Feder exhibits prejudice bordering on villification against progressive Christians, so it is not prejudice per se that he objects to, just prejudice against his side of the aisle.

Hugh Hewitt castigates progressive Christians for lack of faith and then encourages the sending to Senators of an essay telling them they can go to hell if they don't vote his way on the fillibuster issue.

Reminds me of just reading something be Dean Esmay where he calls for civil discussion among bloggers and then defends the spitting on Jane Fonda and says he would spit on Michael Moore given the chance. All in the same post!

an essay telling them they can go to hell if they don't vote his way on the fillibuster issue

Are you speaking literally or figuratively? Has Hewitt really claimed that Senators' salvation would be determined on how they vote on the filibuster issue?

Hewitt didn't write the essay. It was written by another and Hewitt encouraged people to send it to the appropriate senators. Because it was linked and Hewitt has written many posts on the filibuster, I haven't located it yet. Anyway, I should have made clear that Hewitt wasn't the author.

However, considering that the title of his book "If It Isn't Close, They Can't Cheat" implies that all Democrats are election stealers, I'm not encouraged by Hewitt's attitudes toward those he disagrees with.

Some evangelicals support Israel for very scary reasons.

Uh-oh. Chuck just mentioned the open secret... Many evangelicals only want Israel in place so that the Jews can play host to Armageddon.

With friends like that, who needs enemies?

Great, they won't speak in the defense of those being massacered in the genocide of Darfur, (so much for never again) but they will form a league to defend the wealthy, politicaly dominant and apparently defenseless christian right from the slings and arrows of outrageous moderates and liberals.

Isn't it the case that the majority of evangelical Christians hold that all those that do not accept Jesus as their personal savior shall be damned to hell upon their deaths?

Isn't it also the case that the majority of Jews will never accept Jesus as their personal savior, citing other authority?

Isn't it marvelous how these two groups can find common ground in their social and political aspirations in the corporeal world, "knowing" that their common moral outrage will never allow them to pass one another in heaven?

Irony is so ironic sometimes.

Feder's website is quite ridiculous. On the front page, there is a cartoon portraying him as "Ghengis Don" that has him declaring Death to Liberal Nancy Boys! Now if you turned that around and had a cartoon on some website declaring "Death to Christian Reactionaries!", Mr. Feder would be screaming bloody murder about the moral degeneration that led some pagan secularist commie pinko fag-lover to declare such an outrageous and disgusting thing. It's quite like the absurd Ann Coulter writing a book full of the most hateful, nasty invective to accuse liberals of engaging in hateful, nasty invective. There really is no sense of irony among the true believers, which Bill Hicks accurately pointed out so long ago.

Scott,

Just proves that disagreements over eternal issues doesn't necessarily preclude agreement over temporal ones.

Alan:

Indeed, uncontroversially. I'm sure that will provide a good measure of comfort to Don Feder when he gets to the pearly gates of Johnnie Evangelical's heaven and reads the sign: "no Jews allowed."

Many evangelicals only want Israel in place so that the Jews can play host to Armageddon.

Jason, I know a lot of evangelicals, and I would consider myself one as well. I don't know any who support Israel for the reason you propose, but I do know a lot who take Genesis 12:3 seriously, recognize the Jewish roots of their own faith, and/or support Israel because they are currently the only pro-Western democracy in the Mideast.

On the front page, there is a cartoon portraying him as "Ghengis Don" that has him declaring Death to Liberal Nancy Boys!

Ed, for what it's worth, that cartoon seems to be presented as self-deprecating humor. If, let's say, Kos posted a cartoon of himself as "Chairman Kos" declaring "Death to Conservative Counter-Revolutionaries" [note: the Feder cartoon doesn't invoke religion, so I don't think your hypothetical cartoon is an appropriate parallel], then I'd be inclined to take it in the same humorous manner.

Eric, don't play ignorant with me, especially about the Bible. Read this, then come back and tell me if

1) what I'm saying has no scriptural mandate.

2) that no evangelicals support the restored Israel chiefly because it's meant to witness the Last Battle.

The page I've linked comes from the Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry themselves, the very organization you've linked above. How can you possibly tell me you don't know of any Evangelicals who hold these views? This is their political program. And they have never been all that secretive about their motives--except when they get called out for what they're doing. Like now.

Otherwise, they're more or less blatant about it: Your religion, they say to the Jews, is only a tool in the service of a divine plan that you don't (yet) believe in.

So I repeat my question: With friends like these, who needs enemies? I'm favor Israel as a liberal democracy. They favor it as a future battleground for some mystical war they're hoping to spark.

Jason, the article you link provides exactly zero support for the thesis you are promulgating--that conservative Christians only support Israel because they're hoping to spark the battle of Armageddon.

