The Biggest Mistakes Pro Israel Advocates Make #9: How To Avoid Seeming Holier Than Thou

I know, I know, it’s not Tuesday. But I have a good excuse, I promise.

First of all, since Saturday night, I had to deal with rectifying this situation. I guess imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But just because I was flattered doesn’t mean a mega ass-kicking wasn’t in order. Moral of the story: nobody messes with me and gets away with it.

Second, my internet got completely cut off for some reason, and by Tuesday morning I’d used up all my data. I had to wait until the tech guy came around 3:30pm and by that time the Israellycool staff were asleep for the night and couldn’t edit it anyway. So I figured I should cook dinner instead.

At first I wasn’t sure about including Mistake #9 because it just seems so obvious. Like anyone with common sense should be totally aware of this.

But unfortunately, common sense ain’t so common. I see this mistake committed regularly by some of the most articulate, outspoken supporters of our cause. I will not name names, but they usually fall under the category of pro-Israel Chabad, evangelical (or religious) Christian, or settler-zionist (you know what I mean). This mistake is:

chumashMistake #9: Making it a Religious Argument

I’m going to preface by saying that I’m religiously agnostic so this might cloud what I say below.

A lot of the articles and blogs I see written from those points of view argue that Israel is the land G-d chose for the Jews. It is the land that G-d gave to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob (a.k.a. Israel), and the Children of Israel (a.k.a. the Jews). It is the land that was our refuge, our freedom that G-d led us to when we were slaves in Egypt.

The only thing I’m thinking when someone brings up purely biblical reasons for supporting Israel is: Cool story, bro.

Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate support for Israel wherever it may come from, but sometimes a purely religious argument does more harm than good, as it makes people think that such is all there is to Zionism. In fact, Zionism is not a religious movement. It is so secular that Chabad Jews don’t even call themselves Zionists because Zionism is too secular (though they support Israel unconditionally). Did you know that? I didn’t until yesterday.

I know all the Torah stories. I know that the Torah and by extension the Old Testament (Tanach) are some of the most Zionist documents on the planet. I went to Hebrew School. But therein lies a rub: the only people that argument is convincing to are other religious people, people who are already Zionists because they are religious. Any truly bible-believing religious Jew or Christian is a Zionist because the book they so treasure and follow is basically a religious Zionist manifesto. So you are stuck with this problem where you are strictly preaching to the converted, which means this argument does nothing to advance the cause of Zionism as a whole.

Worse yet, to anyone who is not devoutly religious, in other words, the majority of the Western world, the argument alienates them from the Zionist cause. The reason for this is that it makes our cause look vacuous, as if all there is to it is superstition, or something written in a book of fables published 3000 years ago. That argument distracts us from the other far more mainstream, compelling causes for Zionism and associates Zionism with religious fundamentalism. Since religious fundamentalism is currently a fringe movement that most people ridicule and look down upon, Zionism, which is currently associated with right-wing religious fundamentalists in many left-wing circles, is often the same by extension. Among the “young, hip, crowd”, anything associated with right-wing religious fundamentalism is basically the anti-cool. The last thing we want to be is the anti-cool, because being the anti-cool means that even people who agree with us will be too ashamed to admit it and eventually become absorbed into what they perceive is the anti-Israel majority. Since a lot of people assume that what the majority believes must be right, being the anti-cool is a death knell for our cause.

This is something we need to change.

We need to end religious-based arguments once and for all. Not only are they detrimental, but they are misleading, as the true nature of Zionism is purely secular.

That being said, I think that if you weave in the religious argument with the indigenous argument (i.e. that the Jewish religion arose from the Jewish culture, which had its genesis in the land of Israel) it can bolster it. That being said, arguing entirely from a religious standpoint is, in my opinion, completely futile.

Even if we may believe religious Zionist arguments, we should avoid them at all costs as they convince nobody but those who are already convinced, and they do more harm than no argument at all among secular people.

So what arguments can we use instead?

1) Israel is the indigenous homeland of the Jewish People. Cite archaeology rather than the bible. If archaeology proves the bible, you can use that evidence as the basis for any biblical claims you might make.

2) The Arabs as colonizers (turn their “settler colonialism” argument on its side)

4) Continuous Jewish presence in the land of Israel (also the fact that there has only been a Jewish state on that land, everything else was a colony of some larger colonialist entity).

5) This appeal to the left.

Have any other arguments that work? Post them here.

Not caught up? Check out the rest of the series HERE.

