Franklin Graham's response to the CT Editorial (click here, you must be logged on to Facebook to read it). BTW, my response to Graham can also be accessed by scrolling down enough on the same page.
My response:
I have yet to see you biblically address the issues raised by the CT editorial.
Citing Trump's accomplishments avoids those issues. And citing his economic accomplishments without first acknowledging that the economy under Trump continues a trend that started under Obama is disingenuous. Citing Trump's economic performance without acknowledging that part of that performance is riding on the back of the elimination environmental regulations designed to protect us both now from pollution and later from climate change is morally questionable. And citing Trump's economic performance without acknowledging that wealth disparity between the economic classes glosses over the fact that the economy is not doing well for everyone.
Your logic says this: if Trump has done enough good, then he is excused from any charges brought against him. Such logic is the defense for privilege based on moral relativity.
Finally, your accusation about CT being used by the left ignores the fact that we have no left of any influence in the US. We have liberals, but no left. Also it shows that your basic response to CT is not to deal with the issues they raise in detail, but to try to shame them. In that, you speak not as one who wants fellow Christians to think both biblically and critically through issues, but as an authoritarian who wants Christians to do what you say because you said it.
The next response to the CT editorial is written by pastor and author Jentezen Franklin (click here for his article). In my response, I have the name of the writer of the article wrong. The response below is also posted on the FaceBook page of the Christian Post.
My Response
One thing that the CT editorial did was to introduce a dialog that did not have the markings of a blog battle.
As for the article posted here. Let's understand some of the praises of Trump in context.
First, the economy and unemployment rates were already improving under Obama. And what Trump did was to plagurize that improvement in addition to putting his own stamp to it. He eliminated many regulations that protected the environment and workers for federal contractors. As a result pollution increased as well as CO2 emissions. into the air and the pollutants also increased into our waterways so that companies increase their profits. Also, some workers became more vulnerable.
Second, Trump's tax bill along with his increased spending on the defense budget helped the deficit spike during Trump's first two years of his presidency and the increase in the deficit will continue in his third. But there is something even worse than the immediate increase in pollution, greenhouse gasses, and the deficit, it is the basic tenet that is being reinforced by the Trump. That tenet comes from Ayn Rand. And that belief is that the pursuit of self-interest is one's only moral obligation. What follows that belief is the practice and promotion of the maximizing of personal profits. That practice only devours all And thus not only are there negative physical and fiscal effects to Trump policies, the practice and promotion of the maximizing of personal profits devours all ethics, morals, and principles. The breaking of laws is justified if there is a profit in it. BTW, we should also note that wealth disparity continues to increase under Trump and many of the new jobs are low paying jobs. So what has been his performance on the economy from an overall view?
If we stop right there, we see Christians promoting a selfishness in both society and the economy. And when has such a promotion been free of both social injustice and condemnation from the Scriptures?
And while Jack Graham praised the prison reform effort, we should note that that effort was strongly bipartisan. Then we should look at how Trump is increasing our national security. Part of increasing our national security essentially sabotages it. We have now helped initiate a new nuclear arms race and are taking the lead in the militarization of space. That makes us more secure?
And putting immigrant kids in cages with inadequate health supplies in order to increase our security is moral suicide. That especially true when one considers that private contractors are making big profits in helping the government contain illegal immigrants.
And then there are the offenses that started the impeach process. Realize that Trump has been displaying dangerous levels of signs of narcissism and he his becoming more authoritarian as his Presidency continues. The seeking to have a political rival investigated when he had constitutional right to do so is a very dangerous sign. And while some of his supporters claim that the treaty with the Ukraine authorized him to do that, it didn't. The treat with the Ukraine authorized the Attorney General of the US along with his counterparts in the Ukraine make requests for investigations. So neither president was authorized by that treaty to either call for an investigation or receive a request for an investigation. Seeking to investigate and prosecute political rivals is what we see autocrats like Putin do. And speaking of Putin, he defends Trump in this issue.
So now we are down to the pro-life issue. But unless we reduce pro-life to the abortion issue, Trump's record is very spotty. For it has already been shown by this comment that Trump is anything but pro-life.
