israel and more of a tendency to contrast Christianity and Judaism as separate religions.13

...the Church is regarded as the new, authentic Israel which has inherited the promises which God made to the old.14

This commonplace in Christian literature, aimed at demonstrating that the church had now become the new and the true Israel, may well have antedated the Gospels themselves.15

This view finds is basis within the New Testament. Speaking to the Jews shortly before his crucifixion, Jesus pronounced,

"Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit." (Matthew 21:43).

The Apostle Paul, writing what is probably the earliest extant epistle in the New Testament, applies this same promise to a predominantly Gentile church. Confronting the teaching of Jewish legalists Paul offers a radical reinterpretation of the story of Sarah and Hagar.

Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise. These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother... Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son." Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. (Galatians 4:21-31)

This typological hermeneutic of taking Old Tovenant promises previously made to Israel and applying them to the Church can be traced systematically through the writings of the post-Apostolic Fathers.16

Clement (c. 90)

Clement taught that the church was the New Israel.17 In his First Epistle, Clement quotes from Deuteronomy 32:8-9 which deals with Israel's election as God's chosen people. This he applies to the church, calling his hearers to draw near to God, 'who has made us partakers in the blessings of his elect.'18 Kelly makes this assessment,

Clement of Rome sees in its [the church's] election the fulfilment of the prophecies that Jacob should become the Lord's portion and Israel the lot of His inheritance.19

Epistle of Barnabas (c. 100)

Barnabas is more explicit. Speaking of the covenant, he insists it is not, 'both theirs [ethnic Israel's] and ours [the church's]," since, 'they [the Jews] finally lost it, after Moses had already received it.'20 DeMar notes how the author asks rhetorically whether,

'This people [the church] is the heir, or the former, and if the covenant belongs to us or to them.' In answer to this question, "Barnabas" mentioned several Old Testament episodes in which the younger son replaced the oldest son as heir, the obvious implication being that the church (the younger son) has become heir.21

Justin Martyr (c. 160)

In his Dialogue with Trypho, Justin makes the same point, stressing how the prophets warned that Israel would be removed and replaced by another.

For the true spiritual Israel, the descendants of Judah, Jacob, and Abraham (who in uncircumcision was approved of and blessed by God on account of his faith, and called the father of many nations), are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ... Christ is the Israel and the Jacob, even so we, who have been quarried out from the bowels of Christ, are the true Israelitic race... Along with Abraham we shall inherit the holy land, when we shall receive the inheritance for an endless eternity, being children of Abraham through like faith.22

Irenaeus (c. 180)

Irenaeus also explored the biblical analogy of Sarah and Hagar, seeing the rivalry between Jacob and Esau as a type which explained the tensions between the church and the Jews.

...[Jacob] received the rights of the first-born, when his brother looked on them with contempt; even as also the younger nation received Him. Christ, the first-begotten, when the elder nation rejected Him, saying, "We have no king but Caesar." But in Christ every blessing [is summed up], and therefore the latter people has snatched away the blessings of the former from the Father, just as Jacob took away the blessings of this Esau. For which cause his brother suffered the ploys and persecutions of a brother, just as the Church suffers this self-same thing from the Jews.23

Gradually, over the first few centuries, the church which had initially been largely Jewish became predominantly Gentile. At the same time Judaism came to recognise that Christianity was not a Jewish sect. The immediacy therefore of answering the apologetic question as to the relationship of Christianity to Judaism and to the Old Testament became less and less significant.24 Jaroslav Pelikan puts it succinctly,

No title for the church in early Christianity is more comprehensive that the term 'the people of God,' which originally meant 'the new Israel' but gradually lost this connotation as the Christian claim to be the only true people of God no longer had to be substantiated.25

Augustine (c. 413)

In his magnum opus, The City of God, Augustine portrayed the church as embodying the millennial kingdom of God, a view which became universally accepted within the Catholic church until the time of the Reformation. 'As a result the medieval period tended to dissociate contemporary Jews from the ancient Hebrews.'26

2.2 Early Christian Attitudes Toward the Holy Land

Western Christian interest in the land of Israel is closely associated with the birth, demise and subsequent resurgence of the pilgrimage movement. The word 'pilgrimage' comes from the Latin peregrinus which means a foreigner or traveller, and describes a journey to some place regarded as holy, undertaken for a religious purpose and in the hope of receiving spiritual or material blessing.27

In both Islamic and Hebrew traditions, pilgrimage is regarded as a religious obligation imposed on the entire faith community and taught in their sacred scriptures, hence the importance of the land of Israel, and in particular the shrines associated with Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael, to both Jews and Moslems. For Christians however there is no such emphasis or requirement. Jesus taught instead that the sacred is located not in a place but in the body of the believer, and worship is something to be offered to God anywhere and everywhere (John 4:21-23).

In the earliest days of the Christian Church therefore, there does not appear to have been any perceived benefit from undertaking a pilgrimage. But the desire to visit the scenes associated with the birth, life and death of Jesus grew partly from natural interest and partly through the influence of superstitious beliefs the Church inherited from the surrounding pagan religions. Initially the idea of pilgrimage was seen as something voluntary and optional.28

Jerome (345-413), in common with most Protestant pilgrims today, regarded pilgrimages to Palestine as an essential way of gaining a greater understanding of the Bible, '...so we also understand the Scriptures better when we have seen Judea with our own eyes...'29

However, Augustine (354-430), John Chrysostom (344-407) and especially Gregory of Nyssa (335-394) recognised the dangers of associating sacredness with particular shrines. Consequently they actively discouraged Christians from undertaking pilgrimages to Palestine. Augustine and Chrysostom insisted,

'God is indeed everywhere, and he who created all things is not contained or shut in by any one place.'30

'The task is not to cross the sea, nor to undertake a lengthy pilgrimage... both when we come to church and when we stay at home, let us earnestly call on God.'31

Nevertheless, Empress Helena's visit to Palestine toward the end of the fourth century ensured that a pilgrimage to the Holy Land became a fashionable as well as a religious duty.32 Despite the costs, hazards and arduous nature of such a journey, pilgrims increasingly travelled to the Holy Land to do penance, to obtain redemption from serious crimes, and to secure relics for their churches.33 In a desire to create greater unity within his empire, Constantine did much to encourage pilgrimages by building large churches in Jerusalem and Bethlehem which became foci for devotion and worship. Eusebius for example, claimed divine inspiration was behind Constantine's desire to make the Church of the Resurrection 'a centre of attraction and venerable to all.'34 Under Byzantian rule, despite the periodic liberalisation of the ban on Jews visiting or residing in Palestine, the Holy Land was essentially perceived as the land made holy by Jesus and now the inheritance of the church.

Prior to the Reformation, traditional Catholic thought had no place for the possibility of a Jewish return to Palestine nor any such concept as the existence of a Jewish nation.35

2.3 The Middle Ages and the Impact of the Crusades

Historians have examined in detail the lasting impact of the Crusades and have traced the devastating consequences of the sacralising of Mediaeval European military designs to retake the Holy Land from the 'infidels', whether Moslem or Jewish.36

The attempt to liberate the Holy Land from Moslem control was seen by many as a sacred endeavour and even as a form of pilgrimage. When Pope Urban II launched the First Crusade in 1095 he gave several reasons for this 'holy pilgrimage',

....each of high moral value, first to defend Constantinople and by doing so heal the schism between East and West; second, to be a repentant act of faith that would culminate in the moral reformation and total renewal of Christendom; third, it was to be a mass pilgrimage of believers united in the expectation of the imminent return of Christ.37

How far this aspiration was shared by the Crusaders themselves is debatable. Zander seriously questions whether the Crusades ever really had anything to do with 'defending' the Church.38 Robert the Monk, commenting on Pope Urban's mobilisation speech, gave much more provocative reasons.

Let the Holy Sepulchre of the Lord our Saviour which is possessed by unclean nations, especially incite you, and the Holy Places which are now treated with ignominy and irreverently polluted with their filthiness... Enter upon the road to the Holy Sepulchre; wrest that land from the wicked race, and subject it to yourselves... This royal city, therefore, situated at the centre of the world, is now held captive by his enemies, and is in subjection to those who do not know God, to the worship of the heathens.39

For over a century, Bishops, clerics and Kings repeated the call 'to avenge the injury which had been inflicted upon Christ.'40 This explains why Christians had come to regard the land as their exclusive inheritance as the 'true' Israel.

The theological justification for the Crusades went through significant and progressive stages. Initially the motivation was simply to liberate the Holy Land as a means of achieving personal salvation and of hastening the apocalypse. Having conquered and settled the land and created Christian kingdoms, when Jerusalem was once again threatened by infidels, it became an opportunity for martyrdom and sacrifice. After Jerusalem was lost, the Muslim presence was seen as an insult to God, and the later Crusades were justified to avenge the injury to God. Toward the end of the Crusading era the Crusaders saw themselves as the successors of Israel; their duty to claim Christ's patrimony and inheritance.41

Such religious arrogance and the consequent extermination of the Jewish and Moslem inhabitants of Palestine by the European Crusaders unleashed a spiral of barbaric savagery which has fermented for a thousand years, each side locked in what Armstrong calls 'a murderous triangle of hatred and intolerance.'42 Cragg draws some important conclusions about the effect of the Crusades and their religious imprimatur on the Arab psyche.

The Western, Latin Rome saw the Christian East in terms of judicial dominance and ecclesiastical power... The Crusades became an enduring symbol of malignancy as well as heroism, of open imperialism and private piety... They left noble piles of architecture on the eastern landscape but seared the eastern soul. They gave Arab Muslims through every succeeding century a warrant of memory to hold against Christian Arabs as, by association, liable to pseudo-Arabness or worse. What the crusaders did to the eastern psyche, long outlived their tenure.... The image of them is one no century since has been able to exorcise.43

2.4 The Reformation and Puritan Attitudes toward the Jews

The Reformation was in part precipitated by the rediscovery of the Bible as the inspired Word of God and the final authority in matters of faith and doctrine. The translation, publication and free access to the Bible among the laity created a major paradigm shift in popular thinking. Within the Church of England, for example, a large Bible written in English was placed in every parish church, the priest and people required to share the cost. Interpretation was no longer the exclusive prerogative of an ecclesiastical hierarchy. The study of the Biblical texts in their original languages, Hebrew and Greek, was also encouraged. From pulpits right across Europe the Bible was increasingly taught in its historical context and in its plain literal sense.

Every Sunday called to his mind the ancient history and lost property of the 'glory of all lands', while the existing ruin and desolation of the country gave testimony to the truth of the Bible and the certainty of the promised blessings... The biblical descriptions of the Holy Land contribute no less to the propagation of which which (sic) we may call the Zionist idea.44

A new postmillennial assessment of the place of the Jew within the future purposes of God emerged, especially through the writings of Theodore Beza, John Calvin's successor in Geneva, and Martin Bucer in Strasbourg.45 In his Institutes, Calvin stressed that divine blessing was associated with their covenant obedience.

(Salvation depends on God's mercy, which He extends to whom He pleases [Romans 9:15-16]; ...there is no reason for the Jews to preen themselves and boast in the name of the covenant unless they keep the law of the covenant, that is, obey the Word.

Nevertheless, when Paul cast them down from vain confidence in their kindred, he still saw, on the other hand, that the covenant which God had made once for all with the descendants of Abraham could in no way be made void. Consequently, in the eleventh chapter (of Romans) he argues that Abraham's physical progeny must not be deprived of their dignity. By virtue of this, he teaches, the Jews are the first and natural heirs of the gospel, except that by their ungratefulness they were forsaken as unworthy - yet forsaken in such a way that the heavenly blessing has not departed utterly from their nation. For this reason, despite their stubbornness and covenant-breaking, Paul still calls them holy [Rom. 11:16]. Despite the great obstinacy with which they continue to wage was against the gospel, we must not despise them, while we consider that, for the sake of the promise, God's blessing still rests among them.46

Peter Toon traces the development of these ideas from the Continent to Britain and America.

...the word 'Israel' in Romans 11:25ff., which had been understood by Calvin and Luther as referring to the Church of Jews and Gentiles, could be taken to mean 'Jews', that is non-Christian Jews whose religion was Judaism. Beza himself favoured this interpretation of Romans 11 and he was followed by the various editors of the influential Geneva Bible, which was translated in Geneva by the Marian exiles during the life time of Beza. In the 1557 and 1560 editions short notes explained that 'Israel' meant 'the nation of the Jews' but in later editions (e.g. 1599) the note on Romans 11 stated that the prophets of the Old Testament had predicted a conversion of the nation of the Jews to Christ. Through this Bible and the writings of the Puritans (e.g. William Perkins, Commentary on Galatians, and various books by Hugh Broughton) the doctrine of the conversion of the Jewish people was widely diffused in England, Scotland and New England.47

Ian Murray describes the place of the Jews within the emerging Puritan postmillennial eschatology.

The future of the Jews had decisive significance for them because they believed that, though little is clearly revealed of the future purposes of God in history, enough has been given us in Scripture to warrant the expectation that with the calling of the Jews there will come far-reaching blessing for the world. Puritan England and Covenanting Scotland knew much of spiritual blessing and it was the prayerful longing for wider blessing, not a mere interest in unfulfilled prophecy, which led them to give such place to Israel.48

Samuel Rutherford, the Scottish theologian, for example, longed for the conversion of the Jews. In a letter written in 1635 he eulogised,

O to see the sight, next to Christ's Coming in the clouds, the most joyful! Our elder brethren the Jews and Christ fall upon one another's necks and kiss each other! They have been long asunder: they will be kind to one another when they meet. O day! O longed-for and lovely day-dawn! O sweet Jesus, let me see that sight which will be life from the dead, thee and the ancient people in mutual embraces.49

In 1615 Thomas Brightman produced what Peter Toon has described as, 'the first important and influential revision of the Reformed, Augustinian concept of the Millennium' predicting the conversion of the Jews.50 Sharif describes Brightman as 'the father of the British doctrine of the Restoration of the Jews.'51

In His Apocalypsis Apocalypseos, meaning, 'A Revelation of the Revelation', Brightman taught that the Turkish empire would be brought to an end followed by 'the calling of the Jews to be a Christian nation,' leading to 'a most happy tranquility from thence to the end of the world'. In 1635 he completed a commentary on Daniel 11-12 which he sub-titled, 'The restoring of the Jewes and their callinge to the faith of Christ after the utter overthrow of their three enemies is set forth in livelie colours.' Brightman not only believed the Jewish people would come to faith in Jesus Christ, he was also convinced of 'the rebirth of a Christian Israelite nation' which would become 'the centre of a Christian world.'52

Brightman's preaching and writings attracted considerable attention and his views became influential even in British government circles. In 1621, Sir Henry Finch, an eminent lawyer and M.P. developed Brightman's views further and published a book entitled, The World's Great Restoration or the Calling of the Jews, and of all the Nations and Kingdoms of the Earth, to the Faith of Christ. In it he argued,

Where Israel, Judah, Zion and Jerusalem are named [in the Bible] the Holy Ghost meant not the spiritual Israel, or the Church of God collected of the Gentiles or of the Jews and Gentiles both... But Israel properly descended out of Jacob's loynes. The same judgement is to be made of their returning to their land and ancient seats, the conquest of their foes... The glorious church they shall erect in the land itself of Judah... These and such like are not allegories, set forth in terrene similitudes or deliverance through Christ (whereof those were types and figures), but meant really and literally the Jews.53

Other reformers such as William Perkins, Richard Sibbes and John Owen were equally convinced that one day the Jews would be brought to faith in Jesus Christ and for this they prayed earnestly.54 This conviction of the conversion of the Jews was so universally embraced that it was written into the Westminster Larger Confession and Congregationalist Savoy Declaration of 1658. The latter affirmed,

We expect that in the latter days, Antichrist being destroyed, the Jews called, and the adversaries of the kingdom of his dear son broken, the churches of Christ being enlarged and edified through a free and plentiful communication of light and grace, shall enjoy in this world a more quiet, peaceful and glorious condition than they have enjoyed.55

Similarly, the Westminster Directory of Public Worship called upon clergy to pray,

for the Propagation of the Gospell and Kingdome of Christ to all nations, for the conversion of the Jewes, the filnesse of the Gentiles, the fall of Antichrist, and the hastening of the second coming of the Lord.56

In 1649 Ebenezer and Joanna Cartwright, English Puritans living in Amsterdam sent a petition to the British Government calling for the lifting of the ban on Jews settling in England and also assistance to enable them to move to Palestine.

That this Nation of England, with the inhabitants of the Netherlands, shall be the first and the readiest to transport Israel's sons and daughters on their ships to the land promised to their forefathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob for an everlasting inheritance.57

Sharif observes that this was the first time human intervention was sought to realise a Jewish Restoration rather than the reliance on God to accomplish it.58

Jonathan Edwards was probably the most influential American writer of the 18th Century. In his history of the Church written in 1774, As a convinced postmillennialist, Edwards spoke of the overthrow of Satan's kingdom epitomised in the Pope, Islam and 'Jewish infidelity',

However obstinate [the Jews] have been now for above seventeen hundred years in their rejection of Christ, and however rare have been the instances on individual conversions, ever since the destruction of Jerusalem... Yet, when this day comes, the thick veil that blinds their eyes shall be removed. 2 Cor iii.16. And divine grace shall melt and renew their hard hearts... And then shall the house of Israel be saved: the Jews in all their dispersions shall cast away their old infidelity, and shall have their hearts wonderfully changed, and abhor themselves for their past unbelief and obstinacy... Nothing is more certainly foretold than this national conversion of the Jews in Romans 11.2.59

Sharif offers this summary of the importance of the Reformation and Puritanism for the emergence of more explicit Christian Zionist aspirations in subsequent generations.

To the Christian mind in Protestant Europe, Palestine became the Jewish land. The Jews became the Palestinian people who were foreign to Europe, absent from their Homeland, but in due time were to be returned to Palestine... Manifestations of early non-Jewish Zionism were thus neither isolated incidents nor espoused only by religious eccentrics and outsiders... A voluminous religious literature on the role and the destiny of the Jews spread rapidly during the 17th Century and, by its millenarian nature, never fell out of vogue. Many millenarians were rebuked, persecuted and sometimes even executed for their heretical beliefs. Nevertheless, their writings helped to entrench the notion of a Jewish Restoration to Palestine. It was not long until the more practical questions, as to when and how Restoration was to take place, began to gain importance.60

2.5 Prophetic and Revivalist Premillennial Adventism

It is not coincidental that Christian Zionist and millennialist speculation have converged toward the end of each century, especially since the 1590's when the first printed literature dealing with millenarian speculations and the restoration of the Jews first appeared.61 The predominance of military and apocalyptic terminology in the titles of popular books written by Christian Zionists since the 1980's would suggest a similar connection in this century also.62 Andrew Walker has described this as 'PMT' or 'Premillennial Tension'. 'We're counting up to the year 2000 and there's a strong apocalyptical anxiety.'63

The revival during the 1790-1800 period was a direct result of the turmoil Europeans felt in the wake of the French and American revolutions coupled with the approach of a new century. The British, like Europeans on the continent, began to feel that their world was falling apart. People turned away from new secular philosophy and political answers and embraced a more fundamentalist form of Christian teachings that included a revived form of prophetic interpretations of the Bible. In this troubled and uncertain climate, Christian Zionism began to take root.64

Edward Irving (1792-1834)

The rise in popularity of premillennialism in the nineteenth century, and the revolution in prophetic and apocalyptic thought can be largely attributed to Edward Irving.65 In 1825 he preached at the annual gathering of the Continental Society. His address was entitled, 'Babylon and Infidelity Foredoomed',

...in it Irving advanced the assertion that the Church, far from being on the threshold of a new era of blessing, was about to enter a 'series of thick-coming judgments and fearful perplexities' preparatory to Christ's advent and reign.66

A year later in 1826 Irving was introduced to the views of Manuel Lacunza a Spanish Jesuit who wrote a book under the pseudonym of Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra, allegedly a converted Jew, entitled, 'The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty'. Lacunza interpreted all but the first three chapters of the Book of Revelation as describing apocalyptic events about to happen. Irving was so excited by Lacunza's speculations, he mastered Spanish in order to translate and publish the work in English.67 Irving added a 203 page preface to the translation in which he presented with great conviction his own prophetic speculations about the end of the world, predicting, the apostasy of Christendom, then subsequently the restoration of the Jews and finally the imminent return of Christ.

