While conducting a genocide and even a holocaust
in Gaza from 2023 through at least the summer of 2025, the Israeli government was
in no position to launch diplomatic threats against either the E.U. or any of
its states for recognizing a Palestinian state alongside the Israeli state.[1] At
the time, the warrants issued by the ICC for the arrest of Netanyahu and a
former defense minister were still outstanding, and no doubt more warrants would
be issued for other culprits in the Israeli government and military. I applaud
Jews around the world, and especially in Israel, who have had the guts to
protest publicly on behalf of human rights in Gaza and against Israel's savage militaristic
incursion into Gaza and the related death of tens of thousands and starvation
of millions. The human urge of self-preservation is astonishing in that as of
August, 2025, so many residents of Gaza were still alive. So, for Netanyahu to charge
government officials in the E.U. with being antisemitic is not only incorrect
and unfair, but highly presumptuous given the severity of the atrocities unleashed
by Netanyahu and his governmental cadre. Regarding both the Israeli protesters
and the Netanyahu government, distinguishing the ethical from the theological domains,
which are admittedly very much related, is helpful.
Any religion that would applaud the behavior of Israel since that country started bombing civilians (and their homes and even entire cities) in Gaza does not deserve the appellation of religion, much less faith. In the Torah, we can find examples where Yahweh punishes Israel for disobeying the covenant, which includes the Ten Commandments, which in turn include the prohibition against murder, especially of an entire population as if every resident were culpable.
Nietzsche castigates the line, "Vengeance is Mine, sayeth the Lord," because it contradicts omnibenevolence, which is a divine attribute. Even so, Israel might want to heed the line, for even though collective justice does not apply outside of Israel, the Torah applies it to Israel. That Israel includes even the Israelis who have protested the genocide and holocaust in Gaza confirms the vital point that divine decrees in a scripture do not always subscribe to our notions of what is ethical, for otherwise Yahweh’s omnipotence would be constrained by our moral principles. Of course, this point does not give us an “out” for behaving unethically in harming other people, especially innocents, especially if in God’s name, and this is precisely the fallacy into which Netanyahu and his cadre as well as supporters have fallen, even if implicitly rather than consciously.
Put another way, in the Book of Exodus, not even the Hebrews who have not been worshipping the Golden Calf in the desert while Moses is on the mountain can enter the promised land for 40 years; all of Israel is being punished. Similarly, a divine decree against Israel for having broken the commandment against murder so severely would include even the Israelis who have publicly protested Netanyahu’s policies in Gaza (as well as his enabling of attacks by Israeli “settlers” against Palestinians in the occupied territories). That more Israelis could have stopped working and protested such that the Netanyahu governing coalition might change course or even collapse is not the point. Rather, my point here is that collective justice is unethical even when issued by a divine decree, so Israel’s collective punishment of all of the residents of Gaza cannot be justified, either in ethical terms or as if Netanyahu could issue divine decrees that transcend the ethical realm.
Furthermore, the Final Act in terms of Yahweh’s judgment is beyond Israel’s control, given that atrocities have already been committed, and the Christian unqualified (in both senses of this word!) enablers of Israel might remember this too. To presume that a Last Judgment goes your way, or does not apply to oneself, is impious and presumptuous, and in line with the pre-eminence of self-love rather than faith in caritas seu benevolentia universalis. It is ironic that any Christian would forget this very practical faith, and even enable people who violate it so severely. Similarly, it is interesting that the governing coalition of Israel would dismiss Hillel’s teaching not to treat others as you would not want to be treated. Take out the two nots, and Jesus’s Second Commandment is revealed.
In other words, the means of
supporting Israel’s teleological-theological role in salvation history should
not violate divine decrees, or else the Final Judgement may come as a surprise
because means are arguably just as important as goals. In fact, the choice of
means, rather than the ends being sought (e.g., the triumph of Israel for
theological purposes), may be what Yahweh looks at in judging human creatures.
Even
though the theological and ethical dimensions of means are important, and may
even be more important to the ends being sought, a distinctly theological point
does not reduce to one of ethics, for otherwise Yahweh would be subject to our
ethical ideas, rather than vice versa. Even though it has been quipped that
there is nothing like gods on Earth than Generals on a battlefield, not even
their commander-in-chief is capable of issuing divine decrees, and thus should
be held ethically and legally accountable; this is two degrees of
separation from such a person as Netanyahu lashing out hate-speech slurs
against government officials in Europe because they object to what is arguably
a genocide and even a holocaust in Gaza and want to help the residents thereof.
1. Tal Shalev et al, “Israel
Launches Diplomatic Attacks on Its Western Allies Ahead of Palestinian
Statehood Recognition,” CNN.com, August 20, 2025.
