French Friday: Can We Redefine Christian Zionism?  Guess what day it is? It's French fry day. It's French fry day. So grab your prize and say hooray. Drench is here to play on French fry day. It's French fry day. >> Hey everybody, welcome back to the Sky Pod brought to you by Holy Post Media and Universal Exports. I am back with David French. Hi David. >> Sky, great to see you. It's been a minute. We we we missed French Friday for January. >> We did. And I and I know you made a heroic effort to try to make it work, but mother nature was aligned against us. >> Oh. Oh my goodness. I had I had the most adventurous two-mile drive of my life the night the ice storms took out everything in Nashville. It took me 40 minutes to drive 1.9 miles to the golden light of Waffle House to secure a hot meal. Was it a white knuckle kind of drive with the ice? Because some of those I've been in those circumstances. It's terrifying. >> Oh, well, it was a full inch of ice. So, trees were collapsed all over the road. Those the roads had about three inches of snow with an inch of ice on top. And I have a four-wheel drive, which by the way, like at that point, every southern man was turning to their wives and saying, "See, see, this is why this is why he needed the four-wheel drive." But I had the four-wheel drive, you know, four and but I had to turn back four or five times because of different roads were blocked by fallen trees. I mean, it was it was apocalyptic there for that first couple of days in Nashville. Just all the trees down everywhere, total pitch blackness, no lights, no street. It it was weird to be in the middle of a major city and it just be dark, just completely dark and super cold. So, I felt like we were in, you know, 1787 for a minute. >> Well, you're you're either in 1787 or you could be in 2027 when AI takes over and shuts down the grid and we're all scrging for scraps. >> Well, fortunately, our Pentagon is wanting Anthropic to um unleash its AI to be able to open fire without a human intervention, which I don't know how that could possibly go wrong, Sky. Like, I don't know what could possibly be. There was a Marvel movie with this plot if you remember um the first what was it? Captain America. >> Uh which one was it? >> Oh, the Winter Soldier where they're making those flying hovercraft things that were going to shoot people using Okay, we're in weird weird territory. >> It's not what I want to talk about today, but um it's not too far off because there are some current events happening that um and we could spend the time talking about the Scotas ruling, about tariffs. You've written some fantastic pieces about that. You and Sarah have done some really great reporting and explanation of that ruling. I found it thoroughly fascinating how especially Justice Gorsuch and his uh concurring opinion outlined all of the different positions. >> It was a festivist. He had beef with everybody except himself and Justice Roberts. >> I know. He seems like the kind of person I would love to have a couple drinks with and get the his real opinions out on things, although he seems to be sharing them pretty loosely now. Um, well, yeah, he is uh he's an interesting guy. And I think the thing is though, if you had drinks with him, he would be very happy to talk to you about his judicial opinions and not at all willing to talk to you about like why, who he is, what's his background, like all of that stuff. I I I interviewed him >> and oh gosh, this was a couple years ago. You found him to be a personally private person but loquacious about his jurist prudence. >> Yeah. So very loquacious about his judicial philosophy and I was just like I was I was you know interviewing him and really trying to establish you know like hey you know we're we're talking you know and having a really great conversation about juristprudence. Now I want to ask something about your origin story like where where where does this come from? He shut that down really quickly, Sky. He shut that down really quickly. So, yeah, he does not like to be or at least certainly not. I I don't want to make blanket statements because I've had one interview, but he was not interested in in any being analyzed by me. Let me just put it that way. >> All right. Well, I respect that. I respect that. Anyway, I want to point everybody to the stuff you've done at AO advisory opinions. You've written a really great piece in the New York Times explaining why this recent ruling by the Supreme Court might be the most important one of the 21st century so far. >> Lots of good stuff there, but we're not going to talk about it cuz I want to talk about a piece you wrote a couple weeks ago about the rise of anti-semitism, particularly on the MAGA, right, and how that links to Christian Zionism. I I I appreciated your article. I agreed with a lot of it. There's a couple bones I want to pick with you, though. >> Sure. about this, but I think it's an important topic because it comes up in Christian communities quite a bit as it relates to America's foreign policy with Israel. But let's begin with where you begin, which is an examination of what exactly is going on on the MAGA right >> as it relates to anti-semitism and how what do you what's your explanation for the rise of anti-semitism on the right? >> Yeah. So it's very complicated but the short answer is that what is going on is that some of the most popular voices on the right uh some of the most influential voices on the right whether it's a Tucker Carlson Candace Owens of course a Nick Fuentes who you know he's said words like I love Hitler or you know equivalent that you're seeing a explosive growth of anti-semitism you're seeing it in some of the biggest voices and then you're beginning to see that people are sort of glomming on to this And as they glom on to it, they get bigger and they have more of a of a voice. In other words, once you join the wave of anti-semitism, your voice doesn't diminish, it expands, it grows. Okay? So, that's what we're seeing on the right. So, we've got some of the biggest voices now. There there are a lot of people who push back on them, but here's the interesting thing. A lot of the people who push back on them sometimes see their audience shrink. They lose subscribers. They lose people. And so you have this phenomenon where you know for example a Megan Kelly who has essentially you know in many ways become kind of like a human weather vein like she where you know where MAGA winds are blowing you're going to see Megan really staking out that ground and and one thing that is interesting to me is how reluctant she has been to weigh in and use her voice to like clearly condemn a Candace Owens and some others that and and I I think part of the reason is that this is where some of the growth is on the right. This is where you're gaining audience and influence on the right and sky is coming from a lot of different places. The the first thing to understand is that anti-semitism and conspiracy thinking >> just go together like and the reasons are and they have for a long time. It's like as soon as a community gets conspiratorial, just as soon as they get conspiratorial, it's like start the clock. Anti-semitism is on its way. >> To that end, I want to reference something you quote in your piece from Candace Owens where she said, this is a quote, "Jewish supremacists had everything to do with the Civil War in America and that Jewish people were in control of the slave trade. They've buried a lot of it, but it's there and you can find it." That's her