When the Lord shall have finished the taking of witness against the Gentiles... he will begin to prepare another ark of testimony... and to that end will turn his Holy Spirit unto his ancient people, the Jews, and bring them unto those days of refreshing... This outpouring of the Spirit is known in Scripture by 'the latter rain'.68

Irving came to have a profound influence over Henry Drummond, a politician, banker and writer who opened his home at Albury Park, Surrey, to Irving, M'Neile, Way, and those of like mind, keen to study prophecy.

The first decades of the nineteenth century saw an increasing dissatisfaction with the oversimplified Gospel of the earlier evangelical movement. The quest for a more experimental faith and a fuller biblical exegesis led to greater emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit, ecclesiology , and prophecy. These subjects were of major interest to such orthodox churchmen as Haldane Stewart, Hugh MacNeil, and William Marsh, who together with Edward Irving and many others attended at Henry Drummond's invitation the Conferences for Biblical Study at Albury Park, Surrey, in 1826.69

With a growing interest in millennial speculations other writers published similar treaties. McNeile, looking back in 1866, in the preface to his new edition, acknowledged how, a generation earlier, such views were something of a novelty by what he terms 'anti-restorationists'.70

When these lectures were first published in 1830, the subject was comparatively new to the Church in this country. It had no place in the battle-field of the Reformation. It had not been discussed by any of the theological lights of the last century. It was just beginning to be ventilated in consequence of the labours of Mr. Louis Way and Mr. Hawtrey; and more especially in consequence of the writings of Mr. Faber, and the zealous advocacy of Mr. Simeon.71

Benjamin Willis Newton (1807-1899)

Another prolific writer was Benjamin Willis Newton, a Brethren colleague of John Nelson Darby, whose books were reprinted several times between the 1850's and 1900's.72 Newton appears to have been something of a nineteenth century ancestor of Hal Lindsey, interpreting the contemporary European political scene in the light of prophecy.73 He saw, for example, great significance in the fact that one of the Rothschild's was allegedly negotiating with the Sultan for the construction of a railway from Constantinople to Baghdad. He believed this to be one of many signs of the impending merger of the revived Eastern and Western halves of the Roman Empire, a 'Roman world, from England to the Euphrates' centred on Rome.74 Writing in 1859, Newton comments at length on the theological significance of geo-political developments in Europe,

The interests of France, Great Britain and Austria are more and more felt to be identical as respects the aggression of Russia; and this feeling Spain, Italy and Greece, will soon thoroughly share...75

His colourful predictive map of the ten kingdoms making up this revived Roman Empire, published in 1863, comprised the then most influential countries surrounding the Mediterranean, namely, France, Spain, Northern Italy, the Neopolitan States, Austria, Turkey, Greece, Syria and Egypt, together with the British Isles.76 Allowing himself a degree of latitude with regard to the timing of these events, Newton asserted in 1879,

Whether it may be long and deadly; or whether the way of the Western Roman nations may be smoothed so as for the resuscitation of the East under their guardianship to be quietly and speedily effected, it is impossible for us to say.77

In the forward to 'Babylon: Its Future History and Doom with remarks on the Future of Egypt and Other Eastern Countries', (3rd Edition) published in 1890, Newton could still insist, 'On Israel, and on Western Europe chiefly will rest the responsibility of causing the revived Eastern Branch of the Roman World to be what it is to be.'78 Just as contemporary apocalyptic writers see the rise of New Age inter-faith religious unity as a sign of the coming Antichrist79, so Newton was predicting the same at the end of the 19th Century.

The result of the late war with Russia has been to bring the Turkish dominions into recognised political connection with Western Europe... The ancient outline of the Roman Empire will again appear... At bottom, Mohommedanism, what is it but a sect of Christianity? When the Papists, and the Greek church and Judaism, and Mohommedanism, and Anglicanism, shall re-echo this sentiment, and when it shall become governmentally adopted by the nations of the Roman world, we shall soon see the 'Ephah' and 'wickedness', its inmate, established in the land of Shinar.80

In America, following the frequent visits of John Nelson Darby from 1862 onwards, his dispensational views about the Church and Israel had a profound influence upon leading evangelicals like James Brookes, D. L. Moody, William E. Blackstone and C. I. Scofield, to the point where these millennial speculations came to be accepted as normative by the great majority of American evangelicals within the 20th Century.81

James H. Brookes (1830 )

Rev. James H. Brookes, the minister of Walnut Street Presbyterian Church, St. Louis, is known as 'The Father of American Dispensationalism'82. Brookes was instrumental in bringing D. L. Moody to St Louis for the 1879-1880 campaign, and introduced Scofield, and probably also Darby to Moody.

Brookes not only sympathised with J. N. Darby's dispensational views of a failing Church, corrupt and beyond hope, but it is known they met during five visits Darby made to St Louis between 1864-186583 and again between 1872-1877 when Darby preached from Brookes' pulpit.84

Brookes became the most influential exponent of Dispensationalism by three chief means. The first of these was his own Bible study and his habit of gathering young protégés around him for such study. By far the best known of these students was C. I. Scofield. The second means was his literary work. He published many books and pamphlets and he edited The Truth, a Christian magazine, from 1874 until his death. The third means was his leadership in the Niagara Bible Conference and the various prophetic conferences of his day.85

In the summer of 1872, Darby wrote a letter describing the fruitfulness of his initial visit to St. Louis which had included, '...good opportunities and I am in pretty full intercourse with those exercised, among whom are more than one official minister.'86 Mindful perhaps of the disapprobation held within traditional denominational circles for the Brethren and in particular for Darby's controversial views, with which he now identified, Brookes,

...gave no credit for them to Darby or any of the Brethren. This may be due to the fact that there were associations with the name Darby which Brookes wished to avoid. 87

This nevertheless explains how the premillennial dispensational views associated with the Albury and Powerscourt Conferences in England and Ireland had taken root in Middle America.

Dwight L. Moody (1837-1899)

John Nelson Darby's influence over D. L. Moody came about through one of Darby's disciples, a young evangelist Henry Moorehouse who impressed Moody with his 'extraordinary' preaching. According to his son, Moody's message and style were revolutionised, 'Mr Moorehouse taught Moody to draw his sword full length, to fling the scabbard away, and to enter the battle with the naked blade.'88

Albert Newman, a contemporary American historian confirmed the strong influence Darby and his colleagues had over Moody,

The large class of evangelists, of whom Dwight L. Moody was the most eminent, have drawn their inspiration and their Scripture interpretation largely from the writings and the personal influence of the Brethren.89

Arno Gaebelein, Scofield's biographer, notes how Scofield kept Moody conformed to a dispensational prophetic framework, 'Moody himself needed at times a better knowledge of prophecy, and Scofield was the man to lead him into it.'90

Moody's greatest service to Darby and dispensationalism has come through the Bible institute which still bears his name and which became a model for many others. By 1956 it is known that at least 41 Bible schools were identified as dispensational, training some 10,000 pastors and missionaries annually, six of the largest accounting for half the student numbers.91

Moody's Institute in Chicago, although not the first of such schools, became the prototype; and since Moody had imbibed a fair dose of dispensationalism in a rather typical unstructured form, and his colleague and successor R. A. Torrey in a more systematic way, it was natural that the burgeoning Bible school movement, with a few exceptions, should follow this line of thought. And as the Bible schools unintentionally became training centres for evangelical ministers as many of the theological seminaries opted for divergent views, Darby's prophetic teaching became more widely accepted than ever.92

Moody's name is also associated with the popular Northfield Conferences which he founded in 188093 Sandeen makes a further significant observation.

No historian of Moody's amazing career has noted, however, that his Northfield Conferences were virtually dominated by dispensationalists, particularly from 1880 through 1887 and again from 1894-1902.94

William E. Blackstone (1841-1935)

Another of John Nelson Darby's disciples was William E. Blackstone, an influential evangelist, financier and benefactor95. In 1887 he wrote a book, Jesus is Coming which by 1916 had already been translated into 25 languages,96 eventually selling over 1 million copies in 48 languages including Hebrew. In 1908 a presentation edition was sent to several hundred thousand ministers and Christian workers97 and apparently the book is still in print. According to W. M. Smith, this best-seller was,

Probably the most wide-read book in this century on our Lord's return... More Christian leaders had their interest in the second advent awakened by this book than any other volume that had been published for decades.98

Blackstone also helped to found the Chicago Hebrew Mission, which later became the American Messianic Fellowship. In 1890, he headed the first conference between Jews and Christians in Chicago. The following year in March 1891 he lobbied the US President Benjamin Harrison and his Secretary of State, James G. Blaine, with a petition signed by 413 Jewish and Christian leaders including John & William Rockefeller, calling for an international conference on the Jews and Palestine. The petition offered this solution,

Why not give Palestine back to them [the Jews] again? According to God's distribution of nations it is their home, an inalienable possession from which they were expelled by force. Under their cultivation it was a remarkably fruitful land, sustaining millions of Israelites, who industriously tilled its hillsides and valleys. They were agriculturalists and producers as well as a nation of great commercial importance - the centre of civilization and religion. Why shall not the powers which under the treaty of Berlin, in 1878, gave Bulgaria to the Bulgarians and Servia to the Servians now give Palestine back to the Jews?99

Although President Harrison did not act upon the petition, the event was commemorated in Israel in 1965 with a memorial and a forest dedicated in Blackstone's name.100

2.6 The 19th Century Resurgence of Interest in Palestine and Zionism

In the 19th Century there was a considerable thawing in Protestant attitudes toward the Jews,101 of enthusiasm for missionary outreach among them as well as a growing interest in the Holy Land and things Oriental.102 This was largely due to a succession of archaeological discoveries in the Near East, military adventurism, and the growing number of travelogues which fired the imagination.

Travelogues

One of the most popular was Dean Stanley's Sinai and Palestine which went through four editions within a year of its publication in 1856.103 Other authors included William M. Thackeray,104 Gertrude Bell,105 Robert Byron,106 Robert Graves,107 Alexander Kinglake,108 Rudyard Kipling,109 T.E. Lawrence,110 Freya Stark,111 and William M. Thomson.112 However, the most influential English writer among early Arabists was Charles Montague Doughty, an Oxford Don. Like many other European travellers,

Lawrence, throughout his sojourn in the Middle East, was under the spell of 'Travels in Arabia Deserta', a twelve-hundred page account of a two-year odyssey, between 1876 and 1878... This tome, which took Doughty a decade to write is so powerful and all-engrossing in its effect and so completely defines the Arabs and the Middle East desert that the book's influence on Arabists thought cannot be exaggerated. Travels in Arabia Deserta makes Doughty, truly, Britain's first and greatest Arabist... Doughty's book started a literary and psychological movement among Westerners drawn to the Arabs.13

Between 1800 and 1875, around 2,000 authors wrote about the Holy Land, and by the 1830's a visit to the Near East formed part of the grand tour taken by most young European gentlemen.114 Alexander Kinglake, who wrote his travelogue in 1835, noted the tensions Europeans faced when encountering the Eastern denominations.

Many Protestants are wont to treat these traditions contemptuously, and those who distinguish themselves from their brethren by the appellation of 'Bible Christians' are almost fierce in their denunciation of these supposed errors.115

Pliny Fisk & William Thomson, among the earliest 19th century American missionaries to the Middle East were shocked on their arrival in Jerusalem,

...to see the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the other Holy Places guarded by a dirty and superstitious rabble of Greeks and Byzantinized Arabs, all kissing icons and burning incense amid gold-leaf finery, scandalised these well-bred and puritanical New Englanders. In the eyes of the missionaries, it was the Oriental Christians-the Greek Orthodox, the Egyptian Copts, the Lebanese Maronites, and others-who had truly usurped the Holy Land, by emphasizing the hypnotic mechanics of liturgy over the Word of God. The Protestant missionary animus toward these strange eastern rite churches... was never to dissipate.116

Another Beirut missionary, Margaret McGilvary, made similar derogatory comments in the 1920's,

The Oriental Church is the canker at the heart of Christianity, and inasmuch as it is the chief point of contact with Islam, it behooves the Christian world to renovate the system which so unworthily represents its cause in the Near East.117

Harriet Martineau, another writer, referred to the services at the Holy Sepulchre as '...mummeries done in the name of Christianity... idolatrous nonsense...'118 It was this dissatisfaction with the Eastern Churches' monopoly on the traditional sites and a repugnance for their garish shrines which fuelled interest among Evangelicals in such ventures as the archaeological work of the Palestine Exploration Fund, the alleged discovery of the true Calvary in 1883 by General Gordon and the subsequent funding by public subscription of the Garden Tomb Association.119 Since then the Garden Tomb has became probably the most popular religious site for Christian Zionists, after the Temple area, who prefer to worship in this typical English country garden rather than at the historic sites with the unfamiliar yet indigenous Christians.

19th Century Protestant pilgrims, while not wishing to appear superstitious or overly emotional, were nevertheless often moved by their first sight of Jerusalem. Robert Curzon describes the magnetic hold which this place has over pilgrims through what happened in his party.

Everyone was silent for a while, absorbed in the deepest contemplation. It was curious to observe the different effect which our approach to Jerusalem had upon the various persons who composed our party. A Christian pilgrim, who had joined us on the road, fell down upon his knees and kissed the holy ground, two others embraced each other, and congratulated themselves that they had lived to see Jerusalem. As for us Franks, we sat bolt upright on our horses, and stared and said nothing, whilst around us the more natural children of the East wept for joy, and, as in the army of the Crusaders, the word Jerusalem! Jerusalem! was repeated from mouth to mouth; but we, who consider ourselves civilised and superior beings, repressed our emotions; we were above showing that we participated in the feelings of our barbarous companions.120

Curzon's account also reveals something of the condescending prejudice commonly felt by Europeans toward Orientals, a related issue which will be developed later. While the theological reservations of the Reformers were quietly forgotten in the growing fascination with things Oriental, the real breakthrough in the rise in personal contact with the Orient came as a result of innovations in transportation.

Pilgrimages

In 1869 the Suez Canal was opened, coincidentally the same year Thomas Cook led his first tour group to Jerusalem, made up of 16 ladies, 33 gentlemen, and two assistants. By the end of the 19th Century, his company had arranged for 12,000 pilgrims to visit the Holy Land. It is not an exaggeration to say that Thomas Cook probably did more than any other person to facilitate and shape evangelical contact with the Holy Land. His reputation as an organiser of pilgrimages grew after he was invited in 1882 to arrange the visit by Prince Edward, later Edward VII, and his son Prince George, later King George V. In 1872 Cook wrote the following analysis of his new enterprise.

The educational and social results of these four years of Eastern travel have been most encouraging. A new incentive to scriptural investigation has been created and fostered; 'The Land and the Book' have been brought into familiar juxtaposition, and their analogies have been better comprehended; and under the general influence of sacred scenes and repeated sites of biblical events, inquiring and believing spirits have held sweet counsel with each other.121

In 1891 his influence was further enhanced by the publication of Cook's Tourist Handbook for Palestine and Syria. This was designed to be read on horseback or by tent light and contained all the essential scriptural references associated with each location visited. By doing so, Cook reinforced the link in the minds of pilgrims between the Biblical history of the Jews and the contemporary locations visited. Avoiding the traditional pilgrimage itinerary which focussed on religious shrines regarded with distaste by Europeans, Cook also pioneered what he termed, 'Biblical Educational and General Tours' designed especially for clergy, Sunday school teachers and 'others engaged in promoting scriptural education.'122

Cook's tours proved popular for a number of other significant reasons which have a bearing not only on the development of Christian Zionism in the 20th Century but also, conversely, on the decline in contact between pilgrims and the indigenous Christians. Middle-class Protestant clientele from America and Europe were attracted to Cook's tours because they wanted the type of pilgrimage, and above all, the kind of services he alone offered. For example, payments were made in advance obviating the need for pilgrims to carry large sums of money, and thereby risk robbery. Cook also hand-picked and employed the 'dragomen' or local agents who in effect became his subcontractors. Those who were unwilling to co-operate soon went out of business. Tensions over the provision and competence of local guides, the quality of local hotels, unfamiliar food, the suitability of transportation and general fear of the indigenous population are not new. These frictions and prejudices so common today were clearly evident in the 19th Century. They epitomise the inability or unwillingness of Americans and Europeans generally, then as now, to identify with the indigenous Palestinian Christians.

Literary Romanticism

Another important influence upon Christian attitudes toward Zionism in the 19th Century had to do with the growing literary fascination with the Jews and the Holy Land, what Sharif calls, 'the literalization of the Hebrew World'.123 She describes this genre of literature as 'Romantic racism', that is a Romanticism infatuated with Zion, and offers extensive quotations from the writings of Robert Byron, Walter Scott, William Wordsworth, Robert Browning and George Eliot to illustrate it.124 Eliot, for example, was a devout evangelical who at the same time was familiar with contemporary Judaism, apparently regularly attending synagogue services and dialoguing with Jewish Rabbis. In 1874 Eliot began working on Daniel Deronda, described by Sharif as, 'the first truly Zionist novel in the history of non-Jewish fiction.'

Eliot dispenses with the theories of amalgamation or affinity between Christianity and Judaism. The hero of Daniel Deronda is not a Christianized or 'gentilized' Jewish national hero who discovers his Jewish heritage under the influence of non-Jews. Nor are there appeals to Anglican England to follow the example of Cyrus and help to bring a Jewish return to Palestine. Eliot's debt to Shaftesbury and Evangelism (sic) though unacknowledged, must be considered. The gentile author created in Daniel Deronda a true Zionist hero who discovers for himself his Jewish nationality and heritage. The novel represents the apex of non-Jewish Zionism in the literary field, the culmination of a long tradition that began with the Protestant idea of Restoration, but had initially demanded the conversion of the Jews as a first step towards the Palestine goal. Then it was allowed that conversion might happen after Restoration and, by the 19th Century, conversion had been completely dropped as a necessary requirement. Restoration had instead become identified with a return to the Hebrew heritage.125

Through her fictional character Mordecai, a Jewish mystic, Eliot graphically expresses a concrete manifesto behind the 19th Century Christian Zionist vision.

Looking towards a land and a polity, our dispersed people in all the ends of the earth may share the dignity of a national life which has a voice among the peoples of the East and the West - which will plant the wisdom and skill of our race so that it may be, as of old, a medium of transmission and understanding... There is a store of wisdom among us to found a new Jewish polity, grand, simple, just, like the old - a republic where there is equality of protection, an equality which shone like a star on the forehead of our ancient community, and give it more than the brightness of Western freedom and despotisms of the East. Then our race shall have an organic centre, a heart and a brain to watch and guide and execute... And the world will gain as Israel gains.126

Sharif concludes, 'Daniel Deronda was the 'literary introduction' to the Balfour Declaration, which made the presence of a Jewish polity in Palestine a historic necessity.'127

2.7 British Colonialism and the Restoration of Jews to Zion

Bonaparte, Commander-in-Chief of the Armies of the French Republic in Africa and Asia, to the Rightful Heirs of Palestine. Israelites, unique nation, whom, in thousands of years, lust of conquest and tyranny were able to deprive of the ancestral lands only, but not of name and national existence... She [France] offers to you at this very time, and contrary to all expectations, Israel's patrimony... Rightful heirs of Palestine... Hasten! Now is the moment which may not return for thousands of years, to claim the restoration of your rights among the population of the universe which had shamefully withheld from you for thousands of years, your political existence as a nation among the nations, and the unlimited natural right to worship Yehovah in accordance with your faith, publicly and in likelihood for ever (Joel 4:20).128

In the Spring of 1799, during the Syrian campaign of his Oriental expedition, Napoleon became the first statesman to propose a sovereign Jewish state in Palestine. Napoleon believed that with sympathetic Jews controlling the territory between Acre, Lower Egypt and the Red Sea, French imperial and commercial interests in India, Arabia and Africa could be secured.129 Neither Napoleon nor the Jews were able to deliver. Nevertheless his proclamation, '...is a barometer of the extent to which the European atmosphere was charged with these messianic expectations.'130 As Sharif observes,

The idea of a Jewish national Restoration to Palestine had resurfaced in Western European culture at a politically most opportune time. During the course of the 19th Century, a Jewish presence in Palestine, apart from its previous religious-prophetical, benevolent or philo-Semitic connotations, now came to be a political issue for the secular European powers that aspired to overseas expansion and empires. Religious and philanthropic ideas were now skilfully combined with the hard-headed Realpolitik of acquiring or strengthening spheres of influence in the Near East... Secular authorities, as well as religious ones, were now toying with Zionist ideas for their potential usefulness... Palestine suddenly found itself within the orbit of European power politics and under the contending influences of all the major powers: France, Britain and Russia... Britain's interest in the Near East, and of course Palestine, had been stirred by the Napoleonic expedition of 1799. The area's strategic importance to the British Empire had already been fully recognized. The vital necessity of preventing French control over the area had not only resulted in the battles of the Nile and Acre, but also spawned a British military expedition eastwards. Soon Britain's main concern was to hold back Russia by maintaining Turkish sovereignty at all costs.131

Just as Napoleon's motives behind his call to arms directed at Jews across Europe were complex, so it is difficult to separate 19th Century British foreign policy regarding Palestine from the religious beliefs of her own political leaders, notably Lord Shaftesbury, Lord Palmerston and later Lord Balfour.132 Other leading figures in British society who were known to sympathise with Jewish restorationism included the Duke of Kent, Bishop Manning and Gladstone.

