The Heresy of Christian Zionism
How a 19th-century theological mutation reshaped American foreign policy and subverted American Christianity.

“He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother.”
— Cyprian of Carthage, On the Unity of the Church
In the halls of American power, support for the modern state of Israel has become almost liturgical. Presidential candidates genuflect before AIPAC. Senators quote Old Testament passages to justify foreign aid. And evangelical churches wave Israeli flags in their sanctuaries as if honoring the Ark of the Covenant. This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is the fruit of a theological heresy: Christian Zionism.
I. A Broken Covenant Theology
Christian Zionism teaches that God maintains a separate, unfulfilled covenant with the Jewish people, and that the establishment of the modern State of Israel in 1948 was the reactivation of biblical prophecy. This belief is rooted in dispensationalist theology, a system born in the 19th century and alien to historic Christianity.
The idea was systematized by John Nelson Darby, a former Anglican priest who taught that God’s plan was divided into distinct dispensations. He claimed the Church was a temporary parenthesis in God’s real plan for ethnic Israel, a divine detour rather than a fulfillment.
This teaching contradicts Scripture itself.
The Apostle Paul, writing to Gentile Christians in Rome, makes it plain:
“For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel […] it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.”
Elsewhere, Paul declares:
“For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly […] but a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter.”
“And if you are Christ’s, then are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”
In other words, the true “Jew” is not determined by ethnicity or genealogy, but by faith in Christ alone. The early Church understood itself as the continuation and fulfillment of Israel, not a replacement—and certainly not an aside.
The growing distinction between ethnic Jews and Christ-followers became so pronounced in the first century that the believers were first called “Christians” in Antioch (Acts 11:26)—not to declare a new religion, but to distinguish themselves from ethnic Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah.
This distinction continued to be reinforced throughout early Church history, from Justin Martyr to Augustine of Hippo, and remained steadfast for over 1,800 years—until the rise of the Scofield Reference Bible.
II. From Scofield to Dual-Covenantism
The mainstreaming of Christian Zionism in America didn’t arise from theology departments or ecumenical councils. It was carried forward by mass-market Bibles, apocalyptic novels, and financial influence.
As the center of this transformation was the Scofield Reference Bible, an annotated edition of the King James Bible created by Cyrus Ingerson Scofield, a former lawyer, Confederate soldier, and self-ordained minister. Scofield’s Bible included extensive footnotes that promoted dispensationalist theology, including the novel idea that God’s promises to ethnic Israel remain active and separate from the Church.
First published in 1909 by Oxford University Press, it introduced millions of American Protestants to dispensationalism and succeeded in promoting a lasting dual-track vision of salvation: one for the Church, and one for the Jews.
Some researchers, most notably Joseph M. Canfield in The Incredible Scofield and His Book (1988), have speculated that Scofield’s success was aided by wealthy New York connections, possibly including individuals sympathetic to Zionist goals. Canfield points to the improbability of Scofield’s career trajectory and suggests that his association with elite circles facilitated his influence. However, these claims are not supported by direct evidence and have not been confirmed by mainstream academic historians.
One name often mentioned in this context is Samuel Untermyer, a prominent Jewish lawyer and political activist who served as president of Keren Hayesod, a Zionist fundraising organization aimed at Jewish settlement in Palestine. Untermyer was a well-known figure in American public life: a founder of the Non-Sectarian Anti-Nazi League and a vocal advocate for Zionism.
While there is no documented connection between Untermyer and Scofield, both men operated within overlapping political and religious landscapes during a period of growing Christian support for Zionism. Whether or not Zionist figures had influence in Scofield’s rise, the greater concern lies not with Israel as a nation, but with the way American Christians have rewritten their theology to conform to a foreign state’s political goals.
What can be stated definitively is this: the Scofield Bible reframed how American evangelicals viewed Israel, offering a theological rationale for unwavering political and financial support for the modern Jewish state. It laid the groundwork for what later became known as Christian Zionism, influencing everyone from televangelists to presidents.
The result was one of the most influential texts in modern Protestant history, not because of its scholarship, but because of its ideological utility.
Scofield’s Bible taught millions that:
God’s covenant with Jews was still in effect and unrelated to the Church;
The Church would be raptured away, leaving Jews to face a prophetic Tribulation;
Support for a Jewish national homeland was a form of Christian obedience.
This is where dual-covenant theology quietly took root, an idea firmly rejected by Catholics, Orthodox, and the vast majority of Protestant traditions alike. While maintaining lip service to evangelism, Scofield’s framework essentially exempted Jews from conversion by assigning them a different prophetic role. The end result? A theological justification for unwavering political support for Israel—no matter its actions, policies, or consequences for Christians in the region.
In time, these ideas were amplified by Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth, which interpreted every newspaper headline through Scofield’s lens. First published in 1970, Lindsey’s work sold over 28 million copies, making it one of the best-selling nonfiction books of the 20th century and embedding Christian Zionism in the hearts of Cold War-era evangelicals.
Televangelism, Christian radio, and publishing houses like Moody and Tyndale further spread the message. Churches and seminaries adopted Scofield’s Bible as a core text, sometimes placing more trust in its footnotes than in the Scripture itself.
Media empires like CBN and TBN amplified these teachings. Meanwhile, figures like John Hagee and Christians United for Israel (CUFI) translated these theological claims into direct political action.
By 2006, a Pew survey found that 69% of White evangelicals believed the modern state of Israel was given by God to the Jews, and 59% believed this was the fulfillment of biblical prophecy—not as an open question, but a settled fact. Today, 72% of White evangelicals hold a favorable view of Israel, by far the highest of any group aside from American Jews.
