Abraham's Children

As Israel continues its offensive in Gaza, I wanted to take a little bit of time to discuss some of my thoughts on this very complex situation. This past Sunday in Loose Ends, I briefly touched on the situation and introduced The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. I recognize this book has its detractors, but I highly recommend it to help balance the general discussion about Israel which is pushed by the government-media complex.

Now, before I proceed into this controversial subject, let me make it clear that I believe in Israel's right to exist. Much of this conflict is due to events in the last 100 years. Some of this conflict is due to events 4,000 years ago. This entry is going to look at the latter and then we'll review the former (hopefully) later this week.

One last item before I proceed. I've separated religion and politics on this blog so far (for the most part) and try to make it clear when I am stating opinions or facts. This particular situation will make these lines blurry because so much of this conflict is due to religion - at least, many people's opinions have been formed on the basis of religion. Also, I am going to discuss some Biblical history. I am a Christian. I do believe in the Bible. I take some of it as direct fact and other parts as allegory. This makes the situation more complex as so many Christians derive their basis of support for Israel from the Bible. I am going to do my best to express where I stand based both on facts and opinions, and both as a Christian and as independent of religious beliefs. That said, I encourage my non-Christian friends to read on...

First we'll start with the ancient history. The first book of the Bible, Genesis, gives the account of the creation, the flood, and the story of Abraham and his descendants up to the death of his great-grandson, Joseph, in Egypt. The story of Genesis is important in understanding this conflict for two key reasons. First, the story of the flood leaves the world with only Noah and his immediate family, namely his three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. This then implies that all of mankind is descendant from these three men. The story of Abraham is of more importance as he is an important figure in Judaism and Islam (as well as Christianity).

Abraham is a descendant of Shem from which the term Semite is derived. Abraham was the recipient of a special covenant with God. This is recognized by the Jews, Muslims and Christians. This covenant is expressed in Genesis 15:18, "On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, 'To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates.' "

Abraham went on to have eight children, but it is the first two who are of interest to this story. His eldest child, Ishmael, was born to his wife's handmaiden, Hagar. Abraham's wife, Sarah, was unable to bear children which led to her allowing this birth to happen so that Abraham could have an heir. Years later, Sarah is then blessed by God and allowed to have a child who is named Isaac. God tells Abraham that Isaac will receive Abraham's covenant, but that Ishmael will still be blessed to have a great nation.

Now, here's where it gets a bit sticky. The tradition in Islam is that Ishmael is a great prophet along with his father. The Jewish and Christian tradition does not look as favorably towards Ishmael. Further, it is widely considered from all three religions that Ishmael is the progenitor of the northern Arab people. One can almost think of this as the beginning of the split of the Jews and the Muslims (although, this is well before Islam was "found" by Muhammad). So, to me, this begs the question as to the specificity and definition of the covenant between God and Abraham.

Yes. God does indeed specify (in the Bible) that it will be Isaac, not Ishmael, who inherits the covenant of Abraham. Is this covenant specifically in regards to the territory mentioned in Genesis 15? Or is it a covenant of a special relationship with God? Or is it both? Regardless of the interpretation, both Isaac and Ishmael are to be blessed by God, and the specific boundaries of the land promised in the covenant are not well defined.

Today, many Christians and Jews will argue on behalf of the State of Israel in that they have a right to this land because of the covenant between God and Abraham. First, this is from 4,000 years ago and it is difficult to track ethnic roots across four millennia. This also depends on whether the covenant with Abraham applies to all direct descendants through the lineage of Isaac, or if it applies to those who have accepted Judaism as their religion. Further, does this eliminate Christians who are direct descendants of Isaac? Additionally, over the years, Jews have migrated all over the world (both by force and by choice). The State of Israel was established as a homeland for all Jews despite ethnicity.

This tricky relationship between politics and religion was unavoidable in the establishment of a political state for a people who identify themselves ethnically and religiously as one in the same. Are Jews descendants of Abraham ethnically? Or are Jews descendants of Abraham's religion through his covenant with God? Either way, it really cannot be both, and it makes little sense for U.S. foreign policy to be driven by a desire to see the covenant of Abraham realized in the State of Israel.

No matter your religious views, it is not the business of the U.S. government to be involved in answering the questions above. Many Palestinians and other Muslims are no doubt descendants of Abraham - from all of his sons. The U.S. (and any nation which has a separation of Church and State) should not allow the view of Biblical history to shape opinions over territorial disputes. As individuals we are entitled to our opinions over such disputes. But, popular democracy of any such ideals does not give our government the constitutional authority to meddle in such affairs.