(Blog) Jews Divided - Ep. 946 - July 17, 2026

Why American Jews Are Divided Over Israel

If you've wondered why some American Jews support politicians and policies that oppose Israel, the question reaches beyond one election or one Israeli leader. Jeff Rowland and Alan Smith argue that the divide exposes a wider conflict between religious conviction, cultural identity, and political loyalty.

They connect the disagreement over Israel to similar divisions within American Christianity, politics, and the church. For them, the central concern is what happens when a person claims a religious identity while rejecting the beliefs tied to it.

The Question That Has Persisted Since 2012

Rowland said he has wrestled with this question since the 2012 Democratic National Convention, when he saw an obvious division within the Democratic Party over Israel. Since many American Jews vote Democratic, he expected that a party moving away from support for Israel and the Jewish people would lose that support.

Instead, he believes the division has continued and grown.

Rowland pointed to a recent congressional vote in which, according to his account, a majority of Democratic members voted to ban aid to Israel. He also said he heard Democratic Socialists describe Israel as the major dividing issue within their party, even above the usual argument between capitalism and socialism.

"The big division in the party is over Israel."

Smith questioned whether many people in those debates could even locate Israel on a globe. He also recalled hearing a man describe socialism as good, yet admit he did not know why he believed that.

Religious Identity and Religious Conviction Are Different

An article discussed on the show argues that American Jews are not one unified religious community. It describes Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, secular, cultural, agnostic, and atheist Jews, along with people who identify as Jewish mainly through family heritage.

That variety matters because being born Jewish does not always mean a person's worldview follows Jewish religious teaching. The article cited an AP-NORC survey that found religious Jews are much more likely than secular Jews to feel emotionally attached to Israel and to consider support for Israel part of their Jewish identity.

Political identity can shape views of Israel

For many secular American Jews, the hosts said, Jewish identity may function more as an ethnic, cultural, or family connection than as a theological commitment. In that case, political beliefs may come more from progressive academic culture, media, and party affiliation than from the Hebrew Scriptures or traditional Jewish teaching.

The article also found that support for Israel's legitimacy remained stronger than support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In addition, views of Netanyahu often tracked political identity, with Democratic-leaning respondents viewing him less favorably than Republican-leaning respondents.

Smith and Rowland agreed that politics can come before theology for many people. However, they argued that religious belief should still shape a person's political judgments, not the other way around.

Why the Hosts See a Deeper Problem

Smith said he was surprised by the level of division among American Jews. He understood that people may disagree or simply try to get through daily life, but he struggled with the idea that some Jews could take political positions that, in his view, weaken Israel itself.

Rowland replied that Judaism has changed greatly since the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. Like Christianity, Judaism contains different streams of belief and practice. He also said there are Jews who do not believe in God or in traditional Jewish teachings, just as there are Americans who identify as Christians while rejecting Christian belief.

Israel's land and national story

The hosts drew a limit around their comparison between Judaism and Christianity. They agreed that a person may claim a Christian identity without accepting the Bible, but Smith said Jewish identity has a distinct connection to the land of Israel.

Rowland described Christianity as centered on heavenly promises. By contrast, he described Judaism and Israel's national history as tied to earthly promises, including the land given through God's covenant with Abraham.

That is why Smith found it difficult to understand how a person could claim Jewish identity while feeling no attachment to Israel. He argued that the land is bound up with Jewish history, Scripture, and national identity.

Criticizing Netanyahu Is Different From Rejecting Israel

The article makes a distinction the hosts strongly supported. Jews and Christians can disagree about a prime minister, military strategy, diplomatic choices, or specific government policies. However, those disagreements are different from denying Israel's right to exist as a Jewish homeland.

The hosts said public debate often centers on Netanyahu personally. They compared the way critics speak about Netanyahu with the way many Americans speak about President Trump. While they did not claim either leader is perfect, they said critics often fail to explain what they expect Israel or its prime minister to do differently.

The October 7 attack and Israel's response

Rowland raised the October 7 attack, when about 1,200 Israelis were killed in 24 hours. He asked what Israel is supposed to do when its people and land come under attack.

Smith also said Netanyahu had helped stop periods when bombings and attacks were frequent in Israel. Their concern was that people accuse Israel of genocide while leaving out the initial attack and the continuing threats against Israelis.

For the hosts, the major issue is not whether Netanyahu should face criticism. It is whether criticism turns into opposition to Zionism, opposition to Israel's existence, or calls to reduce American support for Israel.

American Jews, Israeli Jews, and Self-Preservation

The hosts contrasted American Jews with Israeli Jews. They suggested that Israeli Jews are more focused on preserving their nation because they live in Israel and face threats against it directly.

Smith compared some American Jews to Jews who did not want to leave Babylon and return to their homeland. He argued that American Jews who oppose Israel should care more about Israel's future, its citizens, and its defense.

Rowland said American culture has become corrupt, lukewarm, and detached from national loyalty. In his view, some American Jews have been so shaped by American political culture that they see nothing wrong with taking positions against their own people or country.

A destructive conflict from within

Smith called this behavior "cannibalistic." He did not mean it literally. He meant that people can work against their own heritage, nation, or community by supporting those they believe want to weaken or destroy it.

The hosts extended that concern to the United States. They criticized Americans who hate their own country, rewrite its history, and portray America as the source of the world's problems. In their view, that same posture is part of the political conflict now dividing the Democratic Party.

They also believe socialism and communism pose a larger threat than many Americans recognize. Rowland connected that concern to Cold War-era warnings that ideological influence could enter the United States through its institutions, especially college campuses.

