Ron Paul`s Israel Problem

If
evangelical Christians are hesitant to support

Ron Paul`s candidacy for the Republican nomination
for President, two reasons are usually proffered: he
does not support Israel, and he wants to bring the

troops home from Iraq.

Unfortunately, many (if
not most) of today`s evangelical Christians have bought
into the whole

neocon warmongering mentality. Somewhere along the
way, evangelicals have forgotten the historic Christian
understanding of "just war," not to mention our
Savior`s promise of divine

blessing upon peacemakers. They have allowed
President George W. Bush and his fellow warmongers to
hijack the legitimate use of defensive war and turn it
into a commitment to aggressive and preemptive war.

If the United States
continues on its current path of aggressive, preemptive
war, incessant nation-building, empire-building, and
globalism, our country will collapse. If history teaches
us anything, it teaches us that no super-power can long
survive global warfare. The economic, moral, and
spiritual strain on the nation would be more than it
could long endure. In other words, Bush`s war doctrine
has put America on a crash course with disaster, and
evangelicals are downright foolish to go along with it.

Ron Paul is anything but
a pacifist. He is a U.S. Air Force veteran, for
goodness` sake. He believes in

Ronald Reagan`s "Peace Through Strength"
philosophy. He believes in a strong military. He
believes in defending the United States. That is not in
question.

Obviously, however, Ron
Paul rejects

nation-building, empire-building,

preemptive war, and globalism. By the way, this is
something the Republican Party also used to reject
before George W. Bush came along.

And please understand,
this is something that the vast majority—and I mean vast
majority—of the American people also reject. If the GOP
nominates a pro-Iraq war, pro-attack Iran,
pro-preemptive invasion, pro-aggressive war candidate,
they can kiss the November elections goodbye. The
American people (except for the most fanatically loyal
Bush supporters) are sick to death of American soldiers
and Marines dying for Mideast oil, million-dollar
Halliburton contracts, and

"surrender-your-liberties-because-we-are-at-war"
drivel. However, it is evangelical
Christians` misunderstanding of Ron Paul`s position on
Israel that seems to be the most problematic.

To be sure, not all
believers agree on the subject of Israel. Christians are
divided between pre-millennialism, post-millennialism,
and even amillennialism. For the most part,
pre-millennialists (such as me) believe that God will
yet fulfill the Davidic Covenant with the nation of
Israel. Post-millennialists, on the other hand, believe
that the Church, which is the Body of Christ, is the
complete fulfillment of God`s promises to Abraham and
David.

Regardless of one`s
particular view of Eschatology, believers should be
united in their support for protecting the sovereignty
and independence of these United States. If this were
really true, the vast majority of believers would
enthusiastically support the candidacy of Ron Paul, as
there is no one in Washington, D.C.,

who more faithfully defends the integrity of
America`s sovereignty and independence. The problem is,
some Christians seem to give more loyalty and support to
the government of Israel than they do their own
country`s independence and freedom.

In this regard, it is
incredible to me how evangelical pastors and leaders can
continue to associate with—and support—radical
Israel apologists such as

John Hagee. His ranting about Jewish people having a
special covenant with God and needing not to come to the
Father through Christ—and even that Jesus never claimed
to be Christ—is nothing short of blatant apostasy.

Whether one believes in
a future Davidic Kingdom or not is immaterial to the
preservation of America`s freedom and independence. If
God intends a future place and purpose for Israel, He is
certainly capable of fulfilling that place and purpose.
He will not need your help, my help, or Ron Paul`s help.
I know that is shocking to the pride and arrogance of
many evangelicals, but it is true nonetheless.

Does that mean that an
American President should deliberately inflict harm upon
the State of Israel? As long as they do not inflict harm
upon us, no. No more than he should deliberately inflict
harm upon any nation that does not inflict harm upon us.
A free and independent nation—not to mention a nation
whose roots are grounded in Christian philosophy—should
seek only that which promotes peace and prosperity. Of
all people, Christians should understand this. Ron Paul
does understand this.

