Addressing the Twisted, False Stated Position on “the Chosen People” by Tucker Carlson (Part Five)

Part One    Part Two    Part Three    Part Four

The Origins of Opposition to Christian Zionism

Religious folk, who claim the Bible, will oppose the position of a regathering first of an unbelieving Israel in anticipation of its future salvation.  Who are these people though?  What is their scriptural basis?  Are they right?  Then, what is the approach they’re taking to answer a grammatical-historical (literal) interpretation of the prophetic passages of scripture?

Someone can feel free to direct me to something scriptural and substantive from the Bible in opposition to Christian Zionism.  I haven’t seen it.  Instead, I’ve seen conspiratorial and pretentious speculation, mainly spinning a false origin story.  The kind of statement I have heard is the following:  “The Jews have to be put back into Israel in order for the second coming of Jesus Christ to take place and Christian Zionists care less about the Jews than they do craving the second coming of Christ.”  I can’t even call this a caricature.  It could be a deceived person, but it is a lie.

I have a hard time saying that the opponents to Christian Zionism are serious about the Bible.  At the best, their positions originated from allegorization or spiritualization of the Bible, not the actual Bible itself.  They invented something, using these subjective techniques, to conform to a presupposed idea, concept, or doctrine.  What will profit most from this in the end is an Antichrist globalist new world order.  And that is not the worst of it, because more than that, it undermines the gospel, which stands on the promises of God and the fulfillment of His covenants.  God is faithful and does not lie.

Review:  America First

In the rest of this post, I will continue to deal with points in the argument of Tucker Carlson against Christian Zionism besides his proclaimed personal revulsion with it and those who support it.  The first point was America First.  I defended from scripture with at least ten points that would conclude the blessing of America from blessing Israel.  Something I didn’t address in that post is what it means or would mean to bless Israel.  To start, of course it would mean not to hate the Jews themselves — to love them — no matter what.

Some of understanding the blessing of Israel starts with what it is not.  It does not require sending money to Israel or participating in Israel’s wars.  Israel wants support from the United States and spends money on lobbyists, like many other countries in the world.  The United States lobbies other countries too.  Israel puts itself first and over the United States, like it would or one would assume it would.

It is hard to quantify the ways God blesses the United States for its legitimate support of Israel.  Mainly it is a matter of faith.  God blesses in fulfillment of its promise.  Ask Grok that question of how God blesses the United States for its support of Israel and it gives a thorough answer to consider.  I’m not going to write it here, but I believe it.  It’s like arguing for answers to prayer.  When I pray, I believe God answers, but I can’t usually quantify all the blessings I get from praying.  I can give examples, but I also assume God is blessing, because He said He would.

Second Argument:  Genocide?

A second argument in the explanation of Tucker’s side is the genocidal nature of the present Israeli administration.  He says that killing women and children isn’t Christian.  I contend that’s mostly an emotional argument, because Israel isn’t trying to kill women and children.  At worst, it doesn’t try hard enough to keep women and children from dying during Israel’s military attacks against Hamas in Palestine.  Because of a natural and really metaphysical hatred of Jews, this is a very difficult physical and political issue for Israel.  They get worse treatment than probably all other nations.

Something from 2023 John MacArthur

Are there biblical guidelines for righteous warfare?  I will circle back to this, but I want to consider the words of a popular conservative evangelical, an expositional preacher, who was a Christian Zionist, John MacArthur.  They resonate with me in light of a biblical viewpoint of God’s covenants.   In back-to-back Sundays (Oct 15 & 22, 2023), MacArthur told Grace Community Church (I’m including his version of the Bible here, just to be accurate):

Hamas is modern Amalek (Ex 17:14–16; Deut 25:17–19). God said, ‘Blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.’ Israel is doing what Saul failed to do—finishing the job God started.

He read 1 Samuel 15:2–3 aloud:

Thus says the LORD of hosts, ‘I will punish Amalek … Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant …’”

Then he added:

That command has never been rescinded in principle. When a nation vows to wipe Israel off the map (Ps 83:4), Israel has biblical warrant to respond with overwhelming force. Mercy to the cruel is cruelty to the innocent.

Further MacArthur

From a 2023 Grace to You blog post reprinting his Q&A, MacArthur said:

Old Testament holy war is over—Israel is no longer a theocracy. But the principle stands: God preserves His covenant people. Genesis 12:3 is still in force—‘I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse.’ Hamas cursed Israel; they will be crushed. Gaza is today’s Ai (Josh 8); when God says ‘utterly destroy,’ He means it.

Some might highlight the present unbelief of Israel.  True, but they didn’t believe most of their history.  The Apostle Paul speaks about their death in the wilderness, because of their unbelief — an entire generation of Israelites.

Just War Theory

These following principles seem to be those from which MacArthur proceeds for his justification for Israel’s warring.  One, he quotes the Canaanite/Amalekite destruction texts as God’s unchanging hatred of those who hate His people.  Two, he insists that the Abrahamic land grant is irrevocable.  Three, he declares that self-defense against existential threats is obedience to the same God who once said, “Show no pity” (Deut 7:16).

MacArthur parallels Amalek and Hamas, not Amalek and Palestine.  With his language, Tucker Carlson does not oppose all war.  Since he supports some war, one must consider what many call, just war theory.  This forbids deliberate attacks on civilians and a lack of intention for collateral damage to the civilian population.  Also, the military must weight expected military gain against civilian harm.  The United States did this in World War 2, weighing American and Japanese civilian deaths by dropping atomic bombs versus a physical land invasion of Japan.  Planners saw exponentially worse civilian harm with the second choice.

Bad Faith Actors

I could write more about this, but I would call the above a start in the discussion on this point.  I like the way Robert P. George described debate on such issues, written in the last few days on twitter:

I am also—again, notoriously, for some of my fellow conservatives—willing to engage people with whom I deeply disagree, so long as they are honest and are willing to do business in the proper currency of intellectual discourse, a currency consisting of reasons, evidence, and arguments. (It is pointless to engage bad faith actors, charlatans, and con men.)

The internet creates a false sense or view of equality.  Someone can build an insidious platform today with a large audience with bad ideas and little substance.  I would put Nick Fuentes in that category with his sophomoric followers.  Tucker Carlson more than ever takes on that description as well, except it’s harder, because he’s 56.  Each of these “bad faith actors,” I would contend, are greatly influenced by syncretism with paganism, and yes, Satan himself or at least demonic doctrine.

More to Come