And so another Peace Plan Boat Floats down the River. It was a long time coming, with speculation aplenty about the “Deal of the Century”. Is it headed for the same ghost-ship harbor where all the other plans have ended up?
I’m not optimistic. In fact I’ll wager it was dead in the water even before the details officially emerged, and despite the leaks.
Three words come to mind: Camp David Fiasco. Those who are unfamiliar with the Camp David Summit can read all about it HERE. You may want to pay special attention to a frustrated Bill Clinton’s post-debacle reflections where he stated: “I still didn’t believe Arafat would make such a colossal mistake.”
Well, I think Arafat knew exactly what he was doing. He never wanted peace to begin with.
Now I’m not a Middle East analyst by any stretch. Yet anyone paying the remotest attention over the years would see a post-Camp-David-pattern where every proposal for peace is summarily rejected by the Palestinians because [fill in the gap].
For an analytical appraisal of the “Deal of the Century” I recommend Amir Tsarfati’s breakdown HERE. In part, Tsarfati writes:
There’s no question that the ‘Deal of the Century’ is, in fact, a two-state solution like several previous attempts from past US administrations. What makes it unique is how the tide has changed in recognizing Israel as the priority, putting the ball in the court of the Arabs for the next step. As discussed, they immediately rejected this deal. The deal is not being implemented, at least not for now. (Emphasis mine)
Unfortunately, like the wind, tides can and do change. There will be life after President Trump. What then? There are a number of dynamics involved in these Peace Plan rejections. The following is my – admittedly amateurish – opinion based on some years researching and writing about the issue…
The Two Palestinian leaderships don’t want peace with a “Jewish State.” They don’t want any Jews anywhere in any land near them. You have to carefully observe what they say (and do). See the Hamas Charter. Also listen to what the Iranian regime has said about Israel, and people like Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad.
One issue is that the conflict with Israel has been a steady cash flow for Palestinian leaders. Any successful Peace Plan would necessarily involve removing all Jews and guaranteeing long-term payments to these leaders (not the people). Of course if the Jews weren’t there, we wouldn’t need a Peace Plan to begin with. But send money anyway!
Speaking of Peace Plans, as time goes by I’m sure the Christian pro-Palestinian activists will resume their hand-wringing. They’ll inevitably point to the unfairness of it all (whatever the rejected Plan was). They’ll blame President Trump because he’s bad [or fill in the gap again], Israel, and those Armageddon-loving, interfering Christian Zionists.
Here’s what I’d like to see happen…
Forget the land-stealing, Palestinian-oppression accusations customarily aimed at Israel. Stephen Sizer, Gary Burge and the usual “Christ at the Checkpoint Peacemaker” suspects need to get their pencils out and draft up a solid Peace Plan in consultation with the Palestinians – one which everyone will agree on. Let us then see what they come up with.
Christian Peacemakers generally subscribe to replacement Theology. They operate on the premise that the Church is True-Spiritual-Israel, and that national oppressive Israel lost all biblical claim to the land. In fact Sizer contends that Balfour was a tragedy. Hence, they allegorize and re-interpret Old Testament promises regarding Israel’s eternal ownership of that land (Jer 7:7, 25:5; Amos 9:14-15).
They find innovative methods of getting around the face-value meaning of Genesis 12:3, Cursing and Blessing Israel. They’ll sometimes suggest that Christian Palestinians have more right to the land than unbelieving Israel. The fact that most Palestinians are Muslim and therefore also “out of covenant with God” is lost on them.
There’s no space for rebuttals here. Moreover it’s a topic which has been addressed before. However, I want to mention a few sources for those who may be interested:
See Michael Rydelnik’s book “Understanding the Arab-Israeli Conflict“; Barry Horner’s “Future Israel” and “Eternal Israel“; David Larsen’s “Jews Gentiles & The Church“; Mike Vlach’s “Has the Church Replaced Israel?” and “He Will Reign Forever.” God will redeem Israel in order to glorify His name (Ezek 36:19-38).
Note: Barry Horner has replied to Gary Burge’s “Territorial Supercessionism HERE and HERE. See also he reflections on some of the responses to “Future Israel” HERE.
Who does the land really belong to, and who was it given to? These are important questions answered in Rydelnik’s book. Are there consequences for dividing God’s land and rising up against Israel? See Joel 3:1-2; Zech 12:2-3, 14:2-3.
However well intentioned politicians may be, I wouldn’t want to be in the position of coercing Israel in any Peace Plan involving trading Land for peace. I can’t help thinking of Uzzah who reached out to steady the Ark of the Covenant. It didn’t end well (2 Sam 6:1-7).
Just as God used Assyria to punish Israel, and then punished Assyria (Isaiah 10), God can use people to either bless or curse Israel. These actions will attract just consequences.
Finally, the biblical fact is that there never will be man-made peace in the Middle East or this world – not until the return of our Lord Jesus Christ. At this point national Israel will recognize its redeemer (Hos 5:15; Matt 23:37-39, 24:30-31).
When we pray for peace in Jerusalem we are effectively praying for Christ’s premillennial return to inaugurate His Kingdom and rule this world justly (Psalm 96:12-13 etc). Any other peace is temporal at best.
Maranatha!
Sharing is caring!
