Mar 9·edited Mar 9Liked by Rev. Matthew Littlefield
Thank you Pastor, for a very thoughtful and well written discussion on this topic. I share your frustration(??) with many of our fellow believers on this topic.
I've attended a Bible-centered evangelical church (Calvary Chapel) for thirty years that while being Dispensationalist, it was not overtly "Israel right or wrong". However, much of the evangelical Christianity faithful really have never had the Dispensational viewpoint seriously challenged, nor do they understand the history behind this interpretation. They genuinely believe the Bible tells us we must always support the modern state of Israel, something that is constantly reinforced in evangelical circles and media. When pressed they throw out verses such as Gen 12:3 and God's promise to Abraham (I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.) They become defensive when pressed on Israel's atrocities, and fall back into a metaphorical "hey I just work here" posture. In other words, the Bible says I have to support them, it's not up to me.
I myself fell into this reflexive thinking and uncritically defended Israel's actions. They are "God's chosen people" after all, as they have no reticence to tell us. However, two events made me seriously challenge my reflexiveness on this, both having to do with my kids. First was our decision to pull our kids out of public schools and put them in a Bible-based Christian school. For mainly practical reasons we placed them in a conservative Lutheran school (Lutheran Church Missouri Synod). Through this exposure I learned for the first time that Dispensationalism was a minority view in worldwide Christianity, and really only had a stronghold in the US. On top of that, it was non-existent for the first 1800 years of Christianity and only took off with the Scofield Reference Bible being published in 1909. I had no idea the interpretation was so new.
The second item was more selfish, in that I have two teenage boys both of military draft-age. I have zero desire for them to fight (and possibly die) in some foreign Mideast sqalor which would have almost no direct bearing on US national interests. Yet there is this pervading evangelical notion that my unwillingness to sacrifice my sons is somehow defying God (as I'm not willing to "bless Israel"). This lead me to dig more deeply into the entire Dispensationalist interpretation that ended up taking me down a path I never envisioned. I rediscovered some of the passages you note, the writings of Augustine and other heroes of the faith, and for the first time understood the concept of Supersessionism. Our salvation through Christ is available to all, gentile or Jew, by accepting His sacrifice on our behalf. All those who do are now God's chosen people. As simple and as fundamental as this sounds, it was a radical notion for me, and likely is for many Dispensationalists. The idea that Jews get their own separate salvation is pernicious and pervading.
As I dug deeper into it I really began to wonder if the Dispensationalist movement had been hijacked for political reasons by those pushing the establishment and support of the modern Israeli state. There's a very compelling 1988 book, "The Incredible Scofield and His Book" that is now out of print but PDFs can be found online. It's meticulously footnoted, and goes through Scofield's life in painstaking detail. Rev Scofield had a checkered past including legal, financial, and marital troubles of which he never publicly repented. He misrepresented his education by repeatedly referring to himself as a Doctor of Divinity when never having attained a PhD. He had mysterious financial backers for the reference Bible that were never explained. He belonged to an exclusive Manhattan social club (Lotos Club) that would normally not welcome a fundamentalist preacher. There are many other oddities of his life that don't add up. I say this not to slander the dead, but because people who use his footnotes to read their Bible really should understand the character of the man that wrote them.
Last off and most important, I just cannot reconcile Christ's teaching regarding how we are to treat others with the modern Israeli state's actions. Evangelical Christians will study the Gospels in detail and accept without caveat Christ's commands to be kind to others. But then that gets thrown out the window when it comes to the Israeli state because of Gen 12:3 and the subsequent Dispensational interpretation. It's morally flawed and intellectually lazy, yet most evangelical Christians never give it a second thought. "God said it, I do it" is their response. The problem is that God didn't say it, John Darby, Cyrus Scofield and their followers said it. Paul never said it. Augustine, Apollos, John Chrysostom, Aquinas, Luther, or Knox never said it. The historical church never said it.
