The Theological Legitimacy Problem of Israel's Establishment: An Investigation in the Context of the 1967 Six-Day War

Abstract
It is common for states to find theological causes for their own institutions, especially in the pre-modern period. However, in modern times, religious-based political powers establish a relationship between the establishment of the state and theological foundations and goals. One of the main pil-lars of theological causes is the expectation and belief in Christ. In this context, the belief of the expectation of Christ in the Jewish faith and the establishment of a Jewish state in the land promised by God is an important ideal. Political Zionism, which Teodor Herzl started with the Bazzel confe-rence in 1897, is essentially an unreligious, racist and secular movement. Since the State of Israel was not established by God, it caused deep debates among the Jews.
The aim of this article is to clarify the problem of theo-political legitimacy of Israel's establish-ment as a state. Established in 1948 with unreligious and secular claims, Israel has seeked to legitimize its establishment theologically since the day it was founded. The Six-Day War, which took place in 1967, was interpreted by the Zionists as a theological confirmation of Israel's fo-undation. In the 1950s, it clear that the Prime Minister of the Israeli Government, David Ben-Gurion, played a leading role in this interpretation as a political actor. Biblical narratives ser-ved as structure, tool, and discourse to Ben Gurion's everyday theo-political rhetoric. It is evi-dent that the Nationalist Religious Party/Movement has managed to adopt the settlement po-licy in the occupied territories to a large extent, to other Israeli Jews who share neither their political stance nor their beliefs. According to them, this victory reinforced the sense of belon-ging of most Jews in the world, revived the optimism and hope of the Israeli people, and this was seen as a divine and miraculous intervention, a sign of approval of the Zionist enterprise. Henceforth, neither religious Jews nor non-religious secular Jews could ignore the sign of af-firmation of this return “to the land of the first prophets.”

The major changes brought about by the 1967 Six-Day War had profound religious-political reper-cussions on both clergy who saw the Jewish state transform into a Jewish state, and non-clerics tra-ditionally linked to the secular definition of the state. The result of this was the demise of the Jewish state and the Jewish land duality. The change between the situation before the Six-Day War and the situation after it is also considered the clearest proof of this. The State of Israel is no longer seen as a gift for the Jews, but as God's revenge on non-Jewish nations. This situation, which can be seen as a theological-political project of modernity in essence, means nothing more than camouflaging the political ambitions of theo-political actors under the guise of theology and aiming to gain the sup-port of large Jewish masses for their purposes. With the Six-Day War in 1967, political Zionism began to assume a religious identity and the State of Israel began to gain general acceptance in the Jewish community, with the exception of some Orthodox Jews. As the State of Israel, which was founded by the Jews and therefore does not have religious legitimacy, was successful in the Arab-Israeli wars, it gained widespread support and approval, considering that it was God's approval of the State of Is-rael. This was accepted as the purpose of God, and the thought that “we could not beat the Arabs if God did not support it” prevailed.
The results of the 1967 Six-Day War gave a significant amount of legitimacy they sought. However, not all Jews agree. Besides the theo-political meaning of seeing the 1967 Six-Day War as “a divine miracle and a theological confirmation of Israel's establishment” from the Zionist perspective, there are also those who see the same event as a “devilish plan” from the anti-Zionist perspective. Accor-ding to those of this view, the Six-Day War is a devilish plan carefully prepared to lure Israel into a trap. According to this understanding, what needs to be done is to wait patiently by fulfilling the requirements of Judaism. Divine affirmation does not happen with wars fought for Zionist purposes. According to this understanding, what needs to be done is to wait patiently by fulfilling the require-ments of Judaism. The theological discussions of Israel's foundation are not over. On the one hand, there is the Messiah expectation of traditional Judaism, and on the other hand, a situation in which Christ is instrumentalized by the Zionists for theo-political purposes.