quote. So this isn't like they're it's a recent conspiracy theory around Jews are doing this. She's citing the Civil War was caused and slavery itself by the Jews. >> Yeah. I mean that's what we're dealing with. So a lot of this is and you know you you talk to people like Yer Rosenberg over at at the Atlantic and he has a sort of a much richer explanation than this. He's he's been a student of anti-semitism for a while, but like there is some bottom line stuff here about um just cons the rise of conspiracy thinking means a rise in anti-semitism. And one of the things you see from both the far left and the far right in this country is an enormous amount of conspiracism. Just a huge amount. So that's no surprise. The other thing that you're seeing that's on the right but not on the left is sort of the rise of a sort of hypertraditionalist fundamentalist Catholicism and Protestantism >> that is uh so for example on the Catholic side that rejects Vatican 2 like Vatican 2 that's when the church went wrong and really wants prevatican 2 Catholicism and then you really have some of the folks in Protestant world and who are very dedicated to Christian nationalism They don't have much patience for the existence of a Jewish state unless the Jewish state is ethnically Jewish and theologically Christian, right? They they don't necessarily and they have a very sharp view. And both both of these views have a have a sort of a similar theological background and sort of a similar theological approach. And it's basically summed up as step one, uh, when Jesus came, the special relationship between God and the Jewish people was severed. It's over. The the purpose of the Jewish people to bring the Messiah, to be the people who ushers in the Messiah, is over. It's done. Now you're just any but like anybody else. And the chosen people, the chosen people are Christians. And so, and then you add on to that that they they really just twist biblical verses about the crucifixion to say not only did the Jews have they been cut off from the tree of life, they have they killed Jesus. So, they're the people who killed Jesus, they're cut off from God's grace. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out sort of how Christian attitudes harden against Jewish people when they've been cut off from the tree of life. They killed Jesus. And this is where you get a lot of that prevatican 2 Catholic anti-semitism that was the scourge, this scourge of Jewish people in Europe for years and years and years. >> So the arguments you just articulated there are are not they're not new. They no >> they existed in in medieval Europe predominantly and were we have quotes of Martin Luther the Protestant reformer using some of the awful things >> right some of some of that same logic so when you hear people paring those ideas today they're not getting that from scripture obviously >> and they're not getting it from what I would argue are renowned or credible theologians they're getting it from medieval stereotypes of anti-semitism and and and and Jewishness from Europe, but for whatever reason, civilizational reasons, Christian ideals of what the West should be like, they're just paring all of those things. The the question I have, there's multiple questions I want to go into here, but one is there has been a form of anti-semitism on the left for some time in part because the left did not like the United States international support for the state of Israel. >> Right. Uh um but the at least in my lifetime the conservative end of the political spectrum in the United States tended to be very pro-Israel and would not tolerate anti-semitic ideas. >> Yeah. >> At least not in not in the spotlight. Maybe on the fringes it existed. It's always been there, but it hasn't been. You just mentioned how different voices are are spewing this stuff and are being rewarded for it on the right. It's far from being shut down or a blemish on someone's record. They are gaining followers and I assume revenue from using. What do you attribute that shift to? Well, I think it is the relentless momentum whether it's explicit or implicit of no enemies to the right. So if you you've had a culture for a long time that it is totally acceptable to critique a member of the Republican party, the conservative legal movement or whatever from the right. >> And so a critique from the right stings. It's the thing you have to worry about. Just like if you were on the left side of the spectrum, let's say you're a university professor, if you're getting critiqued by the TPUSA chapter on campus, well, it could be really bad from people off campus piling on to you. But you're going to get a lot of support rallying on campus. But if you critique, say, Students for Justice for Palestine on campus and you're a solid like left liberal person, you're going to get a lot of blowback from your friends, quote unquote. And so there's been a culture on the right for 10 plus years, probably longer than that, which is criticisms from the right are valid and criticisms from the right must be taken seriously. criticisms from the left are wokeness. And so what that what happens is you have a one-way ratchet that radicalizes. And so if you accept a criticism from the left of you, let's you know, even if you're like a hardcore like 99% rightwinger, if if if that 1% gets to you, then it's like what happened to Sky? What happened to David? I mean, he's paying attention to the progressive gaze, right? But then if you're getting stuff from the right, it's like you got to answer that. You got to deal with that. And so it has this relentless pull towards the radicalization, then it also has a relentless pull towards conspiracies. Because one of the top ways to find yourself crosswise with the MAGA, right, and and sort of the core MAGA movement is if you debunk a conspiracy theory or two. you know, the the it's very hard to be in really good standing with MAGA and say, "Yeah, the 2020 election was totally was free and fair, right? It it's it's there are a a kind of a series of conspiracies and a and a kind of outlook in a worldview that's like the ticket of entry into true MAGA." And again, once you cross that threshold, once you start walking down the conspiracy path, anti-semitism is just waiting for you with open arms. it because it's the it's the turnkey conspiracy. It's it can always be the Jews, right? And so that that means that I I I think the actually difficult thing, the actually really serious problem that you have is that all these people standing up to take on the new right-wing conspiracy theories are also being labeled as rhinos, as boomers, whatever you want to whatever you want to call it, that's what they're being labeled as. >> Yeah. Okay. So, most people know that there have always been fringe groups on the far far right that were anti-Semitic. The KKK, neo-Nazis, those kinds of the the the folks marching in Charlotte with the torches, the tiki torches, saying the Jews will not replace us. Those folks have always existed on the far right. >> But what's changed is it's no longer okay to call those people fringe, loons, racist, like you can't critique them. And so their messaging seems to be coming in more and more and more to like the normal right. So you do get people like Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson and Megan Kelly and others who are if not platforming neo-Nazis and anti-semmites are paring some of their conspiracy theories. That's what's so weird here. It's not that this is new. It's that it's become acceptable