At the core of progressive thought is a deeply reductionist view of human nature. In their worldview, people are essentially blank slates, molded by their environments.
By Dr. Tim Orr
A few years ago, I had a conversation with a progressive acquaintance who was convinced that Hamas was simply reacting to oppression. “If you were treated like that, wouldn’t you resist?” he asked. He genuinely believed that political grievances and economic hardship drove Hamas’ actions. His assumption was clear: if Palestinians had better living conditions, a viable state, and fewer restrictions, peace would follow.
This perspective, while well-intentioned, oversimplifies the issue. It assumes that external factors like poverty and political oppression shape human behavior. But this view ignores a crucial reality—humans are not just economic creatures but spiritual beings driven by deeper convictions, beliefs, and a longing for meaning.
Hamas is not primarily a movement of national resistance. It is an Islamist organization committed to a theological vision that sees conflict as part of a broader religious struggle. While political and economic factors certainly play a role, they do not fully explain why Hamas continues to engage in violence, even when opportunities for peaceful solutions exist. To truly understand this issue, we must move beyond materialist explanations and consider the role of ideology, theology, and human nature.
Progressivism, particularly in the West, tends to assume that people are fundamentally good and that harmful behavior primarily responds to external conditions. This belief comes from Enlightenment thought, particularly the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who argued that humans are naturally innocent and corrupted only by societal structures (Rousseau, 1762/1979). This view shapes much of modern secular thinking, leading many to assume that if people engage in violence, it must be because they have been mistreated.
However, the Bible presents a different perspective. Scripture teaches that the problem with humanity is not simply external oppression but internal sin. Jesus Himself said, “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person” (Mark 7:21-23, ESV).
This does not mean that external circumstances do not matter. Injustice is real, and Christians should work for justice where they can. But injustice alone does not explain acts of terrorism or religious violence. There is a deeper issue involving human nature, ideology, and the longing for transcendence.
One of the most common arguments among progressives is that economic development and improved living conditions will reduce extremism. While economic deprivation can contribute to instability, history shows that terrorism is not necessarily rooted in poverty.
Osama bin Laden, for example, came from a wealthy and influential family in Saudi Arabia (Bergen, 2006). Many of the 9/11 hijackers were well-educated and middle-class. Hamas leaders often live in comfort while sending young men to die for their cause. The idea that economic hardship alone drives radicalization is inadequate.
If poverty were the root cause of extremism, then the poorest countries in the world would be the most violent. But they are not. Some of the world’s most economically struggling nations, such as Haiti and the Central African Republic, face many challenges, but they do not produce transnational terrorist organizations. Meanwhile, some of the wealthiest Muslim-majority countries—such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar—are major exporters of Islamist ideology.
Clearly, something more than economic hardship is at play. People are not just motivated by material needs; they are motivated by their deepest beliefs and worldview.
Hamas is not simply a national liberation movement seeking a peaceful two-state solution. Their founding charter (Hamas, 1988) explicitly calls for the destruction of Israel and the establishment of an Islamic state governed by sharia law. While political grievances may fuel support for Hamas, the organization’s commitment to its religious vision is a central driving force behind its actions.
This is where many Western progressives misunderstand the conflict. They assume that Hamas, like Western political movements, can be negotiated with through diplomacy and economic incentives. But Hamas is not primarily driven by political pragmatism; it is driven by a theological vision in which resistance is not just a political strategy but a religious obligation.
Western secularism struggles to comprehend this because it has largely abandoned the idea that religious beliefs shape human actions. In a post-Christian society, people assume that material well-being is the ultimate goal of all human behavior. But throughout history, people have been willing to sacrifice comfort, safety, and even their lives for the sake of ideology and faith. Hamas, like many other radical groups, operates within this framework.
If ideology and theology are at the heart of radical movements like Hamas, then the solution cannot be purely material or political. What is needed is a greater, truer vision—one that offers real peace, real meaning, and real hope.
This is where the Gospel stands apart. The message of Jesus Christ does not call people to violence but to reconciliation. Christ does not promise rewards for martyrdom through warfare; He offers eternal life through His own sacrifice. He does not demand that His followers establish His kingdom by force; He calls them to love their enemies and pray for those who persecute them (Matthew 5:44).
The hunger for transcendence that drives radicalism is not, in itself, wrong. People long for purpose and meaning beyond themselves. The problem arises when that longing is directed toward ideologies that promise false salvation through violence. The Gospel, in contrast, directs people to the true source of life and peace—Jesus Christ.
This is why the rapid growth of Christianity in the Muslim world is so significant. Many former Muslims who have embraced Christ testify that what drew them was not Western secularism, but the personal encounter with the love and peace of Jesus (Woodberry, 2012). They saw a different kind of faith—one that does not seek power through force, but through transformation.
Western progressives often portray the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a simple case of oppression versus resistance. This narrative, while compelling, overlooks key facts. Hamas is not just reacting to Israeli policies; it actively seeks the destruction of Israel. Its leaders have repeatedly rejected peace deals that would allow for Palestinian self-rule because their goal is not coexistence but conquest.
This does not mean that the Palestinian people as a whole are responsible for Hamas’ actions. Many Palestinians suffer under Hamas’ rule, and they, too, are victims of its extremism. But by excusing Hamas’ violence as mere resistance, progressives fail to hold the group accountable and, in doing so, contribute to the suffering of both Israelis and Palestinians.
A more honest approach would recognize the complexity of the situation, affirm the need for justice, and reject the idea that violence is an acceptable means to achieve political goals.
The problems in the Middle East will not be solved through economic aid alone, nor will they be solved through endless political negotiations. What is ultimately needed is a spiritual transformation—a turning away from false ideologies and toward the truth found in Jesus Christ.
Progressivism, with its secular assumptions and materialist solutions, cannot fully address the deeper issues at play. The Bible teaches that true peace comes not through human efforts, but through reconciliation with God. This is why the Gospel must be at the center of our response.
The question is not whether people will seek meaning and transcendence; it is whether they will find it in truth or in error. The Church must proclaim the message of Christ boldly, offering the only real alternative to ideologies of violence and despair. In the end, the solution to the conflict is not just better policies—it is a changed heart, and that change can only come through the power of the Gospel.
Bergen, P. (2006). The Osama bin Laden I know: An oral history of al Qaeda’s leader. Free Press.
Cook, D. (2005). Understanding jihad. University of California Press.
Hamas. (1988). The covenant of the Islamic resistance movement (Hamas).
Rousseau, J.-J. (1979). Emile, or on education (A. Bloom, Trans.). Basic Books. (Original work published 1762)
Woodberry, R. D. (2012). The missionary roots of liberal democracy. American Political Science Review, 106(2), 244-274.
Dr. Tim Orr serves full-time with Crescent Project as the assistant director of the internship program and area coordinator, where he is also deeply involved in outreach across the UK. A scholar of Islam, Evangelical minister, conference speaker, and interfaith consultant, Tim brings over 30 years of experience in cross-cultural ministry. He holds six academic degrees, including a Doctor of Ministry from Liberty University and a Master’s in Islamic Studies from the Islamic College in London.
In addition to his ministry work, Tim is a research associate with the Congregations and Polarization Project at the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University Indianapolis. His research interests include Islamic antisemitism, American Evangelicalism, and Islamic feminism. He has spoken at leading universities and mosques throughout the UK—including Oxford University, Imperial College London, and the University of Tehran—and has published widely in peer-reviewed Islamic academic journals. Tim is also the author of four books.