Ultimately, we will all be judged on this and we better have a good explanation. Telling God that they supported the slaughter of Palestinians because some pastor at a megachurch (a church flying an Israeli flag in outright idolatry) told then to, likely won't be well received. God did give us a brain and reasoning capability for a reason.
Mar 10·edited Mar 10Liked by Rev. Matthew Littlefield
Thank you Pastor, I could have saved myself a lot of time by reading that article rather than figuring it out from scratch over the years.
One thing that I do find troubling in the article is the continuing references to contemporary dispensationalists as harboring anti-semitic beliefs despite their commitment to Zionism. The authors definition of "anti-semitic" as being negative references regarding Judaism and its practices. By that definition, Christ himself was anti-semitic with His repeated condemnation of the Pharisees. That criticism is rooted in rational observations, not some irrational hatred of a particular ethnic/religious group.
Good article on balance, but it appears its main thrust is to discredit evangelical political power presumably due to its hostility to left-wing causes (as opposed to seeking biblical truth). There's really no other reason I can think of to continually imply that dispensationalists secretly hate Jews despite backing Israel. My experience with evangelicals is nothing of the sort.
It is written by a strong leftist, so her view of evangelicals would be skewed.
I just found its breakdown of the history a helpful summary.
I was raised dispensationalist as well. What shook me out of it was when I started to read the Bible all the way through as a young adult, and realized that many of the claims of dispensationalists were in error. I also had a brilliant New Testament teacher at Bible College who was from Dallas Theological Seminary who gave really strong critiques of their dispensationalist bias.
It was later on that I realized how badly dispensationalist theology influenced the disastrous American Middle East policy. This isn't just about eschatology, people die in godless wars, because many Christians demand that the US, and even Australia and Britain, fight on behalf of Israel in the ME. It's evil.
They have twisted the role of the Church into a subservient position of one nation.
I praise God for your testimony above. I hope others read it and see how badly they were misled by the evil men who founded and pushed dispensationalists theology.
For a strong Christian assessment of the dangers of dispensationalism, I recommend Stephen Seizer's, Christian Zionism: Road Map To Armageddon. He is an Anglican Minister. That book is fantastic.
Mar 10·edited Mar 10Liked by Rev. Matthew Littlefield
Thanks Crush, good stuff.
I realized I never directly answered the Pastor's question regarding why Christians cannot see the obvious evil. At least with regards to US evangelicals it's because they believe God has told them to ignore it when Israel does it. They truly believe that. I don't say this as an excuse as it's reprehensible, but an explanation. It entirely stems from Dispensational theology and its resulting end times eschatology.
And it's not some loony tunes fringe belief but believed by powerful people such as US Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and many others in high places.
I suspect it's the same in other western countries with significant evangelical populations. And it isn't limited to evangelicals as it's tentacles have subtly infiltrated other denominations. Pope John Paul 2 repudiated Supersessionism as anti-semitic despite it being a core teaching of several Doctors of the Church from its earliest days.`
So is it just proliferation of bad doctrine or something more nefarious?
Well said. I also fear Israel’s over reaction… when they are no longer seen as the victims of persecution but are now seen as the perpetrators of a far greater evil will see greater worldly support in the end for the dissolution of Israel as a nation that will indeed see Palestine free and the Jews face even greater persecution than occurred before the hamas attack.
Mar 9·edited Mar 9Liked by Rev. Matthew Littlefield
Rev. Matt - your essay is an answer to a literal prayer I uttered to God just a few days, because the silence of churchianity has been maddening to me.
This morning I was referred to it from Vox Day's site and I sent the following to my friends and family: "Whether you are a believer or not, attend church or not - this is NOT about religiosity - it is REALITY!
If there ever was an essay that is a must read, this is it, including the linked full text by Rev. Matt - in fact, read that linked full text FIRST, as Vox Day always has good overall perspective from all angles to sum things up.
Every pastor needs to read it!
BTW - I find both to be an answer to a prayer just recently- personally."
