One of the follies of recent Western Civilization is its exaggerated hyper-secularization, with man being the measure of all things, and religious faith being relegated to a sideshow, important only to the individual, not the society at large.

This is what drives society’s “abortion is a woman’s personal choice,” attitude, and the acceptance of homosexual marriage.

This was not always so. As recently as 2008, California’s plebesite: Proposition 8, which would have banned same-sex marriage, was approved by a public vote. LBGT activists responded to their defeat with threats of violence, vandalism, and boycotts. A court overturned implementation.

An ahistorical understanding of the First Amendment has been misinterpreted by many talking heads to claim that the United States government is absolutely distinct and separate from any religious influences, when actually what the Founding Fathers intended was that no one particular denomination should prevail in authority. In plain terms, the founders were opposed to a dominant Presbyterian, Congregationalist, or Episcopalian regulation, but not to Jesus, however they interpreted Him.

Of course, religious influence can go too far; hence the disaster of Prohibition, but that was effected by a small minority, and eventually, it was overturned.

While most of the world seems to have come to this present distorted Western view of religious freedom -- today, driven more by ideologues that the respectable original intent of religious liberty -- the Mideast refuses to comply.

In the Levant, we see the spectacle of religious lunatics being steadfast in idiocies and atrocities -- such as modesty regulations including burqas, hijabs, and female genital mutilations; and religious intolerances. The West should have been able to counter their Islamist attitude with an introduction of genuine religious freedom, but instead today we proffer moral anarchy, which only hardens their extremist stance.

And then we run into the Holy Land, which remains like a finger poke in the eye of world politics. It cannot be negotiated away.

In the 19th and early 20th century, the return of the Jews to the land seemed like an obvious and grand idea. It started with Protestants, not the Jews. Groups such as the German Lutheran Templers, and individuals like America’s Willam Blackstone, or the Anglican William Hechler, were advocating for a Jewish return to the land before most Jews, even Theodore Herzl, considered it as a viable possibility.

Of course, their motives were not strictly Jewish. These Christians wanted to prepare the world for the return of Christ, of which the return of the Jews to the land was a requirement. This still motivates many American Evangelicals in their support of Israel.

Much of this early Zionism was political in nature. The Jews just wanted to flee a very hostile Europe where Jews were persecuted. Anywhere was open to consideration. Locations such as Argentina and Uganda were considered.

Should the Powers declare themselves willing to admit our sovereignty over a neutral piece of land, then the Society will enter into negotiations for the possession of this land. Here two territories come under consideration, Palestine and Argentine. -- Jewish Virtual Library

It was some religious rabbis at the Zionist Congress who insisted that no alternative to the Holy Land be considered.

In the intervening 130 years, the world, particularly the West, has become functionally atheist, all except the Levant, where Islam and Judaism are not only taken seriously, but their practices whereof seem to be increasing in fervor.

It is as if the Almighty has declared that if the rest of the world has forgotten Him, there is one piece of geography that won’t.

And this is why permanent peace will not be possible, at least not under the present world leadership. The United States, Europe, Russia, and China would love to impose what to them would seem like a fair solution… If only to get this annoying trouble spot out of their hair.

But the antagonists do not see it this way. They feel a moral duty not to compromise.

The Islamists refuse to allow any portion of Islamic land to be lost to the infidel. There was only one exception to this: the Reconquista of the Iberian Peninsula by the Christians; but the Muslims are still upset about that.

Let the whole world know that we shall never accept that the tragedy of Andalusia would be repeated in Palestine. We cannot accept that Palestine will become Jewish. -- Osama Bin Laden

This is what drives many Muslims to absorb frightening losses and still fight on.

As many secular Jews give up on the Zionist project -- some even becoming hostile to Zionism -- it is the more religious among them who are stepping up to fill the ranks; and those will not yield one inch either. They are trusting in an ancient prophecy

Jeremiah 30: 10-11 “Hear the word of the Lord, you nations; proclaim it in distant coastlands: He who scattered Israel will gather them and will watch over his flock like a shepherd.’

For the Lord will deliver Jacob and redeem them from the hand of those stronger than they.

The point is: If that prophecy be true, if the return of the Jews is God shouting out to the nations, the nations of the world are all but deaf to it. Only Evangelical Christians take it seriously, and they for reasons different from the standard religious Jew. Religious Jews have set up plans to rebuild the temple under Mosaic Law, with the intent of introducing a Golden Age, while Evangelical Christians believe that third temple will be violated, provoking a world war, and the return of Christ.

As the influence of Christianity is dying out in the West -- when the Son of Man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth? (Luke 18:8) -- no one outside the Middle East is interpreting this rightly.

The upshot is that the Holy Land will not allow compromise or neutrality. Men are required to choose one side or the other.

To the modern, that seems insane; politics and religion are supposed to be totally separate. The Holy Land reminds us that this may not be so.

Image: Pixabay