The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Hayes Gahagan of Limestone is a businessman, and a former state senator and former U.S. Senate candidate.
The debate over a Palestinian state is often framed in political or prophetic terms. But from a Reformed perspective — rooted in the Protestant Reformation’s emphasis on God’s sovereignty, human dignity, and the rule of law — the issue is first about justice, peace, and order under God.
All people bear the image of God ( Genesis 1:27). A Palestinian state could, in principle, secure dignity, order, and self-determination for Palestinians while restraining cycles of violence. Scripture reminds us to “do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly” ( Micah 6:8). If wisely governed, such a state could provide stability and even open doors for Gospel witness.
History, however, raises an uncomfortable question: Has there ever been evidence of a Palestinian state — or even a governing body — that would recognize Israel’s right to exist without condemning it? Since 1947, Palestinian leadership has consistently rejected coexistence. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) charter long denied Israel’s legitimacy, Hamas openly calls for its destruction, and even the Palestinian Authority continues to encourage violence against Israel.
Recent demonstrations, with thousands waving Palestinian flags while with some chanting anti-Israel slogans, do not look like a movement committed to peace. They are evidence that the dream of statehood has too often been built not on coexistence, but on rejection. From a Reformed perspective, civil government is ordained by God to reward good and restrain evil ( Romans 13:3–4). A state built on enmity rather than justice cannot fulfill that calling.
This is more than a regional dispute. At its core, it reflects a clash of civilizations: the West, shaped by the Judeo-Christian vision of liberty under God, and the East, shaped by Islam’s culture rooted in the Quran. These worldviews, I believe, lead to very different ideas of justice and peace.
The lessons of history remind us that liberty and justice are not secured by sentiment but by principle. The Protestant Reformation influenced America’s founders with the conviction that rights come from God, not the state. Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights carried this legacy by protecting individual liberty against centralized power.
The contrast between individual rights and state control remains critical for good citizenship — and for judging the legitimacy of governments. I believe a just state protects God-given rights and restrains evil; an unjust state demands control while denying liberty. By this measure, to me Palestinian leadership’s rejection of coexistence reflects not liberty under law but power wielded in enmity.
The Reformed tradition is realistic about sin: political structures can promote justice, but they can also magnify injustice. A Palestinian state is not inherently good or evil; it must be judged by whether it fosters peace and restrains violence. Until there is evidence of Palestinian leadership willing to uphold peace with Israel, statehood risks institutionalizing hostility.
Christians should remember: our ultimate hope is not in borders or treaties, but in the reign of Christ, who rules the nations in justice ( Psalm 2). States rise and fall, but His Kingdom endures forever.