If you want to know how evil flourishes you need look no further than yourself. While I believe that you have the best of intentions you are being used by evil itself. And therein lies the problem. Evil flourishes not when evil people engage in it but when good people allow themselves to be used by it unwittingly. You hate what you see going on in Gaza because it is violent and because people are suffering so conclude it must be wrong. This is foolishness. Look no further than the OT when time after time God orders the Israelites to wipe out entire peoples because of their sinful behavior and ways.
No military in the history of the world has done more to prevent civilian deaths than the IDF. This is astounding especially when you consider that they have done that for people who are literally trying to genocide them. Civilians are dying in Gaza not because of the IDF but because Hamas is purposefully ensuring that they die to use the deaths as propaganda against Israel.
Another problem with your article is that you have simply regurgitated Hamas lies about the number of deaths. The Gaza Health Ministry has released the numbers you have cited and they are simply not true. There have not been 39000 civilian deaths and the majority have not been women and children. And many of the 'children' who have been killed are male teens who are actively involved in terrorism with Hamas. Anyone with even a basic understanding of how naturally occurring numbers work can see that the numbers are made up. The first place to look is the reported “total” number of deaths. The graph of total deaths by date is increasing with almost metronomical linearity. This regularity is almost surely not real. One would expect quite a bit of variation day to day. In fact, the daily reported casualty count over this period averages 270 plus or minus about 15%. This is strikingly little variation. There should be days with twice the average or more and others with half or less.
Perhaps what is happening is the Gaza ministry is releasing fake daily numbers that vary too little because they do not have a clear understanding of the behavior of naturally occurring numbers. …
The fog of war is especially thick in Gaza, making it impossible to quickly determine civilian death totals with any accuracy. Not only do official Palestinian death counts fail to differentiate soldiers from children, but Hamas also blames all deaths on Israel even if caused by Hamas’ own misfired rockets, accidental explosions, deliberate killings, or internal battles. …
The truth can’t yet be known and probably never will be. The total civilian casualty count is likely to be extremely overstated. Israel estimates that at least 12,000 fighters have been killed. If that number proves to be even reasonably accurate, then the ratio of noncombatant casualties to combatants is remarkably low: at most 1.4 to 1 and perhaps as low as 1 to 1. By historical standards of urban warfare, where combatants are embedded above and below into civilian population centers, this is a remarkable and successful effort to prevent unnecessary loss of life while fighting an implacable enemy that protects itself with civilians.
The bottom line is that Hamas must be completely eradicated from Gaza. Period. It would be the equivalent of the Allied forces getting all the way to the doorstep of Berlin during WWII and then withdrawing and allowing the Nazis to stay in power so that they could continue their genocide of the Jews.
Hamas spews propaganda counting on useful idiots to regurgitate it so that the world will lean on Israel to conduct a ceasefire that Hamas will not respect. And you are helping them. You my friend are the Christian that cannot recognize evil.
Thank you David for your comment. You have beautifully demonstrated that the thesis of my article is correct and that I have not strawmanned those I am criticising in the slightest.
You have perfectly demonstrated that if you misunderstand the relevance today of the Old Testament and the place of physical Israel in God's redemption plan, that you cannot avoid calling good evil and evil good. Collective punishment of an entire city through siege and bombing for the acts of some criminals is neither just nor good. It's the same evil the US committed in attacking Afghanistan for the crimes of Bin Laden, rather than simply chasing down the criminals through policing operations, or negotiations with the population where the criminals were being hosted. Bombs are not policing, they are retaliatory. So it's both unjust and therefore evil, and foolish and therefore evil.
But if you just say, well Israel are still God's people and they did similar stuff under Joshua, then it's fine now, God's people are just doing what they have been told they can do. But no one can claim to be Jesus Christ's people who reject him, so this falls over. Making the category error destroys your discernment for good and evil.
But what's even worse, is you've demonstrated something I considered addressing in a future post: many who defend Israel in such a way don't actually understand the very Old Testament they are relying on to justify their position.
God did not give Israel a blanket freedom to wipe out other people's, man, women and child. He just didn't.