and even applauded. And I think your theory is correct that the no enemies to the right idea and you just keep getting more and more extreme because of the algorithms and everything else that gets rewarded these days is really bizarre. Okay, here's the pivot that I want us to really explore and your piece does this as well. What is the link between anti-semitism and anti-sionism? because the I've had numerous conversations with different guests on ever since October 7th and the the attacks that started the war in Gaza and I've been to Israel since the war started and I've talked to people on all sides and there is this weird thing that happens when in some settings if you express any criticism of the state of Israel or the Netanyahu government or the tactics that they're they're using in Gaza or if you question the the some of the parameters of the modern state of Israel, you are accused of being anti-semitic, >> that these things are synonymous. So what's going on there and how do we differentiate between the two things? >> So the first thing you have to realize is there's absolute loons on each end of the spectrum. Just loons when it comes to this issue. I I I will never forget talking to someone uh not long ago who said there are only a few areas where if you write about it, you can expect to see and get commentary from people that you feel like what is happening where what planet are they writing from? Because this is so radical. This is so extreme. And it's not just radical and extreme sky. It's radical and extreme and confident. I have my mind is untroubled by the doubt of the righteousness of my opinion and that's in this world. So there are people that unless you will say Israel committed genocide, they will believe you're a genocide apologist like that you are evil to the core, you shouldn't be able to speak. And then there are people who if you criticize anything that Israel does, well then you're you're at the very minimum you're contributing to anti-semitism. at the maximum you're an anti-semite yourself. So I wrote a p I wrote a piece I have been long a supporter of Israel. Uh and I even I represented the interest of the government of Israel and I was part of a legal team that was representing the interests of the government of Israel in proceedings at the International Criminal Court be after the '08 Gaza war. So I'm very familiar with these issues. I have looked at IDF tactics. I understand IDF tactics. I'm a JAG officer. I understand American tactics. And I wrote a couple of pieces including one where I said the cut off of aid is full wrong is wrong and the cabining of aid into particularly dangerous areas where it's very difficult for people to get to is full-on wrong. And in spite of all that that I had done, Sky, I was accused of blood liel. Of blood liel. Like come on. So the first thing you have to do if you're going to talk about Israel and Palestine in any way that is intelligent, re meaningful, reasonable, you have to learn to screen out the edges. You just have to. It's so hard not it's so hard to because they're so loud and they're so insistent and they're so strident. And so, how do you talk about this while screening out the edges? The people who believe that Israel has absolutely no legitimate right to exist versus the people who think that Israel not only has a right to exist, but it has a right to all of the territory. Say, and they'll have different biblical time periods, right? They'll they'll look at the West Bank and they'll say they're entitled to they don't call it the West Bank, they call it Judea and Samaria. >> Did you see Tucker Carlson's recent interview with Mike Huckabe? >> Yeah. >> Gosh, I I hate that. Neither one neither one covered themselves in glory in that. >> No. And I and I really don't like Tucker Carlson, but I I had to give it to him. He he held Huckabe's feet to the fire and showed the inconsistencies of his own position, which was pretty illuminating. >> Well, you know, Huckabe seemed to embrace a maximalist view of Israeli domination of the Middle East, which I've never even heard any Israeli >> leader articulate. You know, >> we can get into that in a minute, but okay. Before we go further on this, so you you say something in your article which I want to wholeheartedly agree with and and it it's it's avoiding those two extremes that you're talking about. You wrote this. >> Any form of advocacy for Israel that treats Palestinians as any less deserving of safety and security than Israelis isn't just uncchristian, it's anti-Christian. It directly contradicts the teachings of scripture which place Jews and Gentiles in a position of equality. Okay. Wholeheartedly agree. Amen. Full stop. Later in the article, you go on to talk about you you self-identify as a Christian Zionist. >> And that term, you know, is triggering for a lot of people for different reasons. >> Yeah. >> So what some people would argue that calling yourself a Christian Zionist and saying what you just said here that I quoted are those are incompatible with each other. So how do you how do you define Christian Zionism that yeah that makes you comfortable identifying yourself with that term? >> It is the defense of the existence of Israel as a Jew as a as Jewish state not through the use of prophecy but through the use of Christian ethics and morality. Okay. So I distinguish that from some of the extreme version of of of Christian Zionism which is essentially the belief that the modern nation state of Israel is the heir to the biblical nation of Israel and that has been this particular iteration of the nation state of Israel has been prophesied. It is part of God's plan often part of God's plan sorted towards the unfolding of the end times. And I think debates about what is the role of the modern state, nation state of Israel in biblical prophecy, I find that debate interesting. I also find it irrelevant to what national policy should be and actually how the Christian church should truly interact with Israel. >> Okay, hold on. Let me pause you there for a second. If I hear what you're saying, your definition of Christian Zionism is as a Christian rooted in Christian ethics and Christian teachings, you believe in the right of the state of Israel to exist. >> Yes. Do you acknowledge though that that's not how most people define Christian Zionism? >> I acknowledge that most people don't have a definition of Christian Zionism that that it is one of the most contentious terms you can possibly imagine. Um, >> yeah. >> And and I would say that there are a lot of people who have who have a very prophecydriven version of Christian Zionism >> and there are a lot of people who do not. >> When I that's the way I would I would say it. When I first read your piece and that got to that part of it, I kind of went, "I'm not sure I'm with you here, David." Because it's a little bit, this isn't exactly the same, but it's a little bit like saying, "Well, I'm a Christian and I'm I'm a patriotic American, so that makes me a Christian nationalist." I'm like, I've heard other politicians have made that argument like Lauren Boowbert made that argument and she has obviously not ident she doesn't understand the difference between patriotism and nationalism. But a lot of people are framing the phrase of Christian nationalism. It just means I'm a Christian who's patriotic and loves my nation. That's not what Christian nationalism actually means, at least in its historic use. Christian Zionism for the most part is largely equated with a dispensationalist