ODM Daily Inspirational Devotional Messages Bible Verse and Prayers ODM
Gerald McDermott and the Israel Debate: A Fair Reading Guide for Christians
Few topics divide Christians as quickly as Israel. Mention the word at a church lunch and you may hear passionate support, deep suspicion, or an awkward silence. Part of the problem is that many of us formed our opinions from the news before we ever sat down with a Bible and asked what it says.
A recent reading guide on The Daily Declaration by Dr Tim Orr recommends the work of theologian Gerald McDermott as a starting point for Christians who want to think about Israel theologically rather than just politically. Orr calls him the best theologian writing on the subject today, which is a strong claim, and one not everyone shares.
This post offers a fair introduction: who McDermott is, what he argues, where the real points of disagreement lie, and how to build a reading list that includes voices on more than one side. The aim isn’t to tell you what to conclude. It’s to help you study the question well.
Who Is Gerald McDermott?
Gerald R. McDermott is an Anglican priest and scholar of religion. He taught at Roanoke College in Virginia for 26 years, then served as the Anglican Chair of Divinity at Beeson Divinity School in Alabama, and more recently has taught at Jerusalem Seminary. He earned his PhD at the University of Iowa and has written widely on the theology of Jonathan Edwards, world religions and Christian theology.
His writing on Israel is best known through two books:
- The New Christian Zionism: Fresh Perspectives on Israel and the Land (IVP Academic, 2016), a collection of essays he edited.
- Israel Matters: Why Christians Must Think Differently about the People and the Land (Brazos Press, 2017), his own accessible case for what he calls a “third way.”
A later volume he edited, Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity (Lexham, 2021), explores the relationship between Christianity and Judaism through biblical, theological and historical essays.
The Question at the Centre
Dr Orr’s guide puts the core issue simply: Is God faithful to his covenant with Israel?
Almost every Christian would say yes in the abstract. The disagreement starts when we ask what that faithfulness looks like after the coming of Christ. Has God’s promise to Abraham’s descendants been fulfilled in Jesus and the church? Expanded to include Gentile believers? Or does it continue in some way for the Jewish people, including the land?
Orr also makes a point that’s worth underlining. He says there’s a difference between biblical Israel, the Jewish people, the modern State of Israel, Zionism and the policies of the current Israeli government. They are related, but not identical, and failing to keep them distinct creates a great deal of confusion. Believing God still has purposes for Israel doesn’t mean everything an Israeli government does is right, wise or beyond criticism. McDermott himself says the same.
That distinction alone would resolve a lot of arguments.
McDermott’s Main Arguments
Here is a summary of his central claims, as presented in his own books and by Orr.
1. Against supersessionism
Supersessionism, sometimes called replacement theology, is the idea that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. McDermott argues that this view is wrong, that the New Testament doesn’t teach that the church is the “new Israel” in that sense, and that God’s covenant with the Jewish people has not been cancelled. He also points out that supersessionism comes in many varieties and hasn’t always gone hand in hand with hostility toward Jews, though in practice it has often fed it.
2. The land promise continues
One of his most debated claims is that the New Testament doesn’t revoke the Old Testament promise of land to Abraham’s descendants. Orr’s guide points to Luke 21:24, where Jesus says Jerusalem will be trampled by the Gentiles until their times are fulfilled, and to Matthew 5:5, as passages McDermott reads as supporting this. His broader point is that the land promise tells us something about God’s faithfulness, not only about real estate.
3. Christian Zionism came before dispensationalism
A popular assumption is that Christian Zionism is simply a product of dispensationalism, the nineteenth-century system of prophecy interpretation associated with John Nelson Darby and the Scofield Bible. McDermott argues that this is historically mistaken. He points to earlier Christians, including Puritans and figures such as Jonathan Edwards, who anticipated a restoration of the Jews to their land. His “New Christian Zionism” is meant to be non-dispensationalist, non-millenarian and accessible to Catholics, Anglicans, Reformed Christians and others.
4. Jesus was thoroughly Jewish
Several of McDermott’s writings emphasise that Jesus lived and taught within Jewish life, honouring the law, the temple, Jerusalem and Israel’s Scriptures. In this view, reading Jesus as someone who set aside Jewish identity is a distortion.