Accordingly, Ron Paul
rightly wants to return America`s foreign policy to the
established and historic principles of its founding
documents and sentiments. That means free and fair trade
with all and entangling alliances with none. Not even
Israel.

My dear Christian
brethren, let`s get real: America`s policies toward
Israel have not been a blessing to her. They have been a
curse. George W. Bush and most other Presidents during
the last 40 years have treated Israel like the
proverbial red-headed step-child.

For example, America
continues to furnish Israel`s enemies with three times
more aid and assistance than

it does Israel. Three times. Is that being a
blessing to Israel? America gives unflinching and
magnanimous support to

militant Muslim governments such as Saudi Arabia.
There is no nation in the Middle East that has harbored,
trained, supplied, and supported more terrorists than
Saudi Arabia. Is that being a blessing to Israel? In
addition, every time an American President wants to
meddle in Middle Eastern affairs, he insists that Israel
give up land for peace. President Bush is doing that
very thing anew and afresh at this very moment. Is that
being a blessing to Israel?

Let me assure the reader
(if he or she needs assurance) that Israel knows how to
defend itself. In fact, Israel has over 300 nuclear
weapons. Israel has enough weaponry and nuclear
capability to take out any threat to its sovereignty
that any Arab nation—or group of Arab nations—could
mount against it.

Herein lies another
problem: it is a heavy-handed, dictatorial, do-as-I-say
foreign policy from Washington, D.C., that prevents
Israel from defending itself. Before Tel Aviv can do
anything, it must come hat-in-hand to Washington for
permission.

If Iraq was a legitimate
threat, Israel could have taken out Baghdad, Saddam
Hussein, and his entire army with little difficulty. The
same is true right now with Iran. If Iran is a
legitimate threat, Israel could launch whatever attack
is necessary to defend itself. It should not need
Washington`s permission. Israel is a sovereign nation.
It should have the right to defend itself as it deems
necessary. Frankly, it is none of Washington`s business.
The truth is, Israel`s perennial precariousness is a
direct result of Washington`s constant interference.

Ron Paul would put an
end to Washington`s deleterious and insatiable appetite
for nation-building and entangling alliances. The result
would be a stronger Israel and a more stable Middle
East. Not to mention the lack of resentment and hatred
that results from the worldwide perception that America
is an arrogant and bullying country.

Furthermore, Christians
need to understand that Jewish interests are not always
harmonious with the interests of Christianity or the
interests of the United States. Israel certainly did not
act in a friendly fashion when it attacked the Navy
intelligence ship, the

USS Liberty, in 1967. That attack was the second
deadliest against a U.S. vessel since the end of World
War II. The attack also marked the single greatest loss
of life by the U.S. intelligence community. 34 U.S.
servicemen were killed and 173 were wounded in that
attack. In addition, Israel is often found to be

engaged in espionage within the United States.
Should America turn a blind eye to such activities? Of
course not.

Beyond that, Hebrew
Christians are still pretty much regarded as
second-class citizens in Israel. There is no freedom of
religion for Christians in Israel. I have spoken at the
only two Baptist churches in Israel (at that time): the
First Bible Baptist Church in Jerusalem and the Bible
Baptist Church in Bethlehem. The vast majority of the
churches` members were Palestinian or Arab; they were
not Jewish. Most of the opposition to Christianity in
Israel comes from Jews not Arabs.

Evangelical Christians
in the United States also need to seriously consider the
impact of America`s actions upon the Christian
missionaries throughout the world, but especially in the
Middle Eastern world. There are numerous Christian
missionaries throughout the Muslim states. Ask any of
them and they will tell you that America`s meddlesome
foreign policy makes their job harder—not easier.

What I am saying is that
Ron Paul`s position on Israel is not problematic for
Israel`s future security or prosperity. And neither is
it problematic for America`s future security and
prosperity. In fact, Ron Paul`s foreign policy is
compatible with both historic American principles—not to
mention constitutional government—and with deeply
regarded Christian principles. The real problem is that
many evangelical Christians have themselves lost their
appreciation and understanding of these principles.

Dr. Chuck Baldwin is the
pastor of Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola,
Florida. He hosts a

weekly radio show. His
website is

here.