that christians have a religious responsibly to promote and support a jewish state in some portion of the political holy land. he is the author of "god's country, christian zionism in america. -- in america. i want to thank you all and welcome you to the washington history seminar on national and international affairs. i am the cochair of this seminar. ,oday, my other cochair christian osterman, is unable to join us. some of you know some of you do not know. this is a seminar that has been going on for a good number of years. it is the collaborative effort of two organizations, the national history center, which is a part of the american historical association, and the woodrow wilson international center for scholars in its

history and pollen -- public policy program. behind the scenes, we have two particular individuals, who every week work to make sure that this seminar comes off with little difficulty as possible, amanda perry from the national history center and pierce decker from the wilson center in the back. on the side are the folks who do the difficult work of organizing logistics and making sure that the seminar comes off week after week. the seminar is relied upon the friends.y of its among institutional supporters. , we have the department of history at the george washington university and a number of anonymous donors. as i say every single week, please feel free to join their neck -- their ranks at your earliest possible convenience. we are pleased to have roger lewis, who is the founder of the seminar, just under a decade

kennedy,ell as dane the current director of the national history center. if you have one of these devices -- and i'm guessing every single person in this room does, let's see here -- make sure that it is in the off or silent position. they always tend to go off at the wrong moment because there is never the right moment. so if you will turn your vote -- silent.ne to it is my pleasure to welcome our speaker today, samuel goldman, who is a colleague of mine at george washington university, where he is an assistant officer of clinical science and the director -- of elliptical signs -- of political science. of theis the director logo institute for religious freedom. before coming to gw, he received his phd from harvard and he was

a postdoctoral fellow in religion, ethics, and politics at princeton. in addition to his new book, about which he will be speaking today, he has published scholarly essays on a variety of figures. also serves asan the literary editor of "modern age," a conservative review. and now, he will speaking to us on his new project, his new book, "god's country, christian zionism in america." eric isuld say that generous enough to describe me as his colleague. what he did not mention is that he is one of the dean's at the

george washington -- deans at the george washington university and therefore my boss. i have only good things to say about him and the administration of the wonderful university that is kind enough to employ me. i also want to thank the wilson center and the national history center for their generous invitation. as eric mentioned in his i am not in fact trained as a historian. i always address audiences composed of historians with the greatest trepidation because historians tend to ask very difficult questions, which i am only sometimes prepared to answer. i take comfort in these challenges in a story that is french social

theorist, michel foucault, at this time in berkeley. present the same paper and put the history seminar and the philosophy seminar. when the historians raised objections about his use of sources or the archives he visited, he would say, gentlemen, i am a philosopher and these are not my concerns. then he would go to the philosophy center and deliver the same paper. and the philosophers would raise objections about his definition of concept or the structure of his argument and he would say, gentlemen, i am a historian and i cannot be held to your rigorous standards. so i'm going to follow foucault's example if you give me too hard a time and plead them ship in a different scholarly discipline, not philosophy, but in fact

political theory. i think i will say something in my remarks this afternoon about why i think this investigation of christian zionism is important for lyrical theory as well as for religious and political history. to introduce the topic, i will ask you to think back to last january, which i know, for many of us, seems like a lifetime ago , not nearly nine months. when vice president mike pence, whose photograph i noticed in the lobby outside this room, the --ed an address at at israel's parliament, making ofofficial announcement makin president trump's decision of relocating the embassy from tel

viv to jerusalem, a decision that congress quitey a number of years ago, but had been deferred by a series of both democratic and republican administrations. speech was notable for for theolism as wel specific occasion and diplomatic significance. hence, as many of you know, is not only vice president, but also a conservative evangelical christian, a group that here in the united states has been outspoken in its support of the jewish state. reflected that athusiasm, more than just

recitation of diplomatic cliches, of friendship between peoples. pence drew a close parallel between america or the united states or the american people and the people of israel, a parallel that goes back to the very beginnings of european settlement of this continent. i want to quote a passage. here's what pence said. in the story of the jews, we've always seen the story of america. , ais the story of an exodus journey from persecution to freedom, a story that shows the power of faith and the promise of hope. my country's very first settlers also saw themselves as pilgrims sent by providence to build a new promised land. and stories of israel were there anthems and they

easily taught them to their children and due to this day. and our founder, as others have said, turned to the wisdom of the hebrew bible for direction, guidance, and inspiration. so pence is suggesting that the connection between the united states and its territory and its people and the people in the land of israel is deeply woven into the fabric of american culture, beginning with the puritans, but also expressed in the politics of the founding. then moved from history to theology, perhaps even to prophecy. he proclaimed, "it was the faith of the jewish people that gathered the scattered fragments of a people and made them whole again, that took the language of the bible and the landscape of the psalms, and made them live