Lord Shaftesbury

Lord Shaftesbury was himself 'convinced of Darby's teachings',133 and actively campaigned for a Jewish homeland in Palestine.134 Stirred by the Napoleonic expedition, Shaftesbury argued for a greater British presence in Palestine on both religious as well as political grounds, advocating that assistance be given not only to assist Jews to return to Palestine but also for the founding of an Anglican bishopric and cathedral in Jerusalem. This he saw as the means by which God would continue to bless England as he had apparently promised through Abraham, and Lord Palmerston, providentially Shaftesbury's step-father-in-law was Britain's Foreign Secretary. In his diary for 1st August 1838, Shaftesbury wrote,

Dined with Palmerston. After dinner left alone with him. Propounded my schemes which seems to strike his fancy. He asked questions and readily promised to consider it. How singular is the order of Providence. Singular, if estimated by man's ways. Palmerston had already been chosen by God to be an instrument of good to His ancient people, to do homage to their inheritance, and to recognize their rights without believing their destiny. It seems he will yet do more. Though the motive be kind, it is not sound. I am forced to argue politically, financially, commercially. He weeps not, like his Master, over Jerusalem, nor prays that now, at last, she may put on her beautiful garments.135

As a first step Shaftesbury persuaded Palmerston to appoint the fellow restorationist William Young as the first British vice-consul in Jerusalem. He subsequently wrote in his diary,

What a wonderful event it is! The ancient City of the people of God is about to resume a place among the nations; and England is the first of the gentile kingdoms that ceases to 'tread her down'.136

A year later in 1839, Shaftesbury wrote a 30 page article for the Quarterly Review, entitled 'State and Restauration (sic) of the Jews.' In it Shaftesbury predicted a new era for God's chosen people. He insisted,

...the Jews must be encouraged to return in yet greater numbers and become once more the husbandman of Judea and Galilee... though admittedly a stiff-necked, dark hearted people, and sunk in moral degradation, obduracy, and ignorance of the Gospel were not only worthy of salvation but also vital to Christianity's hope of salvation137

Wagner assesses the significance of Shaftesbury's strategy.

Demonstrating keen political insight, Shaftesbury saw three distinct advantages for England in this plan, (1) England would outpace France in the colonial competition to control the Near East; (2) England would be insured a direct land passage to India, the 'jewel' of the British Empire; (3) vast commercial markets would be opened for British economic interests. It was not a mere coincidence that these political goals matched those of the British Foreign office concerning the Near East.138

Lord Palmerston

Shaftesbury's gentle lobbying of Palmerston proved successful. Palmerston wrote an astonishing letter to Ponsonby, the British ambassador in Constantinople, dated 11 August 1840. It concerned the mutual benefit to both Turkey and Britain of allowing Jews to return to Palestine. Ironically the restoration of the Jews was seen, at that time, as an important means of maintaining the status quo, and of avoiding the disintegration of the Moslem Ottoman Empire. Palmerston wrote,

There exists at the present time among the Jews dispersed over Europe, a strong notion that the time is approaching when their nation is to return to Palestine... It would be of manifest importance to the Sultan to encourage the Jews to return and to settle in Palestine because the wealth which they would bring with them would increase the resources of the Sultan's dominions; and the Jewish people, if returning under the sanction and protection and at the invitation of the Sultan, would be a check upon any future evil designs of Mohamet Ali or his successor... I have to instruct Your Excellency strongly to recommend [the Turkish government] to hold out every just encouragement to the Jews of Europe to return to Palestine.139

Days after Lord Palmerston sent his letter, a lead article in the Times dated 17 August 1840, called for a plan 'to plant the Jewish people in the land of their fathers' claiming such a plan was under 'serious political consideration' and commending the efforts of Shaftesbury, as the author of the plan which it argued was 'practical and statesmanlike.' Tuchman claims the article 'created a sensation.'140 Lady Palmerston supported her husband's stance. A letter to written to Princess Lieven reveals something of her ambivalence toward the involvement of Christian Zionists in the plan to restore Palestine to the Jews,

We have on our side the fanatical and religious elements, and you know what a following they have in this country. They are absolutely determined that Jerusalem and the whole of Palestine shall be reserved for the Jews to return to; this is their only longing to restore the Jews.141

Fuelling speculation about an imminent restoration, on 4 November of 1840, Shaftesbury took out a paid advertisement in the Times to give greater visibility to his vision. The advertisement included the following,

RESTORATION OF THE JEWS, A memorandum has been addressed to the Protestant monarchs of Europe on the subject of the restoration of the Jewish people to the land of Palestine. The document in question, dictated by a peculiar conjunction of affairs in the East, and other striking 'signs of the times,' reverts to the original covenant which secures that land to the descendants of Abraham.142

Wagner summarises Shaftesbury's influence on the rise of Christian Zionism in these terms,

One cannot overstate the influence of Lord Shaftesbury on the British political elite, church leaders, and the average Christian lay person. His efforts and religious-political thought may have set the tone for England's colonial approach to the Near East and in particular the 'holy' land during the next one hundred years. He single-handedly translated the theological positions of Brightman, Henry Finch, and John nelson Darby into a political strategy. His high political connections, matched by his uncanny instincts, combined to advance the Christian Zionist vision.143

Like Moses, Shaftesbury did not live to see his promised land realised, however, through his lobbying, writings and public speaking he did more than any other British politician to inspire a generation of Caleb's and Joshua's to translate his religious vision into a political reality.

In addition to influencing British colonial perceptions of the Near East, Shaftesbury also predisposed the next generation of British Conservative politicians favourably toward the World Zionist movement, which led eventually to British support of the Jewish state.144

What is not generally known is that it was probably Shaftesbury who inspired Israel Zangwell and Theodore Herzl to coin the myth, 'A land of no people for a people with no land.' It is likely that they borrowed the idea from Shaftesbury, who a generation earlier, imagining Palestine an empty country, formulated the slogan, 'A country without a nation for a nation without a country.'145

In 1865, James Finn, the British Consul in Jerusalem and another leading restorationist, established the Palestine Exploration Fund for the purpose of encouraging scientific exploration, archaeological research and the cartographic mapping of the Holy Land. According to Sharif, this was merely one of many organisations and charities offering advice and financial support to encourage Jews to emigrate to Palestine and form agricultural colonies.146

Laurence Oliphant

One of those to take up the Zionist mantle of Shaftesbury was another influential M. P., Laurence Oliphant (1829-1888). Unlike many other Zionists, he actually visited Palestine to survey the land and explore prospects for its agricultural colonisation. In 1880 Oliphant published a book entitled The Land of Gilead, in which he reiterated the Zionist case, proposing a detailed settlement scheme east of the Jordan under British protection while acknowledging Turkish sovereignty. Conveniently, Oliphant too recognised the convergence of absolute religious dogmatism and pragmatic political expediency.

It remains for England to decide whether she will undertake the task of exploring its ruined cities, of developing its vast agricultural resources, by means of the repatriation of that race which first entered into its possession, 3000 years ago and of securing the great political advantages which must accrue from such a policy.147

Oliphant also urged the British Parliament to assist the emigration of Jews to Palestine from Russia and Eastern Europe. Controversially he recommended that the 'warlike' Bedouins be driven out, while the more passive Palestinians be moved onto reservations along the lines of the native Indians in North America.148

By 1897 when the First World Zionist Congress met in Basle, Switzerland, Jewish leaders in favour of a Zionist state had sympathetic support from many more senior British political figures. The founder of the Red Cross, the Swiss Christian philanthropist, Henri Dunant, for example, was the first Gentile to be called a 'Christian Zionist' by Theodor Herzl, and one of only a handful of Gentiles to be invited to the Congress.149

William Hechler

Another Christian Zionist to influence Herzl was William Hechler (1845-1931), an Anglican priest and chaplain to the British Embassy in Vienna.

The very embodiment of British evangelism (sic) entering the realm of politics, he was, by background and by training, ideally suited to act as mediator between Jewish and non-Jewish Zionism, combining religious, humanitarian and political Zionism. Imbued with evangelical millenarianism, he even formulated his own exact date for the re-establishment of the Jewish state. Equally, he was moved by his concern over the vast stream of East European Jewish refugees now fleeing towards the West... His booklet, The Restoration of the Jews to Palestine (1894), predating Herzl's Der Judenstaat by two years, spoke of the need for 'restoring the Jews to Palestine according to Old Testament prophecies.'150

Having read Herzl's call for a Jewish state, Hechler arranged to see the author. Herzl records the meeting on 10 March 1896 in his diary.

The Reverend William Hechler, Chaplain of the English Embassy here, came to see me. A sympathetic, gentle fellow, with a long grey beard of a prophet. He is enthusiastic about my solution of the Jewish Question. He also considers my movement a 'prophetic turning-point' - which he had foretold two years before. From a prophecy in the time of Omar (637CE) he had reckoned that at the end of forty-two prophetic months (total 1260 years) the Jews would get Palestine back. This figure he arrived at was 1897-98.151

David Lloyd George

David Lloyd George, who eventually became Prime Minister in 1916, was another self-confessed Zionist, sharing similar views to those of Shaftesbury and Oliphant, although his were, according to Wagner, more 'ardent'. In his own words, he was Chaim Weizmann's 'proselyte... Acetone converted me to Zionism.' In the same speech before the Jewish Historical Society in 1925, he reminisced,

I was brought up in a school where I was taught far more about the history of the Jews than about the history of my own land. I could tell you all the kings of Israel. But I doubt whether I could have named half a dozen of the kings of England, and not more of the kings of Wales... We were thoroughly imbued with the history of your race in the days of its greatest glory, when it founded that great literature which will echo to the very last days of this old world, influencing, moulding, fashioning human character, inspiring and sustaining human motive, for not only Jews, but Gentiles as well. We absorbed it and made it part of the best in the Gentile character.152

Christopher Sykes, the son of Sir Mark Sykes who co-authored the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 which dismembered the Ottoman Empire between Britain, France and Russia, was also one of Lloyd-George's biographers. Sykes wrote that prior to the Paris Peace Accords, signed in 1919, various advisors had tried unsuccessfully to brief Lloyd-George on the issues relating to the Palestine settlement but that he was not able to grasp the issues,

...largely because he could not move beyond the Christian Zionist worldview of his youth. When briefed repeatedly on the contemporary geography of Palestine, Lloyd-George insisted on reciting from his memory of childhood Sunday school lessons the biblical cities and lands of bible times, some of which no longer existed.153

Lord Arthur Balfour

Finally, and probably most significantly of all, Lord Arthur Balfour who pioneered the Balfour Declaration in 1917, was himself also a premillennial Christian Zionist,154 who regarded history as, 'an instrument for carrying out a Divine purpose.'155 From 1905, for example, Chaim Weitzmann, then a professor of chemistry at Manchester University, began to have regular meetings with Balfour to discuss the implementation of that goal. Like Lloyd George, Balfour had been brought up in an evangelical home and was,

...predisposed to the Zionist positions solely on the basis of his limited understanding of the Bible. He subscribed to a simple, lay-person's version of the premillennial dispensational theology.156

Following a meeting with Weitzmann on 9 January 1906, Balfour wrote to his wife saying that he could see, 'no political difficulty about obtaining Palestine, only economic ones.'157 Weitzmann convinced Balfour that none of the other Jewish homeland 'solutions' such as Uganda or Argentina were tenable, and according to his niece, shortly before his death, Balfour remarked that,

...the Jewish form of patriotism was unique... Their love of their country refused to be satisfied by the Uganda scheme. It was Weizmann's absolute refusal even to look at it that impressed me.158

The British Colonialist presence in the Middle East, at the beginning of the 20th Century included both those sympathetic to Zionism like Balfour and others who for a variety of reasons had become 'Arabists.' The American, Kaplan terms them, 'sand-mad Britons' and identifying Sir Richard Francis Burton, Charles Doughty, T. E. Lawrence ('of Arabia'), Harry 'Abdullah' Philby, Wilfred Theisiger, and Gertrude Bell.159 Ultimately, both British Zionists and Arabists were committed to the same end - a strong British presence in the Middle East. Kaplan draws an important distinction between British and American Arabists in the late 19th Century and early 20th.

It was the advantages of power and privilege that imperialism offered that allowed these British men and women to work out their personalities and fantasies upon such an exotic stage. Their myriad eccentricities notwithstanding, men such as Lawrence and women such as Gertrude Bell were in Araby as British government agents, and thus it was the mechanics of imperial power that primarily concerned them... While British Arabists were imperialists, American Arabists were originally-and therefore, most significantly-missionaries. Mission work defines the American Arabist, much as imperialism defines the British Arabist... The British sought to dominate, to acquire a culture and a terrain as one acquires a rare and beautiful book. But Americans... sought something more tantalising. They sought to change this terrain, to improve upon it, using their own model. They manifested a psychology that grew out of the American Revolution.160

T. E. Lawrence

In 1916, Thomas Edward Lawrence, at 27 and an Arabic scholar, had been assigned to British military intelligence in Cairo, to sail to Jidda to seek an alliance with Sherif Hussein with the purpose of ending the unpopular pro-German Turkish occupation of the Middle East, while at the same time guarding the sea route to British India. Although Lawrence's Seven Pillars of Wisdom became one of the most popular 20th Century works on the Middle East in the English language, his official status was always that of a political intelligence officer, who in the end did deliver the Arabs to Great Britain.

Lawrence thought as an imperialist. He favoured the Balfour Declaration and the Zionist enterprise as a means to keep the French out of Palestine and perhaps out of the rest of Syria. He championed ill-fated negotiations between the Sherif of Mecca's son, the Emir Feisal, and Chaim Weizmann (whom Lawrence genuinely admired). Lawrence's prejudices were imperially motivated. He loathed Turks and Frenchmen, and he respected Jews, 'the sooner the Jews farm it [Palestine] the better,' wrote Lawrence in a letter home. In Severn Pillars of Wisdom, he notes that 'only in... the everlasting miracle of Jewry, had distant Semites kept some of their identity and force' in the greater world.161

'Clientitis' was a necessary fact of Middle Eastern politics in an era when autonomous Arab states did not officially exist and when there was no formal means by which local for tribal chiefs could express their views or aspirations other than through sympathetic British officers whose 'career fortunes rose and fell in direct proportion to those of the particular tribesmen they were attached to.' 162

Prior to 1918, it was the belief of the Colonial Office, and practically all the local expatriate Arabists that when the Turks had been defeated, the direct descendants of Mohammed, the Hashemite family of the Sherif of Mecca were the only tribe with sufficient religious and political prestige to rule with any stability in Arabia.

Lawrence, in particular, was a person overly influenced by setting. Among Arabs in the desert, he became pro-Arab; in Whitehall he was pro-Empire; with Chaim Weizmann he felt himself an avid Zionist. Thus to read the wartime missives of Lawrence, Miss Bell, and others-where, for instance, on one occasion Arab nationalism is proscribed, while on another Iraqi and Syrian self-rule is cheered on-is to find oneself in a muddle. And a muddle is what the British, with assistance from the French, made of the post-Ottoman Middle East.163

On 2nd November, 1917, Lord Balfour, then British Foreign Secretary made public the 'following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to and approved by the Cabinet.'

His Majesty's Government views with favour the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of that object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done, which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish Communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. 164

What the Balfour Declaration left unclear was the meaning of a 'national home'. Was this synonymous with sovereignty or statehood and if so what were to be the borders? In all of Palestine or just a portion? What was to be the status of Jerusalem? Furthermore, while it stated that 'the civil and religious rights of the existing population' were to be safeguarded and the territory was designated 'Palestine', there was no reference to Palestinians. 'They were an actual, but awkward non-identity'.165 It was Balfour's opinion that 'the present inhabitants' need not be consulted, either before or after.166 That 90% of the population of Palestine were Palestinian Arabs of whom around 20% were Christian seemed irrelevant to the politicians and Zionists who had another agenda.167 So the awkward questions were left unanswered and it is these ambiguities which have plagued Middle East peace negotiations and divided Christians ever since. According to Wagner,

This single declaration gave the Zionist movement its first political legitimacy in history and created a platform for its leaders to accelerate colonization of Palestine.168

In a speech made at the London Opera House celebration of the Balfour Declaration on 2nd December 1917, Lord Robert Cecil claimed that it marked not the birth of a nation but,

...the rebirth of a nation... I believe it will have far-flung influence on the history of the world and consequences than none can foresee on the future history of the human race.169

A week later, on the 9th December 1917, British troops occupied Jerusalem, 'and the Holy City passed into Christian hands for the first time since the rule of Frederick II as King of Jerusalem.' Her future, 'now lay with the Western powers and was to all intents and purposes bound up with the question of harmonising their interests in Palestine as a whole.'170

General Edmund Allenby

General Edmund Allenby however, broke with more than military custom when he walked into Jerusalem through the Jaffa Gate in order to identify with Jesus Christ, two days later on December 11th 1917. In a speech given later that day Allenby indicated something of his own respect, and his administration's intentions regarding the toleration and protection of the religious rights of the indigenous population.

Since your city is regarded with affection by the adherents of three of the great religions of mankind, and its soil has been consecrated by the prayers and pilgrimages of multitudes of devout people of these three religions for many centuries, therefore do I make known to you that every sacred building, monument, holy spot, traditional shrine, endowment, pious request, or customary place of prayer, of whatsoever form of the three religions, will be maintained and protected according to the existing customs and beliefs of those to whose faith they are sacred.171

It was clearly Allenby's desire to maintain good relations with both Arabs and Jews. Ironically it was actually the Mandate officials who encouraged the early development of indigenous Arab churches, especially among the Anglicans, and fixed the rights and responsibilities of the various denominations with regard to the sacred shrines.172 However, Anglo-French diplomacy and strategic self interest concerning the possession of territory gained from the Turks led to duplicity over the Balfour Declaration, and partisan support for the Jews.

The League of Nations mandate was a double blow to the Arabs because it not only denied them their promised independence, despite their having assisted in the overthrow of Ottoman rule, but endorsed a Jewish national homeland on what had once been Arab soil. In 1917 when Allied forces overran Damascus, helped by Lawrence's Arab guerrillas, the British and French divided their spoils of what had formerly been the Ottoman territory of Syria into six different zones.