18 thoughts on “The Biggest Mistakes Pro Israel Advocates Make #9: How To Avoid Seeming Holier Than Thou”

  1. Norman_In_New_York

    I agree with Dave here that the religious argument can be positive as part of the overall appeal. Herzl was open to establishing the Jewish state at another location besides our historical homeland, but in the end, despite the suppression of overt religious references, the faith that dare not speak its name carried the day. Stalin tried to create his own Jewish subdivision in Far Eastern Siberia, but that failed miserably and what is left is a mere museum piece. Furthermore, every step forward in reestablishing the present day Jewish state has followed Biblical patterns and prophecies, whether wittingly or not. The Prophets not only predicted the character of the saving remnants, they also nailed the conduct of Israel’s neighbors, hostile or otherwise. Moreover, the authors of the Scripture were the first to use history as a guide to future generations, something neither Herodotus, Thucydides or any Roman historian did. And I have reason to believe that even the most secular Israelis are quite well aware of their ancient heritage and act or react in their own way upon it. This may be uncool and generate denials by the ignorant, but in the end, the deniers get caught short and lose.

    1. Noah Farbstein

      I am a huge fan of Aussie Dave and Israellycool. Also, I am a devout Zionist, believer in G-d’s bestowing of the Land of Israel on the Jews or whatever you want to call it.

      Therefore, this time, I must disagree. It seems to me that excluding the religiosity is to acquiesce to the non-believers just as to some ant-Semites (a.k.a. anti-Zionists) the legal argument holds no weight as they claim to argue on “moral grounds”. In other words, lacking the facts, these anti-Semites argue that legality is nothing since we forced millions of indigenous “Palestinians” from their homes.

      Thus, while no expert (although well-studied on the subject), usually I incorporate all arguments. Briefly and simply,

      1. We were given the land by G-d. That is why Abraham migrated there, that is why Moses took us from Egypt and led us back there and that is why today, despite 2,000 years of diaspora and as written in the Torah over 2000 years ago, we have reclaimed it (Only, G-d could part the sea and coordinate our return after 2000 years of persecution. Coincidence? I think not!). Any rational non-Jew-hating person would agree.

      2. Thus, we are the indigenous people (after G-d gave it to us, the Canaanite blood line stopped to exist through intermarriage, etc.). As you state, the Jewish religion arose from the Jewish culture, which had its genesis in the land of Israel (which G-d gave to us).

      3. Legally, it is ours (Balfour, San Remo, Palestine Mandate, UN Article 80, UN Resolution 242, etc. et al.), and

      4. We have an an army that prevents anyone from taking it away.

      1. Alexandra Markus

        We need to frame it as an indigenous argument, and if we use religion we could use it as a bullet point within the indigenous argument as it is part of the culture that had it’s genesis here.

        Otherwise people who aren’t observant Jews who believe the Torah word for word won’t buy it as it will mean nothing to them.

        1. Noah Farbstein

          The Torah is an historical document which chronicles the history of the Jewish people. It proves our Ingenuousness.

          Even if you don’t believe in G-d, you can’t dispute that Abraham settled in Israel, we escaped from Egypt back to Israel and that we were the only people to have a state in that land.

  2. The Jewish religious argument is not the only one out there. The Palestinian claim is based on al-Aqsa and the myth of a flying horse. But there’s no precedence for Jerusalem being an Arab capital, either in religious or political history. Nor are Palestinian Muslims especially privileged wrt to al-Aqsa – I point out that Israeli Muslims could just as easily claim a connection.

    From progressive liberal POV one can state that one needs to respect cultural and religious diversity, and that the land of Israel, especially Jerusalem has a deep historic religious connection to Judaism and the Jewish people. Just as one should respect the Muslim beliefs such as the flying horse and Mohammed’s ascent in a dream through the 7 levels of heaven, (even though it was probably a political myth created by the Caliph Muawiya who ruled from Damascus, and as he did not control Mecca he needed a myth to legitimize his rule as God’s shadow on earth) , so one should respect the various sites that Jews believe are holy as well.

    Even if one is not religious, one can empathize with the importance of historic symbolism.

    I also argue that Hamas seeks to “liberate” al-Aqsa, but the mosque is already under control by the Waqf. A true liberation would be one in which the Waqf would feel free to encourage Jews to attend joint ecumenical services with Muslims (yeah, fat chance but imv it’s useful to get people thinking along these lines because interfaith dialog is a progressive value) and allow those Jews who wish to pray on the Temple Mount.

    When I make this kind of argument I haven’t been met with ridicule yet.

    1. Alexandra Markus

      It might be based on that but it’s not whah they tell the west. They tell the west the israelis are committing horrible human right abuses and colonized the Palestinians. That’s what it’s about. Justice. We need to frame it as an indigenous argument, and if we use religion we could use it as a bullet point within the indigenous argument as it is part of the culture that had it’s genesis here.

  3. IMHO, Religious arguments are only effective when talking with someone in or interested in the same religion… otherwise, using this method is a double whammy… defending Israel and converting the dual dis-believer.

  4. I agree with Levy Kofman up in the FB comments.

    So many Jews in Israel have thrown away the Jewish component of their identity (how many times have I heard “I’m Israeli, not Jewish” – as if they have no history before 1948?), and I believe that is why we have so many internal anti-Israel activists. They can’t justify being a sovereign presence in the Middle East without the religious component, and so they fight against their own.