Jerusalem in AD 70 and the Cost of Internal Division

Smith brought up the Roman siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 as an example of a people weakened from within. He said Jerusalem had multiple defensive walls and enough stored food to last for years while Titus and the Roman army surrounded the city.

However, several Jewish factions inside the city fought each other over power. According to Smith's account, those factions burned and destroyed each other's food supplies, then stole from one another as the conflict intensified.

The city was already facing an enemy outside its walls. Internal conflict made that outside threat more effective.

The warning they draw from the siege

The hosts applied this story to present-day America, Israel, and the church. Their point was that an outside enemy can take advantage when people within a nation or religious community are fighting each other.

They used Jerusalem's fall as an image of civil conflict, where groups attack their own people while a larger threat remains outside. Smith said the same pattern appears in American public life, where citizens are, in his words, "running all over ourselves."

The hosts' warning is that a community can destroy itself from within while focusing on who gets to be "head dog."

The Church Can Repeat the Same Pattern

Rowland agreed with Smith's view that the church often leads the way in internal conflict. They discussed Christian organizations and media ministries, including Daystar, where factions may seek to tear down institutions because of real or perceived failures.

Smith said ministries are made up of people, and people can make mistakes. Yet he argued that trying to destroy every ministry is different from addressing wrongdoing or correcting error.

Rowland said the devil would not create a Christian television network to spread the gospel. Therefore, he saw efforts to destroy such ministries as part of a larger spiritual strategy.

Conflict in the name of God

The hosts described an apostate form of Christianity that attacks fellow believers in the name of righteousness. Smith said the more apostate a church becomes, the more a religious spirit may persuade people that destructive behavior is justified.

They compared that pattern to the factions within Jerusalem during the Roman siege. In each case, people may believe they are defending truth while weakening their own community.

Their concern was not that every criticism is wrong. They argued that constant factionalism can become destructive when Christians focus on tearing down one another instead of dealing with greater threats.

Christians, Politics, and Biblical Authority

Rowland said the same divide seen among American Jews is visible among American Christians. He argued that Christians cannot reconcile their faith with political support for abortion, LGBTQ+ activism, and the public teaching of those lifestyles to children.

The article also referenced millions of Americans who still identify as Christian on surveys while rejecting biblical teaching on sexuality, marriage, Scripture, miracles, and even belief in God.

A claimed faith without biblical belief

The hosts agreed that many people call themselves Christians because of family, culture, or background while rejecting the actual teachings of Christianity. They saw a parallel with people who call themselves Jewish while holding no religious attachment to Israel or Jewish teaching.

Still, they stressed that Christianity and Judaism are not identical. Christianity, in their view, is not built around a national land promise. Israel's connection to the land, however, runs through Genesis, the prophets, God's covenant with Abraham, and Israel's national story.

Rowland also mentioned a woman who had left Christianity and said it was easier to leave the church than to get the church out of her. For him, her testimony showed that an encounter with the Holy Spirit leaves a mark a person does not easily forget.

When Politics Takes the Place of Theology

The article suggested that much of the division over Israel may be political before it is theological. Both hosts agreed, then argued that this is the problem.

"We are more political than we are theological," Rowland said. They believe party identity often guides people more than Scripture does, even when the political positions they support contradict their stated faith.

Smith responded that theology still drives politics in some places. He pointed to Iran as an example, where religious belief and national policy are closely connected.

Iran and the limits of military power

The hosts briefly discussed whether the United States could win a war with Iran. Rowland said he supports slowing Iran down, military action against threats, and regime change. However, he does not expect Iran to disappear.

His reasoning came from biblical prophecy. He said Scripture indicates that Iran will remain present in future events, so military power cannot remove the nation from what he believes the Bible has predicted.

Smith agreed. Their view was that military action may restrain Iran or change conditions in the short term, but it cannot cancel God's prophetic plan.

Spiritual Blindness and Self-Contradictory Thinking

Rowland referred to Paul's teaching in Romans about Israel's blindness. He said Israel's rejection of Christ brought blindness, but he also argued that spiritual blindness can affect any people who reject God and truth.

Smith cited the biblical idea that those who do not receive truth can fall under delusion. Both hosts believed America is experiencing widespread spiritual, political, and cultural confusion.

The examples they raised

Rowland said people increasingly hold beliefs that contradict their own actions and interests. He cited people who support LGBTQ+ causes while displaying signs that read "queers for Palestine," even though, he argued, homosexual people would face violence or death in places ruled by groups they support.

The hosts described that position as illogical and unnatural. In their view, it shows people are following ideas that cannot be reconciled with reality.

Rowland said he believes this kind of thinking has a demonic origin. He connected it to American Jews who support political movements he sees as hostile to Israel, as well as Americans who embrace anti-American ideas. Smith ended the discussion with a joke about a "dumber and dumber spirit," but the underlying concern was serious.

The Issue the Hosts Leave Open

Rowland and Smith did not claim to settle every political debate about Israel, Netanyahu, Iran, or American foreign policy. They did draw a firm line between disagreement over a leader's policies and denying Israel's legitimacy as a Jewish homeland.

Their larger concern reaches beyond Israel. They see religious communities, political parties, and nations being weakened when people put ideological loyalty above religious conviction, biblical authority, national identity, and common sense.

For the hosts, the division among American Jews over Israel is one part of a broader conflict. The same struggle appears wherever people claim a faith or heritage while opposing the beliefs, people, or foundations connected to it.

"Text generated by [rightblogger] based on (Smith and Rowland Video), Jews Divided - Ep. 946 - July 17, 2026"