A sliver of northern Syria was amalgamated into a new Turkish state that Mustafa Lemal Ataturk was beginning to carve out of the rump of the old Ottoman Sultanate. Southern Syria was split into two new British territories, a mandate in Palestine (which the British promised twice over, to the Jews and to the Arabs) and a kingdom in Transjordan ruled by one of Lawrence's World War I allies, Abdullah, the brother of Feisal and the son of the Sherif of Mecca. Eastern Syria became part of British Iraq. The French got the hole in the map that was left, which they in turn subdivided by proclaiming an enlarged Lebanese state, known as Grand Liban, in order to strengthen their friends, the Maronite Christians, who would now have a large Sunni Moslem population under their thumb. Meanwhile, Lawrence's World War I comrade-in-arms Feisal the son of the Sherif of Mecca, required a reward for his services; so the British set him up as the king of Syria in 1920. His kingdom lasted a hundred days until the French forced him out. Lawrence and company then proceeded to dump Feisal on Iraq, where his Hashemites from western Arabia enjoyed no local support.173

Thus, Lord Balfour and David Lloyd-George, probably two of the most influential British political leaders of the First World War years, were basically committed to Christian Zionism. Their support for the World Zionist Movement was a direct result of their evangelical upbringing. These views,

...facilitated the British colonial predisposition toward Zionist interests and the disenfranchisement of the Palestinian people following World War I.174

It was inevitable that there would be an Arab backlash and consequently Britain placed severe restrictions on Jewish emigration right up to the declaration of independence in 1948 thereby inciting antipathy and terrorist attacks from both sides.175 The 1936 Peel Commission which had recommended the partition of Palestine between Jews and Arabs stated,

The partition of Palestine is subject to the overriding necessity of keeping the sanctity of Jerusalem and Bethlehem inviolate and of ensuring free and safe access to them for all the world. That is 'a sacred trust of civilisation', a trust on behalf not merely of the peoples of Palestine but of multitudes in other lands to whom these places, one or both, are Holy Places.76

The professed reason given then for the partition of Palestine was the maintenance of free access for Western pilgrims rather than with settling any territorial rights or providing safeguards for the indigenous communities. Sir Walter Shaw of the British Colonial Office made a more realistic and perceptive appraisal of the situation,

To the Arabs it must appear improbable that such competitors (Jews) will in years to come be content to share the country with them. These fears have been intensified by the more extreme statements of Zionist policy and the Arabs have come to see in the Jewish immigrant not only a menace to their livelihood but a possible overlord of the future.177

The indigenous Christians are now living with the consequences.

2.8 Anglican Israel and the Influence of Episcopal Church in Palestine

In the 19th Century, coinciding with world-wide Western missionary endeavours, improvements in transportation, and paralleling European Colonial expansion in this strategic staging post to Africa and Asia, there was a renewed interest in Palestine among the major Protestant denominations. At the beginning of the 19th Century the only representatives of Western Christianity to be found in Jerusalem had been the Franciscans and only the Orthodox and Armenian traditions were resident in significant numbers. From the mid 19th Century, Protestant denominations began to found their own churches, not so much from a separatist spirit but because of the animosity and ostracism of the Eastern traditions. Their reformed theology, emphasis on personal conversion and lay leadership were anathema to Eastern Orthodoxy.178

This ecclesiastical fragmentation coincided with increasing inroads from Western Europe into the politics, economy, and culture of the Ottoman caliphate and of those parts of it which enjoyed varying degrees of independence. After the arousal that accompanied Napoleon's invasion of Egypt, the Western scramble for influence, and competition to wield it, quickened in the apparent, or actual, deterioration of Ottoman imperial competence in the nineteenth century.179

The Church Missionary Society (CMS) was among the earliest to show an interest from 1821, but it was the London Jews Society (LJS) who established the first permanent mission station in 1831. Their aim was the conversion of Jews to Protestant Christianity.

The influence of Christian Zionism within Anglican Evangelical circles was boosted by the support of Charles Simeon (1759-1836), who in later life was consumed with a passion for the conversion of Jews and the work of the London Jews Society, looking for 'a full and imminent restoration of God's chosen people'180

Whilst Way and others evangelized on the Continent, Simeon at home acted as a kind of one-man general staff, preaching for the Society, recruiting workers, spreading propaganda, collecting funds, advising on overall strategy. He did so with even more than his usual sense of urgency. He lived to see the work prosper remarkably. An annual income of &pound;7,000 in 1815 was doubled by 1836. Episcopal patronage was bestowed on the Society... In that progress Charles Simeon had no small part.181

The British Consul was also the first to be appointed in Jerusalem in 1838, and the Anglican church, Christ Church, was dedicated in 1845. A Protestant bishopric under joint British and Prussian auspices had been founded in 1841. Solomon Alexander, the first bishop and a former Jewish rabbi did not survive long in the post and was succeeded by Samuel Gobat, a Swiss Lutheran. The arrangement with Germany then lapsed and the bishopric became solely Anglican in 1881.182 Initially Alexander and Gobat co-operated with the Eastern Churches, concentrating on the circulation of the Scriptures and opening what were termed 'Bible schools'.

As Eastern Christians bought the Bibles and sought help in reading them, teachers were supplied and more schools opened. The first two CMS missionaries arrived for this purpose in 1851 and were based in Jerusalem and Nablus. The local leadership of the Eastern Churches felt threatened and excommunicated those who read the Scriptures offered by the Anglicans.

Consequently Bishop Gobat felt compelled to protect them and from the 1860's small Anglican congregations based on a loose parish structure and led by Palestinian clergy were formed in Jerusalem, Nazareth, Jaffa, Haifa, and Salt. The transition from a colonialist Anglican church dominated by expatriates to a Palestinian Anglican church was a significant but slow process which is still continuing. According to Bishop Rennie MacInnes, writing in 1925,

The work of the CMS in all its missions is to train those who join her in the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England, with the ultimate object of aiding in the establishment of a self-supporting, self-governing and self-extending system.183

The self-governing Palestine Church Council, also known as the Episcopal Evangelical Church in the Holy Land was officially established in Jaffa in 1905. By then it already included twenty Palestinian clergy serving in Jaffa, Kefr Yasif, Bir Zeit, Ramleh, Shefaamr, Nablus, Acco, Salt, Nazareth and Jerusalem. However, it was not until 1958 that the first Palestinian Bishop was appointed.

For all their will to autonomy, the local recruits to Protestant mission were beholden in various ways to its Western sources, beneficiaries of its educational investments and conditioned by the vicissitudes of external politics.184

However far this process of assimilation has come and still needs to go, is a matter of healthy debate. Unfortunately this commitment has sadly been misunderstood and maligned by many, especially by Christian and Jewish Zionists.

Crombie's partisan history of the Anglican Church in the Holy Land, in keeping with the provocative title 'For the Love of Zion', is an example of this.185 While its sub-title Christian Witness and the Restoration of Israel, makes an assumption as to what Christian witness should lead to or support, Crombie never clarifies his geographical definition of Zion and therefore where this 'restoration' is to take place. Throughout the book however, he is patently unsympathetic with the present indigenous Anglican leadership, and the claim of the Palestinians to the Occupied Territories. The final chapter of his book is entitled 'The antithesis of Alexander - a PLO Bishop'. The book, not surprisingly, has aroused a good deal of criticism among leading Palestinian Anglicans.

I found reading it that it was written by a person who really harbours resentment against the Arabs and against Palestinian Christians... it reflects his prejudice, his resentment, his deep dislike of the local Christians as if they really have nothing to say. Anything that Jews do somehow is always put in the right light and anything Arabs would do is somehow always judged as being wrong... why doesn't he see the presence of so many Zionist Bishops and clergy, those are OK but once you have any person who loves the land God has chosen to give him, an indigenous Palestinian, that's taboo.186

The same kind of Zionist prejudice from a Jewish perspective can be seen in the views of Teddy Kolleck the mayor of Jerusalem. In 1992 he criticised the leadership of the Church of England for allowing the Diocese in Jerusalem 'to fall into the hands of the Arabs.' 187

The termination of the British Mandate in 1948 further accelerated the transition from expatriate to Palestinian control of Anglican mission schools, hospitals and other church assets, although the Zionist agency, the Churches Ministry Among Jewish People (CMJ) has remained strongly independent of, and resistant to, the indigenous leadership of the Diocese of Jerusalem . The elevation of the Anglican episcopate in Jerusalem to the status of an archbishopric in 1957 and its renaming as the 'Episcopal Church in the Middle East' was another important step in this process of naturalisation.188

2.9 American Arabists and Changing American Attitudes to Israel

Robert Kaplan in The Arabists,189 traces how a small but powerful elite of families and friends came to dominate America's relations with the Middle East for over a century, and in particular their perceptions of Jews and Arabs. Known as 'Arabists,' they had gone 'ethnic' immersing themselves in Arab life and culture and enjoying privileged access to the ruling Arab families. They served as educators, military attaches and diplomats, perpetuating both the Western romance with Arabia while at the same time playing a seminal role in the growth of Arab nationalism.

They were descended from the first Americans to travel to what became Lebanon and Syria, the missionaries, scholars and explorers, an extension of the ruling WASP of 19th Century America, but without the imperialist and colonialist agenda which drove much of European interest in the area. These men and women dominated American policy and shaped American perception of the Arab world until World War II. From the late 1940's, coinciding with the birth of the State of Israel, a significant change occurred in the US diplomatic corps, which reflected the country's new ethic and social diversity.

Kaplan describes the impact of this change within the State Department, particularly marked since the 1970's, showing how the rise of Irish Catholics, Jews and Harvard experts within the diplomatic service loosened the grip of Arabists on Middle East diplomacy, and upon American attitudes to the Arab-Israeli conflict. In the early part of the 20th Century American perceptions were very different. For the grown children of those missionary families, returning to Lebanon as Foreign Service officers and educationalists,

Syria constituted much more than a home. It was almost a transplanted version of New England itself, a glorified tableau of Ivy League Brahmins, each with a foothold in the Lebanese mountains, a magical kingdom of Protestant families brimming with a spirit of adventure, rectitude, and religious idealism, where the twentieth century would not fully arrive until 1948. When it came, it came with a vengeance.190

In the Middle Ages the term 'Arabist' referred to a physician who studied Arab medicine. In the 19th Century it was also used of a student of Arab culture or language.191 From 1948 and the founding of the state of Israel the term Arabist quickly became a pejorative term for anti-Semitism. In the words of Richard Murphy, a former ambassador to Syria and Saudi Arabia, the term 'Arabist' came to describe,

'he who intellectually sleeps with Arabs,' someone, that is, assumed to be politically naive, elitist, and too deferential to exotic cultures. The word almost presumes guilt. The very syllables resonate with sympathy and possession-of and with the Arabs-in a way that a word like Sinologist does not.192

Early American missionaries to Lebanon and Syria included Bill Stoltzfus, Arthur & Ray Close, Talcott Seelye, David Zimmerman, and David & Grace Dodge.

In marked contrast to the conduct of European colonials... imperialism and commercial exploitation were entirely missing from the baggage carried by the missionaries in Lebanon. Nor did the Americans even present a threat to the local religious culture, as the missionary colonies in India, China, Burma and Siam would. For if truth be told, compared with the missionaries in the Far East, who won over significant numbers of Chinese to Protestant Christianity, the American missionaries in the Middle East were complete failures. The intractability of Islam quickly forced them to give up any hope of converting souls to Christ... It would be only as purveyors of Western education that the Americans in Lebanon were to succeed. And for that the local Arabs would learn to love them.193

The American Great Awakening fired enthusiasm for missionary work abroad and in the Middle East. A friendly agreement reached in the 1870's between three American denominations saw the Congregationalists take responsibility for Turkey, the Presbyterians for Egypt, Syria and Iran and the Dutch Reformed Church for the Arabian Gulf.

One could even date the beginning of the American Arabist tradition to 1827, when Eli Smith, the Connecticut Yankee from Yale, struck out from the relative safety of a nascent mission community in Beirut for the surrounding mountains, to live for several months with the Moslem and Druze villagers, studying their language.194

What made the contribution of American missionaries to the education of Arabs distinctive was their commitment to do so, at least initially, in Arabic. They wanted to convert from within in partnership rather than as Colonialists from the outside. Unlike the Jesuits who ran the French Catholic Schools, and who consequently attracted Arab families who wanted their children to receive a Western education, the American missionaries tried to avoid creating an elite who in the end would be divorced from their own culture. How far they succeeded is questionable. Hourani regards the ethos of such foreign academic institutions as causing 'social and psychological displacement' for Arab children learning a curriculum essentially 'alien' to their own.195

In The Arab Awakening, the standard treaties on Arab nationalism, George Antonius, himself an Arab Christian, offers a more positive assessment.

The educational activities of the American missionaries in that early period had, among many virtues, one outstanding merit, they gave the pride of place to Arabic... In that, they were the pioneers... the intellectual effervescence which marked the first stirrings of the Arab revival owes most to their labours.196

Daniel Bliss and David Dodge founded the Syrian Protestant College in Beirut in 1866, and while acknowledging the failure of previous American missionaries to convert Jews and Moslems or even the Eastern Orthodox, was nevertheless committed to teaching Arabs 'the Protestant values of democracy, hard work, and free intellectual enquiry.'197 The College actively encouraged discussion and free thinking on matters such as politics providing a fertile seed bed to Arab nationalism.

Despite the 'truncation' of Syria by British and French imperialism, Dodge, was still optimistic for the realisation of Arab nationalism, and under his leadership, the teaching staff, unlike the French Jesuit College, became internationalist, including many Arabs, Americans and Europeans.

AUB... became the heart of an Arab nationalist awakening... a world for whom the State of Israel was a provocative remnant of British colonialism, just as Maronite-dominated Lebanon was a remnant of French colonialism... AUB became, in a political-cultural sense, more influential that either the British or French governments in the Middle East; a startling achievement considering that the American government had recently retreated from the region and had no presence to speak of.198

But the dream of cultivating the inverse of colonialism was shattered by the outbreak of World War I when the traumatic effects of European geopolitical power struggles and colonial rivalries spilled over into the Holy Land. The vision of the American missionaries for a 'a borderless Arab nationalism' in which Syria followed the model of the United States becoming a liberal democracy was not shared beyond the majority Sunni Moslems, least of all by the Maronites, Druze, Greek Orthodox, Jews or Armenians living in uneasy coexistence.

During the First World War, besides the relief work of the Syrian Protestant College, the American missionaries in Syria, received the enormous sum of sixteen million dollars from churches in the United States for their work in feeding and clothing poor Arabs.

But while the British and French were drawing lines on the map and switching rulers around like chess pieces, the American Protestants were suffering alongside the victims of famine and massacre, which were the mundane consequences of World War I. While Britons like Lawrence, Philby and Miss Bell were falling in love with Arabs, the missionaries were learning-more than they ever had before-what it actually felt like to be like an Arab... in the hospices and soup kitchens of World War I Syria, far from the tents of kings and the power centers of London.99

In 1919, aware that the British and French were undermining his goal of self-determination in Syria, Woodrow Wilson sent Charles Crane, a wealthy American Arabist as head of the King-Crane Commission to investigate the wishes of the indigenous people. Reservations expressed by Arab leaders and expatriate Americans led Cranes Commission to recommend the abandonment of American support for a Jewish homeland, that further Jewish immigration be severely restricted and America or Britain govern Palestine.

While Crane went on to help finance the first explorations for oil in Saudi Arabia and the Yemen, his admiration for Hitler's Germany 'the real political bulwark of Christian culture', and of Stalin's anti-Jewish purges in Soviet Russia, led his biographer to describe his later life as dominated by,

...a most pronounced prejudice... his unbridled dislike of Jews.' Crane 'tried... to persuade ...President, Franklin D. Roosevelt, to shun the counsels of Felix Frankfurter and to avoid appointing other Jews to government posts.' Crane 'envisioned a world-wide attempt on the part of the Jews to stamp out all religious life and felt that only a coalition of Moslems and Roman Catholics would be strong enough to defeat such designs.' In 1933 Crane actually proposed to Haj Amin Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, that the Mufti open talks with the Vatican to plan an anti-Jewish campaign.200

It is significant that The Arab Awakening by George Antonius was funded by and dedicated 'To Charles R. Crane, aptly nicknamed Harun al-Rashid affectionately.'201

The reasoning behind opposition by American missionaries to the founding of the state of Israel is a complex one. In 1948, weeks before the founding of the State of Israel, Bayard Dodge retired from AUB for Princeton in New Jersey. In April he wrote a watershed article in Readers Digest entitled, 'Must There Be War in the Middle East?'

This six-thousand-word article, while forgotten and obscure, is the definitive statement of American Arabists on the birth of Israel. Though he cautioned, 'Not all Jews are Zionist and not all Zionists are extremists,' for Dodge the Zionist movement was a tragedy of which little good could come. Dodge was not anti-Semitic... Dodge's argument against Zionism rests, not on the politics of the movement, but on the Arabs' opposition to it, which in Dodge's view made the Zionist program unrealistic and therefore dangerous. Years and decades of strife would, Dodge knew, follow the birth of the Jewish state. As a result, wrote Dodge, 'All the work done by our philanthropic non-profit American agencies in the Arab world-Our Near East Foundation, our missions, our YMCA and YWCA, our Boston Jesuit college in Baghdad, our colleges in Cairo, Beirut, Damascus-would be threatened with complete frustration and collapse... so would our oil concessions,' a scenario that Dodge said would help Communist Russia. Dodge then quoted a fellow 'American Middle East expert' as saying that 'they [the Russians] intend to get many thousands of Russian Communist Jews into the Palestinian Jewish State.' Though Dodge made passing reference to the Holocaust (barely three years old at the time he wrote the article), he appeared oblivious to its psychological and historical ramifications upon the European Jewish refugees in Palestine. While admitting that the Arabs would never countenance a Jewish state, Dodge nevertheless exhorted Jews to lay down their arms and talk to the Arabs. The article ends with a quote from the Bible, 'Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of Hosts.' Dodge did not seem aware that the death-camp-haunted Jews of Palestine read the Old Testament with different eyes from those of a Protestant missionary.202

Kaplan argues that Dodge's views were representative of the wider expatriate and missionary community of Beirut who believed the US, British and Russians morally and politically wrong to railroad the partition of Palestine through the United Nations. Richard Crossman, the MP who was a member of the Anglo-American team investigating the Palestine crisis in 1947, observed that the American Protestant missionaries, 'challenged the Zionist case with all the arguments of the most violently pro-Arab British Middle Eastern officials.'203 Based on the perceptions of Bill Stoltzfus, who during his diplomatic career had been US Ambassador to six Arab countries, Yemen, Bahrain, the Y.A.E., Qatar, Oman and Kuwait, Kaplan concludes,

..the American community on Lebanon was almost, to a man, psychologically opposed to the State of Israel. But very few went over the line into anti-Semitism.204

Furthermore, President Harry Truman's foreign policy advisers were opposed to the proposal to recognise the state of Israel which they saw as a threat to maintaining good relations with the strategic oil-rich Arab nations, at the very time America was engaged in a race to thwart Soviet hegemony. In his memoirs Truman claims his State Department specialists were opposed to the idea of a Jewish state because they either wanted to appease the Arabs or because they were anti-Semitic, a charge many disputed claiming Truman was playing domestic politics, more concerned for the growing influence of American Jews than the advice of his Foreign Service professionals.