again." i know this is a highly educated audience, so i will pose a pop quiz. would anybody venture to name the passage in the hebrew bible or the old testament to which pence was alluding? don't be shy. guesses? ok. well, i won't torment you any longer. 37 of the book of ezekiel, which is often described as the vision of the dry bones or sometimes the vision of the valley of the dry bones. and in this vision, the prophet sees himself standing in a valley full of dry human bones. and before his eyes in this

prophecy, the bones are reconstituted as living bodies. then god reveals the bones to his vehicle as the people of -- then godile reveals the bone to easy keel as ezekiel as of the people of israel in exile. for those of you who care, this is the king james translation. that is slight -- that is a anachronism. in fact, it was not the king james, but the earlier geneva bible, the first complete translation of the bible into english that was especially important in inspiring the religious and political movements that i call christian zionism. and in important ways, the king

james or authorized version distance itself -- distances proto-scientists -- proto-zionist restoration. here is what god says to ezekiel. me, son oftled to man, these bones are the whole house of israel. behold. they say our bones are dried and our hope is lost. we are cut off for our parts. therefore, prophesy and sent to them, thus see if the lord, god, behold, o, my people, i will open your graves and cause you to come out of your graves and bring you into the land of israel. and ye shall know that i am the lord when i have opened your graves, oh, my people, and brought you out of your grave and shall put my spirit in you and you shall live. and i shall place you in your own land. then shall you know -- then

shall ye know that i come of lord, have spoken and performed it. this, i'm quite certain, is what the vice president had in mind when he said it was the faith of the jewish people that gathered the scattered people and made them whole again. they took the language of the bible and the landscape of the psalms and made them live again. we know, of course, that important public officials like vice president pence don't really write their own speeches. so when i read these words in the newspaper, i became curious about who might have composed them or what inspired them. i don't know the answer to the first question. presumably, they came from the vice president's staff. but it did turn out that portions of the speech were rather closely based on some statements by rabbi lord

jonathan sacks, a great scholar and advocate of french a between jews and christians, the united states, the united kingdom, and the state of israel. i know that, in writing the reappeared,t have with permission, i should say -- this is not a case of plagiarism or unattributed quotation -- that rabbi lord sacks had precisely these passages and also the historical background in mind. also indulgest myself in a moment of self-promotion and say that the speech may have been further improved if vice president pence and his staff had read my book, which you see here, because this book is, so far as i know, the only historically comprehensive

and at least in intention accessible to non-specialist readers a study of american christians' interest and sometimes of session with -- sometimes obsession with the jewish state, an obsession that hence would suggest really does go back to the puritans. theminor correction -- puritans and the pilgrims, as we know, are not the same people. pence is participating in a characteristic conflation of these two groups when he described the early settlers of new england as pilgrims. but all that to one side. so what i tried to show in this book is that christian zionism, which i define arbitrarily as the idea that christians have a religious resort -- religious

responsibility to promote, support, or protect a jewish state in some portion of the local holy lands. and i say this is an arbitrary definition. that is not entirely true. the purpose of the book is in some ways to define the -- if you are interested, we can about the terms of those definitions and their advantages and disadvantages. but this is the one i use areas of intentionally rather lose.

they are considerably older. if you are familiar with some of the literature in this topic, you might find a different answer. they emanate from the influence from john nelson darby, an anglo evangelist who is the in -- amine kaiser

incidentally, the pre-millennial part of pre-millennial dispensation is probably redundant. there is no post-millennial dispensation. a copy of is in order. i know there is a caveat is in order. a caveat is in order. i know there is contextual interpretation here it but broadly -- into rotation. -- broadly speaking, to show i know there is conceptual interpretation. the current dispensation will conclude with the return of the jewish people to the biblical

promised land. and either immediately after or possibly in conjunction with this return, christ will return in person to defeat his enemies and establish the millennial -- for the next phase of history, that will last for another thousand years with peace and harmony until satan escapes from his bonds and raises an army and is defeated and finally the new heavens and new earth, of which the book of revelation speak, come into existence. if you are familiar with this school of thought, this all is very exciting and clear. they can be somewhat for bidding ing forbidd -- forbidd those who are not theologically

experienced. typified by the so-called left behind or in times series of novels which have also produced spinoff movies and television also workslieve, and "thethe 1970's bestseller late great planet earth" by hal lindsay. so to return to the influence of darby, yes, it's true that darby popularized this particular scheme of interpretation and of historical reasoning. -- in thatspect, respect, he is an important figure in the development of christian scientism -- christian zionism. moree was drawing upon deeply rooted arguments and assumptions.