Although that theory is popular among liberals who like to use it to bash conservatives, and/or explain that Republicans aren't really pro-Israel (all the while Democratic leaders get cozier with the Palestinians), it's frankly ridiculous. Right off the bat, any serious student of the Bible will tell you it's ludicrous to try and "bring about" prophetic events; God has His timetable, and what is prophesied will occur at the time God has ordained it.

So, to answer your point #2, I'm sure there are some evangelicals who support Israel chiefly for the reason you suppose. You can find some people who will adhere to pretty much any theory, no matter how ridiculous. But that doesn't warrant your applying that theory to all Christians who support Israel.

Back to the article and your point #1, yes, there is plenty of scriptural support for the battle of Armageddon. But the article isn't saying "Let's support Israel so we can hasten this event," it's saying "This is why Israel holds an important place in the future of the world, just as it holds an imporant place in its past."

To sum up, I think that people who claim what you're claiming have a misunderstanding of the nature of Biblical prophecy. I think the worst you can say about Christian conservatives is that they support Israel because they want to be "on God's side," rather than caring about Israelis as people. (I don't think this is generally true, though. I think Christians as a group have at least as much affection for the Jewish and Israeli people as any other group of non-Jewish people.)

But that doesn't warrant your applying that theory to all Christians who support Israel.

I never did. Obviously, there are other and far more legitimate reasons to support Israel than the ones advanced by the Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry. As I said, I support the right of Israel to exist because it is a democratic government with a large degree of personal freedom. I think that we should befriend all such governments--and mistrust the rest.

But your claim, that you know of no Evangelicals who support Israel so that the conditions will be right for Armageddon, is either false or else based on some very serious ignorance about an organization to which you have linked. This is a direct quote from the page we are discussing:

The end of this age, as we know it, will climax with all the nations of the world coming against Israel at the battle of Armageddon (Joel 1:15; 3:9–17; Zeph. 3:8–9; Zech. 12—14).

In that day, God will use the nation of Israel to help Him destroy the nations of the world.And this is just why the "Friends" of Israel want the Jewish state to continue existing. I suggest to you that supporting a nation so that a war can happen is monstrous, both in terms of foreign policy and prophetic interpretation. If God wants a war to happen, aren't Christians supposed to trust that He can cause it?

Obviously all Christians don't want to use Israel as a pawn like this--Really it's only a tiny minority. But still, it's a pretty obnoxious one, and I find it troubling that you speak of the Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry so benignly. It's a bit like calling the Klan a Christian fellowship organization.

But that doesn't warrant your applying that theory to all Christians who support Israel.

I never did.

Well, OK. But you first referred to this tiny minority as "many Evangelicals." A casual reader could interpret that as claiming a majority, or at least a significant fraction.

But your claim, that you know of no Evangelicals who support Israel so that the conditions will be right for Armageddon

Actually, I said that I "don't know any," not that I "don't know of any." That is, among the Evangelicals I know personally or have read a lot of what they've written, I don't know any who hold that position.

This is a direct quote from the page we are discussing:

The end of this age, as we know it, will climax with all the nations of the world coming against Israel at the battle of Armageddon (Joel 1:15; 3:9–17; Zeph. 3:8–9; Zech. 12—14).

This is merely a statement of a fairly non-controversial interpretation of Biblical prophecy. How does this imply that FOI wants to act in such a way as to hasten this event?

If God wants a war to happen, aren't Christians supposed to trust that He can cause it?

Yes, which is exactly what I said in my last comment. And I see nothing in that page which implies that FOI supports Israel "so that a war can happen." I am not greatly familiar with FOI, so it's possible you are correct about them but if so I'm not seeing it in anything you've posted.

The hugely popular "Left Behind" series requires that Israel have its original borders before Christ returns. The influence of LaHaye and Pat Robertson (who opposes a Palestinian state on the basis that it is unprophetic) has clearly influenced a lot of conservative evangelicals to be unloving toward Palestinians and to advance foreign policy goals that oppose any peace process.

Eric,

The quote I used in support of my claim was not parsed correctly. This section is indeed at their website:

The end of this age, as we know it, will climax with all the nations of the world coming against Israel at the battle of Armageddon (Joel 1:15; 3:9–17; Zeph. 3:8–9; Zech. 12—14).

But then, this one is there too. In my first post these showed up as my words, though they come from the site as well:

In that day, God will use the nation of Israel to help Him destroy the nations of the world.

Now, let's take these words in context, and realize that giving this as a reason for supporting Israel is chilling to say the least. And that's exactly what FOI does.

Jason, that quote is not given as a reason for supporting Israel. It is an event that many Christians believe will happen regardless of whether we support Israel or not.

As I pointed out already, the overall point of the page you link to is not about why one should support Israel, but why Israel is significant. Here's an excerpt from the conclusion of the article:

According to this verse, the Jewish people exist for at least four reasons.

