Is Christian Zionism Worthy of the Name of Christ?

Christian Zionists do not see the images of skeletal corpses of Palestinian children who have starved to death as a curse but as fulfillment of prophecy. They do not see the slain families gunned down at food hubs as a war crime but as the work of God. They do not look at the savage bombing and shelling that kill or wound dozens of Palestinian civilians, where an average of 28 children die daily, as anything extraordinary but as a step closer to Christ’s return. They do not see the wasteland of Gaza, pulverized by bombs and methodically being torn down by bulldozers and excavators, leaving virtually the entire population of Gaza homeless, as barbaric but necessary. They do not see the destruction of water purification plants, decimation of hospitals and clinics, where doctors and medical staff are often unable to work because they are weak from malnutrition, as savage but as a step closer to the kingdom. They do not blink at the assassinations of doctors as well as journalists, 232 of whom have been murdered for trying to document the horror. Christian Zionists, like the Jewish Zionists they support, have blinded themselves morally and intellectually. They view the genocide through the lens of a bankrupt media, a bankrupt theology and a political class that tells them only what they want to hear and shows them only what they want to see.[1]

There was a time when dispensationalism in the lineage of Cyrus Scofield (and the Scofield Reference Bible), and popularized by Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye seemed dismissively silly. Lindsey’s inventiveness, finding in Revelation “supersonic jet aircraft with missiles … advanced attack helicopters … intercontinental ballistic missiles with Multiple Independently Targeted Re-entry Vehicles tipped with thermonuclear warheads … biological and chemical weapons, aircraft carriers, missile cruisers, nuclear submarines, laser weapons, space stations and satellites” is as creative as any fiction, accounting for book sales in the tens of millions.[2] But Christian Zionism has become the majority voice in American politics and is the enabling force behind Israel’s genocidal slaughter of Palestinians, so what one believes about the millennium is deadly serious.[3] Ironically, Christian Zionism preceded and nurtured development of Jewish Zionism,[4] and from its inception has been more Israel centered than Christ centered as Israel takes precedent and is the means of understanding Christ.[5] The innovators of this method have, from the beginning, taken liberties in interpreting Scripture with no precedent in the New Testament or the early history of the church.

For example, where the New Testament and the early church saw Christ alone as the unifying hermeneutic, Scofield argued his dispensational hermeneutic recovers a harmony, otherwise lacking in Scripture. He “recovers the harmony,” by “distinguishing the ages” creating divisions never before detected in Scripture. Thus, the Jews in the fourth dispensation only needed to “abide in their own land to inherit every blessing” and turn down the law. According to Scofield, “The Dispensation of Promise ended when Israel rashly accepted the law (Ex. 19:8). Grace had prepared a deliverer (Moses), provided a sacrifice for the guilty and by divine power brought them out of bondage (Ex.19:4); but at Sinai they exchanged grace for law.”[6] “The Dispensation of Promise” ended when Israel rashly accepted the law (Ex. 19:8). To make a divide before and after the cross he concludes, “The mission of Jesus was, primarily, to the Jews … The Sermon on the Mount is law, not grace … the doctrines of grace are to be sought in the Epistles not in the Gospels.”[7] Christ and the beginning of the Gospels, clearly set forth Christ as a new beginning (Mark 1:1; John 1:1), yet Scofield ignores this division, placing Jesus’ life and ministry within the dispensation of the Law. In his opinion, the Lord’s Prayer and the Sermon on the Mount are not for Christians and are not applicable to the church.[8] Dispensationalists insist that those who do not divide Scripture according to their divisions are not “rightly dividing the word.” According to Dwight Pentecost, “scripture is unintelligible until one can distinguish clearly between God’s program for his earthly people Israel and that for the Church”[9] and the only way to follow God’s program is to follow dispensationalist divisions. The ethics of Christ, the teaching of Christ, the life of Christ, must be set aside as part of the law. In other words, Scofield’s divisions (as arbitrary as they are), not Christ, make sense of Scripture.