these arguments and assumptions are particularly deeply rooted here in the united states. in the 19th century and even into the early 20th century, there was an active christian zionist movement in britain, andh attracted adherents supporters from elements of the church of england and some of the defending churches, but is nowadays virtually a dead letter and has been since world war ii. that isn't the case in america. i think one of the reasons that isn't the case is that these specific arguments in support of christian zionist conclusions echoed or were compatible with religious ideas that many americans already accepted. so in short, darby was kaiserful as a system of

itizer and a popularizer because he was articulate rating many -- articulating many ideas that christians already possessed. so where did these ideas come from? well, as vice president pence indicated, it seems to be the product of this peculiar analogy which obsessed the. tens and -- the puritans and was later woven into the fabric of american civil religion. this is the idea that the story of america or the american people in some way mirrors or follows the story of biblical israel. each story begins with tyranny and persecution. it is then followed by an exodus that leads to a period of

wandering in the wilderness. and then finally, the chosen people is finally allowed to enter the promised land where it establishes a mighty state with god's help, one nation under of the wordst say, of the pledge of allegiance. many scholars interpret this analogy between american blue local israel as a chip -- biblical israel as a chosen nation as what is pejoratively known as replacement theology, in which american christians take over from the biblical israel or from the jewish people their role as the elect nation, and then north america or the united states becomes this second design or new -- second

zion on you promised land. this imagining or replacement is then said to lead to a conception of the united states as a redeemer nation. greats the title of the book on the subject that holds the future of the human race in his hands in the modern age as the political -- the biblical israel did many years ago. you can achieve good everything from the civil war to the cold war struggle against communism to this vision of american national destiny. i should say that i think that interpretation, which, in , was popularized by perry miller and many of his students, is entirely wrong. it certainly finds expression in presidents, of including abraham lincoln, john f. kennedy, some of whose staff

were certainly reading miller even if he wasn't perhaps in the way that some of pence's staff have been reading rabbi lord saxton. all of them use metaphors and from theat are derived israel inhe biblical order to make sense of the american predicament and responsibility. this is a real current international theological political imagination. version, is another which is a bit more complicated. this is the one on which i focus in the book. in this story, americans and the united states do not replace the -- theof land and israel people and land of israel in god's favor.

instead, they are called by god to help realize the original promise or the original covenant of god with the jewish people, with the descendents of abraham, which is reflected in many prophecies like that of the dry bones that i quoted at the beginning of my talk. americanseans that are called or are elect or are to an, that are called subsidiary role in supporting, promoting, or assisting the establishing -- establishment of the jewish state in, again, some part of the biblical landscape, in other words, christians on his him. this -- christian zionism. suggested,t, as i

that this way of thinking goes back quite a long time. the farther than international zionist movement associated with theater hurts herzog.ith theodore i will mention just a few major figures in this tradition, beginning with woodrow wilson himself, since we are here at toldilson center, and who rabbi stephen s wise, the a son ofeader, that as a presbyterian minister, he was delighted and honored that he should play a central role in the restoration of the jewish people, according to wise, at least. i am relying on the accuracy of his account. wilson said that he determined

that he and his administration would affirm and support the british belford declaration in 1917. unlike some writers on this topic, i don't think wilson was a christian zionist in any deep religious sense. but i think he certainly was aware of these ideas and of this language. it seems to have played some to leadhis decision diplomatic support of the united states to the zionist cause. more centrally, christian zionism in america includes figures like william e blackstone, who calls himself god's errand boy. and in 1891, he came to washington and rang the doorbell just down the street on pennsylvania avenue to present a president benjamin

harrison, calling for american influence to be used to establish a jewish state. was a follower of darby, if somewhat an unorthodox one. you could attribute his actions to darby's influence, but what is really striking about the so-called blackstone memorial, as this petition was known, is the many dozens of signatures that it carries from private individuals, including the then speaker of the house of representatives, the chief justice the supreme court, jpmorgan, john d rockefeller senior, the editors of dozens of major newspapers, and other prominent americans -- these were not people who were followers of darby or dispensationalists. yet they were willing to lend their names to this cause. there some reason to think that

even president harrison was sympathetic to it, at least in principle. another name is george bush, not , of course, the 20th century and 21st century presidents. but rather one of their ancestors, who was a professor of hebrew at new york university in the middle of the 19th century, and wrote a book on the prophecy of ezekiel, which i quoted, and argued for a political interpretation of the prophecies. bush said professor that the fulfillment of this prophecy is a work to be carried out by states acting in their political capacity. uses.s the phrase that he that is to say by diplomacy, by economic inducements, and perhaps by military means. it is not simply a miracle for which one might hope and pray,

but which is not to be pursued as a political goal. another contributor to this boudinot, wholias is an eight to george washington -- an aide to george washington and a president of the continental congress and later a president of the bible society. he said who knows, but god has raised up these united states in these latter days for the very purpose of a couple she his will in bringing his beloved people to his own land and his beloved people here is the jewish people, the people of israel. jonathan edwards, probably america's greatest theologian in this tradition. i mention edwards here because

he is misinterpreted. he did speak of a great religious revival, which is known as the great awakening or the first great awakening, which might begin in america. some of his language suggests he believed america itself was the millennial kingdom. but if you look more closely, including looking at the notes on his personal copy of the clear, that while he thought the millennial age might begin in america, it would culminate in jerusalem with the establishment of an weekly a religious,t state. the christian zionist religion includes the -- which is the leading