view of the n modern state of Israel as it fits into a certain theological framework and interpretation of prophecy. So >> I mean certainly not in the Catholic context. Uh yeah, perhaps not. But in the way it dominates American Protestantism, >> that's usually I mean Mike Huckabe would be >> a Christian Zionist and he would root it deeply in >> his reading of Genesis 15 and and prophecies and things like that. So that's what caught me by surprise is I also believe the state of Israel has a right to exist. I also think I'm approaching both Israelis and Palestinians through an ethic set by Jesus and human dignity and equal rights, things like that. But I am very hesitant to call myself a Christian Zionist because of the way that term is often heard and assumed to be equated with I think that the modern state of Israel has God's ordained blessing to do what they want because they have a right to this land going back to Genesis. I don't agree with that theological framework. So I just I understand rooting your view in Christian ethics as all Christians should. The difference is most Christian Zionists I think root root it in more than Christian ethics. They root it in Christian theology and a particular kind of Christian theology. >> Yeah. Also there's another element of this because so much Christian anti-semitism there's been so much Christian anti-semitism. There is a need for a specifically Christian response to Christian anti-semitism. And so part of the problem I have is that I don't consent to other people's definitions of things. Okay? So if if if you're going to be if you're going to talk about conservatism, for example, I do not consent to MAGA's definition of conservatism. >> Okay? If you're going to talk about Christian Zionism, I do not consent to Mike Cuckabe's definition of Christian Zionism because the fact of the matters guy and this is something that I think evangelicals forget all the time is evangelicalism is really one channel of Christianity. It is and one channel that's not even the biggest channel. It's a ch one channel of Christianity. And we get often so parochial and myopic as if the arguments that we have with each other as evangelicals are the Christian arguments, right? that I object to that and I object to that more and more and more every year that a lot of the arguments that you have in evangelicalism are actually like in some ways given the the numbers of people involved and given the sort of the strange offshoots and different sex in evangelicalism often it's like reminds me more of a debate in a dorm room over obscure theological points than it reminds me of a debate in like an actual classroom. room say where you're actually having to defend a position against its most rigorous opposition and one of the problems that I have is we have an evangelical world that is often quite cloistered only listens to each other >> and it has powerful elements that have bought into this sort of you know divine that that this idea that the modern nation state of Israel has been established by God. It is absolutely providential. No question about it. And we're going to be enemies of God if we disagree with the Netanyahu not Netanyahu Netanyahu uh administration. I it you know at some point it just gets absurd, right? And so what I'm trying to do is articulate a a version, a vision of this that is rooted in my Christianity that responds to Christian heresy, I think, and Christian bigotry in explicitly Christian terms, >> right? Because >> Yeah, >> I agree with you on that. Here's my question. Uh does a Christian response to anti-semitism have to be Zionism? I find it very difficult. I find the argument against the idea of a Israel is a Jewish state. I find that argument it's it is I understand it in the abstract. The problem I have is in the concrete. So there are a lot of people who support a Palestinian state and they do not support Israel as a Jewish state. Well, there are some I mean the official position of the United States is still a two-state solution. A Palestinian state and a Jewish state. >> Correct. >> But um the way I have generally understood I mean there's a lot of variation within the term Zionism. Clearly >> Tom Freriedman has written a lot about this over the years, your colleague at the New York Times and he talks about three incompatible desires that Zionists want. And he his argument is you can have any two of the three but it's hard to have all three. And the three elements are a Jewish state that occupies all the land that is a democracy. He says you can have a democracy that's all the land but it's not Jewish. You can have a Jewish state that's a democracy but it's not going to get all the land. Or you can get a democracy with all I forget how that all goes. But some Zionists are arguing modern state of Israel should have should have all that land you know from the river to the sea kind of idea. It should be a Jewish state and a democracy. And he keeps arguing you can't have all three of these. But that seems to be what some Zionism or the most strident form of Zionism is arguing. >> Extremists. >> Yes. >> Yes. Extremists want that. No question. >> So can you have be a Zionist and say no, the state of Israel should be a pluralistic culture that includes people who aren't Jewish? >> Well, you can be a Zionist and say because the modern state of Israel is a pluralistic culture that includes people who are not Jewish. It just has a very large Jewish majority and so which is pro going to continue for the next 100 500 years unless Israel conquers the West Bank and assimilates it and does what the maximal Zionists want to do in which case then all of a sudden you have something much more like an apartheid state where you would have a you know a Jewish minority or a 50/50 that has engaged in a wars of conquest >> to assimilate within the borders a whole bunch of people that If everyone was granted equal rights, it wouldn't be a Jewish state anymore. Like, think about it like this. Think about if I'm supporter of Kurdish autonomy and independence, which I am. So, you have a concrete geographic region that is disproportionately inhabited by an enormous number, a disproportionately high number of Kurdish citizens. They grant civil rights to non-Kurdish citizens, but definitely because of the geography, it's a majority Kurdish. So I feel like I could say because of the historical oppression of Kurds and because Kurds have been singled out for being Kurds for oppression that one of the absolute best ways to preserve a people from domination oppression is through the means of a nation state. And so would somebody say that I am therefore for apartheid Kurdistan? No. But if Kurdistan decided that I'm we're it's going to invade all of Iraq and rule the Shia and Sunni Arab population as quote Kurdistan, that's a problem. Similarly, if you had a Palestinian state and it's a Palestinian state, but then it tried to conquer Israel as a quote Palestinian state, you've got a problem. >> Yeah. Well, we're not going to solve the Israeli Palestinian conflict obviously in this conversation, but some would argue depending on what point in the last hundred years you want to look at. It hasn't been a Jewish majority state. There were equal, if not more, Palestinians on that piece of land for a lot of the last century until they were removed or forced into exile or as refugees. You know, it goes on and on and on. So it's your analogy doesn't quite work cuz I would agree if you have a a a designated part set of land where 80% of the