Israel were given this command regarding the cities of the Nephilim/Rephaim/Anakim which were all the same people, as Deuteronomy 2-3 and Joshua 11 observed this was their goal and they achieved most of it under his rule, the rest was achieved under David. There was no such commands after this. It was not a wholesale license, but a strongly restricted command.
But even more important is the Gibeonites. God gave the land to Israel, but the Gibeonites tricked Joshua and he made a covenant with them. This secured their presence in the land. God held Israel to that promise and judged them when they broke it.
Israel, before its founding in 1947-48 made a deal with the Palestinians for a division of the land. But as soon as the international forces withdrew, Israel promptly took much of the land they agreed to allow for the Palestinians, creating hundreds of thousands of refugees and instantly breaking the deal they made, and this has caused much of the conflict ever since. You could argue: they would have faced conflict anyway. Perhaps. But we will never know, because Israel instantly started by going too far, according to their own agreement. Plus, the justification the Arabs used for those early attacks by the allied Arab nations was Israel's instant rejection of the agreed division of the land. A deal, which if the Old Testament was still in force, God would hold the Israelites to. He punished the nation for breaking that deal with the Gibeonites, who were Canaanites, why would he not hold Israel to the same standard today if the Old Testament provisions still apply?
So you demonstrate a misunderstanding of the Old Testament.
But your comment is helpful in another way. You make the same contradictory argument many make. You assert Israel can go as far as they like in attacking Palestinians, but then you debate the numbers as inaccurate. These numbers are the conservative numbers, not the larger numbers some have put out. But the IDF's intent to kill civilians is observed with the seige, you don't starve people into health. Seiges kill, they kill horribly, they kill indiscriminately. But your reliance on the position: Israel can do what they want as they are God's people combined with the argument that the numbers cannot be that large as Israel wouldn't do that shows a conscience that understands what is happening is wrong.
Thank you Pastor, for a very thoughtful and well written discussion on this topic. I share your frustration(??) with many of our fellow believers on this topic.
I've attended a Bible-centered evangelical church (Calvary Chapel) for thirty years that while being Dispensationalist, it was not overtly "Israel right or wrong". However, much of the evangelical Christianity faithful really have never had the Dispensational viewpoint seriously challenged, nor do they understand the history behind this interpretation. They genuinely believe the Bible tells us we must always support the modern state of Israel, something that is constantly reinforced in evangelical circles and media. When pressed they throw out verses such as Gen 12:3 and God's promise to Abraham (I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.) They become defensive when pressed on Israel's atrocities, and fall back into a metaphorical "hey I just work here" posture. In other words, the Bible says I have to support them, it's not up to me.
I myself fell into this reflexive thinking and uncritically defended Israel's actions. They are "God's chosen people" after all, as they have no reticence to tell us. However, two events made me seriously challenge my reflexiveness on this, both having to do with my kids. First was our decision to pull our kids out of public schools and put them in a Bible-based Christian school. For mainly practical reasons we placed them in a conservative Lutheran school (Lutheran Church Missouri Synod). Through this exposure I learned for the first time that Dispensationalism was a minority view in worldwide Christianity, and really only had a stronghold in the US. On top of that, it was non-existent for the first 1800 years of Christianity and only took off with the Scofield Reference Bible being published in 1909. I had no idea the interpretation was so new.
The second item was more selfish, in that I have two teenage boys both of military draft-age. I have zero desire for them to fight (and possibly die) in some foreign Mideast sqalor which would have almost no direct bearing on US national interests. Yet there is this pervading evangelical notion that my unwillingness to sacrifice my sons is somehow defying God (as I'm not willing to "bless Israel"). This lead me to dig more deeply into the entire Dispensationalist interpretation that ended up taking me down a path I never envisioned. I rediscovered some of the passages you note, the writings of Augustine and other heroes of the faith, and for the first time understood the concept of Supersessionism. Our salvation through Christ is available to all, gentile or Jew, by accepting His sacrifice on our behalf. All those who do are now God's chosen people. As simple and as fundamental as this sounds, it was a radical notion for me, and likely is for many Dispensationalists. The idea that Jews get their own separate salvation is pernicious and pervading.