The premillennial dispensationalist hermeneutic presumes Christ failed to establish his kingdom, failed to bind Satan and defeat evil at his first coming, so he must return to complete this unfinished work, but before he can come back, according to variations in the theory, Israel must return to its homeland, may or may not convert to Christianity, and may or may not be aligned with either God or the devil. Either way, the New Testament hope of the immanent return of Christ must await the unfolding of current events surrounding Israel. Ethics, theology, salvation, and world history, are centered on historical events surrounding Israel, while Christ plays a secondary role (permanently or for now, depending on the theory), so that “blessing Israel” is determinant of salvation (in a mangled reading of Genesis 12:3). “A Christian Zionist,” according to Louis Hamada, “is a person who is more interested in helping God fulfill His prophetic plan through the physical and political Israel, rather than helping Him fulfill His evangelistic plan through the Body of Christ.”[10] The work of Christ is made subordinate to the manipulation of political Israel, supposedly fulfilling prophecy enabling the return of Christ. The details of how this may work, have endless variations, and may change week by week, indicating the primary focus is on what God is doing now through Israel, and not on what he has done through Christ.

At an ethical and humanitarian level killing Palestinians for Christ is blasphemous but Christian Zionist theology puts Israel over Christ, not only in its subversion of Christian ethics, but in its twisting of Christian salvation. In the explanation of Dale Crowley, “They have one goal: to facilitate God’s hand to waft them up to heaven free from all the trouble, from where they will watch Armageddon and the destruction of planet earth.”[11] The literal and futurist interpretation, despite Paul’s identification of Christians with the true children of Abraham (e.g., Gal. 3:7), requires a separation between the Church and the Jews (the “chosen people”) and two means of salvation.

The saving focus is not in Christ’s first coming but in his second coming, in which he will rapture believers into heaven, but this cannot happen until Israel is gathered into its homeland and the Temple is rebuilt. In Covenant Premillennialism, there is at least a relation between the church and Israel but in the various versions of Dispensationalism God has an eternal plan for Israel and an eternal plan for the church, and the twain need not meet.[12] This blatant misteaching revolves around a single chapter in Revelation (chapter 20) and devolves to the meaning of a single word: millennium.

Millennium or a thousand years appears only three times outside of Revelation 20,[13] but it is only in Revelation 20 that there is mention of a thousand-year reign: “they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years” (20:6). The premillennial and dispensationalist reading is a “literal” future reading, taken from this most figurative and allegorical of books. However, this “literal” reading is highly selective, with few believing horses will be the main transportation in heaven, and Jesus will return on a horse with a sword clenched between his teeth, and he will be accompanied by a posse of horse mounted angels, and they will carry a massive chain so as to lock up Satan in a deep hole. That is “literal” is a misnomer, except in regard to the length of the thousand years. But what all premillennialists agree upon is that this thousand year period, in which Satan is bound and Christ’s kingdom is inaugurated, has not yet happened. They argue Satan is not bound and the death of Christ has not impacted his reign, in spite of the fact that the New Testament directly connects the death and resurrection of Christ with the defeat of Satan and the kingship and kingdom of Christ. That is the millennium is a reference to the age ushered in by Christ and the church in which the work of evil is delimited, and it is a “thousand years” as this is symbolic of completeness.[14]

Paul describes sin as a fearful slavery from which Christ defeats and frees us (Ro. 8:15). As Hebrews puts it, he freed “those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives” (Heb 2:15). The manner that this was accomplished was through Christ’s death: “that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14). It was on the cross that “he gave himself” (Gal. 1:4, 1 Tim. 2:6; Tt. 2:14), that he might rescue, ransom, and redeem from the power to which men have been given up. The power that killed Christ is exposed, and the death-dealing of the world and the ruler of this world are defeated in Christ: “Now judgment is upon this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out. “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself” (John 12:31-32). John puts it succinctly, “The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work” (I John 3:8). At the opening of Revelation Jesus holds “the keys of death and Hades” (Rev. 1:18). Presumably the one who holds the keys to death has taken control of what was formerly under Satan’s power. As Paul says in Ephesians, “He put all things in subjection under His feet” (Eph. 1:22). Christian Zionists would nullify this reality.

