Embassy: Challenges and Opportunities

This week the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs posted Ambassador Dore Gold’s congressional testimony regarding the movement of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. He made one statement that has prophetic implications:

But what I’d like to discuss today is what could be called the international interest, or the interest in Jerusalem of concerned states.

We know of course that there are prophetic clues in Scripture as to the status of Jerusalem and the mood of the international community.

Gold makes the point in his congressional testimony that in order for the embassy move to come to fruition, Israel needs Western approval for such an action.

(He appeals to Washington and the wider world on the basis of Israel’s commitment to protect holy sites.)

Now, we can debate whether that is in fact true, but we do that as Bible-believing Christians who are pro Israel. However, we must remember that our worldview makes no more sense to the secular world as their worldview makes to us. Two competing views. Each views the other as crazy.

But from the standpoint of geopolitics, Gold’s statement is true. The question is, how could such approval come in the current political climate? There seems to be a window of time to do this, under Trump, but always we must take into account the utter hostility of the Obamas of this world.

Gold’s premise before the House’s Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is the product of a decent mind and heart. Problem is, much of the world does not share Dore Gold’s character. For that reason, I believe an appeal to moving the embassy because Israel will protect the holy sites is, pains me to say it, a waste of time.

Everywhere, we see compelling evidence that the international community’s priorities are seriously misplaced and in fact, people in general will not stand with righteousness. To put a finer point on it, Jesus’s prophecy has come to fulfillment, that in the last days the love of many will grow cold (Matthew 24:12). I always like the preciseness of Scripture: Many. The love of many will grow cold. This indicates a civilizational problem.

Frankly, the decision-makers in international politics don’t really care about the Holy Land’s holy sites.

A terrific Italian writer, Giulio Meotti, wrote this week in the Jerusalem Post that Western audiences have a fatal character defect (my characterization):

“The Media Research Center found that US television devoted more than six times the amount of air time to the death of a gorilla in comparison to the air time given to the beheading of 21 Coptic Christians in Libya in 2015.”

We don’t care about our own kind. Why would people see the rightness in recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capitol?

I often write in this space (and, as an aside, I am profoundly grateful for the opportunity RaptureReady—Todd and Terry—afford me in visiting with you weekly) about Israel being abandoned by everyone in the very last days. That is an unpleasant reality, but one that is necessary in order for the Messianic Age to dawn.

The fundamental problem with pro Israel advocacy is that 90 percent of the efforts are devoid of any biblical underpinnings. If one can’t make Israel’s case from the Bible, why would audiences listen to pragmatic and practical reasons to support the embassy’s move?

They don’t.

And as I also often say in this space, the very worst offenders—and this reality is a mind-bender—reside in the American Evangelical community.

Although strong pockets of Israel support still remain in the Church, they are still pockets. The rest of the suit is filled with people (leaders and laity) either hostile to Israel, or indifferent.

I spent a long time trying to convince pro Israel groups that anti-Israel fervor among evangelical leaders is a serious problem, but to little avail. However, what we must recognize—and this has everything to do with this week’s topic—is that the evangelical network led by people like Jen Hatmaker, Ed Stetzer, Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, Andy Stanley, Lynne Hybels, Jonathan Martin, Jon Huckins, Mae Cannon, Sammy Awad, and a thousand others is the train that is stream-rolling Israel support in the Church.

These people have vast influence, holding sway with a laity that is largely biblically illiterate. It is why American audiences in general don’t care about the persecution of Christians in distant lands, recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capitol, or, more close to home, abortion. Most people are “go along to get along,” in the Church.

Politically, Gold is appealing to a majority of House members who are cultural Christians, at best. If even people like Condi Rice and George W. Bush (billed as somewhat of an evangelical) don’t “get” Israel, why would people who rub shoulder with the John Kerrys of the world?

They don’t. And won’t.

