Does Israel have biblical right over Palestine? Christian Zionists claim so
Theologians disagree. Here’s how they dismantle the flawed argument:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/26b87/26b87007256af26237fc26b680e2ae63c0f9abe1" alt="The foundation of Christian Zionism is the belief that Israel has a God-given and unquestionable right to the land. But does this claim hold a theological basis? Not quite. / Photo: Reuters The foundation of Christian Zionism is the belief that Israel has a God-given and unquestionable right to the land. But does this claim hold a theological basis? Not quite. / Photo: Reuters"
The foundation of Christian Zionism is the belief that Israel has a God-given and unquestionable right to the land. But does this claim hold a theological basis? Not quite. / Photo: Reuters
The idea that Israel has a "biblical" right to the occupied West Bank has become a favourite talking point among certain political figures.
Last week, Elise Stefanik, nominated by the US President Donald Trump as an ambassador to the United Nations, resonated this claim, giving a definitive “yes” when asked if she agreed with far-right Israeli officials who argue the entire West Bank is Israel’s biblical inheritance.
But this isn’t just a matter of political rhetoric. The "biblical right" narrative is rooted in Christian Zionism – a belief system that’s shaped both US foreign policy and Israel’s extensive human rights violations against Palestinians.
So, where does this idea come from, and does it hold any theological weight? Let’s break it down.
A ‘Biblical’ right? Not quite
The foundation of Christian Zionism is the belief that Israel has a God-given and unquestionable right to the land. But does this claim hold a theological basis? Not quite.
According to its proponents, certain biblical promises made to figures like Abraham translate directly to the modern state of Israel’s territorial claims. The most commonly cited verse comes from the Old Testament, where Abraham is told: “I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse.”
This verse is often used to argue that God gave the land of Israel to Abraham’s descendants – meaning, Israel has a "biblical right" to the West Bank.
But here’s the thing: that interpretation cherry-picks scripture. Revd Dr Stephen Sizer, an expert on Christian Zionism, points out that the promise in the Book of Genesis was made specifically to Abraham, not to his descendants in perpetuity, and certainly not to a modern nation-state.
“There’s nothing in the text to suggest that God intended the promise to apply unconditionally or forever,” Sizer explains.
He tells TRT World that this claim is nothing more than “a feeble attempt to justify colonisation from the Bible”.
Whose promised land?
Sizer, a former vicar and vocal critic of Christian Zionism, has written extensively on its theological flaws and political impact.
When asked whether the "Promised Land" was given exclusively to the Jewish people as their eternal inheritance, Sizer explains that the Bible directly counters the idea of unconditional land ownership, in fact.
“Contrary to popular assumption, the Scriptures repeatedly insist that the land belongs to God and that residence was always conditional. 'The land is mine and you reside in my land as foreigners and strangers.’ (Leviticus 25:23)"
Even Abraham himself, as described in Hebrews, saw the "promised land" as a temporary dwelling, ultimately looking forward to a heavenly inheritance, not a permanent, earthly possession.
“Residence was open to all God’s people on the basis of faith, not race. Indeed, the writer to Hebrews explains that the land was never their ultimate desire or inheritance, but a temporary residence until the coming of Jesus Christ. Their eternal inheritance, and ours, is heavenly, not earthly,” Sizer explains.
On the global stage, the argument for a "biblical right" fares no better.
UN Resolution 242 explicitly calls for Israel to withdraw from territories occupied in the 1967 war, including the West Bank. These settlements Israel has built on these lands violate international law, making the "biblical right" rhetoric not just flawed; but illegal, too.
Christian Zionism
Christian Zionism isn’t just an abstract theological belief – it has been a driving force in shaping US foreign policy.
Since the establishment of Israel in 1948, Christian Zionists have played a significant role in lobbying for policies that favour Israel, always at the expense of Palestinians. The roots of Christian Zionism were evident in 1948 when US President Harry Truman became the first world leader to officially recognise Israel as a Jewish state, doing so just 11 minutes after its creation.
Fast forward to Trump’s presidency, and Christian Zionism was again at the forefront.
Under his administration, the US formally recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in 2017 and endorsed Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights in 2019 – actions that directly contradicted international law, as the former is designated by the UN as occupied Palestinian territory and the latter is Syrian land under Israeli military occupation.
But it’s not just about Trump. Christian Zionism has deep roots in US politics, influencing both Democrats and Republicans.
For instance, Mike Pompeo, the former US secretary of state, has defended Israel’s decades-long control of the Palestinian territories by claiming that the Israeli state has a biblical claim to the land, dismissing the notion that Israel is an occupying power.
“[Israel] is not an occupying nation. As an evangelical Christian, I am convinced by my reading of the Bible that 3,000 years on now, in spite of the denial of so many, [this land] is the rightful homeland of the Jewish people,” he said.
White evangelical Christians have proven to be some of the staunchest supporters of the Israeli state, arguably more so than any other group.
Former Israeli Ambassador to the US Ron Dermer even acknowledged this dynamic once, urging Israel to prioritise evangelical Christians over American Jews in its diplomatic efforts.
“People have to understand that the backbone of Israel’s support in the United States is the evangelical Christians,” he said.
Christian Zionism largely stems from evangelical and fundamentalist Christian beliefs, which view support for Israel as a divine mandate tied to the realisation of apocalyptic prophecies.
Evangelicals argue that the Second Coming of Christ hinges on the fulfillment of specific events, such as the return of Jews to the so-called "Promised Land" and the establishment of the state of Israel.
This narrative not only dehumanises Palestinians but also casts them as barriers to prophecy, portraying them as somewhat “human animals” that need to be ethnically cleansed.
It is within this dangerous framework that Christian Zionism continues to enable and legitimise oppression, systemic violence and occupation, creating a theological and political justification for the suffering of millions.
Silence in the face of genocide
When politicians rely on fabricated rhetoric, they help perpetuate illegal settlements, entrench occupation, and support systemic injustice.
But beyond shaping policies, this serves a darker purpose: enabling the US to whitewash Israel’s genocide and its own complicity in these violations.
Christian Zionism’s influence, extends beyond US politics and into churches, particularly across Europe.
Sizer notes that the relationship between the Church of England and pro-Israeli lobby groups has often led to silence from many Christian leaders.
“There has undoubtedly been what many see as an unhealthily close and long-standing relationship between the leaders of the Church of England with the Board of Deputies of British Jews, who describe themselves, unapologetically, as a pro-Israeli lobby,” says Sizer.
“Lamentably, many Christian leaders in the US and Europe have stood by, silent and complicit, unwilling to criticise Israel for what is increasingly recognised as a genocidal campaign against the Palestinian people,” he says.
This silence only emboldens the continued oppression of Palestinians, enabling the legitimacy of occupation to continue under a theological guise.