Jesus, in his healing ministry, says he has bound Satan. He casts out demons, and this is the sign that Satan is bound: “Or how can anyone enter the strong man’s house and carry off his property, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house” (Matt. 12:29). It is in this context, failing to recognize Christ’s defeat of Satan, that Jesus introduces blasphemy of the Holy Spirit: “Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven” (Matt. 12:31). They suppose he does these things by the power of the Beelzebub, but Jesus asks, “How can Satan cast out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. If Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but he is finished!” (Mark 3:23-26). Here in Mark, he also equates missing this with blasphemy against the Holy Spirit: “Truly I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter; but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin” (Mark 3:28–29). Jesus declares he has bound Satan. He has “put the finger of God upon him,” and this means the kingdom of God has come upon you (Luke 11:20). With the sending out of the seventy Jesus declares, “I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning” (Luke 10:18). Jesus came to “proclaim release to the captives” as he reads from the scroll of Isaiah, and says, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:21). Jesus clearly teaches Satan has been bound by his ministry. Revelation speaks of a loosing of Satan (or a lengthening of the chain that binds him); could it be that this occurs where Christians blasphemy the Holy Spirit and void the work of Christ, by dividing the kingdom (between the church and Israel) focusing on events surrounding Israel?

Revelation portrays the slain Lamb (Jesus Christ raised from the dead), as having defeated evil and reigning over the world: “And I saw between the throne (with the four living creatures) and the elders a Lamb standing, as if slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God, sent out into all the earth” (Rev. 5:6). Through Jesus’ death and resurrection the reign of God on the earth is established (in Rev. 4:1–8:1). The point of Revelation is how to endure devastation without being defeated by Satan: “And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even when faced with death” (Rev. 12:11). By means of His death and resurrection and then in their witness, Christians are made a kingdom of priests who reign upon the earth (Rev. 5:10). “Now the salvation, and the power, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, he who accuses them before our God day and night” (Rev. 12:10). The dragon, that serpent of old has already been cast down in defeat, due to the testimony and blood of the martyrs and the “blood of the Lamb” but where the power of the cross is obscured the chain binding Satan is loosed. The implication is that where the message of Christ is perverted Satan continues to reign.

The genocide in Gaza is the clearest of signals that Christian Zionism is not only a bankrupt form of the faith, but spawned by the worst form of evil. This is not the Christianity of Christ or the New Testament, but is anti-Christ in its opposition to the ethics of Christ and the salvation Christ offers in His defeat and reign over evil. To answer the question of the title: Christian Zionism is not worthy of the name of Christ, but identifies the enemy Christ came to defeat.


[1] Referencing Chris Hedges report on Israel and Gaza, but substituting “Israelis” with “Christian Zionists,” brings home the evil being perpetrated in the name of Christ by premillennial, dispensationalist, and Zionist Christians. Chris Hedges, “The Gaza Riviera,” The Chris Hedges Report, July 26th, 2025. Thank you Jonathan for opening this to me.

[2] Hal Lindsey, The Apocalypse Code, (Palos Verdes, California, Western Front, 1997) 36. Cited in Stephen R. Sizer, The Promised Land: A Critical Investigation of Evangelical Christian Zionism in Britain and the United States of America since 1800 (PhD Dissertation at Middlesex University, 2002) 128.

[3] The list of prominent Christian Zionists is now beyond enumerating, but include most every prominent Republican politician and such prominent Christians as Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson, John Hagee (the founder of Christians United for Israel (CUFI)), and Mike Huckabee.

[4] See Donald M. Lewis, A Short History of Christian Nationalism: From the Reformation to the Twenty-First Century (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2021). Robert O. Smith, More Desired than Our Owne Salvation: The Roots of Christian Zionism (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

[5] As made clear by Robert Smith (even in the title of his book).

[6] The New Scofield Study Bible, (New York, Oxford University Press, 1984), fn. 1, p. 20. Cited in Sizer, 120.

[7] Scofield Bible, 989. Cited in Sizer, 120.

[8] Sizer, 120-121.

[9]Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come, (Findlay, Ohio, Dunham, 1958), 529. Cited in Sizer, 126.