This reframing of Gospel and prophecy has had an impact far greater and more tangible than just opinion polls.
III. From Prophecy to Policy
Through organizations like CUFI, Christian Zionism has become a political force. CUFI, which claims over 10 million members, holds annual summits in Washington, lobbies Congress directly, and mobilizes church networks to influence policy in alignment with what it sees as biblical prophecy. Its messaging is clear: to oppose the State of Israel is to oppose God.
But CUFI is only part of the picture. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has grown into one of the most powerful and controversial lobbying organizations in Washington. While officially bipartisan and secular, AIPAC’s agenda aligns closely with the Christian Zionist worldview and benefits from its grassroots fervor.
In the 2023–24 cycle, AIPAC and its affiliated PACs contributed or spent money on 361 congressional candidates, providing over $53 million in support. At least 349 out of 535 members of Congress, or 65%, have received funds from AIPAC. This includes both parties, from Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries to Speaker Mike Johnson, each receiving over $650,000, with three Democrats receiving over $1 million each. Beyond direct donations, AIPAC underwrites hundreds of congressional trips to Israel, fostering personal ties to Israeli interests and shaping policy through experience rather than debate.
Abroad, this has produced:
Over $174 billion in U.S. aid to Israel since 1948, with over $22 billion spent on military aid to Israel in 2024 alone
The 2018 U.S. Embassy move to Jerusalem, which was heavily lobbied for by evangelicals
Routine opposition by the American political machine to two-state solutions or land-for-peace frameworks
Neglect of Palestinian Christians, many of whom are treated as theological inconveniences rather than brethren in Christ
This alignment has also shaped domestic law in profound ways:
Thirty-seven U.S. states have passed laws requiring individuals or businesses to pledge not to boycott Israel as a condition of government contracts. Civil liberties groups argue these laws violate the First Amendment.
States like Florida have passed antisemitism statutes (e.g., HB 741, using the IHRA framework) criticized as dangerously open-ended—able to limit not just criticism of Israel but broader civic discourse, and, in its initial draft, could have banned the Christian Bible.
In New York City, a proposed ban on metzitzah b’peh (a ritual involving direct oral suction during circumcision, which had resulted in several infant herpes cases) was reversed in 2015 by Mayor de Blasio under pressure from Jewish groups.
Politicians from both parties regularly frame support for Israel as a moral and religious imperative, blurring the line between civic neutrality and sectarian allegiance.
This pro-Israel fervor is often so extreme it eclipses concern for the actual Body of Christ in the Holy Land, especially the Palestinian Christians who remain largely invisible in evangelical discourse. It blurs the interests of American citizens, undermines Constitutional protections, and distorts the very integrity of American Patriotism itself. As Christians and Americans, we must love truth more than ideology and seek peace without prophecy-as-policy.
IV. From Heresy to Hegemony
“See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental [principles] of the world, and not according to Christ.”
Christian Zionism is not orthodoxy—it is a political ideology masquerading as faith. It was invented in the 19th century, marketed in the 20th, and weaponized in the 21st. It fractures covenant theology, sidelines the Church, and endangers global peace in pursuit of a timeline no one fully understands.
Dispensationalist teaching hinges on a destructive eschatology. Based on a selective reading of passages like Zechariah 13:8–9, many believe that two-thirds of Jews must die before Christ can return. Even worse, this eschatological exploitation conditions Christians to welcome war in the Middle East. It substitutes the peacemaking Christ (Matthew 5:9) for a militarized Antichrist of our own making. To oppose Christian Zionism is not to oppose the Jewish people—it is to refuse the weaponization of faith for geopolitical ends.
But the consequences don’t end at the church door.
This ideology has reshaped U.S. foreign policy, directed tens of billions in military aid, justified war, and distorted the very language of American civil religion. It has undermined the First Amendment through anti-BDS laws, reversed public health policy in cities like New York to appease religious blocs, and redefined loyalty to Christ and country through the lens of unwavering support for a secular foreign state.
This pro-Israel fervor is often so extreme that it eclipses not only concern for the Body of Christ in the Holy Land, but also the interests of the American people and the integrity of our own national principles.
“Did I have room in my heart for the suffering that this war created? Was my commitment to eschatology greater than my commitment to these people, whom God surely loved?”
— Dr. Gary M. Burge, Whose Land? Whose Promise?
To move forward, Christians must:
Reclaim the historic Church view of Israel, the Church, and the covenants
Advocate for just peace in the Holy Land, not prophetic conflict
Reject prophecy-driven foreign policy that causes death in Christ’s name
Refuse to sanctify American legislation or diplomacy in the name of eschatology
And Americans, especially Christian voters and lawmakers, must have the courage to approach U.S. policy toward Israel with constitutional clarity and moral sobriety, not apocalyptic fervor. This is not a call to oppose Israel, but it is a call to stop confusing support for the state with obedience to God. As Christians and Americans, we must pursue peace, justice, and the common good with discernment.
As the Apostle Paul reminds us, “He is not a Jew who is one outwardly […] but a Jew is one inwardly” (Romans 2:28–29). It’s time we recover this inward Gospel, not one written in the stars or the headlines, but in the circumcised heart.
Thanks for reading! If you believe the West is worth saving, then The Oak Remains is for you.
I write to uncover truth, restore forgotten foundations, and chart a way forward through faith, history, and first principles.
Want to support this work directly? Buy me a coffee or consider upgrading your subscription to help keep the lamp lit.