people are all ethnically the same and there's a minority group there that's given equal rights of course that could be Kurdistan that could be Israel that could be whatever that's not the situation in this in this geographic space that we are talking about. It is much it's not as clearly evident that Jews are overwhelmingly the majority on that piece of land which is where all the conflict comes from. And so I mean that's the bottom line the problem is you have the you also have overlaying this the Holocaust. >> Sure. But that gets that gets back to my point. If you want to rewind history to I don't 1945 or 1920. The question is, is the only solution to anti-semitism Zionism or Zionism as defined by the most radical proponents of >> obviously defined by the most radical proponents is absurd, right? They're they're loons. They're loons. Okay. So, but how many years of history of vicious violent genocidal persecution do you need to have before you can say that, you know, perhaps the only way this people can live in some degree of security and peace is if they have their own state. And, you know, if you go back to the partition in 1947, you know, you had, if you look at that map, it was divided up into majority Palestinian areas and majority Jewish areas. So, it was kind of a patchwork quilt, but in both of those both of those areas, there was a majority Palestinian uh community and a majority Jewish community. And and the Jewish states said yes to that. The Palestinian and all their Arab states said no to that. Right? >> And once you do that and you launch offensive warfare, then the problem that you have is you might lose that war. You might lose that war. And when you lose that war, you don't get to just go, "Oh, our bad, our bad. We tried to exterminate you. Now we all go to status quo antib, you know, antibellum that, you know, so at some point my point on this with, you know, because people absolutely got upset about this piece about it being a Jewish state." And I would respond, I'd say, you know, do you have the same feeling about Kurdistan? Do you have the same feeling about >> um the Czech Republic, Slovakia? Yeah. Yeah. I mean like >> and this is a part of your article that I think needs to be highlighted because it shows your consistency. You wrote this as an extension of this commitment. No group of people should be subjected to abuse or persecution much less genocide. You go on in this formulation a so-called Christian Zionist would also probably be a Christians not a phrase you hear every day or have a Christian commitment to Palestinian statethood. You're saying that the persecution or genocide against Palestinians is equally abhorentt to the Christian mind and we ought to advocate for their peaceful existence on an autonomous self-governing state. And also there's an element of this that where there is a Christian bigotry that requires a Christian response and that Christian bigotry is that extreme Zionism that would say drive these Palestinian folks off the land. And so, you know, it's it's interesting. I I like the eye concept of equality of treating like with like things alike. You know, that's the fundamental concept of equal protection is similarly situated people should be treated similarly. And so if you have a geographically compact area that is um the home of a deeply persecuted minority that has not been able to find security under the umbrella of safety of anybody else. And in fact, all of history is contradicting that that's maybe even possible. And it's so sad to see the rise of anti-semitism here in the United States, which is previously been like a real home for Jewish people. >> So, what do you do with that? And it's very interesting to me, and this is where anti-semitism converges with anti-ionism. I know lots of people who would very, very happy to see Kurdistan independent. I know lots of people who would be very happy to see an a Palestinian state created out of the West Bank and Gaza Strip as a Kurdish state as a Palestinian state, but then are absolutely revolted at the idea of Israel as a Jewish state. So then again, one of the one of the issues with anti-semitism is that you treat Jews differently and worse than other people groups. And so if you have an analysis of people groups and sovereignty and ethnicities and nations and you're willing to grant sovereignty and nation state status to persecuted people groups, but not to Jews, but not to Jews, then you're my eyebrows going to raise. >> Yeah, >> my eyebrows. >> Like I said earlier, I I also support the right of the state of Israel to exist. Uh, I think what what the moment we are in, and I think this Tucker Carlson interview with Mike Huckabe, who's the current ambassador of the United States to Israel, highlights, is our foreign policy and our current government is aligned with some of the most extremist ideas of what Zionism means. And it's often at the at the expense and and turning a blind eye to the abuses of the Netanyahu government towards Palestinians, towards people in the West Bank, towards Gazins. That's what makes it hard in this moment because there isn't a strong advocacy in the United States government right now for the rights of Palestinians. At the same time, whenever I bring up this topic in various settings and sound like I am advocating for the equal rights of Palestinians or some critique of the Israeli government, what sometimes gets thrown at me is, well, you're being anti-Semitic, which is insane because I don't think criticism of the state of Israel means you don't believe in the equal dignity and human rights of Jewish people anywhere. So that's that we just the rhetoric has gotten so bizarre in this current setting that I wish we could hold these things together and it's one of the reasons I stay away from the language Christian Zionism because it's such a loaded triggering term that doesn't help the conversation move along. >> Well, so that's the difference between you and I, Sky. If I there's a term being fought over, I run to the battle like a moth heading towards flame. And I'm like, we got to define this thing. And you know, I think you might have some pretty prudent like uh this this term is getting corrupted and maybe it's not very useful. >> I would argue the term is corrupted. You're trying to redeem it, which okay, but I I would rather fight a different battle. But you know the bottom line is the the definition of Zionism is the ex is supporting the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. That is what Zionism is. And what I'm saying is it is absolutely that is an absolutely uh ab you know that that Zionism not support for Netanyahu not support for the various Israeli tactics in Gaza. We have to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. And when somebody jumps at me for saying I'm a Christian Zionist because of anything that Netanyahu did, I said,"Ive not aware of a definition any credible of definition of Christian Zionism that includes supporting Benjamin Netanyahu any more than I'm aware of any definition of patriotism of American patriotism that requires me to support Donald Trump." No. Now, there are radicals >> I mean, you and I have seen them all the time that will say, "We don't support Donald Trump." So, we're not patriots and we're not even Christian. >> Yeah. I I I think >> I have no problem with someone saying as a Christian rooted in the ethics of Jesus, I'm a Zionist. But the moment you say I'm a Christian Zionist, it brings all of these theological all this baggage about Genesis 