[10] Louis Bahjat Hamada, Understanding the Arab World, (Nashville, Nelson, 1990), 189. Cited in Sizer, 15.

[11] Dale Crowley, ‘Errors and Deceptions of Dispensational Teachings.’ Capital Hill Voice, (1996-1997), Cited in Sizer, 18.

[12] Apocalyptic Dispensationalism, Messianic Dispensationalism, and Political Dispensationalism offer variant interpretations but are agreed on the key facts surrounding Israel.

[13] In Psalm 90:4 and twice in II Peter 3:8. See Russell Boatman, What the Bible Says About the End Times (Joplin: College Press, 1980) 74-84. I am utilizing Boatman throughout this section.

[14] “As seven mystically implies universality, so a thousand implies perfection, whether in good or evil [AQUINAS on ch. 11]. Thousand symbolizes that the world is perfectly leavened and pervaded by the divine; since thousand is ten, the number of the world, raised to the third power, three being the number of God [AUBERLEN].” Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., & Brown, D. (1997). Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (Vol. 2, p. 598). Logos Research Systems, Inc.

Cluster Bombs for Jesus: The Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit 

The demonization of Jesus by the Pharisees (in Matthew 12:23-29) will ultimately result in his crucifixion. This, combined with Jesus’ teaching, exposes their blind hatred, their taking good for evil and evil for good. He exposes the murderous scapegoating mechanism, which is the true heart of their religion. They have confused God and the devil, such that they would destroy God incarnate in order to save their nation, religion, and themselves. Killing God to save the nation (Israel, in this instance), is the satanic strategy and law of the universe which Christ exposes. The Creator submits himself to the law of his creatures, submitting himself to murder – their salvation system. The strategy is evident in the nuclear strategy (mutually assured destruction), entailing the destruction of the world (in nuclear winter) in order to win a nuclear war, pointing to the law of blind hatred, demonization, and scapegoating always at work in war. Every war is the result of “ultimate injustice,” a desperate “necessity” in which there are no options and all out destruction is the only alternative. The enemy has the power to destroy the nation. They have nuclear plans, weapons of mass destruction, and the devil himself is on their side. The demonized other is beyond the pale – with negotiation or forgiveness unimaginable. The positing of satan – the demonized other – is the satan, which makes forgiveness or empathy or balance impossible.

In the eyes of the Pharisees, Jesus is an evil enemy devoid of the good. His movement must be destroyed. He is the devil, Hitler, Osama Bin Laden, Stalin, Mussolini, and Putin, or the equivalent of every demonized devil, who must be obliterated. However, the charge against Jesus is not yet the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The age of the Spirit is ushered in by the Messiah, inclusive of His rejection and death, exposing once and for all the blind hatred that would kill him and for which he pronounced forgiveness on the cross.

Demonizing Jesus, calling the good evil, and glorifying evil as good, allows no room for the work of life-giving power of the Holy Spirit or forgiveness, but this is not the blasphemy to which Jesus refers. The attack on the Son of Man is not itself the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, as demonizing Jesus, calling the good evil and evil good, is not a peculiar problem of Pharisees or Romans. Demonization is the universal human problem giving rise to violence and war. This is the law and organizing principle of the world which killed Jesus, and this is the mechanism Jesus exposes.

The mechanism of blind hatred, of scapegoating, and sacralizing murder, are forever exposed by the work of Christ, which ushers in the age of the Spirit. The age of the Spirit, or the age of forgiveness, are made possible by the work of Christ. The blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is demonization and scapegoating in spite of Christ’s work. The forgiveness of God is contingent (as outlined in the Lord’s Prayer) upon forgiveness (may I be forgiven as I forgive), most especially of the enemy or the unforgiveable other. Demonization of the enemy, in the age of the Spirit, is the unforgivable sin as it cancels the possibility of forgiveness. The unforgiveable sin, in other words, is projecting the impossibility of forgiveness upon the demonized other.