5. Christians must repudiate antisemitism
McDermott and Orr both argue that Christians have a special duty to oppose antisemitism, given the church’s history and the Jewishness of our Messiah. McDermott has written against anti-Jewish ideas appearing in Christian circles, including some in conservative and Reformed communities.
The Biblical Texts at the Heart of the Debate
If you want to read for yourself, these are the key passages, and the way each side tends to read them:
- Genesis 12, 15 and 17. God’s promises to Abraham of descendants, blessing and land. Everyone agrees these matter. The question is how they are fulfilled.
- Romans 9–11. The most important chapters in the New Testament on this question. Paul writes that God has not rejected his people (11:1), that a partial hardening has come on Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in (11:25), and that God’s gifts and calling are irrevocable (11:29). McDermott reads these as affirming the continuing significance of ethnic Israel. Others read “Israel” in these chapters as the believing remnant, or as a mix of both.
- Matthew 5:5. “Inherit the earth” or “inherit the land,” since the Greek word can mean either. This is a key text for those debating whether Jesus extended or reinterpreted the land promise.
- Luke 21:24. “Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” Some see this as pointing to a future for Jerusalem; others read it as describing the events of AD 70.
- Ezekiel 36–37. The gathering of Israel, the new heart and the valley of dry bones. Readers disagree about whether the fulfilment is spiritual, historical, future, or all three.
- Romans 4:13 and Hebrews 11:8–16. Often cited by those who see the land promise as expanded to “the world” or as pointing to a heavenly city.
- Ephesians 2:11–22 and Galatians 3:28; 6:16. Passages about Jew and Gentile being made one in Christ, and the phrase “the Israel of God.” Supersessionist readers lean on these; McDermott and others argue that unity in Christ doesn’t erase Jewish distinctiveness.
Where Critics Push Back
A fair guide has to represent the serious objections, which come from several directions.
Covenant and Reformed theologians. Many argue that the promises to Israel find their fulfilment in Christ and the church, and that the land is a type pointing to something greater. They point to Hebrews and Romans 4:13, and to Paul’s redefinition of who belongs to Abraham’s family (Galatians 3:29). Many in this tradition also firmly love the Jewish people and hope for their salvation, and they reject the charge that their position is antisemitic. Some, such as O. Palmer Robertson, have written extensively on how the “Israel of God” should be understood.
Scholars of Paul and the New Testament. Some, including scholars in the “New Perspective” tradition, argue that Paul redefines Israel around the Messiah, and that the question of land is secondary to the NT’s focus on a worldwide inheritance. They don’t all agree with each other, but many see McDermott’s reading of Romans 11 as one possibility among several.
Palestinian Christians and their advocates. Voices such as Munther Isaac and Naim Ateek argue that the theology of land has been used to justify displacement and injustice, and that Palestinian Christians, who have lived in the Holy Land since the first century, are often ignored in Western church debates. They ask whether a theology that favours one people’s claim to land can do justice to Christ’s concern for the oppressed.
Historians. Some historians accept that Christian restorationist ideas existed before dispensationalism, but argue that the strand was marginal, and that modern Christian Zionism as a mass movement did grow substantially through dispensational teaching. This is a disagreement about emphasis, not a flat contradiction.
Political concerns. Even sympathetic readers worry that a theology of Israel can become an uncritical political endorsement. McDermott’s response, as Orr presents it, is that his argument doesn’t depend on any prime minister or policy being right.
A Balanced Reading List
If you want to study this properly, read across the spectrum. Here are some real, widely cited starting points, grouped by perspective:
McDermott and the “New Christian Zionism”
- Israel Matters (Brazos, 2017)
- The New Christian Zionism (IVP Academic, 2016)
Non-supersessionist theology
- R. Kendall Soulen, The God of Israel and Christian Theology (Fortress, 1996)
Covenant and “Israel of God” readings
- O. Palmer Robertson, The Israel of God: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow (P&R, 2000)
Critical evangelical perspectives
- Gary Burge, Whose Land? Whose Promise? (Pilgrim Press, 2003)
- Colin Chapman, Whose Promised Land?
Palestinian Christian voices
- Munther Isaac, From Land to Lands, from Eden to the Renewed Earth (Langham, 2015)
- Munther Isaac, The Other Side of the Wall (IVP Academic, 2020)
- Naim Ateek, Justice and Only Justice (Orbis, 1989)
Jewish perspectives
- Jon D. Levenson, Sinai and Zion (1985)
- Michael Wyschogrod, The Body of Faith (1983)
You won’t agree with every author, and that’s the point. Reading people you disagree with is how you find out whether your own position can withstand scrutiny.
