Should Christians support the nation of Israel?
This question touches on one of the most important distinctions in Scripture: the difference between Israel and the Church. Several writers address this from multiple angles — the heavenly calling of Christians, the earthly promises belonging to Israel, and the believer's relationship to the political affairs of this world.
Israel Is Earthly; the Church Is Heavenly
The most foundational point is that God has two distinct peoples with two distinct callings. F. B. Hole sets out the contrast plainly:
F. B. HoleIsrael's blessings and privileges were largely of an earthly and material order, the church's are heavenly and spiritual.
He explains:
In the Old Testament instructions were given as to the way in which the children of Israel should return thanks to God when they were actually in possession of the promised land. They were to take the first of all their fruits and set them in a basket before the Lord their God, with an acknowledgment of His goodness on their lips. Is the Christian to approach God in this way? On the contrary, when Paul wrote to the Ephesians as to the heavenly inheritance of Christians, far from speaking of material things, he said, "Blessed by the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ" (Eph. 1:3).
And further:
While Israel's destiny is to be the channel of blessing to all nations, during the golden years of the millennial age, the church's destiny is association with Christ in heaven. Isaiah 60 well describes the future of Israel. Revelation 19 and 21, under various figures, presents to us the destiny of the church as "the Lamb's wife."
The Church Is Extra-National
Hole makes another critical point — the Church does not operate on the same national basis as Israel:
On the other hand, there is nothing national about the church. Peter declared, corroborated by James, that the divine programme for this dispensation is the visiting of the nations by God, "to take out of them a people for His name" (Acts 15:13-14). God is now making an election from all nations, and those thus gathered out for His name compose "the church."
The church, then, is not national, nor is it international, it is rather extra-national, i.e., altogether outside of all national distinctions, and totally independent of them.
Heavenly Citizenship, Not Earthly Nationalism
A. J. Pollock addresses this even more directly. Writing against the British-Israel theory (which tried to link the British nation with the lost ten tribes), he draws out a principle that applies to any attempt to tie Christians to national or political causes related to Israel:
A. J. PollockSupposing the theory to be true, the Israelite when converted, as likewise the Jew, would necessarily in taking Christian ground give up Israelitish or Jewish hopes. How wrong then for Gentile believers today, who never had Jewish and earthly hopes, to give up heavenly hopes in exchange for earthly hopes. For it is said of believers: "Our conversation (Greek, polituma, literally enfranchisement or citizenship) is in heaven; from whence we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ" (Phil. 3:20).
British-Israel writers would drag Christians down from this heavenly citizenship, and connect them with earth. Earthly blessing will be right for Israel in a coming day, but it is not the portion for the Christian today.
Pollock also states the principle broadly:
There is no such thing as a Christian nation [Greek, ethnos], in God's ways, but out of the nations God selects a people [Greek, laos] for Himself. The thought of a Christian nation in this dispensation receives no support from Scripture.
And on the Christian's relationship to politics he writes:
We are not of the world even as Christ is not of the world. We touch not its politics, its schemes for bettering man apart from the acknowledging of God's claims. We recognize "the powers that be are ordained of God" (Rom. 13:1). We are subject to their ordinances, unless they clash with God's revealed will in the Scriptures.
Separation from Worldly Alliances
T. B. Baines, writing on the parable of the pounds in Luke 19, draws out what it means for Christians to be left in a world that has rejected Christ:
T. B. BainesTo how many true Christians is the thought present, "I am here for Christ, in charge of His interest in the scene where He has been rejected"? ... To him [Paul] that death was not only deliverance from sins, but deliverance "from this present evil world." To him that cross was not only the place where sin had been judged, but the means by which "the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world."
He goes further, directly addressing the question of political methods and alliances:
Who could suppose the servants of the absent Lord taking counsel with the citizens that had cast Him out, as to how they should care for His goods? Is it any better when believers go to the world, or resort to worldly principles, worldly wisdom, and worldly alliances, in the hope of furthering the cause of Christ?
Ambassadors, Not Lobbyists
J. A. Von Poseck captures the believer's posture:
J. A. Von PoseckHe is not here! But we are; and for what purpose? Merely to walk through it as pilgrims and strangers? Not only so, but Christ has sent us into it as ambassadors, with a message of peace and life.
The Christian is an ambassador for Christ — not an advocate for any earthly nation, however connected to biblical history it may be.
J. T. Mawson strikes the same note:
J. T. MawsonOur service is in the world that hates Him. Let us not attempt to disguise or reason away this sad fact; the citizens of it said, "We will not have this man to reign over us;" and that decision has never been reversed. ... If it hates Him, and we are true to Him, it will hate us too.
Israel's Future Is Real — But It Is God's Work
None of this denies that God has purposes for the nation of Israel. F. B. Hole is clear:
F. B. HoleGod's ways with Israel have only ended for a time. Later on, in a day still future, they will be resumed, and the glorious promises made to that favoured nation be literally fulfilled. Israel has been side-tracked, as it were, while the church occupies the rails. When the church has been transferred to heaven, Israel will again be brought out upon the main line of God's dealings.
Pollock likewise affirms:
God has an earthly people, though under His displeasure at this present time, and He has a heavenly people. To confuse and confound the one with the other ... is to do no good service to either.
And on the two brides — Israel and the Church:
The former [Israel] is earthly, an earthly Bride for Jehovah, a Bride for time, the millennium brings that to a close; the latter [the Church] is heavenly, a heavenly Bride, and that for eternity.
In Summary
The consistent teaching is this: Christians should not take up the political cause of supporting the nation of Israel as though it were a Christian duty. Three threads converge:
1. The Church's calling is heavenly, not earthly. Our citizenship is in heaven (Phil. 3:20). To take up earthly national causes — even ones connected to God's ancient people — is to exchange heavenly hopes for earthly ones.
2. The Church is extra-national. It exists altogether outside of national distinctions. Christians are strangers and pilgrims in every nation, including Israel.
3. Israel's restoration is God's sovereign work, not ours. He will fulfil His promises to Israel in His own time — after the Church has been taken to heaven. To attempt to advance that programme through political support or worldly alliances is to "resort to worldly principles, worldly wisdom, and worldly alliances" (Baines) in a way that does not belong to the Christian's calling.
This does not mean indifference to Jewish people as individuals. The Christian's calling is to be an ambassador of the gospel to all — Jew and Gentile alike. But the modern political question of "supporting Israel" as a nation is a worldly affair that belongs to the sphere from which the cross has separated us.