As Sean Davis, CEO of Federalism, often states, all politics is theology say. The recent exchange between Tucker Carlson and Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) was more convoluted than the discussion surrounding U.S. relations after the recent attack on Iran.
In an interview aired on Wednesday, Cruz referenced a biblical principle: “Those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will be cursed.” This statement is rooted in Numbers 24:9, alluding to God’s promise to Abraham found in Genesis 12:3: “I bless you and I bless those who bless you.”
Cruz also noted that he stated he doesn’t support sending Iranian American troops into action, but would back involvement if the risks escalated. He concluded that this means Americans are “biblically commanded to support Israel.”
To be fair, Cruz emphasized to Carlson that this view is his “personal motivation,” separate from his responsibilities as an elected official. He highlighted other geopolitical reasons for backing Israel, noting its position as “the strongest ally in the Middle East.”
However, whether Cruz intended it or not, their dialogue illustrated a debate among evangelicals about the meaning of the Abrahamic covenant for American Christians and its implications for modern Israeli politics.
Carlson posed the question: “Is the nation referred to in Genesis the same as the one led by Benjamin Netanyahu?”
Cruz affirmed this perspective, commenting later that Tucker argued when the Bible mentions “Israel,” it does not necessarily denote “Israel.”
This raises the question: How should Christians interpret “Israel” in this scenario?
Contrary to Cruz’s dismissal, it’s perfectly reasonable for a devoted Christian to highlight the practical and spiritual distinctions between the ancient Israelites—defined by Old Testament narratives—and contemporary individuals inhabiting the political entity of Israel (Arabs, Russians, Ukrainians, etc.).
The references to Abraham’s covenant made by Cruz are integral to the biblical narrative of God’s redemption. Old Testament prophets articulate the coming Messiah as the fulfillment of this covenant. As stated, “It is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham,” speaking of Christians.
It’s crucial that we don’t disregard the significance of the covenant in Genesis 12:3, but we must also acknowledge how Christ’s arrival in the New Testament engages with and enhances that covenant. God’s commitments to the Christian Church do not replace the Old Testament covenants; rather, they expand upon them. In Paul’s writings, he employs the metaphor of Gentiles or non-Jewish followers (grafting) onto an olive tree. Only through the Old Testament covenant can the covenants established with Abraham, Moses, and other patriarchs find fulfillment.
Paul elucidates that the blessing of God’s promise to Abraham in Genesis prophesied the church’s inclusion. In Galatians 3, he suggested that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and proclaimed the gospel to Abraham, stating, “In you all the nations will be blessed.” Thus, those of faith are blessed alongside Abraham, termed “the man of faith.”
A few verses later, it asserts, “The promise was made to Abraham and his descendants.” It doesn’t imply “many people,” but rather refers to “one”—which is “Christ.” According to Paul in verse 19, “the promise was made.”
Just as understanding the new covenant requires context from the Old Testament, it’s equally vital to comprehend the Abrahamic covenant within the framework of the New Testament relationship between Christ and the Church. God’s promise to Abraham in Genesis should be perceived in light of the entire gospel narrative. The Abrahamic covenant should be treated with respect, yet it shouldn’t be selectively applied to current geopolitical contexts, particularly as a justification for warfare.
Historically, many Jews erred by searching for a political Messiah when they were meant to seek a spiritual Messiah. We must be cautious not to make the same mistake when correlating Israel’s spiritual condition with modern political entities.
As Christians, we naturally feel a kinship with the Israelites, sharing a biblical heritage. We shouldn’t overlook the profound love and compassion God has for the people of Israel throughout scripture. We should embody that love, including praying for Jews to recognize Christ as the promised Messiah. Additionally, we should pray for their protection in light of consistent threats from Iran to destroy them and their homes. It’s evident who the relative “good guys” are in the conflict between Israel and Iran; no rational person claims moral equality between the two nations.
As long as Cruz and others reference Abraham’s covenant in discussions about foreign policy, they endorse general goodwill and moral backing for Israel, which isn’t contentious among Christians. The strong political alliance between America and Israel necessitates a certain degree of support from U.S. perspectives.
Nonetheless, interpreting God’s promise to Abraham in the Old Testament doesn’t require the U.S. government to make foreign policy choices founded solely on the objectives of the 21st-century Israeli nation-state. To put it starkly, that would mean we are obligated to formulate foreign policy decisions—regardless of whether they align with U.S. interests—based on whether it benefits the Israeli nation-state.
Ted Cruz expressed skepticism about this notion, agreeing with Tucker in another segment of the conversation that “the single standard for American foreign policy decisions is U.S. national interest.” Yet, this simplistic reading of Genesis 12 reveals the precariousness of intertwining tenuous theological interpretations with foreign policy.
The covenant made with Abraham, fulfilled through Christ, and expanded through the Church’s covenants, constitutes a significant aspect of the gospel narrative that deserves our thoughtful exploration. It beautifully illustrates God’s creativity and sovereignty and His plan for saving His children. However, that does not serve as a valid rationale for initiating U.S. conflict with Iran.
Elle Purnell is the Federalist Agenda Editor. She has appeared on Fox Business and Newsmax, and her work has been featured by RealClearPolitics, Tampa Bay Times, and The Independent Women’s Forum. She holds a bachelor’s degree in government with minors in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @_ellepulnell.
Source: thefederalist.com