Gold’s final statement before the committee reads thusly:

“Whatever is finally decided on the embassy issue, states have a clear choice. They can support the State of Israel, which has acted responsibly in protecting this legacy of humanity, or they can undercut Israel, by preferring arrangements for the Holy City that plainly have not worked in the past and will undoubtedly fail in the future. There is a regional assault on holy sites underway across our region. Israel deserves your support as it defends Jerusalem. For only a free and democratic Israel will protect Jerusalem for all the great faiths.”

I can’t say whether I believe the embassy will be moved, or not. There are other things that could trigger the epic end-times battles over Jerusalem. Granted, moving the embassy could be the trigger. Or it could be something else.

What we can say is that the challenges and opportunities for moving the embassy in our day are also epic.

As the world grows weaker in combatting Islam, and as it develops more of a dhimmi mentality, I think the words of Ambassador Gold, though noble, are falling on deaf ears.

Jim1fletcher@yahoo.com

 

Coddling the PLO

As with all visitors to the Holy Land, I saw many fascinating things on my first trip to Israel, now many moons ago.

As I think about this year, as it ends, I remember walking through Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem’s Old City. This year is the centennial of course of the British taking the holy city from the Ottoman Turks, which set today’s backdrop in motion.

Early Zionists felt that this event, when General Allenby dismounted and strode through the gate, would be the trigger for a quickly cascading series of events that would end with a modern Jewish state.

We all know though that other events can intervene, and intervene they did. A world war threw one monkey wrench into the machine, but it was perhaps dwarfed by the quagmire the Brits found themselves in as they mediated disputes between Jews and Arabs in Palestine.

It was in this period that oil was found in Arabia, thus setting in motion an atmosphere in which the West decided to placate the Arabs…often at the expense of the Jews.

Another thing I saw on that first trip was “Orient House,” an east Jerusalem quasi-headquarters-embassy for the Palestinians. It was illegal for the PLO/PA to operate in such a way during the early years of Oslo, so periodically it was shut down.

But the Arabs are nothing if not relentless. That is the key to their “successes,” both diplomatically and by way of terrorism.

They were also helped immeasurably by their Western friends, particularly in Washington D.C. The contradictions were also difficult to watch, too.

Ronald Reagan’s White House agreed to recognize Yasser Arafat and the PLO as the true representative of the Palestinians. Yet in 1987, Reagan also signed into law legislation that there would never be a PLO office on U.S. soil.

One wonders whether George H.W. Bush ever really disliked the PLO, and his successor hosted the blood-soaked Arafat a staggering and shameful 13 times! Barack Obama’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, at least in terms of facilitating a network in Washington, are well documented.

The PLO/PA opened an office in Washington seven years after Reagan used his pen. This established the lawlessness of Bill Clinton’s regime.

This week, the Trump administration has announced that this office might be shut down, due to the PA attempting to get the International Criminal Court to prosecute Israelis for alleged crimes against the Palestinians.

Though we might wish that Trump would do more to support Israel (the whole business of not moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem is a murky story that I’m not convinced is Trump’s fault), he is infinitely better to Israel than any of his predecessors.

According to the Times of Israel:

“Trump administration officials in recent days have been leaking like sieves about plans to relaunch the peace process as soon as next year. The Palestinians until now have been game — Zomlot, the PLO envoy to Washington, has been effusive in his outreach to Jewish groups, the media and American politicians about Trump’s ‘ultimate deal.’ They have put on hold bids to join international agencies.

“Nuh-uh, the Palestinians now say. Closing the office ‘is unprecedented in the history of US-Palestinian relations, which could have serious consequences on the peace process and US-Arab relations, as well as serves as a blow to peacemaking efforts,’ Nabil Abu Rudeineh, Abbas’ spokesman, said over the weekend.”

In reality, this is more game playing by the Palestinians. Push, pull, push, pull. They say they will in good faith be involved in the “peace process,” then do things to scuttle it.

I believe the PLO leadership has never been about state-building or their people. They are for themselves. Maintaining luxury lifestyles.

Whether their Washington office is closed for a bit or not, that self-absorbed mindset will continue as long as the West allows it.

Jim1fletcher@yahoo.com