Sympathy for the Arabs and Palestinians in particular, continued among American Foreign Service officials working in the Middle East. Wat Cleverius, an Arabist, was transferred from Saudi Arabia to Tel Aviv in 1969, as economic officer, was responsible for US charities working among Palestinians, including CARE, Catholic Relief and Lutheran World Service, following the annexation of the West Bank by Israel. Looking back over three years work he wrote,

By the time I left Israel in 1972, I had begun to witness enormous corruption on the part of the Israeli civil-military establishment on the West Bank, in the form of humiliations, physical intimidation, and petty bribes that Arabs had to pay Israeli officials. Old Arab men were made to kiss the asses of donkeys in front of their families. Once the Likud came to power in 1977, they really promoted the head crunchers. They put the toughest and poorest Iraqi Jews and other Sephardim [Oriental Jews] in the West Bank, in order to really beat up the Arabs.205

American Foreign policy under Presidents like Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon B. Johnson tended to favour maintaining the status quo in the Middle East combining,

...emotional sympathy toward Israel-albeit in varying degrees-friendship toward the Arabs, and, most important of all, a desire to avoid conflict.206

The Six-Day War was bad news for Arabists. 'Israel was strengthened, Arab states were humiliated, and US embassies in Arab countries were closed, forcing many an Arabist to switch careers.'207 The seismic effect of the Six-Day war changed more than the borders of Israel. Her perceived US strategic value in the Middle East coincided with Richard Nixon's election as President. Critical of the State Department and FSO's, Nixon believed,

...an astonishing number of them have no obvious dedication to America. ..and evinced 'an expatriate attitude.' Even worse in Nixon's eyes, FSO's were the kind of people likely to be Democrats. Nixon was also a cold warrior who saw the Middle East, not in its own terms, but in terms of the world-wide struggle against the Soviets...now irrevocably in bed with the Arabs, making Israel a valuable Cold War asset.208

Nixon chose Henry Kissinger, a Jewish refugee from Germany, to head the National Security Council. According to Kaplan,

While previous administrations sought to avoid conflict in the Middle East, Nixon and Kissinger saw the imminent threat of confrontation as a series of opportunities for rearranging the pieces of the Arab-Israeli puzzle more to America's liking... with American Jews proud and energised as a result of Israel's war victory, Nixon saw Middle East negotiations as a loser in domestic political terms... In other words and put crudely, the relationship between the American president and the American Jewish community now loomed larger than the relationship between Arabists and their personal connections in the Levant.209

Arabists like Andrew Killgore, for example, who gave 25 years to serving in the US Foreign Service in many Arab countries, found himself, in 1974, when he expected to be named ambassador to Bahrain, exiled to the embassy in New Zealand. 'I thought that... I'd never get a good job [in the Arab world], because the Zionists, in my view, had it in for me at that time.'210 Regarding Kissinger, Killgore, who in 1977 became US ambassador to Qatar, was even more outspoken,

Henry, of course, was just a fifth columnist, as far as I am concerned. He was working for the Israeli's... Henry's real objective was to get out of the Middle East the Arabists that the Zionists didn't like. Because Henry was not so crypto-he just was Zionist.211

Following his retirement in 1980, Killgore went on to publish The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, in which in 1987 and 1988 he made the following provocative statements,

It is wrong and perverse for fanatical elements within the two and a half percent of our population who are Jewish to hold Congress hostage... America must regard the Israeli progression from penetration to direction of U.S. foreign policy as the work of a master criminal.212

1970 saw a coup attempt against the pro-Western government in Jordan by the PLFP and Syria, which, in the eyes of the United States, would have only benefited the Soviets.

Nixon and Kissinger faced a stark realization, only Israel could save the king of Jordan and preserve the balance of power in the region. The threat of Israeli military intervention caused the Syrians to retreat, allowing King Hussein to crush the Palestinian guerrillas in what came to be known as the Black September War.

The U.S.-Israeli strategic relationship was born amid the ashes of the failed fedayeen revolt. In the three years leading up to the 1970 Jordan crisis, annual U.S. military aid to Israel averaged under $47 million. In the three years succeeding the crisis, the annual aid averaged over $384 million.213

The influence of AUB on the post-war Arab world can be measured by the fact that at the Charter meeting of the United Nations in 1945, AUB graduates outnumbered those of any other university on the world.214 By the late 1960s, the faculty were pro-Palestinian, anti-Nixon and antiwar, and drew parallels between American imperialism in Vietnam and Israel.

David Dodge, acting president of AUB and the great-grandson of its founder Daniel Bliss, was ironically the first American to be taken hostage in Lebanon following Israel's invasion in 1981. On being released a year later, Dodge gave the following explanation for his abduction,

We condoned Israel's invasion of Lebanon and my kidnapping was in part due to the actions of Israel and U.S. support of Israel. Yes, I feel more strongly than ever that American policies in the Middle East are not even-handed enough.215

Another American missionary taken hostage in 1984, Ben Weir and his wife Carol were highly critical of American policy in the Middle East. Weir was a lecturer at the Near East School of Theology in Beirut, an ecumenical Seminary committed to training Protestants for ministry in the Arab world. Without the kind of government backing available to AUB, NESTB was even more dependent on and integrated within the indigenous Moslem Arab culture. Kaplan argues, 'The Weirs represented the extreme evolutionary offshoot of the American missionary adventure in Lebanon...' 216 David Long, an American State Department Arabist, was responsible for liaising with the Weir family in the negotiations to get Weir released. He wrote later,

The Weirs treated me and the State Department as the enemies, even though we were their government, trying to help get Ben Weir released... Carol Weir and her church group had this holier-than-thou attitude toward the U.S. government. They didn't even want the CIA to debrief him when he was released, even though the debriefing could have helped other hostages. To them, the CIA and the Israelis-not the kidnappers were the enemy.217

In any country, changes in foreign policy will invariably reflect, to some degree, changes in domestic perceptions of the world. Kaplan explains how in the 1970s and 1980s, in regard to the Arab-Israeli conflict, a gulf emerged between the experiences of the American expatriate missionary-diplomatic community living in the Middle East and American public opinion back home.

The historic relationship between a group of privileged Americans and the educated stratum of Arabs in Greater Syria was just not something that an increasingly ethnic and middle-class society in the United States was even aware of or to which it could easily relate. Regarding Israel, while those like Dodge, Seelye and Mrs. Weir were in a unique position to witness the very worst aspects of the Israeli national character, Americans at home could identify with positive aspects of Israeli life more easily than they could with anything going on in the Arab world, especially in blood-spattered Lebanon. For all its faults and crude tactics, even AIPAC was psychologically closer to mainstream America than the AUB crowd was.218

America's desire to be 'even-handed' is typified by the continued presence of an embassy in Tel Aviv and a consulate in East Jerusalem.

The Jerusalem consulate is the most controversial U.S. diplomatic mission in the Middle East, if not in the world. It represents the Arabist frontline against the pro-Israel section of the State Department, as represented by the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv, forty-five minutes away with no crossing points in between.

The consulate building in Arab East Jerusalem was a rebuke to the State of Israel. It was, to all intents and purposes, an American embassy located on territory controlled by the Israeli government. But the consulate did not recognise the Israeli government in Jerusalem, nor did it primarily deal with Israelis, its main purpose was to deal with Arabs in Jerusalem and the West Bank under Israeli military rule. Because the United States did not recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital, the consulate tried to insist that when the U.S. ambassador to Israel visited Jerusalem from Tel Aviv he should not fly the American flag on the hood of his limousine. Jerusalem was the consulate's turf, not the embassy's. The consulate in East Jerusalem, a graceful old stone building near the mediaeval Arab souk, was Araby, while the embassy, situated on a noisy and garish street in the heart of Jewish Tel Aviv, clearly was not. A war raged between the two installations.219

Ironically, pro-Zionist Senator Bob Dole has recently introduced legislation to the American Senate which requires the US Embassy to be rebuilt in Jerusalem by 31 May 1999, and authorising $100 million for 'preliminary' spending in the next 3 years. On 24th October 1995 he stated,

Israel's capital is not on the table in the peace process, and moving the United States embassy to Jerusalem does nothing to prejudice the outcome of any future negotiations.220

Marshall Wiley, was a US diplomat in Iraq, Lebanon and Israel from the early 1950s. In 1981, then the US ambassador to Oman, he resigned from the US Foreign Service because he opposed the aggressive support for the State of Israel given by the incoming Reagan administration. This was his outspoken assessment of Israeli policy toward the Palestinians.

Among the things I remember are the old Arab villages from the pre-1948 era that the Israeli's had bulldozed... The previous conquerors didn't displace the population the way the Israelis displaced the Palestinians. There was some resentment on my part toward Israel, because the viewpoint I had gotten in Israel was exposed as false when seen from the Arab side. The Palestinians lived in miserable conditions. Israeli colonialism is, in my view, worse than that of the [Ottoman] Turks.221

In what was becoming an increasingly pro-Israel administration, in 1989 Wiley went further arguing,

Israel is only about 2 percent of the [Middle East] population, and because of their support for that 2 percent, we're willing to alienate the goodwill of the other 98 percent, which have most of the land area and most of the resources, which, I think, in terms of our national interest, is a mistake.222

Ironically it was Moshe Dayan, the hero of Israel's Six-Day War, who recognised the value of American Arabists to Israeli security when he said, '..the more friends and influence America has in the Arab world [and elsewhere], the more secure Israel will be.'223

2.10 Orientalism and European Cultural Imperialism

Western Christians have, for many generations, appeared to share with the Jews not only a cultural antipathy toward Palestinians in particular but also pejorative political assumptions about Arabs generally.224 Edward Said claims this prejudice, or 'Orientalism' is representative of a peculiarly European way of dealing with foreigners. In his book, Orientalism,225 he eloquently demystifies romantic European notions of the Orient, exposing the reality and intensity of European hostility and cultural imperialism toward the East in which the strengths of the West are magnified and contrasted with the supposed weaknesses of the Orient.

Such bias and contrived generalisations have had the effect of polarising West from East, limiting the 'human encounter between different cultures, traditions and societies.' 226 At its most mundane it surfaces in views and phrases that highlight the fact that Arabs are different from Europeans, whether in skin colour, dietary preferences or personal habits. At a more profound level Orientalism has also had a profound and lasting impact upon American and European foreign policy.

Kinglake, in his unorthodox and frank impressions of the Middle East, Eothen, first published in 1844, contains an early example of Orientalism.

A man coming freshly from Europe is at first proof against the nonsense with which he is assailed; but often it happens that after a little while the social atmosphere of Asia will begin to infect him, and, if he has been unaccustomed to the cunning of fence by which reason prepares the means of guarding herself against fallacy, he will yield himself at last to the faith of those around him; and this he will do by sympathy, it would seem, rather than from conviction.227

Lawrence's Seven Pillars of Wisdom, written nearly a century later, contains 'perhaps the most famous Arabist analysis of the Arab mind, considered brilliant by some and racist by others.' 228

In the very outset, at the first meeting with them, was found a universal clearness or hardness of belief, almost mathematical in its limitation, and repellent in its unsympathetic form... They were a people of primary colours, or rather of black and white, who saw the world always in contour. They were a dogmatic people, despising doubt, our modern crown of thorns. They did not understand our metaphysical difficulties, our introspective questionings... They were at ease only in extremes. They inhabited superlatives by choice... they never compromised, they pursued the logic of several incompatible opinions to absurd ends, without perceiving the incongruity... They steered their course between the idols of the tribe and the cave.229

The perceptions of the Revd John Holmes is another good example of this. Following a visit to Palestine in 1929 he wrote with admiration for the Jewish pioneer settlers,

As I met and talked with these toilers on the land, I could think of nothing but the early English settlers who came to the bleak shores of Massachusetts, and there amid winter's cold in an untilled soil, among an unfriendly native population, laid firm and sure the foundations of our American Republic. For this reason I was not surprised later, when I read Josiah Wedgewood's 'The Seventh Dominion' to find this distinguished Gentile Zionist of Britain speaking of these Jewish pioneers as 'the Pilgrim Fathers of Palestine'. Here is the same heroism dedicated to the same ends... It is obvious that the native Arabs while no less stubborn and savage than the American Indians, cannot be removed from the scene.230

Edward Said offers more recent evidence from an essay by Dr Henry Kissinger entitled 'Domestic Structure and Foreign Policy'. In it Kissinger relies on what linguists refer to as 'binary opposition', in which, like Orientalists, he divides the world into two halves, the developed post-Newtonian and the developing pre-Newtonian world.

And like Orientalism's distinction Kissinger's was not value-free, despite the apparent neutrality of his tone. Thus such words as 'prophetic,' 'accurate,' 'internal,' 'empirical reality,' and 'order' are scattered throughout his description, and they characterise either attractive, familiar, desirable virtues or menacing, peculiar, disorderly defects. Both the traditional Orientalist... and Kissinger conceive of the difference between cultures, first, as creating a battle front that separates them, and second, as inviting the West to control, contain, and otherwise govern (through superior knowledge and accommodating power) the Other. 231

Said gives further examples of 'respectable' Orientalism in the writings of Harold Glidden, an advisor on American foreign policy to the United States Department of State Bureau of Intelligence and Research, whose views were published in the American Journal of Psychiatry in February 1972.

...it is a notable fact that while the Arab value system demands absolute solidarity within the group, it at the same time encourages among its members a kind of rivalry that is destructive of that very solidarity; in Arab society only 'success counts' and 'the end justifies the means'; Arabs live 'naturally' in a world 'characterised by anxiety expressed in generalised suspicion and distrust, which has been labelled free-floating hostility'; 'the art of subterfuge is highly developed in Arab life, as well as in Islam itself'; the Arab need for vengeance overrides everything, otherwise the Arab would feel 'ego-destroying' shame. Therefore, if 'Westerners consider peace to be high on the scale of values' and if 'we have a highly developed consciousness of the value of time,' this is not true of Arabs. 'In fact,' we are told, 'in Arab tribal society, strife, not peace, was the normal state of affairs because raiding was one of the two main supports of the economy.' 232

Probably the most disastrous recent example of how Orientalist attitudes have influencfed foreign policy decisions would be the failure of the United States and the Western Alliance to take seriously Saddam Hussein's expansionist intentions prior to his annexation of Kuwait. April Glaspie, the US ambassador to Iraq, and significantly the first woman ambassador in the Middle East, made two fundamental errors, prior to Iraq's invasion which are inherent flaws common to Arabists, and yet ironically at the same time are typical of Western Orientalists.

..first, what was required in this situation was not so much tough talk as straight talk. She was not straight with Saddam. Whatever may have been Washington's official position at the time, an Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was going to result in some sort of strong U.S. response-common sense would tell you that-and she failed to point this out to him. Second, here was an area specialist who completely misjudged the overall situation, as Gertrude Bell had misjudged it with King Feisal and as the missionaries had repeatedly misjudged it with the Sunni Arab nationalists, all misjudgements that stemmed from the hubris that allowed Westerners to think that they could modify the behaviour of another culture and shape it in their own perfect image. Saddam could be moderated if only he had the right incentives, like nonlethal military equipment...233

In April 1991, April Glaspie appeared in public for the first time following the invasion of Kuwait, to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Sydney Blumenthal of the New Republic notes that she appeared 'without makeup or jewellery; her long grey hair was pulled back and her dress absolutely plain. Her puritan austerity suggested virtue.' Indeed, she looked every inch the missionary.'234

For the Orientalist the West is seen as liberal, peaceful, rational and capable of embracing 'real' values whereas the Oriental is not. Kenneth Cragg who has lived in the Middle East for many years, and has closely identified with the Arab culture, both Moslem and Christian, concurs with Said's criticism of Orientalism, for its 'crude stereotype imaging of the East', and for being,

....a gross form of Western superiority complex, expressed in a literature and a scholarship that imposed its own false portrayal on the East and refused to care sensitively for the East's own evaluation of itself. By distortion it had its own way with its eastern versions and made these the instrument of control and, indeed, of denigration... 19th and 20th century Western Orientalism is thus found uniformly culpable, and a conniver with misrepresentation. 235

This indictment of the West falls as much upon the Church as it does upon politicians since it has contributed to the divisions among Protestant Christians in places like Jerusalem where Hebrew-Messianic believers and Zionist Christians gravitate toward Christ Church, Palestinians and their supporters to St George's, while pietistic Evangelicals invariably end up at the Garden Tomb. Each community tends to worship in isolation, attracting their own following in varying proportions from among pilgrims. Edward Said, although himself a nominal Anglican, crystallises the issue at a more profound level.

I consider Orientalism's failure to have been a human as much as an intellectual one; for in having to take up a position of irreducible opposition to a region of the world it considered alien to its own, Orientalism failed to identify with human experience, failed also to see it as human experience. 236

Eber concedes that it is perhaps inevitable that we find it hard to cope with the 'foreign' because of the weight of our emotional 'baggage' carried when travelling abroad, since we cannot avoid 'refining and redefining ourselves, confirming and reconfirming our individual and collective identities' in the light of this encounter. Nevertheless it is, she argues, '....only by examining and becoming aware of our own internal voice-overs and editing processes can we bring into sharper focus the images that we see.'237 Similarly Cragg calls unambiguously for 'imaginative, uninhibited and uninhibiting sympathy between Arab and Western Christians' 238

These are however lone voices and there remains a pervasive and arrogant racism implicit in much Christian Zionism in that presence of a Palestinian Church is ignored or denigrated, and their very existence threatened.239 This is the result not only of the historical processes already considered, but has been compounded by relatively recent theological controversies concerning biblical prophecy and eschatology. These coincided with the momentous events of 1967.

2.11 The 20th Century Revival of Christian Zionism

In the early 20th Century, following the devastating toll of the 'Great War', and then the 'Great Depression', American fundamentalism became preoccupied with refuting theological liberalism and consequently interest in Zionism appears to have waned.

In a detailed history of the rise of 20th Century American fundamentalism prior to 1970, Erling Jorstad traces the right wing, anti-modernist, anti-communist and xenophobic agenda of the movement. There is significantly, however, no reference to Israel.240 Similarly, in George Marsden's historical overview of the rise of fundamentalism and evangelicalism in America between 1870-1930, he argues that despite some evidence of anti-Semitism, in the early 20th Century there seems to have been little interest in contemporary Israel.241

During the 1940's both prior to and after the founding of the state of Israel, liberal Protestant Christians such as Paul Tillich, William Albright and Reinhold Niebuhr were the principle allies of Israel, founding the Christian Council on Palestine in 1942. Niebuhr, as Professor of Social Ethics at Union Theological Seminary defended his Zionism on pragmatic grounds rather than religious ones in an article for The Nation in 1941. Persecution in Europe combined with restrictive immigration laws in America led Niebuhr to recognise the 'moral right' of the Jews to Palestine in order to survive as a nation.242 In 1946 he testified before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry in Washington on behalf of the Christian Council on Palestine. While acknowledging the conflicting rights of Arabs and Jews in Palestine, he argued,

The fact however that the Arabs have a vast hinterland in the Middle East, and the fact that the Jews have nowhere to go, establishes the relative justice of their claims and of their cause... Arab sovereignty over a portion of the debated territory must undoubtedly be sacrificed for the sake of establishing a world Jewish homeland.243

Some notable dispensational leaders did, however, maintain a faithful and vocal commitment to an imminent realisation of the Zionist dream. Dr M. R. DeHaan, for example, founder of the Radio Bible Class World-wide Gospel Broadcast, who was regularly heard via over 600 radio stations world-wide, published his studies in the Book of Daniel in 1947. In a chapter entitled, 'The Jews and Palestine' he interprets the events before and after the Balfour Declaration in the light of Abrahamic Covenant and Belshazzar's "Handwriting on the Wall" from Daniel 5. His racist attitude toward the indigenous Christian and Moslem Palestinians is typical of Christian Zionists yet an inevitable consequence of his dispensational presuppositions.

Now the land of Palestine is the Holy Land because in His eternal purposes and program, God has set it aside for the one purpose of occupation by his peculiar people, the descendants of Jacob, and because it is God's Holy Land, anyone who tampers with it and seeks to separate its people from their possession comes under the judgment of God. This is the record of history...

Belshazzar, the king, stretched forth his hand and touched the holy things of God, the vessels that had been taken from the holy Temple in Jerusalem in the land of Judah. As a result, God brought swift and speedy judgment upon the nation and Babylon fell and came to a dismal end. Today the same thing is still true in principle, and the Holy Land, that little parcel of land... Is still the key to the world's problems. When the nation of that land to whom God has promised it by covenant is given full and free possession of the land, then only will the nations be at rest and the peace for which men strive shall finally be realised.

In recent years, there has been much indication of the fact that this is about to be consummated, and we believe we are sat the very threshold of that glorious time when Israel shall be fully restored top the land again and the millennial rest will be ushered in by the coming of the Messiah. Many Bible students were quite certain some twenty or twenty-five years ago that we had just about reached that period in history when Israel would be restored to the land and it would be a signal for the return of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is a well-known fact established in history that when the tide of war was turning against the Allies in World War 1, it was a humble modest Jewish chemist, Dr. Chaim Weitzman, now world famous and very much in the news again, who came forward in the zero hour of the apparent defeat of the Allies with the formula for the most powerful explosive ever discovered up to that time, T.N.T., and donated the discovery to his beloved country, Britain, and that turned the tide of victory for the Allies... Then it was that Lord Balfour announced that in the event of victory over the enemy, the land of Palestine would be set aside and given to Israel as her national homeland. Well, you remember the war ended, and the Balfour declaration gave Britain the mandate over the entire land of Palestine, the Holy Land. Here we believe was the golden opportunity. She had it in her power and her right to clear the land of its unlawful possessors and make it exclusively the homeland for God's scattered people. However, for reasons of expediency or otherwise, this dream, this promise was never fully realized... If only the nations had been able to see their way clear to keep their promise to set aside the Holy Land as a national refuge and return it again to their rightful possessors to whom God had promised it, God might have raised many, many more of the see of Jacob like Dr. Weitzman to bring blessing and help to the nations of the world... And so the awful crisis continues and the unrest in the land is gaining by leaps and bounds.244

The combination of the founding of the state of Israel in 1948, the capture of Jerusalem and the West Bank in 1967, and the defeat on both occasions of the combined Arab armies, increasingly came to be seen as significant fulfilment's of biblical prophecy by a new generation of American and European dispensational fundamentalists.