As I dug deeper into it I really began to wonder if the Dispensationalist movement had been hijacked for political reasons by those pushing the establishment and support of the modern Israeli state. There's a very compelling 1988 book, "The Incredible Scofield and His Book" that is now out of print but PDFs can be found online. It's meticulously footnoted, and goes through Scofield's life in painstaking detail. Rev Scofield had a checkered past including legal, financial, and marital troubles of which he never publicly repented. He misrepresented his education by repeatedly referring to himself as a Doctor of Divinity when never having attained a PhD. He had mysterious financial backers for the reference Bible that were never explained. He belonged to an exclusive Manhattan social club (Lotos Club) that would normally not welcome a fundamentalist preacher. There are many other oddities of his life that don't add up. I say this not to slander the dead, but because people who use his footnotes to read their Bible really should understand the character of the man that wrote them.
Last off and most important, I just cannot reconcile Christ's teaching regarding how we are to treat others with the modern Israeli state's actions. Evangelical Christians will study the Gospels in detail and accept without caveat Christ's commands to be kind to others. But then that gets thrown out the window when it comes to the Israeli state because of Gen 12:3 and the subsequent Dispensational interpretation. It's morally flawed and intellectually lazy, yet most evangelical Christians never give it a second thought. "God said it, I do it" is their response. The problem is that God didn't say it, John Darby, Cyrus Scofield and their followers said it. Paul never said it. Augustine, Apollos, John Chrysostom, Aquinas, Luther, or Knox never said it. The historical church never said it.
Ultimately, we will all be judged on this and we better have a good explanation. Telling God that they supported the slaughter of Palestinians because some pastor at a megachurch (a church flying an Israeli flag in outright idolatry) told then to, likely won't be well received. God did give us a brain and reasoning capability for a reason.
Edit: fixed typos
Great comment. For those who want to explore this more, you can read this in depth piece:
https://www.mintpressnews.com/untold-story-christian-zionists-power-united-states-israel/260532/
Thank you Pastor, I could have saved myself a lot of time by reading that article rather than figuring it out from scratch over the years.
One thing that I do find troubling in the article is the continuing references to contemporary dispensationalists as harboring anti-semitic beliefs despite their commitment to Zionism. The authors definition of "anti-semitic" as being negative references regarding Judaism and its practices. By that definition, Christ himself was anti-semitic with His repeated condemnation of the Pharisees. That criticism is rooted in rational observations, not some irrational hatred of a particular ethnic/religious group.
Good article on balance, but it appears its main thrust is to discredit evangelical political power presumably due to its hostility to left-wing causes (as opposed to seeking biblical truth). There's really no other reason I can think of to continually imply that dispensationalists secretly hate Jews despite backing Israel. My experience with evangelicals is nothing of the sort.
That is a fair criticism of the article.
It is written by a strong leftist, so her view of evangelicals would be skewed.
I just found its breakdown of the history a helpful summary.
I was raised dispensationalist as well. What shook me out of it was when I started to read the Bible all the way through as a young adult, and realized that many of the claims of dispensationalists were in error. I also had a brilliant New Testament teacher at Bible College who was from Dallas Theological Seminary who gave really strong critiques of their dispensationalist bias.
It was later on that I realized how badly dispensationalist theology influenced the disastrous American Middle East policy. This isn't just about eschatology, people die in godless wars, because many Christians demand that the US, and even Australia and Britain, fight on behalf of Israel in the ME. It's evil.
They have twisted the role of the Church into a subservient position of one nation.
I praise God for your testimony above. I hope others read it and see how badly they were misled by the evil men who founded and pushed dispensationalists theology.
For a strong Christian assessment of the dangers of dispensationalism, I recommend Stephen Seizer's, Christian Zionism: Road Map To Armageddon. He is an Anglican Minister. That book is fantastic.
Jeff - www.crushlimbraw.com - a former premillennialist tells about his journey of discovery which began decades ago.