In church history, the demonization of Jesus is soon reversed, so that the very motive that killed Jesus is turned on the Jews during the crusades. The contagion of violence that killed Jesus, in the ultimate rejection of the Gospel, is taken up in the name of Jesus. Could it be that among the first to commit the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit were those Christians who trampled on the cross of Christ by demonizing and murdering Jews in the name of Jesus? Rather than obeying the gospel command (the forgiveness of the enemy demonstrated and instituted by Christ), Christians, in their antisemitism, cancelled the very heart of the gospel. They are among those who go on “sinning willfully.”

As the writer of Hebrews indicates, it is one thing to set aside the Law of Moses but “How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?” The next verse indicates clearly, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay” (Heb 10:28–30). The unwillingness to suffer, the seeking of vengeance (not allowing for God’s vengeance), the demonization of the other, all in the name of Jesus, tramples upon the cross and the Spirit of grace it provides.

This is frightening at a personal level, as it is easy to demonize the enemy, but it is also frightening at a corporate level, as the contagion of demonization sweeps over people and there seems to be no resisting it. The gospel is the singular point of resistance, the singular place where we should be able to stand back from the hysteria of scapegoating and recognize that all-out violence, that which killed the savior, is the blasphemy from which he would save.

The problem or impossibility of Christian nationalism, is that nations work according to the logic of the scapegoat while Christianity is the exposure of the scapegoating mechanism. The nation state depends upon demonization, while Christianity is premised upon its defeat. The lie of demonization, apart from its exposure by Christ, never sinks in. The projection of evil necessary for war, is the lie which is only incrementally exposed, apart from Christ.

It is obvious that the various military fiascoes of the United States, in Vietnam, Panama, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and now Ukraine are built on a hollow demonization. Evil must be destroyed no matter the cost, or at least this is the narrative which justifies yet one more war. To protect human rights and establish international order there is no end to the human rights violations and chaos required. The justifications are lies, but few seem to notice. Germany had no nuclear weapon, the Japanese were set to surrender before the nuclear holocaust unleashed on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the communist domino effect was a hoax, there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Noriega was an American puppet, etc. etc. etc.  The past justifications now stand exposed, and the lying prognoses of easy victory are set aside as the next demon arises. The hoax is forgotten, and pure evil is projected on the next enemy. As Chris Hedges argues, “The U.S. public has been conned, once again, into pouring billions into another endless war. They lied about Afghanistan. They lied about Iraq. And they are lying about Ukraine.”[1]

Yes, the Russian invasion of Ukraine was a war crime, but have we forgotten it was provoked by NATO expansion and by the United States backing of the 2014 “Maidan” coup? Could it be, as Hedges argues, that the war in Ukraine is a proxy war serving U.S. interests? “It enriches the weapons manufacturers, weakens the Russian military and isolates Russia from Europe. What happens to Ukraine is irrelevant.” Hedges concludes, “The war will only be solved through negotiations that allow ethnic Russians in Ukraine to have autonomy and Moscow’s protection, as well as Ukrainian neutrality, which means the country cannot join NATO. The longer these negotiations are delayed the more Ukrainians will suffer and die. Their cities and infrastructure will continue to be pounded into rubble.[2]

Indeed, negotiation is the only possible outcome, short of Ukrainian absorption by Russia, yet the United States may reap benefits in resisting the inevitable. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell admitted as much: “First, equipping our friends on the front lines to defend themselves is a far cheaper way — in both dollars and American lives — to degrade Russia’s ability to threaten the United States.” Hedges makes the case that the Ukrainian war is not without vested U.S. financial interests, as “most of the money that’s been appropriated for Ukraine security assistance doesn’t actually go to Ukraine. It gets invested in American defense manufacturing. It funds new weapons and munitions for the U.S. armed forces to replace the older material we have provided to Ukraine. Let me be clear: this assistance means more jobs for American workers and newer weapons for American servicemembers.”[3]

In the Clint Eastwood movie Unforgiven, the old gunslinger is familiar with the sort of demonization that has had to occur to give rise to murderous impulses, but he needs the money. He recognizes the humanity of his victims, and his own cold-blooded willingness to kill is made obvious. Forgiveness is neither given nor a possibility in this black and white world, yet the entire edifice is exposed as a lie, in this most unwestern of westerns.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy has taken on the aura of a white hatted good guy, but is his banning of eleven opposition parties justified, or is his allowing of fascists and right-wing militias to flourish truly serving democracy? Is it even possible to question his saintliness or to question the goodness of Ukraine? Hedges raises the questions,