christian imperialist and published a series of books based on sermons he had preached on the inevitable return of the jews to their land, perhaps with some degree of participation by new england. with hissagreed cotton,n-law, john namesake of mather's son, cotton mather. thatn actually proposed england and possibly new england would be involved sooner rather than later in the transportation of the jewish people to the biblical promise land. he said the jews would be carried by somali nation -- and vice -- why some willing nation -- and by some willing nation, he means his own -- on chariots

that to jerusalem. and he goes back to urge some measures to begin the caravan. mather, i think, agreed in principle, but he felt the time was not quite right for action. nevertheless, here among some of the most prominent puritan religious leaders, you find the same kinds of claims, references to the same texts, and the same style of interpretation. conclude by making some observations or at least suggestions about the significance of all of this. one, of course, is simply historical. it is my opinion that, until very recently, when there has significant upsurge of scholarship on this topic, including some really excellent

studies, this history was sibley unknown. it had simply been -- was simply unknown. it had simply been forgotten. that is partly because of broader trends in the discipline of history, but also because i think of the way that christian zionism was brought to the attention of the non-christian leaders invangelical the 1970's and 1980's. one of the things that you notice, if you read a lot of evangelical leaders in the 1970s and 1980s. ne of the things that you will otice if you read a lot of the apocalypse and biblical interpretation, it's weirdly self-effacing historically and

hat emerges from evangelical commitments from direct interpretation of the bible. references to few istorical or theological figures or developments that influence the idea -- these ideas. suggestion is, it's if you look. both believerss, and nonbelievers took this lindsey lly and hal says it's all in the bible and it's in the bible but that turns out not to be the case. in the first place the interest here is historical. i hope that i have contributed to the study of american religious history here think there is an implication for american foreign

policy. the implication is, whoever your views on these questions and the appropriate disposition of in the middle east or the relationship between the united states and the state of i don't think that we can understand the connection between these countries without history into account. so the united states and israel a sometimes said to have special relationship as far as i can tell. president kennedy who used that phrase golden myrsation with ear. in my judgment the relationship these countries can't be anything but special for good or ill and calls for the united states to treat israel like a like one ntry sometimes hears are probably misplaced because israel is not a normal country.

the story of israel, the story the story sh people, of what american christians have holy land is in a refracted way part of the simply story and it's not possible. at least as long as the bible read and these denominational and theological of itions continue to think the state of israel and its numbers the way one might think or the netherlands. those are normal countries. not.l is finally, i think there is a here to the study of political theory or the history of political thought. and here i'll try to justify my in intervention conversations for which i have professional credentials to

contribute. and that is that it's an attempt way texts and he and concepts constitute understanding of itself and influence its behavior. case, it is the story of -- therecal israel and are particular elements in this story that have been important o america and less important elsewhere but there are other models.and other i think what crime zionism has a common long witch or until fairly recently, noton language for thinking only about international but also about domestic american national

purpose. scholars of political theory often neglect this kind of action because it can't be found in the cannon cal philosophers. part of the challenge and pleasure of this project for me that although i had been in reading books by kant r hagel or locke and trying to reconstruct and interpretation that might correspond to the author's intention this project me to read a much wider sources. ranging from newspaper accounts public policy papers to sermons and pamphlets. which was tch movies nice and i discuss them in a on what i would call the culture of popular as well as d 1960s

more systematic works in thought. and political did this because i think it's in that range that most thinking really occurs. metaphors, ations, from old bered lines books that we actually conduct our political conversations. hope, and i'll conclude in his point is that bringing some order to these i may make it possible to conduct a more fruitful conversation about the controversial issues foreign policy and policy that are unavoidably bound up in the topic. my point here is not to convince

to become a christian zionist. 'm not a christian myself and although i'm a supporter of hristian, it's quite important to me to be as transparent as i i about who i am and where come from. a common , to provide vocabulary that will allow who have quite different iews, different religious and cultural backgrounds to engage in discussion kraus and isagreement without suspecting each other of speaking in code plans.ertaining secret hasn that respect, the book a civic purpose. as i do hope that i've made some scholarly contribution, it's

really the specific purpose that's most important to me. i thank you very much, and wassed to that the rest of the time should be devoted to questions so that's what we shall do. hank you >> our ground rules, wait to be called upon. for the microphone to reach you. our c-span folks are here. you're not using the mic others won't be able to hear say.you have to we have an eager hand up here at the front of the room and the is appearing right behind you right now. you.hank how really interesting. >> you are -- sorry, i already didn't follow the rules. questions for you. there is a diversity of people christian zionists.