Coincidentally, the New Scofield Reference Bible, a revision of the 1917 version, edited by Dr. E. Schuyler English and a team of dispensationalists including John F. Walvoord, was published in 1967 which, given its timing, inevitably fuelled greater interest in Christian Zionism.245 Ironically, Schuyler English had edited a young person's version of the Scofield Bible, entitled the Holy Bible, Pilgrim Edition, some twenty years earlier, in 1948.246 It is interesting to note that the popular edition of the Scofield Reference Bible was published in 1917 coinciding with the Balfour Declaration and in the words of Lord Cecil, 'the rebirth of a nation'247; the youth edition of Scofield with the War of Independence in 1948; and the 'new' edition of Scofield with the occupation of Jerusalem and the West Bank in 1967.

The 1967 'Six Day War' marked a significant watershed for evangelical Christian interest in Israel and Zionism. With the annexation of the West Bank Liberal Protestants and organisations such as the World Council of Churches increasingly distanced themselves from Zionism, whereas the same events fuelled enthusiasm among fundamentalists for Israel.248 For example, Jerry Falwell did not begin to speak about modern-day Israel until after Israel's 1967 military victory.

Falwell changed completely. He entered into politics and became an avid supporter of the Zionist State... the stunning Israeli victory made a big impact not only on Falwell, but on a lot of Americans... Remember that in 1967, the United States was mired in the Vietnam war. Many felt a sense of defeat, helplessness and discouragement. As Americans we were made acutely aware of our own diminished authority, of no longer being able to police the world or perhaps even our own neighbourhoods... Many Americans, including Falwell, turned worshipful glances toward Israel, which they viewed as militarily strong and invincible. They gave their unstinting approval to the Israeli take-over of Arab lands because they perceived this conquest as power and righteousness... Macho or muscular Christians such as Falwell credited Israeli General Moshe Dayan with this victory over Arab forces and termed him the Miracle Man of the Age, and the Pentagon invited him to Vietnam and tell us how to win the war.249

Billy Graham's father-in-law, Nelson Bell, the editor of the prestigious and authoritative mouthpiece of conservative Evangelicalism, Christianity Today, appeared to express the sentiments of many American Evangelicals when, in an editorial in 1967 he wrote,

That for the first time in more than 2,000 years Jerusalem is now completely in the hands of the Jews gives a student of the Bible a thrill and a renewed faith in the accuracy and validity of the Bible. 250

The most influential of all fundamentalist Christian Zionists of the 20th century is undoubtedly Hal Lindsey. He has been described by Time Magazine as 'The Jeremiah for this Generation', and by his own publisher as 'The Father of the Modern-Day Bible Prophecy Movement.'251 Lindsey is a prolific writer, with at least eighteen books dealing directly or indirectly with the End Times, his own radio and television programmes, seminars, Holy Land Tours, and by subscription, his monthly Countdown Magazine and International Intelligence Briefing.

Lindsey's most influential book, The Late Great Planet Earth has been described by the New York Times as the '#1 Non-fiction Bestseller of the Decade.' It has gone through more than 100 printings with sales, by 1993, in excess of 18 million in English, with a further 30 million copies in 31 foreign editions.252 Despite dramatic changes in the world since its publication in 1970, most significantly, it remains in print in its original un-revised form. Lindsey has subsequently become a consultant on Middle Eastern affairs to both the Pentagon and Israeli Government.253

This particular kind of reading of history, coloured by a literal exegesis of selected biblical scriptures, is dualistic, dogmatic, triumphalist, apocalyptic and confrontational. Lindsey's last but one book, The Final Battle, includes the statement on the cover "Never before, in one book, has there been such a complete and detailed look at the events leading up to 'The Battle of Armageddon.'"254

Lindsey confidently asserts that the world is degenerating and that the forces of evil manifest in godless Communism and militant Islam are the real enemies of Israel. He describes in detail the events leading to the great battle at Megiddo between the massive Russian, Chinese and African armies that will attempt but fail to destroy Israel. He and others like Louis Goldberg, a professor of Theology and Jewish Studies at the Moody Bible Institute, offer detailed illustrated plans ostensibly showing future military movements of armies and naval convoys leading up to the battle of Armageddon.255 These will merely hasten the return of Jesus Christ as King of the Jews who will rule over the other nations from the rebuilt Jewish temple on the site of the destroyed Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem.256

Jerusalem will be the spiritual centre of the entire world... all people of the earth will come annually to worship Jesus who will rule there.257

One of the reasons fundamentalists appear so enthusiastic about such a terrible scenario may have to do with their hope of the secret rapture. Just before the final conflagration they believe Jesus will,

...'rapture' true Christians into the upper air, while the rest of humankind, was being slaughtered below. 144,000 Jews would bow down before Jesus and be saved, but the rest of Jewry would perish in the mother of all holocausts.258

The Moody Bible Institute and Dallas Theological Seminary have played no small part in promoting a Fundamentalist and Zionist eschatology among thousands of American ministers and missionaries.259 Charles Dyer, a professor of Bible exposition at Dallas even includes photographs allegedly showing Saddam Hussein's reconstruction of Babylon to the same specifications and splendour as Nebuchadnezzar.260 Dyer warns that this is evidence that Hussein plans to attempt to repeat Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of Israel, the only Arab ever to have done so. 'The Middle East is the world's time bomb, and Babylon is the fuse that will ignite the events of the end times.'261

An indication of how seriously fundamentalists take the military aspect of their apocalyptic scenario can be seen from the content of the itinerary used by Jerry Falwell in his Friendship Tour to Israel in 1983. It included meetings with top Israeli government and military officials and an,

.....On-site tour of modern Israeli battlefields... Official visit to an Israeli defence installation... strategic military positions, plus experience first hand the battle Israel faces as a nation.262

The demise of the Soviet Union, the rise of militant Islam, the success of the Allies in the Gulf War, and the approaching third millennium have only fuelled more imaginative speculations among fundamentalists, while the same anti-Arab prejudices and Orientalist stereotypes persist.

Long ago the psalmist predicted the final mad attempt of the confederated Arab armies to destroy the nation of Israel... The Palestinians are determined to trouble the world until they repossess what they feel is their land. The Arab nations consider it a matter of racial honour to destroy the State of Israel. Islam considers it a sacred mission of religious honour to recapture Old Jerusalem.263

Following the Gulf War, the Israeli Ministry of Tourism hired the Fundamentalist musician Pat Boon to promote pilgrimages in North America through a series of costly advertisements in Evangelical journals and on television. According to Wagner there are a number of Evangelical Christian Zionist leaders even more right wing than Falwell and Robertson, who in the 1980's had direct access to Reagan and the White House.264 These include Terry Risenhoover and Doug Kreiger who were very influential in gathering American support for the Jewish extremist organisation, the Temple Mount Faithful.265 These particular Christian and Jewish Zionists believe that the Moslem Dome of the Rock must be destroyed and the Third Jewish Temple built in order to ensure the return of Jesus.266

To such Fundamentalists the existence of a Palestinian Christian church is either ignored completely, or maligned as theologically Liberal and spiritually dead, an irrelevancy in the inexorable movement of world history leading to the imminent return of the Jewish Messiah. Basilea Schlink, for example, berates the Palestinian Intifada as 'terrorism.... aimed solely at destroying Israel.'267 Her uncompromising views are typical of many other Zionists who elevate the State of Israel to a privileged status far above any human sanction or criticism.

Anyone who disputes Israel's right to the land of Canaan is actually opposing God and his holy covenant with the Patriarchs. He is striving against sacred, inviolable words and promises of God, which He has sworn to keep.268

The founding of the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem in 1980 represents in some senses the coming of age of Christian Zionism as a high profile concerted international movement. The ICEJ was opened with the express intention of bringing comfort and support to the Jewish people and the State of Israel. It was built at a time when other governmental embassies were being moved out of Jerusalem to Tel Aviv in protest at Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem. Their promotional material includes the following explanation.

When the vision of the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem was first given it was expressed in the following concerns; to care for the Jewish people, especially for the newborn State of Israel which includes standing up for the Jews when they are attacked or discriminated against, and for Israel to live in peace and security.... to care that the world wide body of Christ will be rightly related to Israel in comfort, love and prayer for her well-being, to care for the nations whose destinies will be increasingly linked to the way in which they relate to Israel, the care and preparation for the coming of the Lord.269

Among other things the work of the ICEJ specifically includes promoting Zionist pilgrimages, and imposing a Zionist agenda on pilgrimage itineraries. ICEJ are not alone in offering explicit support for Israel. Doug Kreiger, an evangelical fundamentalist listed over 250 pro-Israel evangelical organisations operating in America and founded between 1980-1985.270

2.12 The Coalition of Religious and Political Zionism

There are a number of similarities between 19th Century British and 20th Century American attitudes to Israel. In both, as the international power broker of their day, the blend of religion and politics became inextricably entwined. In the closing decades of the 19th and early 20th Century, there was a convergence of British strategic colonial interests and Christian Zionism within significant segments of the intellectual and political intelligentsia. Likewise current American foreign policy in the Middle East largely coincides with that of the powerful Christian Zionist lobby.271 Both parties, now as then, favour a strong and dominant pro-American presence in the Middle East whether for pragmatic reasons of military strategy, or because it conforms to their particular eschatology. Among a consensus of American Christian fundamentalist leaders, these twin motives, religious and political are unashamedly connected and intrinsic to a predicted apocalyptic scenario which one writer has gone so far as to describe as, 'Operation Desert Storm II.'272

In 1976-77 several events occurred simultaneously which had the effect of accelerating the influence of Christian Zionism as a political phenomenon in America.

A religious and political marriage was consummated between American Zionist organisations, Israeli leadership, and Fundamentalist Christian Zionists.273

In 1977 the Likud party under Menachem Begin came to power on an expansionist Zionist platform using biblical phraseology to justify the settlement of the West Bank. It was Begin for example who first renamed Israel and the Occupied Territories as Judaea and Samaria.274 In America the Jewish lobby realised the potential significance of wooing the political endorsement of the powerful 50-60 million Evangelical block vote through their fundamentalist leadership. With this in mind, in 1979, the Israeli government honoured Jerry Falwell with the Jabotinsky Award in appreciation of his support of Israel. They also provided him with a Lear jet to assist in his work on their behalf.275

U.S. President Jimmy Carter was well known for his evangelical beliefs and these he applied to his Middle Eastern policy.276 In a speech made in 1978 he explained how he saw the state of Israel as,

A return at last, to the Biblical land from which the Jews were driven so many hundreds of years ago... The establishment of the nation of Israel is the fulfilment of Biblical prophecy and the very essence of its fulfilment.277

In another speech, this time given before the Israeli Knesset in March 1979 he dwelt on the special relationship between America and Israel, stressing how,

It has been and it is a unique relationship. And it is a relationship that is indestructible, because it is rooted in the consciousness and the morals and the religion and the beliefs of the American people themselves... Israel and the United States were shaped by pioneers - my nation is also a nation of immigrants and refugees - by peoples gathered in both nations from many lands... We share the heritage of the Bible.278

Carter made several trips to the Middle East where he met with both Israeli and Palestinian leaders. His recollection of those meetings demonstrates a sad naivety . When faced with repeated claims of the denial of basic human rights among the Palestinians, Carter innocently confessed,

On one occasion I argued with them about their refusal to take the strongest cases to the Israeli Supreme Court, and I tried to assure the group that they would get a fair hearing and perhaps set a precedent that would be beneficial in many similar cases... I was assured that Israeli lawyers were available to represent the Palestinians... The Israelis told me that in every instance there was a legal basis for the taking of land - or it was needed for security purposes... I asked an Israeli Supreme Court justice if he considered the treatment of the Palestinians fair; he said that he dealt fairly with every case brought before him in the high court... When I inquired about the purposes of the PLO, they seemed somewhat taken aback that I needed to ask such a question...279

Following the failure of the Camp David agreements Carter came to believe the Arab-Israeli conflict could not be solved by international intervention, or even pressure from America, but only by the Israeli electorate.

Unless there is a massive Arab-Israeli war, the key to the future of Israel will not be found outside the country but within. Neither the United States nor any combination of Arab powers can force its preferences on Israel concerning the West Bank and Gaza, Palestinian rights, or the occupied territories of Syria and Lebanon. The judgments concerning what is best for israel will be made in Jerusalem, through democratic processes involving all Israelis who can express their views or elect their leaders... The outcome of this debate will shape the future of Israel; it may also determine the prospects for peace in the Middle East - and perhaps the world.280

Carter's pessimistic dispensational roots are perhaps evident in the last sentence. His eventual downfall, in part due to the loss of the fundamentalist block vote; the exploitation of the media by Evangelicals Concern for Israel including well known figures as Pat Boone and Vernon Grounds; the rise of Moral Majority as a political campaigning organisation under Jerry Falwell; and the election of Ronald Reagan as a President who publicly subscribed to a Fundamentalist premillennial dispensational theology, all combined to give a considerable boost to the Christian Zionist cause. In the 1980 presidential elections, Wagner claims that 80% of Evangelicals supported the conservative wing of the Republican party, and Ronald Reagan, in particular.

The election of Ronald Reagan ushered in not only the most pro-Israel administration in history but gave several Christian Zionists prominent political posts. In addition to the President, those who subscribed to a futurist premillennial theology and Christian Zionism included Attorney General Ed Meese, Secretary of Defence Casper Weinberger, and Secretary of the Interior James Watt.... Once the Reagan Administration opened the door, leading Evangelical Christian Zionist televangelists and writers were given direct access to the President and cabinet members. Rev. Jerry Falwell, Christian Zionist televangelist Mike Evans and author Hal Lindsey among them.281

'White House Seminars' became a regular feature of Reagan's administration bringing Christian Zionists into direct personal contact with national and Congressional leaders.

In Reagan's Address to the Nation on the West Bank and the Palestinians in 1982, marking the ejection of the PLO from Beirut, he gave the official position of the United States government,

Today has been a day that should make all of us proud... Our involvement in the search for Mideast peace is not a matter of preference, it is a moral imperative... We also have an irreversible commitment to the survival and territorial integrity of friendly states... So the United States will not support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and we will not support annexation or permanent control by Israel... But it is the firm view of the United States that self-government by the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza in association with Jordan offers the best chance for a durable, just and lasting peace.282

However, in a personal conversation reported in the Washington Post in April of 1984, Reagan told the chief Israeli lobbyist, Tom Dine,

You know, I turn back to the ancient prophets in the Old Testament and the signs foretelling Armageddon, and I find myself wondering if-if we're the generation that is going to see that come about. I don't know if you've noted any of these prophecies lately, but believe me they certainly describe the times we're going through.283

For Fundamentalists such as Jerry Falwell and Mike Evans, America is seen as the great redeemer, her role in the world providentially and politically preordained.284 The two nations of America and Israel are like Siamese twins, linked not only by common self interest but more significantly by similar religious foundations. Together they are perceived to be pitted against an evil world dominated by Communist and Islamic totalitarian regimes antithetical to the values of America and Israel.285 So for example, Mike Evans, founder and president of Lovers of Israel Inc, in the following quotations from his book, Israel, America's Key to Survival, almost mimics and plays on the apocalyptic scenario of Benjamin Netanyahu, offering 'biblical' grounds for their countries mutual survival.

If America goes down, then the whole world goes down. Nothing will remain of the world. If America was not around, the Soviet Union would take over the world in three days. Their goals are to destroy America... to destroy it... to reduce it to nothing; and they feel they can effectively do it through terrorism.286

Only one nation, Israel, stands between Soviet-sponsored terrorist aggression and the complete decline of the United States as a democratic world power... Surely demonic pressure will endeavor to encourage her to betray Israel. This must not happen. Israel is the key to America's survival. For God has said of the nations who will oppose Israel, "Yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted... I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curseth thee..."(Isa.60:12; Gen. 12)...As we stand with Israel, I believe we shall see God perform a mighty work in our day. God is going to bless America and Israel as well. It is not too late. I believe this is the greatest hour to be alive, and the key is unity, standing tall, proclaiming with a voice of love our commitment to the House of Israel, and to the God of Israel.287

Similarly, Ramon Bennett, author of 'Saga: Israel and the Demise of the Nations' and spokesman for Arm of Salvation, a Christian Zionist organisation based in Jerusalem, emotively dedicates his book, 'To the men of the Israeli Defence Force who display immense courage when facing impossible odds. To the grieving parents, wives, children, sweethearts, sisters and brothers and friends, whose tears have watered the parched earth of Eretz Yisreal.' 288

The International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem has, since 1980, become the semi-official voice of this coalition of Christian religious and political Zionist organisations, frequently cultivated, exploited and quoted by the Israeli Government when ever a sympathetic Christian view point is needed to enhance their own policies, and rebut Western criticism. For example, in October 1996, Benjamin Netanyahu the Israeli Prime Minister spoke at the Jerusalem 3000 rally organised by the International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem, to support Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem. Following the provocative opening of an underground tunnel by the Israelis from the Western Wall through the Moslem Quarter, he was cheered when he insisted the tunnel, 'is open. It will stay open. It will always stay open.'289

Not surprisingly the 1993 Peace-Accord signed by the Israeli Government and the PLO has been sharply criticised by Christian Zionist groups who see it as a threat to the realisation of Eretz Israel. In particular they have opposed the handing back of the West Bank and the threat to the status of the Jewish settlements. For example, Theodore Temple Beckett, Chairman of the Christian Friends of Israel Community Development Foundation, as well as President of the Colorado-based Foundation for Israel, has initiated an 'adopt-a-settlement program among American Evangelical Churches. The Jewish town of Ariel has already been adopted by Faith Bible Chapel in Denver. By the end of 1995 it was Beckett's expectation that around 70 Jewish settlements would have been adopted by churches,

...with larger churches adopting larger settlements and smaller churches adopting smaller settlements and giving all a morale boost to show them they are not alone and are loved by many.290

On the 21st December 1995, just hours before the Israeli's handed over administrative responsibility for Bethlehem to the Palestinian National Authority, the Voice of America radio station carried a news report claiming some Evangelical Christian groups had called for a boycott of Christmas celebrations in Bethlehem in protest.

Nine Christian Organisations have called their faithful not to go to Bethlehem this Christmas, to protest the transfer of the City to Palestinian rule. One of those Groups is called Bridges for Peace. Its Director is Clarence Wagner.

'There are millions of Evangelical Christians and other Middle East Christians who are concerned about the fact that Bethlehem has been unilaterally turned over to the Palestinian Authority, which is under the aegis of the PLO, and therefore has placed Bethlehem under Muslim control. Historically, Islam has not respected Christian holy sites. And here, Manger Square, the birthplace of Jesus, one of the holiest shrines in Christianity, is sort of quietly being turned over to a Muslim authority and no one is saying anything like, 'What will this mean for the future?... We have no idea what the experience under the PA will be, particularly if more fanatical Islamic Fundamentalism does increase in the years to come.'

...But the Latin Patriarch of the Holy Land, Michel Sabbah, who is Palestinian, said he welcomes the transfer of authority in Bethlehem and Mr. Arafat's plan to attend Midnight Mass. He says, religion and politics have always been linked in the Middle East and this is an opportunity to make that linkage in a positive way. Patriarch Sabbah... sharply criticizes those who are calling for a boycott of Bethlehem this Christmas.