Why did the Ukrainian parliament revoke the official use of minority languages, including Russian, three days after the 2014 coup? How do we rationalize the eight years of warfare against ethnic Russians in the Donbass region before the Russian invasion in Feb. 2022? How do we explain the killing of over 14,200 people and the 1.5 million people who were displaced, before Russia’s invasion took place last year? How do we deal with the anti-Russian purges and arrests of supposed “fifth columnists” sweeping through Ukraine, given that 30 percent of Ukraine’s inhabitants are Russian speakers? How do we respond to the neo-Nazi groups supported by Zelenskyy’s government that harass and attack the LGBT community, the Roma population, anti-fascist protests and threaten city council members, media outlets, artists and foreign students? How can we countenance the decision by the U.S and its Western allies to block negotiations with Russia to end the war, despite Kyiv and Moscow apparently being on the verge of negotiating a peace treaty?[4]

What becomes obvious, is the bad guys may not be as demonic or the good guys as saintly as there black and white hats indicate. Apart from the necessities imposed by scapegoating, the necessary divisions of one kingdom against another as the logic of this world, the need for enemies might be exposed for what it is. War requires demonization; thus demonization and scapegoating are required for nation building. Where an enemy is lacking one must be created.

If Russia did not want to be the enemy, Russia would be forced to become the enemy. The pimps of war recruited former Soviet republics into NATO by painting Russia as a threat. Countries that joined NATO, which now include Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, Croatia, Montenegro, and North Macedonia, reconfigured their militaries, often through tens of millions in western loans, to become compatible with NATO military hardware. This made the weapons manufacturers billions in profits.[5]  

On Friday, the Biden administration announced it would start delivering cluster bombs to Ukraine. Declared weapons of mass destruction and outlawed by 123 nations – including all of America’s allies – cluster bombs are the short-term equivalent of all out warfare, in which blind destruction of the enemy boomerangs back to kill noncombatants. The bomblets are notorious for producing duds, or the equivalent of small, unexploded grenades which can lie around for years or decades before someone – very often a child, spots the brightly colored objects and sets them off. [6] The weapons pose a severe and lingering risk to noncombatants, having killed or injured an estimated 56,000 to 86,000 civilians since World War II. The Nazi developed weapon, was heavily deployed by the United States in Vietnam, where in an eight-year period the Air Force dropped some 350 million bomblets, which accounted for some 75-90% of American casualties (early in the war) at the hands of the Viet Cong, as recovered duds provided their primary source for explosive devices.[7]

One might suspect, with Hedges, that it is the cabal at the center of the military-industrial-complex that keeps the U.S. engaged in endless conflicts. He claims it is the “pimps of war who orchestrate these military fiascos” and that they “migrate from administration to administration.”[8] While there may indeed by these Dr. Strangeloves, plotting continual war and potentially if not inevitably set to ignite the war which will end civilization, I presume there is a more sinister force at work, a force so powerful as to be the guiding logic organizing human civilization.

The grand tragedy is that this force uncovered and defeated by Christ is thought to be in the service of the good. Cluster bombs, weapons of mass destruction, and ultimately nuclear weapons, may be called for so as to defeat the enemy. It may be that only through final war and world destruction that the battle can be won. This is the lie being posed. Apart from the Gospel, the lie of scapegoating, demonization, violence, and war, are the only alternative. The necessity of violence is only countered in Christ who has defeated and exposed the lie from the Father of Lies.  


[1] Chris Hedges, “They Lied About Afghanistan. They Lied About Iraq. And They Are Lying About Ukraine,” <chrishedges@substack.com> July 2, 2023

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] The Editorial Board, “The Flawed Moral Logic of Sending Cluster Munitions to Ukraine,” The New York Times (July 10, 2023)

[7] John Ismay, “America’s Dark History of Killing Its Own Troops With Cluster Munitions,” New York Times (Dec., 4, 2019).

[8] Hedges, Ibid.