that would o people express views that are anti-semitic. the second question, we think of hem today as people defending israel no matter what and everything israel wants to do would be correct. i was interested in how your zionistsn -- christian are people who protect israel in -- are there streams of zionism that would support a two-slate solution and oppose settlements but would be more not strictly policies.g israel's >> just to ensure that everyone heard the question. about the first relationship between christian and anti-semitism and

the nature of christian zionists israel. are there in every case. first nswer to the question, that's really an interesting issue and one to paid a considerable amount of attention in the book. of the puzzle here is by ring out what you mean anti-semitism. hand, i think that are almost onists fire bro hebraic. can't be a zionist if you don't think there is something valuable or important in the the land of and israel and in the literary and traditions that jews preserved.ed and philo-hebraic in that

sense is not like actually liking jews. one of the tensions in the zionism hashristian been the distance between the zioniststhat christian expected of jews and the actual onferences and political activities of jews. to the assumption of zionists has always been of course the jews would ant to be restored to the land of israel because of its rophecy so why don't they want that? and not just more recent zionists, but -- they became quite frustrated when hey discovered many and probably most jew that is they encountered in america really had no interest in going were, in fact, quite powerfully attracted to idea of america as a new

zion. i think, for nge, hristian zionists, this was particularly shocking to william mentioned, isom i that he expected the jewish for zionism to come from orthodox jews and he was unaware that traditional jewish orthodoxy has a fraught relationship with the idea of a to the promised age.and the pre-messianic at maximum it continues to oppose it. a puzzle for him. it was easy to understand why jews may notecular embrace zionism because, in his view, they were really the worst sort of people. hey were neither christian nor jewish. they were nothing, and were

therefore corrupt and not worth but he was concerned about the orthodox. so he turned to his bible as christian zionists tend to do nd he was looking through the prophecies, and he found in one the minor prophets zephaniah, where god says through the prophet, gather yourselves together, oh, nation that has no shame. that's how it's translated in john nelson darby version of the bible. shame.n that hath no he said, okay, what this is suggesting is that the jews will together in a condition of unbelief, and will even though they don't know that's what's happening to them. in the last days,

christ will reveal himself and hey will either recognize that he's the promised messiah or die.will and that's the solution that blackstone arrived at. now, that did not impede blackstone himself from pretty friendly and successful relationships with jews of a variety of positions, but in the there is a 40s, idea, which f this holds that the persecution of jews by the genocide in europe part of god's plan to the places of of exile and toward their real home. in that sense, hitler is work.tingly doing god's

is that exactly anti-semitism? only in a very strange sense because, in principle, there is this commitment to the significance and continuation of at least untille does notdays, but that always translate to great nderstanding or empathy for actual jews. more heartening to or ments in the last 30 years in christian zionism has been an attempt by christian learn more about the real jewish experience, both the in the state nce of israel, which, as we know is a modern society in which people stuff.bs and do it's not just a collection of tourism, but ical in the united states and other diasporic.

that's the first answer. secondly, it depends on what period you're talking about. the 1970s and 1980s hristian zionism has been might say, d as one more uncritically supportive of israel. never entirely uncritical. read even marks by falwell or pat robertson or even john hagee, they will always say blank ot giving israel a check. were the state of israel to do something that's unacceptable to christians that would be bad and we would criticize them but that never seems quite to happen. but there are -- there is an liberal dition of protestant zionism which is reinhold neber.

one ain figurine in chapter. eber, i think, was attempting to develop a kind of christian ionism that was both theologically serious but also olitically and morally sophisticated. nd again, in the interest of transparency about my own views, i wish every success to some and colleagues of mine who are trying to revive a more neborian style of christian as opposed the more rigorously, rigorously,eska logical form. zionists orested in israeli politicians' responses ofchristian zionism, and one the early sticking points was

they may like jews, but in their there needs to be a conversion first. so the jews can return to israel to accept ey have christ and then the millennium or not, depending on whichever flavor or variant this we're talking about. so that doesn't necessarily go over very well. but like, we like you, really, you need to convert. so if you could just talk about response that these politicians and or zionist that i would o appreciate it. the second issue or question has to do with what's driving what? for the more modern period, to the newonvergence right and christian zionism and a staunch pro-israel stance hand-in-hand.ing years hal lindsey 40 plus ago, and it's a trip.

>> i should say that's a feat thisse lindsey suggests in book that the world may end in 1988. so we're already 30 years past expiration date. >> i guess i'm glad that that's the case, otherwise, we wouldn't this seminar. but in the reading of various you can obviously draw many different conclusions. the book of revelation is doesn't lead to any single interpretation just ike the rest of the bible doesn't. so i'm wondering with, what's new right d of the and its relationship to christian zionism and to israel? is it the right part of it that's making them less and less ritical, or is it still fundamentally a variant of religions interpretation that but it that position doesn't necessarily have to do that?