15 and we can't do anything that would be against the government of Israel because then America won't be blessed and all the rights of the it goes on and on and on with this bizarre theology. And that's where I'm like I that is not a helpful conversation. And the assumptions that it carries are are >> and I I I hear you saying that that's a narrow view that captures a lot of American evangelicalism, but it's not the broader understanding of Christian Zionism. >> It is the operational one in this government today. Except that this government isn't exactly that. It's very divided. So one of the things about this government is that it has actually coerced Israel into some agreements that if Biden had done it then there would be anger at Biden. >> Sure. I mean even the ceasefire that Trump was able to accomplish would never have happened under Biden probably. >> And some of what we're seeing that we're reading as support for Israel is actually actually support for the United Arab Emirates and other people who have been lining Trump's pockets and this Trump coalition. I don't think people realize how much anti-semitism is in it. Um there's an enormous amount including within the government. And so this is why this battle is so intense is that when you had Tucker and you had Huckabe. Yeah, Huckabe is the ambassador. But does Tucker have supporters and friends up and down the Trump administration? You better believe it. And so I think the actual reality is a lot more complicated. I think the actual reality is you have an older generation of Republicans who are very much they're the ones who are most influenced by what you might call that extreme Christian Zionism. And then you have the younger generation of Republicans that is really shot through with anti-semitism. >> And all of the momentum right now is on the side of the younger anti-semitic faction. That's where all of this momentum is. And so the the ability it is I think very important because they're they're appealing to Christianity to support their Zionism very explicitly. And so the answer to them has to be Christian because you're talking to communities that are believe if one side is making a Christian argument and they're Christians and the other side is not making a Christian argument, the side making the Christian argument tends to win. And so what I'm I'm I mean two Christians obviously. And so what I'm saying is there a Christian argument against the prevatican 2 Catholic anti-semites and there's a Christian argument against the uh like we'll call him Huckabe and and I don't know how radical he is as practically as a matter of his policies but he seems pretty radical. Um, so you have to have a Christian arguments against Huckabe Huckabeism and you have to have a Christian argument against prevatican 2ism or you're not reaching Christians. And so I think that that's a very important part of this very important component of all of this. >> I don't disagree with any of that. I do think uh having engaged with quite a few Palestinian Christians both here in the United States and in Palestine, the label of Christian Zionist is not going to get you a hearing with with with that community for sure. It's a huge barrier. So I am all for Christian arguments. Absolutely. Everywhere we go, we should be advocating from a Christian, explicitly Christian point of view for equal rights, human dignity, safety and security, self-determination, all these other things for all kinds of different people. But we need to be shrewd about the way we do that and and sensitive to the way history has defined terms that can open doors or close them. So, okay. Uh before we wrap up, I want to briefly talk about another piece you wrote this month about a movie that you said broke your heart. >> And I I'll confess up front it's a movie I have not seen. It's not a movie I had planned to see, but after reading your >> Me I know you say that up front, but uh so tell us about the Testament of Anne Lee. What is it and why did it strike you so deeply? >> Okay, so the movie is about Anne Lee. Who is Well, that's a news flash. Testament of Anne Lee Sky. It's about Anley. >> Not Annley. >> Annley. >> Not Angley. Anley. Annley is the founder of the Shakers, the Shaker movement. Uh, also known as Shaking Quakers, although it's less clear that they were actually an outgrowth of the Quakers as opposed to religious dissident from various different traditions. But it's the story of her forming the very tiny, and when I say tiny Shaker religious sect, I mean tiny. uh when they when they formed it in England, she encountered brutal persecution, just brutal persecution because remember England at this time, this is colonial era America, uh has a very robust state church which she desented from. So she's brutally uh persecuted. She's uh imprisoned in the mo the worst of conditions. At the same time, she has this kind of arranged marriage to a guy who's not, as the movie portrays it, it's he's not kind to her. The historical record is a little more mixed on that. It's very clear that it was sort of an arranged marriage that she wasn't really into. And then then she gives birth to four children in four years who all die. And in the midst of this religious persecution, in the midst of this suffering and trauma, she says she has a revelation from God that the thing that is really keeping the the millinarian church from purity and righteousness is sex. >> And when I say sex, guy, I mean all of it, >> right? Total celibarital, >> total celibacy. I mean, I I haven't studied this, but when I hear her story being in a marriage she didn't really want to be in >> losing four children sequentially, I mean, if I were her, I would be like, "Yeah, every sex has brought nothing but pain and suffering into my life. >> It can't be from God. I'm out." Like, it makes sense. There's a logic to it. >> Yeah. She also lived in a part of Manchester, England that was known for its just absolute depravity. So, she's surrounded by sexual depravity. She has experienced a kind of arranged marriage. She has lost four children and she's being brutally persecuted by the Church of England and English authorities. And so she says this is a revelation from God. And about eight or nine people kind of agree with her like this is not the thing that you know you get out in the streets and you start preaching this sermon that like is packing them in, right? >> No, this this is not a a church growth >> uh strategy for sure. So she says, "Let's go to America." Which is sort of the call and the cry of persecuted people for centuries. Uh and this is the early version of this. Let's go to America. And so she and I think eight others get on a boat and they cross the uh Atlantic Ocean in extreme hardship as you did. They arrive in the United States of America. And this is where the movie just was gut punching me again and again. So they come to America for freedom. And what's one of the first things that they see? They see a slave auction. Um the revolution. They come in the middle of a revolution. What happens to them? Well, revolutionary soldiers, patriots, colonists want to know where they stand. And these are shakers who are pacifists. So they're they're not just celibate, they're also pacifists. They also were very egalitarian. So she was a a female preacher. She was the leader of the sect. um they would welcome people who are women, who were black, who are white, who were Native American. It was very egalitarian. So that raised a lot of hackles back in that day. So she's seized