Thanks Crush, good stuff.
I realized I never directly answered the Pastor's question regarding why Christians cannot see the obvious evil. At least with regards to US evangelicals it's because they believe God has told them to ignore it when Israel does it. They truly believe that. I don't say this as an excuse as it's reprehensible, but an explanation. It entirely stems from Dispensational theology and its resulting end times eschatology.
And it's not some loony tunes fringe belief but believed by powerful people such as US Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and many others in high places.
I suspect it's the same in other western countries with significant evangelical populations. And it isn't limited to evangelicals as it's tentacles have subtly infiltrated other denominations. Pope John Paul 2 repudiated Supersessionism as anti-semitic despite it being a core teaching of several Doctors of the Church from its earliest days.`
So is it just proliferation of bad doctrine or something more nefarious?
Precisely correct. Getting the identity of God's people wrong, causes them to attribute to God's will that which we should not.
Hence misunderstanding the place of Israel in Scripture causes them to miss evil and at times mislabel evil.
Among other evils, judeo-churchianity obscures how radically transformative a new Covenant is.
It really does.
Well said. I also fear Israel’s over reaction… when they are no longer seen as the victims of persecution but are now seen as the perpetrators of a far greater evil will see greater worldly support in the end for the dissolution of Israel as a nation that will indeed see Palestine free and the Jews face even greater persecution than occurred before the hamas attack.
Rev. Matt - your essay is an answer to a literal prayer I uttered to God just a few days, because the silence of churchianity has been maddening to me.
This morning I was referred to it from Vox Day's site and I sent the following to my friends and family: "Whether you are a believer or not, attend church or not - this is NOT about religiosity - it is REALITY!
If there ever was an essay that is a must read, this is it, including the linked full text by Rev. Matt - in fact, read that linked full text FIRST, as Vox Day always has good overall perspective from all angles to sum things up.
Every pastor needs to read it!
BTW - I find both to be an answer to a prayer just recently- personally."
https://voxday.net/2024/03/09/those-who-call-evil-good
I am glad you were blessed by it.
If you want to know how evil flourishes you need look no further than yourself. While I believe that you have the best of intentions you are being used by evil itself. And therein lies the problem. Evil flourishes not when evil people engage in it but when good people allow themselves to be used by it unwittingly. You hate what you see going on in Gaza because it is violent and because people are suffering so conclude it must be wrong. This is foolishness. Look no further than the OT when time after time God orders the Israelites to wipe out entire peoples because of their sinful behavior and ways.
No military in the history of the world has done more to prevent civilian deaths than the IDF. This is astounding especially when you consider that they have done that for people who are literally trying to genocide them. Civilians are dying in Gaza not because of the IDF but because Hamas is purposefully ensuring that they die to use the deaths as propaganda against Israel.
Another problem with your article is that you have simply regurgitated Hamas lies about the number of deaths. The Gaza Health Ministry has released the numbers you have cited and they are simply not true. There have not been 39000 civilian deaths and the majority have not been women and children. And many of the 'children' who have been killed are male teens who are actively involved in terrorism with Hamas. Anyone with even a basic understanding of how naturally occurring numbers work can see that the numbers are made up. The first place to look is the reported “total” number of deaths. The graph of total deaths by date is increasing with almost metronomical linearity. This regularity is almost surely not real. One would expect quite a bit of variation day to day. In fact, the daily reported casualty count over this period averages 270 plus or minus about 15%. This is strikingly little variation. There should be days with twice the average or more and others with half or less.
Perhaps what is happening is the Gaza ministry is releasing fake daily numbers that vary too little because they do not have a clear understanding of the behavior of naturally occurring numbers. …
The fog of war is especially thick in Gaza, making it impossible to quickly determine civilian death totals with any accuracy. Not only do official Palestinian death counts fail to differentiate soldiers from children, but Hamas also blames all deaths on Israel even if caused by Hamas’ own misfired rockets, accidental explosions, deliberate killings, or internal battles. …
The truth can’t yet be known and probably never will be. The total civilian casualty count is likely to be extremely overstated. Israel estimates that at least 12,000 fighters have been killed. If that number proves to be even reasonably accurate, then the ratio of noncombatant casualties to combatants is remarkably low: at most 1.4 to 1 and perhaps as low as 1 to 1. By historical standards of urban warfare, where combatants are embedded above and below into civilian population centers, this is a remarkable and successful effort to prevent unnecessary loss of life while fighting an implacable enemy that protects itself with civilians.