thefirst question was about inter's or relation, especially public officials, to christian signism. i'll take this opportunity to plug a wonderful forthcoming storial daniel sub.el on this fortune -- and out soon, and e dan, who reads and speaks hebrew has spent a lot of time in he state archives in israel knows a lot about that. phases, b.b., and b.b., after beguin. beguin, the answer is

had very ficials little understanding of american movements. they were very touchy about prosization. there was tensions in the 1950s nd 19 sits between american evangelicals and israel oncerning some of the restrictions on pros tillization, that the state then maintained. incident, formous xample, in which billy graham as denied use of an arena for his crusade because public pros was prohibited and vice versa. in this period, american christians particularly in the and elical

neo-fundamentalist strains knew israel, so about they were interdependent in some ways. now, israel was for much of its history a very depended ry that heavily on stur rhythm. some of the early context, context wean the state of israel and american christians is through the tourism.of there was a considerable amount at stake in pilgrimages and holy land tours. they were speaking past each other. part, until beguin. exception is le david ben gurion, although he secular in his own belief was much more rhetoric and his conception of the state than any of the other early israeli leaders and for that reason,

christian zionists were always quoting hill. 1971, not too long before his death. he spoke at a conference on organized by american and held in ups jerusalem. jerusalem. >> he alludes to some of the texts. more about much this than i do, that it's my i willpressi -- impression, ben g he was.now exactly who he was a statesman in the twilight of his career and he was wanted anded is his piece. hat began to change in the 1970s and especially after

lecuid took power. they were much more aware of the cultivating a larger source of political support in the united states community, which is, of course, significant and aren't ial but there that many people, there aren't that many votes. beguin and some of his advisers realized there was the an alliance or there. of ened one of the sections of a k with an account meeting held between falwell and beguin in 1981, just down the street from the white house in they emerged shaking hands and proclaiming an eternal bond and en american christians state of israel. in that -- since then, the relgs

hip has been much more organized and intentional. hat said, there is at least potentially an instrumental character because of the difference religious attitude ofhink the israelis and jews who encourage relations between the date of israel and american christians is that, you know, your support where you can find it. what people tter expect to happen at the end time. old joke goes, when the messiah arrives we'll ask him if it's his first or second visit. for christians, even though at point, most of the major organizations st sillization. pros they do not seek to convert jews

as jews. there will be some kind of fulfillment. we don't really know but for the pursuing jews, and billy graham was influential making that change after his of 1963. tour but nevertheless, in the back of idea minds has to be the not false and many christian zionists reject the idea of conversion because and don't see judaism christianity as being separate or different but what they would judaism is incomplete. the completion of judaism means plan foretion of god's the human race is the recognition of the jewish people, of the people of israel the promised messiah. you don't e circles

talk about that. >> many, many hands but i've first.wo jim banner here and then roger then we'll open it up. microphone. it's coming. >> i have a question. i would like for you to address in particular and zionism. of christian how much of the territory of american christianity does it occupy? you guess, orould made wn of christians, is up of christian zionists, and about, asve a question to whether christian zionism exists in other countries. it seems to me that's a fairly important question given your united states and how there is such an two kinds tween our of zionism, and finally this probably has something to do anti-semitism, because certainly there is still plenty

of christians who are anti-semites, although that might be dropping. would you argue that the people are probably not christian zionists. >> let me try to take the questions in reverse order. again, about regard as sm, what i a sincere attempt to overcome anti-semitism is greatf the motivation for deal of christian zionism. hagee, who is the founder, i don't think he's much longer united in christians for israel, which claims over a gives members, so that you some idea of the scale, many of his books, how he was led to his belief in christian obligation to jews

in israel as he became more of the history of christian anti-semitism. no reason to doubt that in his case or others. think christian zionists are probably less likely to be anti-semitic anti-semitic. as for the extent, it's tell.cult to ne of the perennial problems, mythological problems in the tudy of religion, especially among political scientists, my is that it's hard to poll these questions because exactly what people mean when they answer there is some reason to think that in many cases, people have never really thought but given a set of questions, they will pick an answer. hesitate to make any

efinitive claim but i can tell you what polls show which is a considerable majority of elf-identified evangelicals express what i would call christian zionist sentiments. they believe that god promised land of israel. that's not defined in the question so again you don't know quite what they mean. promised the land of israel to the jewish people. numbers are much, much ower in most other christian denominations. 50-50 among t catholics and lower than that in liberal or main line protestant denominations. test the interesting scholar,d the religion his name is escaping me for the moment, his last name is smith, this, is book about

the views of african-american protestants ecause they have many of the theological -- but they are less likely to express so this gets to but's question about motive we're still talking about millions and millions of people united states. that leads to the last question r really the first that you zionist.ut christian of all, crime st zionism is not dying out in the nited states, but it's certainly aging. that youngers show people are much more inclined to themselves nones, having

no religious affiliation than their parents and grandparents, i think with that, less interest in christian zionism. missionary time, the efforts of american christians extraordinary fruit america.a and south particularly the effort of pentecostal churches and who have, in really exported some s, zionist ideastian from america to christian communities in south america, brazil, but also in africa. i'll just very quickly wrap up toause i think this connects one of eric's questions, that's foreign ministry is especially interested in