'They are our brothers, every human being is our brother, but they are coming from abroad and they are bringing in the country feelings from abroad which do not correspond to the views and to the needs, spiritual and human, of the Land. This Land needs reconciliation. So, this is what we need, and not people coming from outside to tell us to boycott this and boycott that.' 291

The International Christian Embassy, quoted in the Sunday Times, on Christmas Eve 1995 predicted that the celebrations that night would, '...look more like Arafat's birthday than that of Jesus.'292 Ray Borlaise, writing in the Prayer Bulletin of Intercessors for Britain in January 1996, made similar criticisms of the transfer of power in Bethlehem, but apparently on sound theological grounds,

It is plain from Zechariah 12 that Jerusalem will become a contentious issue leading to conflict. Many feel that Ezekiel 38 & 39 will take place in the last days and will be a conflict between Islamic countries and Israel. There may be previous skirmishes before that battle takes place on the 'mountains of Israel' - some areas of which have just been handed over to the Palestinians. We sense that the peace may falter causing Samaria and Judea to pass back into Jewish hands. Will God allow Bethlehem, the burial place of Rachel, the town of Ruth and the birth place of David (let alone that of Jesus) to remain in Arab hands when it was promised to Abraham, Issac (sic) and Jacob as an eternal inheritance? (Genesis 17)293

Borlaise, in one short paragraph, makes a number of typical Christian Zionist assumptions which will be explored in more detail in a later chapter. He assumes, for example, that selectively chosen ancient Hebrew writings relate directly to contemporary events, and will thereby some how determine future events, conveniently ignoring other prophetic passages in which God warns of the expulsion of the Jews from the land as and when they fail to act righteously and with justice. It is also interesting that Borlaise not only refers to the Occupied Territories, as 'Judea and Samaria,' but also assumes that because Bethlehem had an historical significance in Jewish history between 3,500 - 2000 years ago, contemporary Jewish people have some divine right to occupy and confiscate the land of those living there prior to 1967.

A notorious example of this relates to the confiscation of Palestinian owned land at Abu-Ghoneim mountain, located at the northern edge of Beit Sahour on the traditional site of the Shepherds Fields, which was ratified by the Israeli Supreme Court on December 4th 1994. Local Christians see this particular Jewish settlement project, called Har Homa, as one of the most serious and dangerous, not only because the building work involves the destruction of several ancient Christian shrines, but also because it demonstrates a flagrant State-initiated contradiction and judicially-ratified disregard for both the text and spirit of the Peace Accord signed a year earlier.294

At the Third International Christian Zionist Congress, held in February 1996 under the auspices of ICEJ, the following resolutions were passed unanimously indicating the explicit religio-political agenda of ICEJ.

Further, we are persuaded by the clear unction of our God to express the sense of this Congress on the following concerns before us this day,

1. Because of the sovereign purposes of God for the City, Jerusalem must remain undivided, under Israeli sovereignty, open to all peoples, the capitol of Israel only, and all nations should so concur and place their embassies here.

2. As a faith bound to love and forgiveness we are appreciative of the attempts by the Government of Israel to work tirelessly for peace. However, the truths of God are sovereign and it is written that the Land which He promised to His People is not to be partitioned... It would be further error for the nations to recognize a Palestinian state in any part of Eretz Israel.

3. To the extent the Palestinian Covenant or any successor instrument calls for the elimination of Israel or denies the right of Israel to exist within secure borders in Eretz Israel, it should be abolished.

4. The Golan is part of biblical Israel and is a vital strategic asset necessary for the security and defense of the entire country.

C. The Islamic claim to Jerusalem, including its exclusive claim to the Temple Mount, is in direct contradiction to the clear biblical and historical significance of the city and its holiest site, and this claim is of later religio-political origin rather than arising from any Qur'anic text or early Muslim tradition.

7. While Gentile believers have been grafted into that household of faith which is of Abraham (the commonwealth of Israel), replacement theology within the Christian faith, which does not recognize the ongoing biblical purposes for Israel and the Jewish People, is doctrinal error.

8. Regarding Aliyah, we remain concerned for the fate of imperiled Jewish People in diverse places, and seek to encourage and assist in the continuing process of Return of the Exiles to Eretz Israel. To this end we commit to work with Israel and to encourage the Diaspora to fulfill the vision and goal of gathering to Israel the greater majority of all Jewish People from throughout the world.295

Under Netanyahu's influence, the Israeli government remains enthusiastic to nurture the support of Christian Zionists. Exploiting the association of Megiddo with the apocalypse, Israeli planners and architects, with Netanyahu's blessing, have began creating a three dimensional 'virtual Megiddo'. While some critics have described it 'Apocalypso', Israeli officials are keen to capitalise on the millions of additional visitors, 'expected to flock to mark the end of the millennium in gloomy style.'296 Ze'ev Margalit, the official in charge of the development claimed, ...the beauty of this place is that it has a 6,000-year history that can take people back to the dawn of civilisation, a vibrant present and an apocalyptic future.297 Anxious to avoid creating a 'Disneyland of the apocalypse', Margalit added, 'There are a lot of different ideas on how to deal with this. It is easy to get kitsch and we must avoid that. So we will leave a lot to the imagination.'298 Keen to encourage greater numbers of Christians to visit Israel leading up to the Millennium, Netanyahu has recently taken part in programmes broadcast on Evangelical radio stations.

Boosting evangelical tourism dovetails with his plans to deepen Israel's ties with leaders of America's Christian far right, many of whom are sympathetic to Zionism... Netanyahu has a long history of nurturing these ties. He believes the conservative Christian influence in American public opinion, and particularly within the Republican party controlling congress, can be used to counter liberal Democrats such as President Bill Clinton, who want Israel to cede land to the Palestinians.299

2.13 A Preliminary Critique of Christian Zionism

Armstrong is not alone in tracing in Western Christian Zionism evidence of the legacy of the Crusades. Fundamentalists have, she claims, 'returned to a classical and extreme religious crusading.'300 The Ruether's also see the danger of this kind of Christian Zionism in its, 'dualistic, Manichaean view of global politics. America and Israel together against an evil world.'301

The following quote from Senator Bob Dole is a good example,

American-Israeli friendship is no accident. It is a product of our shared values. We are both democracies. We are both pioneer states. We have both opened our doors to the oppressed. We have both shown a passion for freedom and we have gone to war to protect it. 302

This 'simple dualism' and 'highly dogmatic thinking' is something a number of sociologists have observed as common to much American fundamentalism.303 Bishop Kenneth Cragg writes,

It is so; God chose the Jews; the land is theirs by divine gift. These dicta cannot be questioned or resisted. They are final. Such verdicts come infallibly from Christian biblicists for whom Israel can do no wrong-thus fortified. But can such positivism, this unquestioning finality, be compatible with the integrity of the Prophets themselves? It certainly cannot square with the open peoplehood under God which is the crux of New Testament faith. Nor can it well be reconciled with the ethical demands central to law and election alike. 304

The Middle East Council of Churches (MECC), representing the indigenous and ancient Oriental and Eastern Churches, has been highly critical of the activities of Christian Zionists, and the International Christian Embassy, in particular. They assert, for instance, that the International Christian Embassy has aggressively imposed an aberrant expression of the Christian faith and an erroneous interpretation of the Bible which is subservient to the political agenda of the modern State of Israel. Indeed they represent a tendency to,

...force the Zionist model of theocratic and ethnocentric nationalism on the Middle East... (rejecting)... the movement of Christian unity and inter-religious understanding which is promoted by the (indigenous) churches in the region. The Christian Zionist programme, with its elevation of modern political Zionism, provides the Christian with a world view where the gospel is identified with the ideology of success and militarism. It places its emphasis on events leading up to the end of history rather than living Christ's love and justice today.305

In 1988 the MECC went further insisting that Christian Zionism had no place in the Middle East and should be repudiated by the universal Church because it was 'a dangerous distortion' and significant shift away from orthodox Christocentric expressions of the Christian faith.

(This is) ...a fundamental disservice also to Jews who may be inspired to liberate themselves from discriminatory attitudes and thereby rediscover equality with the Palestinians with whom they are expected to live God's justice and peace in the Holy Land.306

Although ICEJ's support for Israel is primarily political, MECC has been concerned more with its theological basis, and ICEJ's attempt to sacralize a political ideology beyond human criticism or ethical standards and to treat the security of a Jewish State within the entire land presently occupied as a fundamental axiom of their supra-historical eschatology. The declarations following the first, second and third Christian Zionist Congresses, organised by ICEJ in 1985, 1988 and 1996, according to MECC, show a significant shift away from orthodox Christocentric expressions of the Christian faith. Based on the writings of ICEJ's spokesman, rev. Jan Willem van der Hoeven, MECC argue that the 'Christian Zionist',

......is placed in a reductionist eschatology by engaging in actions designed to bring 'comfort and support' to modern political Israel. Accordingly, Jesus is de-emphasised, as is His death and resurrection, while salvation and judgment are redefined.... Christians will be judged solely according to their actions on behalf of the state of Israel. True Christians are those who leave their Gentile background and become 'Israelites of God' 307

It is therefore perhaps not surprising that among the Middle East churches generally, Christian Zionism is regarded as a devious heresy and an unwelcome and alien intrusion into their culture, which advocates an ethnocentric and nationalist political agenda running counter to their work of reconciliation, and patient witness among both Jews and Muslims.308 In the course of interviews conducted in 1993, one leading Anglican cleric said, 'Making God into a real estate agent is heart breaking... They are not preaching Jesus any more.'309 They are, in the words of another Palestinian clergyman, 'instruments of destruction'310 Another senior churchman was equally forthright,

Their presence here is quite offensive... projecting themselves as really the Christians of the land... with total disregard for the indigenous Christian community.311

Similarly outspoken criticisms of the Israel Trust of the Anglican Church (ITAC) were made by another Palestinian Anglican clergyman.

CMJ are propagating Zionism rather than Christianity. It is working against the interests of the Anglican Church in Israel. 312

Essentially, Christian Zionism fails to recognise the deep seated problems that exist between Palestinians and Israelis; it distorts the Bible and marginalises the universal imperative of the Christian Gospel; has grave political ramifications and ultimately ignores the sentiments of the overwhelming majority of indigenous Christians.313 It is a situation that many believe Israel exploits to her advantage, cynically welcoming American Christian Zionists as long as they remain docile and compliant with Israeli government policy. Consequently,

Local Christians are caught in a degree of museumization. They are aware of tourists who come in great volume from the West to savour holy places but who are, for the most part, blithely disinterested in the people who indwell them. The pain of the indifference is not eased insofar as the same tourism is subtly manipulated to make the case for the entire legitimacy of the statehood that regulates it.314

Cragg offers this astute critique of Christian Zionism,

The overriding criteria of Christian perception have to be those of equal grace and common justice. From these there can be no proper exemption, however alleged or presumed. Chosenness cannot properly be either an ethnic exclusivism or a political facility.315

Christian Zionism appears, at least in the eyes of its critics, to offer an uncritical endorsement of the Israeli political right and at the same time shows an inexcusable lack of compassion for the Palestinian tragedy. In doing so it has apparently legitimised their oppression in the name of the Gospel.

Is such a condemnation of Western Christian Zionism legitimate? The task of this thesis will be to examine in detail the various forms of Western Fundamentalist Christian Zionism, to note their historical development, to appraise their theological interpretation of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures and to assess their political impact on the Middle East and indigenous Palestinian Church, in particular.

Revised 31 August 1998



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1 Kenneth Cragg, The Arab Christian, A History in the Middle East (London, Mowbray, 1992); Thomas A. Idinopulos, Jerusalem Blessed, Jerusalem Cursed, Jews, Christians and Moslems in the Holy City from David's Time to Our Own (Chicago, Ivan R. Dee, 1991); Michael Prior & William Taylor, Eds, Christians in the Holy Land (London, World of Islam Festival Trust, 1994); Barbara W. Tuchman, Bible and Sword, How the British came to Palestine (London, Macmillan, 1982); P.W.L. Walker, Ed, Jerusalem, Past and Present in the Purposes of God, 2nd edn. (Carlisle, Paternoster Press, 1994).

2 Regina Sharif, Non-Jewish Zionism, Its Roots in Western History (London, Zed, 1983); Douglas J. Culver, Albion and Ariel, British Puritanism and the Birth of Political Zionism (New York, Peter Lang, 1995); Ian Murray, The Puritan Hope (Edinburgh, Banner of Truth, 1971); Peter Toon, ed. Puritans, the Millennium and the Future of Israel: Puritan Eschatology 1600-1660 (Cambridge, James Clarke, 1970); Donald E. Wagner, Anxious for Armageddon. (Scottdale, Pennsylvania, Herald Press, 1995); David A. Rausch. Zionism within early American Fundamentalism, 1878-1918; a convergence of two traditions. (New York: Mellen Press, 1979); Grace Halsell, Prophecy and Politics, Militant Evangelists on the Road to Nuclear War (Westport, Connecticut, Lawrence Hill, 1986)

3 International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem. 'International Christian Zionist Congress Proclamation, Affirmation of Christian Zionism', 25-29 February 1996; 'Why should Christians be friends of Israel?' Christian Friends of Israel leaflet. n.d.

4 Glen Bowman, 'The politics of tour guiding, Israeli and Palestinian guides in Israel and the Occupied Territories'. In Tourism & the Less Developed Countries. ed. David Harrison (London, Belhaven, 1992), p. 121.

5 Hal Lindsey, The Final Battle (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front, 1995), back cover.

6 Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (London, Lakeland, 1970), pp. 56-58.

7 Michael Palumbo, Imperial Israel, The History of the Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. rev edn. (London, Bloomsbury, 1992)

8 George Antonius, The Arab Awakening, The Story of the Arab National Movement (New York, Putnam, 1938)

9 Edward W. Said, The Question of Palestine rev edn. (London, Vintage, 1992)

10 Barbara W. Tuchman, Bible and Sword, How the British came to Palestine (London, Macmillan, 1982)

11 Joan Peters, From Time Immemorial, The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict Over Palestine (London, Michael Joseph, 1984)

12 Cragg, Arab, p .47.

13 W. H. C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1984), pp. 121, 124.

14 J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrine, rev. edn. (San Francisco, Harper & Row, [1960] 1978) p. 190.

15 Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, 5 vols. (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1971-1989), vol. 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600), p. 16. Cited in Gary DeMar & Peter Leithart, The Legacy of Hatred Continues (Tyler, Texas, Institute of Christian Economics, 1989), p. 38.

16 In this aspect I am indebted to the leads offered by Gary DeMar & Peter Leithart, in The Legacy of Hatred Continues: A Response to Hal Lindsey's The Road to Holocaust (Tyler, Texas, Institute of Christian Economics, 1989)

17 DeMar & Leithart, Legacy., p. 42.

18 Clement, 'First Epistle.' In Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1. pp. 12-13.

19 Kelly, Early., p. 190.

20 Epistle of Barnabas IV. In Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1. p. 138.

21 Ibid., XIII. In Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1. p. 145. Cited in DeMar & Leithart, Legacy., p. 39.

22 Justin, Dialogue with Trypho, XI. In Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1. pp. 200-267.

23 Irenaeus, Against Heresies. IV. XXI. 3. In Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1. p. 493.

24 DeMar & Leithart, Legacy., p. 43.

25 Pelikan, Emergence., p. 26.

26 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 11.

27 J.C. Lambert, 'Pilgrimages' In The Protestant Dictionary, eds Charles Sydney Carter & G.E. Alison Weeks (London, The Harrison Trust, 1933), p. 507.

28 Walter Zander, Israel and the Holy Places of Christendom (London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1971), p. 5.

29 Zander, Ibid., p. 7.

30 Zander, Ibid., p. 8.

31 Zander, Ibid., p. 8.

32 Lambert, Pilgrimages, p. 507.

33 Zander, Israel, p. 9.

34 J. G. Davies, Pilgrimage, Yesterday and Today, Why, Where and How? (London, SCM, 1988), p. 10.

35 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 10.

36 Steven Runciman, A History of the Crusades. vol. 1 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1954); Karen Armstrong, Holy War, The Crusades and Their Impact on Today's World (London, Macmillan, 1988)

37 Davies, Pilgrimage, p. 18.

38 Zander, Israel, p. 10.

39 Zander, Israel,, p. 13.

40 Ibid., p. 15.

41 Ibid., pp. 18-19.

42 Karen Armstrong, Holy War, The Crusades and Their Impact on Today's World (London, Mcmillan, 1988), p.xii.

43 Cragg, Arab, p. 23.

44 Nahum Sokolow, History of Zionism (London, Longmans, 1919), p. 60. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 13.

45 DeMar & Leithart, Legacy., pp. 45ff.

46 John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, IV, XVI, p. 14)

47 Peter Toon, 'The Latter-Day Glory," in Puritans, the Millennium and the Future of Israel: Puritan Eschatology 1600-1660, ed. Peter Toon (Cambridge: James Clarke, 1970), p. 24.

48 Ian Murray, The Puritan Hope: Revival and the Interpretation of Prophecy (London, Banner of Truth, 1971), pp. 59-60.

49 Murray, Puritan., p. 98.

50 Toon, Latter-Day., p. 26. Cited in Demar & Leithart, Legacy., p. 48

51 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 18.

52 Toon, Latter-Day., pp. 30-31. Cited in Demar & Leithart, Legacy., p. 48.

53 Mayir Verete, 'The Restoration of the Jews in English Protestant Thought, 1790-1840', Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 8, No. 1, p. 14. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 18.

54 J. A. DeJong, As the Waters Cover the Sea: Millennial Expectations in the Rise of Anglo-America Missions, 1640-1810 (Kampen, J. H. Kok, 1970), pp. 27-28. Cited in DeMar & Leithart, Legacy, p. 49.

55 DeJong, Waters., p. 38. Cited in DeMar & Leithart, Legacy, p. 50.

56 DeJong, Waters., p. 37-38. Cited in DeMar & Leithart, Legacy, p. 49.

57 See Don Patinkin, 'Mercantilism and the Readmission of the Jews to England.' Jewish Social Studies, Vol. 8. July 1946, pp. 161-78; and Cecil Roth, England in Jewish History (London, Jewish Historical Society of England, 1949), p. 7, cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 24.

58 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 25.

59 Jonathan Edwards, 'History of Redemption.' in The Works of Jonathan Edwards, 2 vols. (Edinburgh, Banner of Truth, [1834] 1974), vol. 1. p. 607.

60 Sharif, Non-Jewish., pp. 13, 29.

61 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 17.

62 Hal Lindsey, The 1980's, Countdown to Armageddon (New York, Bantam, 1981); The Road to Holocaust (New York, Bantam 1989); The Final Battle (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front, 1995); Dave Hunt, Peace, Prosperity and the Coming Holocaust (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House, 1983); Billy Graham, Approaching Hoofbeats, The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (Waco, Word, 1983); Storm Warning (Milton Keynes, Word, 1992); John F. Walvoord, Armageddon, Oil and the Middle East Crisis (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1990); Moishe Rosen, Beyond the Gulf War, Overture to Armageddon (San Bernardino, Here's Life Publishers, 1991); Edgar C. James, who is on the faculty of the Moody Bible Institute, wrote two books recently, Arabs, Oil & Armageddon. rev. edn. (Chicago, Moody Press, 1991) and Armageddon and the New World Order. rev. edn. (Chicago, Moody Press, 1991). These authors are representative of apocalyptic dispensationalism or what Don Wagner calls 'Armageddon Theology'.

63 Andrew Walker, cited in an interview with Geoffrey Levy, Daily Mail, 2 September 1994, p. 18.

64 Wagner, Anxious., p. 88.

65 Iain H. Murray, The Puritan Hope: revival and the Interpretation of Prophecy (Edinburgh, Banner of Truth, 1971), p.188.

66 Murray, Puritan., p. 189.

67 Arnold Dallimore, The Life of Edward Irving, Fore-runner of the Charismatic Movement (Edinburgh, Banner of Truth, 1983), p. 62.

68 Edward Irving, preliminary discourse, 'on Ben Ezra', The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty, by Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra a converted Jew, Translated from the Spanish, with a Preliminary Discourse (London, L.B. Seeley & Sons, 1827), pp. 5-6.

69 Timothy C.F. Stunt 'Catholic Apostolic Church' The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, ed. J. D. Douglas. rev. edn. (Exeter, Paternoster Press, 1978), p. 203.

70 Hugh M'Neile, The Collected Works, Vol. II. The Prophecies Relative to the Jewish Nation (London, The Christian Book Society, 1878), p. 213.

71 M'Neile, Prophecies., preface to new edition 1866, first published 1830; see also George Stanley Faber, A Treatise on the Genius and Object of the Patriachal, the Levitical and the Christian Dispensations. (London, F.C & J. Rivington, 1823). 2 vols.

72 B. W. Newton and Dr S. P. Tregelles, Teachers of the Faith and the Future, ed. George Fromow (London, Sovereign Grace Advent Testimony n.d.)

