The recent municipal elections in the Jerusalem suburb of Beit Shemesh have been in the news in Israel. But Joshua Berman points to other important news coming from the town, which is also the site of the largest ongoing archaeological excavation in the country. Among the findings are the remains of a 7th-century-BCE plant for the mass production of olive oil, unprecedented in size, littered with handles from large jugs bearing the inscription la-melekh, “for the king.” These words indicate that the oil was intended as tribute for the kings of Assyria, who at the time exercised their suzerainty over the kingdom of Judea. To Berman, the discovery sheds light on both biblical politics and biblical theology:

The covenant that God establishes with Israel at Sinai is patterned after the ancient Near Eastern vassal treaty. The idea was simple: when a weaker king fell into distress—such as siege or famine—he would call out to a greater king to provide salvation. When the greater king did so, both kings understood that they would enter an alliance of unequals—sovereign and vassal. The vassal would pledge loyalty and tribute to the sovereign, and in turn the sovereign would vouchsafe the vassal’s security. The idea is carried over into the Torah. . . . Israel cries out from Egypt. God delivers the Israelites and establishes a treaty with them: if Israel is loyal to God, and offers tribute—observance of the commandments—God will vouchsafe its security and prosperity. . . .

The foremost component of the ancient Near Eastern vassal treaty was that the vassal had to pledge loyalty to the sovereign king alone. He could not simultaneously strike another pact with a different power. Here, too, we see how the prophets of Israel converted a political idea into a theological one. Prophets like Isaiah and Ezekiel insisted that when Israel and Judah established treaties with foreign powers, they were, in fact, betraying God. They preached that Israel had to know that its security and prosperity depended upon one source alone—faithful commitment as a vassal to the sovereign, the King of Kings.

The new finds at Tel Beit Shemesh vividly show us why these prophets were so dead-set against the establishment of vassalage with foreign powers. Just imagine all those residents of Beit Shemesh in the 7th century BCE, filling up those oil jugs with the word melekh (king) on them. Every time they saw the word melekh they would be reminded that their security and prosperity were safeguarded by the Assyrian king. When your day-to-day reality is that you are dependent on the king of Assyria, what hope is there that you will really feel dependent on God?

Two extraordinary events demonstrate something important about Israel’s most fervent adversaries. One was a speech given at something called The People’s Forum (funded generously by Goldman Sachs), which stated, “When the state of Israel is finally destroyed and erased from history, that will be the single most important blow we can give to destroying capitalism and imperialism.”

The suggestion that this tiny state is the linchpin of a global, centuries-old phenomenon like capitalism goes well beyond anything resembling rational criticism. Even if Israel were guilty of genocide, apartheid, and oppression—which of course it is not—it would not follow that its destruction would help end capitalism or imperialism.

The other was an anti-Israel protest that took place in front of New York City’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, deemed “complicit” in Israel’s evils. At organizers’ urging, participants shouted their slogans at kids in the cancer ward, who were watching from the windows. Given Hamas’s indifference toward the lives of Gazan children, such callousness toward non-Palestinian children from Hamas’s Western allies shouldn’t be surprising. The protest—like the abovementioned speech—deliberately conveyed the message that Israel is the ultimate evil and its destruction the ultimate good, cancer patients be damned.

The fact that Israel’s adversaries are almost comically perverse does not mean that they can be dismissed. If its allies fail to understand the obsessive and irrational hatred that it faces, they cannot effectively help it defend itself.