south america and africa these because as support for the in e of israel wanes traditionally christian ountries in europe, they recognize as a result of these religious movements new sources support in the third world or global south or whatever, stylized term you prefer. >> right here. lewis, very brief question. the state of play with the zionists in may 1948. most in 1948, the prominent and influential christian zionists, although they didn't quite use that term, they tended to use the term zionists were liberal protestants. in a gathering somewhat like

this, if you were to ask in the who is a country who supports the state of israel or a nism, it would have been politically and theologically liberal christian who would have mind, and nebor and some allies worked very the various zionist organizations in america to for zionist, and kateland:at u-conn has written a good book about that. adjuncts to the christian zionist movement were not just letterhead

organizations. influence andreal spontaneous support. time, there was a time, e of what, at that would have been called probably fundamentalist christians, and beginning after 1947 with the establishment of the ational association of evangelicals to call themselves evangelical christians, who were more cally much conservative, who were much more to ical in their approach these issues as opposed to eber's attempt to develop a theologically and hilosophically grounded christian support for israel. unnoticed re almost at the time. the 1967 war, american jewish

community was conducting surveys of christian opinion, to try to israel, itudes towards they almost ignored conservative rotestants or evangelicals or fundamentalists, who then as a far the 1970s constituency for christian zionism. nd i think, and this, again, goes to the question of pivotal , 1967 was the year there not only because of the success of the state of israel and especially old city of f the erusalem from jordan, appeared vividly to fulfill ancient prophecies, which was appealing protestants, but also because main line and liberal protestants took a sharp left turn at that point, and

attitudes testant toward the state of israel began to mirror liberal protestant ttitudes about the vietnam war and nebor and his allies who zionist began to be ccused of hypocrisy by many of their allies in the anti-war movement at home. nebor was active in clergy and vietnam.ncerned about i never quite get that right and accused of dividing united dividing the front among the religious left against wars. this moment in 1967, onservative christians, theologically conservative christians are moving right theologically le liberal christians are moving left politically. but, that didn't happen until

fairly -- until fairly late and forgotten is radition of liberal protestant or main line protestant zionist. >> gentleman right here in the blue shirt. way, hone is coming your right there, in the middle. you, professor goldman. i was the director of the middle desk of the world council in geneva for 15 years. i wined and dined with mainly from the protestant background but we orthodox and other christian groups. my experience there is a drift etween, a strong from the christian fundamentalists' position and the main line. liberal and you call them leftists. they are main line. look at christians as the

that e of christ about -- stresses equality with all people and i have trouble consent of the chosen people. i also, in my capacity as the secretary of the middle east, i of contact with jewish christian groups, who came to my dialogue. i was very appreciative of the christian, muslim and jewish dialogue in the world council of churches. amused and embarrassed y the christian zionist ideology. i'm sorry to say that. not sure that christian zionism is providing security israel. in the long run you have six million palestinians between the river and the sea being oppressed by the

jewish state. to call the main line of stians, majority hristians, who support israel, ut are discomforted with the occupation and with the justification that comes from in fact, l theology, some christian theologians see a -- in ity between the islam who want to establish a uslim state and change the whole architecture of the middle a very strong jewish for that has no tolerance palestinians' existence. c-span to address that. >> if not c-span, our speaker. i'm not sure to what to nt -- it was a statement be acknowledged or a question,

but there are a couple of points that are certainly important and worth addressing. concerning the liberal ornt of many main line, or as they would have world war ii,fore modernist protestants, is real his support spite for the state of israel, in fact, support that went far cases, the many official zionist line on of territory and sovereignty. he says this explicitly. he wrote a piece in the new republic, which, at that point, magazine a left wing in 1957, called our stake in the state of israel in which he himself embarrassed. by ays i'm embarrassed eschatological --

for israel. zionist or nds for pro zionism. must be said, and this connects to the earlier question that at least in the united states, the main line really are dying out, and they have become top heavy.rily they have very powerful they don't , but have a lot of people in the i think part of the reason that american broadly, ty, speaking simplyen a right turn is that main line churches, main line christian denominations reproduced themselves and the political center of theity has shifted to where

congregations are, where the communities are, and ultimately, votes are. as for the term main line, just i don'tefly, the reason like that term is that it wasn't until the late which was a time at which probably, what was meant by the ain line, was already beginning, the decline that i'm avoid ing, so i tend to it. the reason why i say liberal, is ot because i mean politically liberal but because they were theologically liberal and that's in of a conventional term religious history and theology. that's no innovation of mine. then we back here and can move forward. > -- with the pakistani speculative. my question is the phenomenon of calling trump on the one hand,

obviously c, and he has to defend himself by telling his son-in-law is yet zionists -- he's the israel, and er of then the christian that you call eftist say these people are just very selfish and they are ith trump just for political gain, nothing else, and the empowered just because there was a black president for eight years in the and they hated him. other countries, like, for pakistan, you have a womanizer who was a like trump. very up front and people elected corruption, of pakistan was ruled by political -- and the country