by colonial authorities for not swearing allegiance to the colonial cause. And then later after an underappreciated figure in American history, New York Governor George Clinton, who is also a leading anti-federalist, intervenes to say, "What are we doing? We don't imprison people for consc, you know, rights of conscience." She's let out and then she's beaten by her own neighbors and beaten by other communities to the point where um it it essentially kills her. When she was re when she was reentered in 1820, they found a skull fracture. That's how badly she'd been beaten. But the movie is so powerful because at the very end of it, so you you see this woman who's coming to America out of hope and yet she's able to establish a community, but she's also viciously persecuted. Both of these things are happening at once. And then in this super powerful moment, one of the women comes up to her and gives her the news that Washington is has surrendered to Cornwallis. >> And she kind of falls surrendered to Washington. >> I mean, Cornwallis is that's a that's a historical revision, right? >> Corn Wallace has surrendered to Washington >> and she like falls on her knees in gratitude because of the hope of liberty to come. And then there's this beautiful scene at the very end that just tears boom just exploded for me is her plain pine casket is underneath this beautiful painting of a tree. And why would that matter? Because remember we just referenced Washington. And what was Washington's favorite Bible verse? The one that he wrote 50 times to people including to the Hebrew congregation of Rhode Island talking about accepting religious liberty. It was Micah 4:4. >> Yeah. It's in his farewell address famously. >> It's in Yes. Every man shall live under his own vine and his own fig tree and no one shall make him afraid. >> And it just struck me to see a casket under the tree. And it was such a powerful vision of the hope of the American experiment with the gut punch that the reality is that we don't often we we we have failed to live up to it time and time again. And so I saw it as like, you know, for me it was sort of like this very, you know, emotional moment that was like, how many more caskets will there be under the tree of liberty before we can be who we are supposed to be >> and >> so that's why I love that's why I loved it, >> especially in this moment. And I mean, you wrote this piece earlier in February when the whole country was riveted by what was happening in Minneapolis and not just the the tragic deaths of some of the protesters, but the the the clear stoking of violence and animist towards immigrants who many who entered this country undocumented, illegally. I understand there's a lot of controversy about what our national policy should be towards that but almost universally these people came like Amy Amy Lee Ann Lee uh >> to seek something better for themselves. There was they were drawn to this country because of its promises and hope >> and we can have a much better system that welcomes people and screens people and all that that's that's clearly needed. But to punish people and dehumanize them for the very promise upon which this country was built seems inconsistent. Um, and this story from 200 years ago or 250 years ago captures that very live debate right now. So I'm I I was I was touched by your article even though I haven't seen the movie yet. I mean, it's so touching, Sky, because it really, you know, I I used in the article the phrase already and not yet, which >> you know, I'm sure you've heard that in the evangelical world, like there's the already. Christ did come. You know, he's already defeated death and hell, >> but not yet. Like, there isn't the second coming. There isn't the establishment of Christ's kingdom. You know, that that this is we live in that already and not yet. And and in many ways, we do as a country. We've already sort of staked out a lot of ground around concepts of liberty and pluralism and democracy and rule of law and yet we still still 250 years later fall short of our own aspirational goals. >> Yeah. >> And I just thought it was a beautiful movie illustrating that on both ends. >> It does seem kind of ironic and we've talked about this in the past that at least again in my lifetime the political right side of the spectrum has tended to be the more libertarian side. the one that says we want limited government. Um, don't tread on me. Deregulation. Uncle Sam shouldn't be sticking his nose into all of our private affairs and business and on and on and on. And yet that would be sort of the let each person, you know, live in peace under their own fig tree and and not worry about being interfered with and kind of that frontier mentality of go west young man and be independent. That's been more the ethos on the political right. And yet today the political right is marked by things like Christian nationalism which is an illiberal vision that says we want to impose upon everyone else what we think is right and not let people live in peace based on their own values, religions or convictions. How did we get to that point? You know it is a great great great question because you know the political right also claims to like sort of speak for the founders right and but you if you look at the founders at their best when they were saying what they wanted for this country, what they aspired to and again I'll say it you know they didn't live up to it as I wrote in the piece like Washington who was so wonderfully dedicated to that vine and fig tree uh verse his slaves were he did not designate to free his slaves until his wife died >> that's what that was his intention so we're talking about very imperfect people but when they were talking about what they imagined I want to read for you a a very short part of Madison's uh remmonstrance memorial and remmonstrance against religious assessments. This was the very famous letter that he wrote against a sort of religious assessment for the support of particular churches in Virginia. And he says this because the proposed establishment is a departure from that generous policy which offering an asylum to the persecuted and oppressed of every nation and religious religion promised a luster to our country and an assession to the number of its citizens. That that'll preach Sky like this is founding vision. We're a beacon of liberty and hope. I was talking to I had a the occasion to speak to David Blight who's a Yale historian and one of the foremost historians of you know Frederick Douglas and sort of that that civil war period and we're reflecting on the declaration at 250 and he was talking about how much the declaration was supposed to be a beacon. This was supposed to be something that would attract people to us. And so right now there is an irreconcilable tension in the heart of the Republican party that I think is the vestage of the GOP that you and I have talked about combined with MAGA means that you have this devotion to the founders but a total contradiction to their ethos in the same movement >> and that will not last. One or the other is going to have to win out. >> Totally. Um Madison's quote reminds me of one from George Washington. I cited this in numerous places, but I gave a message earlier uh late 2025 when I was out in California about Christian nationalism called Malice Toward None. And and I quoted Washington. This one's I've used this so many times because I think it's so relevant to our current circumstances. He said this, "The bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent and respectable stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all nations and religions whom we shall welcome to a participation of all of our rights and privileges." So the idea that America was always supposed to be a Christianonly nation and not welcome people who are Jews or Muslims or you know name what your religious background >> it's demonstrably untrue whether you quote Madison or Washington that founding generation had this vision of America Jefferson right >> so to to turn your back on that and say no no no no we're a Christian nation >> and you maybe will tolerate your presence here but you don't get all the same rights and privileges if you're not a Christian that is antithetical to everything the founders believed in and what the founding documents articulate. So >> totally. >> Yeah. I find the inconsistency on the right crazy that they're the same ones that want to hold up pictures of Jesus handing the Constitution to the founders and and celebrate America as this God- ordained nation and at its founding and then turn their back on the very founding principles of the nation they say God founded. It doesn't make any sense. >> Do you know what hurt me recently? uh sky, it just really hit me and and I think part of the there are several things that are, you know, we're living in a very difficult time and so a lot of things will kind of unsurprisingly like hit you in an emotional way in when you're going through like a nation's going through a difficult time and I'm sure a lot of the listeners feel the same way. They'll be kind of shocked by their emotion in a moment because this is a hard time and I was watching the Apple TV show Tyron. >> Do you watch that? >> I haven't seen it. No. >> So good. So good. If you like spy thrillers, so good. >> Watching the first season of the night manager. >> Manager. >> Yeah. Come on, Sky. >> I haven't seen the second season yet. I know. I'm late to the game. >> So good. >> All right, Tyron. I'll play the list, too. >> No. No. I don't I'm not I'm not somebody who scolds you for being late. I'm like, come here, big guy. You're part of the club now. >> Have you seen season two yet? >> Yeah, it's seen it all. >> All right. Should I watch season two? Is it worth it? >> 100%. All right. Yeah. So anyway, this woman is she's Iranian and she's wanting to flee Iran and she's horribly oppressed as as so many Iranian women are. And they ask her, "Where do you want to go?" And I was hoping it would say America. >> Like that's what I was hoping. And instead she doesn't know. And for some reason that hit me. Like that hit me because it is so contradictory to everything I grew up with as a kid of the Cold War. Like you would you would want to hear somebody who's in Poland or Romania or the Soviet Union or in China. You want to leave. You want to be free. You want to have feel safety and security. Where would you want to go? And for generation after generation, there was an answer. >> Yep. >> America. As imperfect as we are. >> I I'll tell you one story and then we got to go. My father is an immigrant from India. He grew up in Mumbai. He went to a high school, St. Xavier's Boys Academy, which was run by Jesuits from New York City. Across the street from his high school, I visited there. I've been to this location. Across the street from his high school in the 1950s and60s, the United States State Department set up what was called an American Cultural Museum. And it was part of their PR efforts against communism in various parts of the world. And my dad would go across the street from his high school and marinate in Christian pop or not Christian, American popular culture. He'd listen to Elvis Presley records and watch American movies and and that's where he fell in love with America and the ideals of America and the the freedoms of America and the equality of America. And that's when he decided his goal in life was to leave India and become an American. And he did that. He came here. That's why he now fast forward. I was back in Mumbai number of years ago visiting family and a younger relative who was a high school student was graduating from high school and he was going to go abroad for college. I'm trying to leave some of the details uh ambiguous here. And I asked him I said are you thinking about coming to the United States for college? And he looked at me and he said no way. And I said why? and he said, "Well, it's pretty obvious you don't like brown people there very much, and I'd prefer not to get shot." So, I he ended up in Australia. And I was just the the the dramatic change from my father's experience, which was there was no better place to be in all the world than America to fast forward two generations and another member of the family in India going, I would never want to come to America. And it just shows you how things have changed. And I wonder what kind of brilliance and talent and intelligence and ingenuity and entrepreneurship are we losing because there's so many people who don't think of America as the shining city on a hill anymore the way Ronald Reagan used to talk about it. >> Yeah. >> Uh and it broke my heart a little bit to hear a relative say that. >> It should. It should, Sky. That's a proper reaction. It's tragic. I mean, I it's tragic and it really cuts to the heart of what I've loved about this country my whole life, my whole life. You know, one thing that I loved was when you would have a defector from the Soviet Union or the Eastern Block or China or whatever, and they would join the US Olympic team. >> Mhm. >> I saw them as every bit as American as the people who were born here. >> Weren't the the Olympics were so much better during the Cold War? Let's be honest. >> Yeah, >> there was so much more to fight for. I mean, >> I still love him. I still love him. But >> yeah. >> H All right, David, thank you uh for coming back and for the excellent articles and thoughtprovoking ideas. And hopefully if you know people don't want to see the the what was it the testimony of >> Ann Lee >> Annne Lee then go watch Terron or the night manager something else maybe something with >> very different very and I will warn you the testimony of An Lee or the testament of an Lee it it shows ecstatic worship in a very sympathetic way and that's something that is very interesting to me why I've rarely seen that. What's the warning about? >> Because it's ecstatic worship. Like a lot of people will look at that and they'll be like, >> "That's not like what I do at church. That's weird." And but it's very historically it's based in shaker dances, shaker movements, stylized a bit more, but very historically based. But also, >> it it does show in this really powerful way the ecstasy of forgiveness, of confession and forgiveness. >> And it's beautiful. It's beautiful. So, but it's also not what happens in your normal day in the pews. So, that's why I'm saying that it's it's not mocking Shakerism. It's showing shakerism. >> All right. Well, >> and and so it's very interesting. >> All right. Well, they're called Shakers for a reason. >> It's true. >> All right, David. Uh hopefully we'll catch up next month. >> French Friday is a production of Holy Post Media featuring David French and me, Sky Jatani. Music and theme song by Phil Viser. This show is made possible by Holy Post patrons. To find out how you can become a Holy Post patron and to find more common good Christian content, go to holypost.com., French Friday: Can We Redefine Christian Zionism?, YouTube, 01kjg0a3akcyppex0v7vpd0raf.