73 Benjamin Wills Newton, Antichrist, Europe and the East: The Antichrist Future also the 1260 Days of Antichrist's Reign Future (London: Houlston & Sons, 1859); Babylon: Its Revival and Future Desolation being the Second Series of Aids to Prophetic Enquiry London: Houlston & Sons (1859); Map of Ten Kingdoms of Roman Empire (London: Lucus Collins, 1863); Babylon: Its Future History and Doom with remarks on the Future of Egypt and Other Eastern Countries, 3rd edition (London: Houlston & Sons., 1890).

74 B.W. Newton, Babylon: Its Revival., p. 17.

75 B.W. Newton, Antichrist., p. 143.

76 B.W. Newton, Map of Ten Kingdoms of Roman Empire (London: Lucus Collins, 1863)

77 B.W. Newton, Antichrist., p. 146.

78 B.W. Newton, Babylon: Its Future., preface to 3rd edition (1890).

79 Dave Hunt, Peace, Prosperity and the Coming Holocaust. (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House, 1983); Global Peace and the Rise of Antichrist (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House, 1990); A Woman Rides the Beast, The Roman Catholic Church and the Last Days. (Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House, 1994);

80 B.W. Newton, Babylon: Its Future., pp. 145, 150. 'Shinar' being the earliest Hebrew name for Babylon. It is interesting that Charles Dyer a modern Dallas Seminary dispensationalist similarly regards the apocalyptic references to Babylon in the Book of Revelation to refer literally rather than figuratively to modern Iraq. See The Rise of Babylon, Signs of the End Times (Wheaton, Illinois, Tyndale House, 1991).

81 Don Wagner, Anxious for Armageddon (Waterloo, Ontario, Herald press, 1995), p. 89. See also separate chapters on Darby, Irving and Scofield.

82 John Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth (Brentwood, Tennessee, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991), p. 38.

83 Ernest Reisinger, 'A History of Dispensationalism in America' (http://www.founders.org/FJ09/article1.html)

84 Ernest Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism British & American Millenarianism 1800-1930 (Chicago, University Chicago Press, 1970), pp. 74-75.

85 Gerstner, Wrongly., pp. 39-40.

86 J. N. Darby, Letters of J. N. Darby (London, Morish Co., n.d.) Vol .2, p. 180.

87 Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church (Philadelphia, Presbyterian and Reformed, 1945), p. 133.

88 William R. Moody, The Life of Dwight L. Moody (Murfreesboro, Tennessee, Sword for the Lord, 1900), p. 140.

89 Albert Henry Newman, Manual of Church History Volume 2, Modern Church History 1517-1902 (Philadelphia: American Baptist Society, 1904), p. 713.

90 Arno C. Gaebelein, The History of the Scofield Reference Bible (Spokane, WA, Living Words Foundation, 1991), p. 25.

91 Gerstner, Wrongly., p. 51

92 Ian S. Rennie, 'Nineteenth-Century Roots,' in Handbook of Biblical Prophecy, eds. Carl E. Armerding and W. Ward Gasque (Grand Rapids, Baker, 1977) p. 57, cited in Gerstner, Wrongly., p. 45.

93 Gerstner, Wrongly., p. 45.

94 Ernest R. Sandeen, "Towards a Historical Interpretation of the Origins of Fundamentalism," Church History 36 (1967) p. 76.

95 Berth Lindbert, A God-Filled Life: The Story of W. E. Blackstone (American Missionary Society, n.d.)

96 William E. Blackstone, Jesus is Coming (Chicago, Fleming Revell, 1916)

97 Ian S. Rennie, 'Nineteenth-Century Roots,' p. 48.

98 W. M. Smith, 'Signs of the Times', Moody Monthly, August 1966, p. 5.

99 Reuben Fink, America and Palestine (New York, American Zionist Emergency Council, 1945), pp. 20-21. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 92.

100 Harold R. Cook, 'William Eugene Blackstone' The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church ed. J.D. Douglas (Exeter, Paternoster, 1974), p. 134.

101 David A. Rausch, Fundamentalist Evangelicals and Anti-Semitism (Valley Forge, Trinity Press International, 1993); Zionism within early American Fundamentalism, 1878-1918; a convergence of two traditions (New York: Mellen Press, 1979)

102 Naomi Shepherd, The Zealous Intruders: The Western Rediscovery of Palestine (London, Collins, 1987); Linda Osband, Famous Travellers to the Holy Land (London, Prion, 1989).

103 Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, In connection with their history (London, Murray, 1871)

104 William M. Thackeray, Notes of a Journey from Cornhill to Grand Cairo, rev. edn. (Heathfield, Cockbird, [1848] 1990)

105 Gertrude Lowthian Bell, The Desert and the Sown (London, Heinemann, 1907)

106 Robert Byron, The Road to Oxiana (London, Macmillan, 1937)

107 Robert Graves, Lawrence and the Arabs (London, Jonathan Cape, 1927)

108 Alexander Kinglake, Eothen, Traces of Travel Brought Home from the East (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1906)

109 Rudyard Kipling, Kim (London, Penguin, [1901] 1987) with an introduction and notes by Edward W. Said.

110 T.E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom, A Triumph (New York, Fleming H. Revell, 1920)

111 Freya Stark, East is West (London, John Murray, 1945)

112 William M. Thomson, The Land and the Book (London, T. Nelson & Sons, 1887)

113 Robert Kaplan, The Arabists, The Romance of an American Elite (New York, The Free Press, 1993), p. 49.

114 Davies, Pilgrimage., p. 140.

115 Ibid., p. 141.

116 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 22.

117 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 22.

118 Davies, Pilgrimage., p. 141.

119 William Stuart McBirnie, The Search for the Authentic Tomb of Jesus (Montrose, Califoirnia, Acclaimed Books, 1975), p. 40.

120 Davies, Pilgrimage., p. 143.

121 Davies, Pilgrimage., p. 148.

122 Naomi Shepherd, The Zealous Intruders, The Western Rediscovery of Palestine (London, Collins, 1987), p. 180.

123 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 34.

124 Sharif, Non-Jewish., pp. 34-47. See also Margaret Brearley, 'Jerusalem in Judaism and for Christian Zionists' in Jerusalem, Past and Present in the Purposes of God, ed. P. W. L. Walker (Cambridge, Tyndale House, 1992), p. 110.

125 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 46.

126 George Eliot, Daniel Deronda (London, 1899) Works of George Eliot, vol. 8.

127 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 46.

128 Cited in Franz Kobler, Napoleon and the Jews (New York, Schocken Books, 1976) pp. 55-57. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., pp. 50-51

129 See Albert M. Hyamson, Palestine: The Rebirth of an Ancient People (London, Sidgwick & Jackson, 1917), pp. 162-163; Salo W. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews (New York, Columbia University Press, 1937) vol. 2. p. 327. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 52.

130 Salo W. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews (New York, Columbia University Press, 1937) vol. 2. p. 327. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 52.

131 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 54.

132 Douglas J. Culver, Albion & Ariel, British Puritanism and the Birth of Political Zionism (New York, Peter Lang, 1995); and Barbara Tuchman, The Bible and the Sword, How the British came to Palestine (London, Macmillan, 1957).

133 Wagner, Anxious., p. 91.

134 Tuchman, Bible and the Sword (London, Macmillan, 1982) p. 115.

135 As quoted by Norman Bentwich and John M. Shaftesley, 'Forerunners of Zionism in the Victorian Era', p. 210; See also Edwin Hodder, The Life and Work of the Seventh Earl of Shaftesbury (London, 1886), vol. 1, pp. 310-311, both cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 56.

136 M.J. Pragai, Faith and Fulfilment, Christians and the Return to the Promised Land (London, Vallentine, Mitchell, 1985), p. 45.

137 Earl of Shaftesbury, 'State and Prospects of the Jews', Quarterly Review, London, January/March 1839. Cited in Wagner, Anxious, p.91, and Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 42.

138 Wagner, Anxious., p. 91.

139 Palmerston to Ponsonby, Public Record office MSS, F.O. 195/165, (no. 261) 25 November 1840. cited in Tuchman, Bible., p. 175; and Sharif, Non-Jewish., pp. 58-59.

140 Tuchman, Bible., p. 176

141 As cited in Sir Charles Webster, The Foreign Policy of Palmerston 1830-1841 (London, 1951), vol. 2. p. 761.

142 cited in Wagner., Anxious, p. 91.

143 Wagner, Anxious., p. 92.

144 Wagner, Anxious., p. 92.

145 cited in Wagner, Anxious., p. 92; also Albert H. Hyamson, Palestine under the Mandate (London, 1950), p. 10, cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish, p. 42.

146 Sharif, Non-Jewish, p. 67.

147 Cited in Tuchman, Bible., p. 173.

148 Regina Sharif, Non-Jewish Zionism (London, Zed Press, 1983), p. 68.

149 Brearley, Jerusalem., p. 112.

150 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 71.

151 Theodor Herzl, The Diaries of Theodor Herzl (New York, 1956), cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 71.

152 Cited in Philip Guedalla, Napoleon and Palestine (London, 1925), pp. 45-55, quoted in Sharif, Non-Jewish, p. 79.

153 Wagner, Anxious., p. 94-95.

154 MECC, What?, p. 7.

155 Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 78

156 Wagner, Anxious., p. 93.

157 Kenneth Young, Arthur James Balfour (London, G. Bell & Sons, Ltd., 1963), p. 256.

158 Young, Arthur, p. 256.

159 Kaplan, Arabists, pp. 8-9.

160 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 8.

161 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 54.

162 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 57.

163 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 62.

164 Ronaldshay, The Life of Lord Curzon, vol. 3, (London, Ernest Benn, 1928), p. 160.

165 Cragg, Arab., p. 234.

166 Said, Question., p. 19.

167 Wagner, Anxious., p. 94.

168 Wagner, Anxious., p. 94.

169 Tuchman, Bible., p. 340.

170 O'Mahony, Christianity., p. 471.

171 Idinopulos, Jerusalem., p. 283.

172 Idinopulos, Jerusalem., p. 283.

173 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 63.

174 Wagner, Anxious., p. 95.

175 Idinopulos, Jerusalem., p. 291.

176 Idinopulos, Jerusalem., p. 294.

177 cited in Wagner, Anxious., p. 142.

178 Cragg, Arab., p. 24.

179 Cragg, Arab., p. 24.

180 Arthur Pollard, 'The Influence and Significance of Simeon's Work' in Charles Simeon 1759-1836, ed. Arthur Pollard & Michael Hennell (London, SPCK, 1964), p. 180.

181 Pollard, Charles., p. 180.

182 Anthony O'Mahony, 'Christianity in the Holy Land, The historical background', The Month, December 1993, p. 470.

183 Rennie MacInnes, Palestine Church Council, Facts and Needs (Jerusalem, 1925), p. 4.

184 Cragg, Arab., p. 134.

185 Kelvin Crombie, For the Love of Zion, Christian witness and the restoration of Israel (London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1991)

186 Based on an interview with a senior Palestinian Clergyman. These interviews are transcribed, but to retain confidentiality they are annotated by date and number (Interview 1993.12).

187 Margaret Duggan, 'Keeping faith with the Christians in the Holy Land'. Church Times, 21 February 1992, p. 8.

188 Kenneth Scott Latourette, Christianity in a Revolutionary Age, Volume 5, The 20th Century Outside Europe (Exeter, Paternoster, 1962), p. 292.

189 Robert Kaplan, The Arabists, The Romance of an American Elite (New York, The Free Press, 1993)

190 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 5.

191 J.A. Simpson & E.S.C. Weiner, The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd. edn. (Oxford, Oxford University press, 1989), p. 598.

192 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 7.

193 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 16.

194 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 22.

195 Albert Hourani, A History of the Arab Peoples (London, Faber and Faber, 1991), p. 327. n.b. The Syrian Protestant College was renamed the American University of Beirut after the First World War.

196 in Kaplan. Arabists., p. 35.

197 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 36.

198 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 38, 73.

199 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 63.

200 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 71.

201 Antonius, Arab., foreword.

202 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 80.

203 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 81.

204 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 185.

205 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 139.

206 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 148.

207 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 148.

208 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 151.

209 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 152, 155.

210 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 158.

211 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 158.

212 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 158.

213 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 164.

214 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 182.

215 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 189.

216 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 189.

217 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 190.

218 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 191.

219 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 193.

220 Middle East Realities 'Lie of the Week' (Internet:MiddleEast@AOL.COM, 01/11/95)

221 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 255.

222 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 257.

223 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 312.

224 Shirley Eber, 'Getting stoned on holiday, Tourism on the Front Line' In Focus, Tourism Concern, 2, Autumn 1991, pp. 4-5.

225 Edward Said, Orientalism (New York, Vintage, 1978)

226 Said, Orientalism, p. 45.

227 Kaplan, Arabists., foreword.

228 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 52.

229 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 52.

230 John Haynes Holmes, Palestine Today and Tomorrow: A Gentile's Survey of Zionism (New York, Macmillan, 1929), pp. 89, 248. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 135.

231 Said, Orientalism., pp. 47-48.

232 Said, Orientalism, pp. 48-49.

233 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 296.

234 Kaplan, Arabists., p. 297.

235 Cragg, Arab., p. 297.

236 Said, Orientalism, p. 328.

237 Shirley Eber, 'Reflections on Images', Tourism in Focus, Tourism Concern, 6, Winter 1993, p. 3.

238 Cragg, Arab., p. 297.

239 Keith Roberts, Religion in Sociological Perspective (Belmont, California, Wadsworth, 1990), p. 262.

240 Erling Jorstad, The Politics of Doomsday, Fundamentalists of the Far Right (Nashville, Abingdom, 1970)

241 George Marsden, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1991)

242 Reinhold Niebuhr, The Nation, 21 February 1942, pp. 214-216 and 28 February 1942, pp. 253-255. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 113.

243 US Department of State, Hearings of the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry, 14 January 1946, p. 147. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 113.

244 M. R. DeHaan, Daniel the Prophet, 35 Simple Studies in the Book of Daniel (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1947), pp. 169-172

245 Daniel P. Fuller, Gospel and Law, Contrast or Continuum. The Hermeneutic of Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1980)

246 E. Schuyler English, ed., Holy Bible., Pilgrim edition (New York, Oxford University Press, 1948)

247 Barbara Tuchman, The Bible and the Sword (London, Macmillan, 1957), p. 340.

248 Rosemary Radford Ruether & Herman J. Ruether, The Wrath of Jonah, The Crisis of Nationalism in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (San Francisco, Harper, 1989), p. 173.

249 James Price and William Goodman, Jerry Falwell, An Unauthorized Profile, cited in Grace Halsell, Prophecy., p. 72.

250 Wagner, Beyond., p. 4.

251 Hal Lindsey, The Final Battle (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front, 1995), back cover.

252 George Marsden, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1991) p. 77. See also Michael Lienesch, Redeeming America: Piety and Politics in the New Christian Right (Chapel Hill, North Carolina, North Carolina Press, 1993), p. 311. Lindsey latest publisher, Western Front, is more conservative referring to 'a dozen books with combined world sales of more than 35 million.' Lindsey, The Final Battle (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front, 1995), back cover.

253 Wagner, Beyond., p. 4.

254 Lindsey, Final., front cover.

255 Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (London, Lakeland, 1970), p. 155; Louis Goldberg, Turbulence Over the Middle East (Neptune, New Jersey, Loizeaux Brothers, 1982), p. 172.

256 Lindsey, Israel., pp. 31-48.

257 Lindsey, Israel., p. 165.

258 John F. Mahoney, 'About this Issue' The Link (Americans for Middle East Understanding) Vol. 25, No. 4 October/November 1992, p. 2.

259 John F. Walvoord, Israel in Prophecy (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1962); Charles Dyer, The Rise of Babylon, Signs of the End Times (Wheaton, Illinois, Tyndale House, 1991)

260 Charles Dyer, World News and Biblical Prophecy (Wheaton, Illinois, Tyndale House, 1993), pp. 128-129.

261 Dyer, Rise., rear cover.

262 Wagner, Beyond., p. 3.

263 Lindsey, Israel., pp. 38-39.

264 Wagner, Beyond., p. 9.

265 Pevtzov, Apocalypse., p. 6.

266 Wagner, Beyond., p. 6.

267 Basliea M. Schlink, Israel at the Heart of World Events (Darmstadt-Eberstadt, Evangelical Sisterhood of Mary, 1991), p. 29.

268 Schlink, Israel., p. 22.

269 MECC, What., p. 11.

270 Halsell, Prophecy., p.178.

271 Noam Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle, The United States, Israel and the Palestinians (London, Pluto, 1993)

272 Dyer, World., p. 232.

273 MECC, What., p. 9.

274 Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreider, The Chosen and the Choice (London, Futura, 1988), p. 13. For how Christian Zionists justify occupation through such terminology, see Mike Evans, Israel, America's Key to Survival (Plainfield, New Jersey, Haven Books, 1980), 'Judea & Samaria', pp. 129-148.

275 Wagner, Beyond., p. 5.

276 Jimmy Carter, The Blood of Abraham (London, Sidgwick & Jackson, 1985)

277 Speech by President Jimmy Carter on 1 May 1978, Department of State Bulletin, vol. 78, No. 2015, p. 4, cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 136.

278 Jerusalem Post, March 1979, cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 135.

279 Carter, Blood., pp. 118-215.

280 Carter, Blood., p. 60

281 Wagner, Beyond., p. 5.

282 Cited in Carter, Blood., Appendix 5. pp. 228-234.

283 Ronnie Dugger, 'Does Reagan Expect a Nuclear Armageddon?' Washington Post, 18 April 1984.

284 Michael Lienesch, Redeeming America: Piety and Politics in the New Christian Right (Chapel Hill, North Carolina, University of North Carolina, 1993), p. 197.

285 Merrill Simon, Jerry Falwell and the Jews (Middle Village, New York, Jonathan David, 1984), pp. 63-64, 71-72.

286 Benjamin Netanyahu in Mike Evans, Israel, America's Key to Survival (Plainfield, New Jersey, Haven Books, 1980)

287 Evans, Israel., p. 221.

288 Ramon Bennett, Saga: Israel and the Demise of the Nations. (Jerusalem, Arm of Salvation, 1993)

289 Patrick Cockburn, Independent. 30 September 1996, p. 9.

290 Sarah Honig, 'Adopt-a-Settlement Program' The Jerusalem Post, 2nd October 1995.

291 Al Pessin, Voice of America Broadcast, transcribed by Tetsuya Fujimoto on Palestine-Net, (an Internet User Group) monitoring events in Israel/Palestine. 21st December 1995.

292 Andy Goldberg, 'Christmas dissent hits Bethlehem...' Sunday Times, 24th December 1995, p. 14.

293 Ray Borlaise, Intercessors for Britain Prayer Bulletin, No.140, January/February 1996.

294 William Dalrymple, 'They say they saw the angels here, now this flock must go' Daily Telegraph, 24 December 1994, p. 1; Marcia Hansen, 'Har Homa Settlement Project, An Obstacle to Peace and Coexistence' Christian Aid, Action for Partners Press Release, 6th September 1995.

295 International Christian Zionist Congress Proclamation, International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem. 25-29 February 1996.

296 Andy Goldberg, 'Israel plans a hell of a party at Armageddon.' Sunday Times, 17 November 1996, p. 18.

297 Goldberg, 'Israel'., p. 18.

298 Goldberg, 'Israel'., p. 18.

299 Goldberg, 'Israel' p. 18.

300 Armstrong, Holy., p. 377.

301 Ruether, Wrath., p. 176.

302 Near East Report, vol. 21, No. 20, 18 May 1977, p. 78. Cited in Sharif, Non-Jewish., p. 136.

303 Keith Roberts, Religion in Sociological Perspective (Belmont, California, Wadsworth, 1990), p. 272.

304 Cragg, Arab., p. 238.

305 MECC, What., p. 13.

306 MECC, What., preface.

307 MECC, What., preface.

308 MECC, What., p. 1.

309 Based on interviews with Palestinian clergymen (Interview 1993.9)

310 (Interview 1994.23)

311 (Interview 1993.12)

312 (Interview 1994.23)

313 Chapman, Whose., p. 277.

314 Cragg, Arab., p. 28.

315 Cragg, Arab., p. 237.