has become dirt poor and these take advantage, the many people take advantage of corruption in pakistan. singularly, trump won over the president. black would you put some light on this? the ll, i can't comment on comparison to pakistan about which i really know very little simply ould say that i don't think it's true that trump is an anti-semite. concerns or r about character one might have. i don't think that is an example of hypocrisy. true is that is shown himself in to be a nal conduct of the moral

practices that conservative endorse.s tend to here, maybe, there is a more, more serious accusation of hypocrisy on their part. but, i wrote an op ed about this for the "new york times" last spring. there is a long tradition that goes back to the bible of pagan rulers as god's instrument for the his plan for the ultimately rael and for the human race. n trump's case, the comparison s drawn to cyrus, to the persian king who was responsible the return of for ews to jerusalem during the captivity.babylonian

he actually was -- well, i won't chronology.e this is important if you get into dispensationallism and you figure out how long the periods are. ut anyway, cyrus is the symbol of that and trump has been cyrus, both in israel and in the united states. responding to these comparisons, somebody wrote a vox that the website said, oh, isn't this crazy? reflection of evangelicalism. eligious fundamentalism naivety. but it's nothing new. the first comparison of an american president to cyrus was in the 1990s. as long as there have been presidents, the new minister named david

austin suggested that president adams might support a return of the world's jews to was then ottoman palestine, congregation was in elizabeth, new jersey. in my - who i mentioned remarks was also from elizabeth and probably attended his was at least familiar with his ideas. so again, this is an example of way in which these stories nd these sets of images and metaphors are very deeply intertwined and have been for a long time. of trump.ecause it's not because of obama. it's not because of billy it's not even nelson darby.n >> i'm just repeating what two didn't get aand we straight answer. is christian zionist believe in solution?te

>> i don't think christian conclusion ires any one way or the other. there are christian zionists who two-state solution. there are christian zionists who do not. in my son i say definition of christian zionism a jewish state in sol portion of promise land is to that nto account ambiguity. what i would say is there is more basis in christian zionism for a two-state solution you might think because for christians, jerusalem is much more important than the west bank or occupied territories. and that's part of the reason protestants tive and evangelicals have been so moving stic about jump the embassy. the recognition of jewish jerusalem is er

absolutely central to this way f thinking, and even reinhold neber published an open letter 1967,e new york times" in in which he said that christians unified jerusalem under israeli control. fundamentalists who believe that. what happens in hebron is much less important and there is dispute among christian zionists about how to resolve that problem. > we have time for one last quick question. back there against the wall. >> quick question, retired. i was wondering what the position of zionism is in the church? >> that's a great question. such an interesting one that i'll have to reserve it for i'm told is which going to begin in a moment. is that answer

ormonism, i shouldn't say mormonism, mormons prefer to be to as the lds church, it's important to be respectful that. lds teaching resolves the which i allude in the book's title in a really interesting way. the book is called "god's country." it could have been god's country mark? facing the question facing many of these people is what is god's country? promised to d abraham, or at least in some interpretation depending on the line want to draw or is this america, god's country, and there is always an as people try to figure out how both israel or be chosen,people can chosen.rica can also be the lds church solves that tension in a very interesting look, they are both god's country.

time there nd of will be two jerusalems, a new north america in nd the old jerusalem exactly where it always has been. so in lds theology, there is no two, diction between the and i'll just mention one more a good because it's one. one of the tasks that joseph the lds prophet, said to his apostles was to travel to holy land under ottoman control and anoint the ground so the jews could return there. a plaque in ally jerusalem set up by the lds happened.re this view, a result of that

more or less have always been hesitant to direct missions at jews, because they do believe in but timate reconciliation, it's a double reconciliation. t's a recognition that god has two countries, both the united tates, or at least the saints based in america, in the united states, and israel. go on but i do have to draw this to a close. housekeeping points. we do not meet next week on the ighth of october but we will meet in two weeks on monday afternoon to hear katherine coyne on her new book, immigration e problem," the reception that sam ust alluded to will actually take place right next door but one floor down. nother group is competing for space. they win on this floor. i want to thank our friends at us today. joining

i want to thank our audience, to of course, thank you samuel goldman. thank you so much. [applause] i grab a quick signature. copyright national cable satellite corp 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> interested in american history tv? website at c-span.org/history. ou can view our tv schedule, preview upcoming programs and atch college-level lectures using archival films and more. american history tv at c-span.org/history. c-span's washington journal

live every day with news and impact you.s that coming up monday morning, loomberg news national political reporter and npr's white house correspondent in uss the week ahead congress and at the white house. the center for strategic and studies defense budget analysis todd harrison will talk about the pentagon's ailing its first ever comprehensive audit. be sure to watch c-span, at 7:00on journal, live morning.onday join the discussion. touring ear c-span is cities around the country. thanks to our recent visit to memphis, tennessee, you're history tv allan eekend, every weekend, on c-span 3. >> mem is in the south center art of the united states right next to the mississippi river. i think memphis is best known