Sorry Reverend No — Jesus Was Not a “Zionist.” That Term Didn’t Exist, and the Claim Distorts Scripture.

Online, Reverend Jordan Wells portrays himself as a Christian leader and outspoken Christian Zionist, building a following largely through provocative posts and viral clips on X and Facebook. But despite the clerical title he uses, Wells often does not act like a reverend, particularly in the way he publicly attacks people of other faiths. His social media presence is marked by hostility toward Muslims and Catholics alike, pairing harsh rhetoric with sweeping theological and political claims. Wells has repeatedly promoted an aggressively pro-Zionist ideology, including assertions that Jesus was a Zionist, framing modern geopolitical allegiance as a religious litmus test. Critics argue that this posture abandons Christian teachings of humility and charity in favor of confrontation, division, and ideological warfare—raising serious questions about whether his conduct reflects spiritual leadership or political activism cloaked in religious language.

Calling Jesus a “Zionist” is anachronistic and theologically inaccurate. Zionism is a modern political ideology, emerging in the late 19th century. Jesus lived under Roman occupation nearly 2,000 years earlier and explicitly rejected political-nationalist messianism.

Let’s address the claims point by point.

1. Jesus wept over Jerusalem — but not to endorse political sovereignty.
Jesus wept because Jerusalem rejected justice, mercy, and the way of peace, not because it lacked statehood. In fact, He warned that the city would face destruction because of its leaders’ violence and hypocrisy. That prophecy was fulfilled in 70 AD. Lament is not political endorsement.

2. “Salvation comes from the Jews” does not equal ethnic or nationalist supremacy.
John 4:22 affirms salvation’s origin, not its limitation. Jesus immediately expands the covenant beyond ethnicity, declaring that true worshipers will worship “in spirit and truth”, not tied to land, temple, or nation. The Gospel abolishes tribal exclusivity, not sanctifies it.

3. Paul’s olive tree destroys nationalist theology — it does not support it.
Romans 11 teaches humility, not triumphalism. Gentiles are grafted in by faith, and Jews are warned they can be broken off by unbelief. The covenant is faith-based, not land-based. Paul explicitly states that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile — a direct rejection of ethnic hierarchy.

4. Peter never preached eternal political land claims.
Peter preached repentance, resurrection, and the Kingdom of God, not territorial entitlement. The New Testament redefines inheritance as the whole world through Christ, not one strip of land through bloodline.

5. The early Church was not “unapologetically Zionist.”
The early Church was often persecuted by both Rome and the Jerusalem authorities. Early Christians did not fight for land, borders, or political dominance. They preached a crucified Messiah whose Kingdom was not of this world.

Jesus rejected violent nationalism outright.
He rebuked Peter for using the sword.
He refused to lead a revolt.
He said the meek—not the powerful—inherit the earth.
He redefined “Israel” around obedience to God, not ancestry.

To conflate Jesus with modern political Zionism is to collapse theology into ideology and turn Christ into a mascot for nation-state power — something He consistently opposed.

Standing with God’s covenant means standing for justice, mercy, humility, and the protection of the innocent, not baptizing modern politics with ancient scripture.

Not politics. Bible — read carefully, not selectively.