    1. The “Jewish Nation” argument is a good one. We are a Nation with a history. The “G-D gave this to me” argument is lousy. To people that don’t believe that G-D exists, or in a Personal Deity, or MY Deity, it’s like claiming that a sword and sorcery book writ a few thousand years ago (replete with talking snakes in a garden, or whales that people live in, or flying chariots and angels) entitles you to something in the here and now.
      Even if every single bit is true verbatim, it does not work as the argument to make. Especially to one who thinks it’s fantasy.

  5. Good post Lex. All one ever get’s back from anti-Zionists is “G-d is not a real estate broker”. It’s a losing argument; it IS very “uncool”; and it says MY G-D is better and bigger and stronger than YOUR G-D.

    After all, which G-D are we talking about? Not theirs; surely.

    Someone who thinks the Bible is a historical document, interwoven with bits of fantasy is not going to be convinced that you’re anything but a loon; by claiming that the “fantasy” part of it is what entitles you to a piece of actual material; land and a full fledged State in this case.

    Using the Bible as a document to reveal heritage; sites sacred to a Nation, ancient burial grounds, Temples, cities and towns is a different matter altogether; combined with international Law, the Mandate, other unquestioned States that resulted from the Mandate system, and the war which was NOT meant to create “fair” boundaries but to annihilate the Jews, and was NOT begun by us, which we WON, sets clear precedent.

    The actual anti-Zionists may hear the argument above. The Antisemites will NEVER hear ANY argument. They are of a single mind tow remove us from the face of the earth. So… F` em.

    1. PS. About the plagiarism, your post did indeed get pick-pocketed. But the guy’s name really IS Fagan! #NotaSurprise. ;-))

      1. In all honesty it’s about PRACTICE. People have got to practice Hasbarah (I can’t stand the term, but it’ll do for now). They’ve got to practice it where there’s a running argument, not a place where we all just take potshots at each other.
        I spent about 4 years on HuffPo. Daily. And I learned and improved. I saw what worked; who took to it, and who would never be swayed even a single iota no matter the argument presented.

        The religious argument is a failure. A Total Failure. For all the reasons you mentioned.

        The GOAL is not to convince the haters. They hate. It’s what they do. That’s why they’re there. The goal is to convince anyone on the fence. To convince the “middle”, the “undecideds” as if it were an election. That is why we challenge the haters. We do it for the reading audience. We do it so that the record is clear. We do it so that they aren’t the ones changing hearts and minds.

        And it does take practice. Lots and lots of it.

  6. This is actually a common “red herring” argument one hears from the anti Israel side

    in which they claim that the *only* reason given for Israel’s existence is the Bible (aka “Because G-d Said so”) for the explicit purpose of then knocking it down (e.g. they will say “Why do we care what the Bible says?”).
    I am a religious Jew and I never use a religious argument in support of Israel because I realize that such arguments only appeal to those who are religious Jews and religious Christians.
    What I do like to point out is something quite simple:
    Israel is a democracy.
    Therefore, anyone who is democratically minded should support its existence.

  7. I am going to argue the devil’s advocate, because I do essentially agree with your line of argument, but I can also see some valid opposing arguments. I think the religion argument is not necessarily futile, and although the Indigenous People argument is much more powerful, unfortunately sometimes the religious argument can’t be avoided. For example, sometimes the anti-Israel crowd throw the religious concepts of ethics at the opposition, such as Obama lecturing Jews on Jewish Values. Our argument is more complete and stronger if we can point out that the religious Israelis are living by the Jewish values and dispelling many lies. Secondly it is difficult to defend settlements or disputed territories without explaining the religious basis such as the importance of Hevron, and what happened when these places and East Jerusalem were under Jordanean rule. Religious concepts are useful to dismiss some blood libels (eg pointing out that Jewish Law prohibits ingesting blood.

    1. “For example, sometimes the anti-Israel crowd throw the religious concepts of ethics at the opposition”
      To that, I think the appropriate response would be to point out that they have no right to lecture pro Israel people on something they are woefully ignorant of.

  8. What I see more often are attempts to argue about genetic connections and descent from the ancient Israelites and Judeans, meaning a denial of our peoplehood.

  9. If you sum up the religious argument as “we have a right to ge here because G-d gave it to us” then sure, it’s ridiculous. But religion is much more than a bullet point in the Indigenous People story, it is tightly intertwined with the journey from ancient people to Jews of the present. How else to explain the significance of Jerusalem? How else to explain what the Jews of Hebron are protecting with their very being? Before Israel, Jews referred to this land as the Promised Land, the Holy Land. Yenta in “Fiddler on the Roof” announced she was going to the “holy land”, not Palestine. And even now, Israel is the epitome of modernity, the front runner of technological advance, but right now it is practicing the Shmita year, all crops and fields are rested this year. Straight from the Torah.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top