How to Read Well on a Divisive Topic
- Start with the text. Read Romans 9–11 slowly, in more than one translation, before reading anyone’s commentary.
- Separate the questions. Keep theology, history, politics and ethics apart. You can hold one view on prophecy and another on a particular policy.
- Identify the author’s tradition. Knowing whether someone is a dispensationalist, a covenant theologian, a Messianic believer or a Palestinian Christian helps you read fairly.
- Check for straw men. Does the author describe opposing views in a way their holders would recognise?
- Look for the best argument on each side. Be able to explain why a thoughtful person might disagree with you.
- Notice where you feel strong emotion. That’s usually where you most need to slow down.
Our Take
Here’s where we’d like to add some commentary.
1. Start with Scripture, but don’t pretend we read it neutrally.
Dr Orr’s instinct, that Christians should start with the Bible rather than the news cycle, is right. But all of us bring assumptions to the text, shaped by our church tradition, our experiences and the media we consume. Admitting that is the first step toward reading more honestly.
2. The distinctions matter more than the conclusions.
If Christians could agree on one thing, it might be to distinguish between the Jewish people, the land, the modern state and a particular government. Much of the heat comes from collapsing those categories, whether by defending everything a government does because of a theological conviction, or by condemning an entire people because of a government’s actions.
3. This isn’t a test of orthodoxy.
Christians who love Jesus, honour Scripture and trust the gospel come to different conclusions here. The historic creeds don’t settle it. Treating a particular reading of Israel as the dividing line of true faith would be a mistake, and it’s a mistake made from more than one direction.
4. Antisemitism and indifference to Palestinian suffering are both failures.
A faithful Christian reading rejects hatred of Jewish people without qualification. It also refuses to look away from the suffering of Palestinians, including Palestinian Christians. Holding both together is difficult, and necessary.
5. Be careful about the present crisis.
Orr’s guide includes readings on Hamas, Gaza and the war with Iran. Those are matters of intense moral, legal and political debate, where facts are contested and rapidly changing. Whatever one’s theology of Israel, those questions deserve their own careful, evidence-based study, and Christians should be slow to treat them as settled by a book on covenant.
6. Humility is part of the method.
Both sides have at times claimed more certainty than the texts allow. Saying “this is how I read the passage, and here’s why, and here’s what would change my mind” is a sign of strength, not weakness.
The Other Side of the Argument
In fairness, here is how McDermott’s supporters would respond to the critics above:
- On the land. They argue that if the land promise were simply fulfilled or transformed, we would expect the New Testament to say so clearly, and that silence in some passages isn’t the same as cancellation.
- On Paul. They say Romans 11:28–29 is difficult to square with the idea that God has no continuing purpose for the Jewish people as a people.
- On history. They point to the long Christian record of anti-Jewish teaching, which they argue grew partly from replacement thinking, as a reason for the church to rethink.
- On politics. They argue that a theological conviction about Israel is compatible with criticism of particular policies, and that McDermott models this.
- On the charge of uncritical support. They respond that Christian Zionism, in McDermott’s version, is explicitly not a blank cheque.
And here is how supporters of other views would reply in turn: that the New Testament’s emphasis is on Christ as the true Israel and the global scope of the promise, that reading modern geopolitics into ancient texts is risky, and that a theology of land cannot be separated from the people who live on it now.
A thoughtful reader can feel the pull of both.
Questions to Reflect On
- Where did my current view of Israel come from, and have I ever tested it against Scripture?
- Can I explain Romans 9–11 in my own words?
- Can I describe the best case for a view I disagree with?
- Do I distinguish between the Jewish people, the State of Israel and a government’s policies when I speak?
- Am I as concerned about Palestinian suffering and about antisemitism as the situation calls for?
A Short Prayer
Lord, you are faithful to your promises, and your word is true. Give us humility to study your Scripture, honesty about our biases, and love for every person caught up in the conflict in the Holy Land. Protect the Jewish people from hatred. Comfort Palestinians who grieve and suffer, including our brothers and sisters in Christ. Give wisdom to teachers and pastors, and unity to your church where we disagree. Bring peace to Jerusalem, and draw all people to your Son. Amen.