That people may see the Jewish people and their history and realize that they are unique to this world...

That people may know the existence of the Jewish people can only be explained supernaturally...

That people may consider that the God of the Bible has done this miraculous work and seek a relationship with the sovereign God of the universe...

That people may understand that the God of Israel is the true God of this universe. He is the One we need to listen to and obey...

Israel’s history is relevant to people the world over, Jew and Gentile alike, and prompts them to respond in faith to the Holy One of Israel.

I honestly cannot see how you reach your conclusion that FOI supports Israel in order to bring about the battle of Armageddon based on this article. It seems you had that opinion long before you read the article, and you're reading in between the lines. If you are right about FOI, you're going to have to come up with better evidence than this. Otherwise it's a mere conspiracy theory.

The influence of LaHaye and Pat Robertson ... has clearly influenced a lot of conservative evangelicals to be unloving toward Palestinians

I think the actions of Palestinian homicide bombers over the past 4 years might have something to do with that as well. Say what you will about the actions of the IDF and/or supposed pro-Israel media bias, I think the intentional murder of innocents (not to mention dancing in the streets after 9/11) has had a greater influence on the opinions of conservative Evangelicals in America than LaHaye and Robertson.

I haven't read everything at http://www.whoseflorida.com/armageddon_lobby.htm" target="_blank">this page, but much of it is clearly relevant, and it entirely proves my original point: Many evangelicals really do want to hasten Armageddon, and they are attempting to do this by supporting Israel.

I haven't read everything at this page, but much of it is clearly relevant, and it entirely proves my original point: Many evangelicals really do want to hasten Armageddon, and they are attempting to do this by supporting Israel.

Sorry about the broken link... This one should be right.

That page is fairly dripping with bias and conspiratorial tones. Nevertheless, I do not deny that there is a (to use your words) tiny but obnoxious minority of Evangelicals/Fundamentalists who support Israel chiefly to hasten Armageddon. But what I find really offensive is when people try to use guilt by association to smear all Evangelical supporters of Israel that way. For instance, the idea that that sort of thinking is driving Bush's foreign policy is complete bunk.

It's like trying to paint all Democrats as closet socialists or even communists. I'm sure I could find a similar page that lists "evidence" to prove that John Kerry was planning to undermine our capitalistic system and turn over our national sovereignity to the United Nations.

I agree with everything you've said in your last comment, Eric. Still, I find it hard to deny that FOI is at least knee-deep in the pro-Armageddon nonsense, and perhaps it's a topic I should research for a future post.

I applaud Mr. Feder's formation of the JAACD. He understands what I think many Jews miss. The Christianity of the "fundamentalist" and evangelicals, who are frequent targets of condemnation, is incidental. It is not their Christianity that is under attack. It is their adherence to beliefs which are concomitant with, but no necessarily exclusive to, Christianity. Many of these beliefs are shared with Jews, and even in some cases Moslems. Christians are just the politically easy, perhaps even politically correct, target. I expect Mr. Feder remembers Martin Niemoller's analysis on the fate of politically correct targets. Jews may not head the list now, but people of faith in something above the power of the state will always end up on that list, and it seems to be the fate of Jews to be near the top.

The anti-Christian bigots will one day be the anti-Jewish bigots; again, not because of their Jewishness, but because of a faith in an absolute moral code from a transcendent source. They will turn on Moslems eventually. Moslems are currently media darlings of the radical left because the enemy of their enemy is their friend. This is not to say all Moslems engage in terrorism or harbor hateful beliefs, any more than all evangelicals are desperate to push the big red button. Most don’t. Leftists’ current embrace of Moslems is motivated by a desire to further their own goals under the mantle of tolerance. Leftists really have no tolerance for the anti-abortion, anti-practiced homosexuality, pro-traditional-family beliefs to which Islam tenaciously clings; more tenaciously than modern day Judaism and Christianity, it seems. Their support for Islamist terror, expressed in violent street demonstrations and invitation of Islamist firebrands to particularly left-leaning universities, is motivated by the desire to make America, and other market-based western democracies, look bad. Their ultimate goal is an unachievable earthly utopia. I will throw my lot in with those who strive for paradise in the afterlife, even if their vision excludes me there, than those who strive for paradise on earth, who would certainly exclude me here.

As far as some Christians being motivated by a desire to hasten Armageddon, that desire leading to support of the State of Israel, I say, "So What?" If there support consists of encouraging the support of Christian majority democracies to continue helping Israel exist, to fund raise to that end, etc., I couldn't be happier. Maybe they regard unconverted Jews at the end time as lost souls. That may be they're belief. It's no skin off my nose. Their actions speak louder than their motives and proselytizing.