Of the many conflicts around the globe, the one between Israel and Palestine has a particularlevel of complexity to it as religion plays a significant role. Not only are there Jewish andMuslim sensibilities involved—evangelical Christianity also attaches high levels ofsignificance to the land of Israel-Palestine, primarily due to eschatological considerations.Research on the role religion plays in conflict abounds. Similarly, over the past 50 years,many books have been authored on the subject of Israel within evangelical Christian circles,not to mention sermons preached. The vast majority of those works promulgate the idea thatthe worldwide church has a responsibility to support the modern nation of Israel. However,recent evangelical scholarship has been more nuanced in its approach. The aim of this paper isto analyze two recent exegetical works by Christian scholars, Gerald R. McDermott and GaryM Burge, who participate in the current American evangelical debate surrounding IsraelPalestine. The method of choice for this analysis is of a comparative kind in which theauthors’ interpretations will be categorized by whether they find biblical pericopes to mandateor not mandate Christian support, politically and/or economically, of the political Israel. Theresults of the study shows that McDermott argues that the texts mandate Christian supportwhereas Burge comes to the opposite conclusion. While both authors show strong argumentsfor their respective positions, the primary difference between the two theologians lies in theiremphasis on which of the two Testaments one should read the other through.