The bottom line is that Hamas must be completely eradicated from Gaza. Period. It would be the equivalent of the Allied forces getting all the way to the doorstep of Berlin during WWII and then withdrawing and allowing the Nazis to stay in power so that they could continue their genocide of the Jews.
Hamas spews propaganda counting on useful idiots to regurgitate it so that the world will lean on Israel to conduct a ceasefire that Hamas will not respect. And you are helping them. You my friend are the Christian that cannot recognize evil.
Thank you David for your comment. You have beautifully demonstrated that the thesis of my article is correct and that I have not strawmanned those I am criticising in the slightest.
You have perfectly demonstrated that if you misunderstand the relevance today of the Old Testament and the place of physical Israel in God's redemption plan, that you cannot avoid calling good evil and evil good. Collective punishment of an entire city through siege and bombing for the acts of some criminals is neither just nor good. It's the same evil the US committed in attacking Afghanistan for the crimes of Bin Laden, rather than simply chasing down the criminals through policing operations, or negotiations with the population where the criminals were being hosted. Bombs are not policing, they are retaliatory. So it's both unjust and therefore evil, and foolish and therefore evil.
But if you just say, well Israel are still God's people and they did similar stuff under Joshua, then it's fine now, God's people are just doing what they have been told they can do. But no one can claim to be Jesus Christ's people who reject him, so this falls over. Making the category error destroys your discernment for good and evil.
But what's even worse, is you've demonstrated something I considered addressing in a future post: many who defend Israel in such a way don't actually understand the very Old Testament they are relying on to justify their position.
God did not give Israel a blanket freedom to wipe out other people's, man, women and child. He just didn't.
Israel were given this command regarding the cities of the Nephilim/Rephaim/Anakim which were all the same people, as Deuteronomy 2-3 and Joshua 11 observed this was their goal and they achieved most of it under his rule, the rest was achieved under David. There was no such commands after this. It was not a wholesale license, but a strongly restricted command.
But even more important is the Gibeonites. God gave the land to Israel, but the Gibeonites tricked Joshua and he made a covenant with them. This secured their presence in the land. God held Israel to that promise and judged them when they broke it.
Israel, before its founding in 1947-48 made a deal with the Palestinians for a division of the land. But as soon as the international forces withdrew, Israel promptly took much of the land they agreed to allow for the Palestinians, creating hundreds of thousands of refugees and instantly breaking the deal they made, and this has caused much of the conflict ever since. You could argue: they would have faced conflict anyway. Perhaps. But we will never know, because Israel instantly started by going too far, according to their own agreement. Plus, the justification the Arabs used for those early attacks by the allied Arab nations was Israel's instant rejection of the agreed division of the land. A deal, which if the Old Testament was still in force, God would hold the Israelites to. He punished the nation for breaking that deal with the Gibeonites, who were Canaanites, why would he not hold Israel to the same standard today if the Old Testament provisions still apply?
So you demonstrate a misunderstanding of the Old Testament.
But your comment is helpful in another way. You make the same contradictory argument many make. You assert Israel can go as far as they like in attacking Palestinians, but then you debate the numbers as inaccurate. These numbers are the conservative numbers, not the larger numbers some have put out. But the IDF's intent to kill civilians is observed with the seige, you don't starve people into health. Seiges kill, they kill horribly, they kill indiscriminately. But your reliance on the position: Israel can do what they want as they are God's people combined with the argument that the numbers cannot be that large as Israel wouldn't do that shows a conscience that understands what is happening is wrong.
So thank you for this illustrative comment.