Other things merit mentioning, but it should be apparent by now that Christian support for Trump's presidency causes more harm than good to the reputation of the Gospel. And that support for Trump emerges more from a selfishness, either individual or corporate, than it does from any honorable interest. And when that selfishness includes a religious selfishness, then the Gospel is significantly harmed.
Finally we have the response from R. Scott Clark who is a seminary professor, author, and the owner of the Heidelblog (click here for his response to the editorial).
My response:
The CT editorial spoke for many religiously conservative Christians. And it did so not because the writer believed that America is the Kingdom of God or that the President is our national pastor. And it did so not because the writer denied that we have a 2-fold citizenship or denied that we should have different expectations of members of the Church from members of society.This year is odd in that at this time of year, many of us Christians are talking about impeachment almost as much as we are talking about Christmas. The loyalty being shown to Trump can be attributed to the two most prevailing faults in America's conservative Church: misplaced loyalties and a penchant for authoritarianism.
It was done because both there is still a role of demanding justice from our government and because the reputation of the Gospel is a stake here.
Just because there are two different standards for members of the Church and members of society, doesn't mean that there are no standards of justice for society and the state. That was an important point made by Martin Luther King Jr. when he referred to Augustine when he said that unjust law is not a law. We should note that our nation was founded on white supremacy among other things. White supremacy order our society, determined land acquisition through ethnic cleansing, enabled the race-based enslavement of people, enabled Jim Crow, was part of The Constitution, and still exists in the growing wealth disparity between the races. Christians who supported white supremacy hurt the reputation of the Gospel. Why? That is because when we call ourselves Christians, everything we do or refrain from doing, say or refrain from saying is associated with the Gospel. That is just as true for when we act and speak as individuals as when we witness society and the state acting and speaking for us. The various levels of guilt of so many Germany citizens during the Nazi regime bears witness to that. And since we so often fail to adequately represent Christ in all areas of life without living in a dictatorship, the knowledge that everything we do and say as well as what we refrain from doing and saying is associated with the Gospel should strike fear in every Christian's heart. It does in mine.
We should also note some Church history here. For preceding the French, Russian, and Spanish Revolutions, the respective predominant branch of the Church in those 3 cases supported those with wealth and power prior to those revolutions. Lenin spoke observationally when he repeated Marx's claim that religion 'is opium for the people.' As a result, when those revolutions took place, the Church was credibly portrayed as the enemies of the people. Here we should note that Post Modernism is an expanded macrocosm of those events--Post Modernism also rejects the metanarrative of Modernism, not just Pre Modernism.
We should note that though both of our major political parties are bought and paid for by financial elites and corporations. And the Republican Party, more than the Democratic Party, caters to the interests and even cravings of those elites and corporations and do so to great harm to our nation and, thus, eventually to the reputation of the Gospel. So when the vast majority religiously conservative Christians back Trump and the Republican party, we are merely witnessing Church history tragically repeating itself.
Clark's ironic weakness here is the pedestal on which he places our nation and is founders. Ironic because he writes from a 2KT viewpoint regarding the different levels of righteousness that exists in society and the Church. That pedestal, however, has a caveat. That condition is that one sees the nation as political conservatives, some of whom have refused to apologize for America's actions, see it. And it is that wedding of political and religious conservatism that, again ironically, allows Clark contribute to tragic repeating of Church history.
We should note that when loyalt to other groups or ideologies are stronger than to God or universal morals, then loyalty becomes the leading cause of blindness. We become blind to the faults of those in our groups and/or to ideologies. That is as true for liberals and leftists as it is for conservatives.
In addition, we have a penchant for embracing authoritarianism. Here we should note that when referring to authoritarianism, I am referring to how it is defined by post WW II scholars. Their work on authoritarianism grew out of a concern for why Germans remained so loyal to Hitler even after their painful demise was so imminent. And here we should be reminded of what Trump once said about his base. He said that they would remain loyal even if he were to shoot someone in the middle of Manhattan. Thus, though it might seem counterintuitive for many of us religiously conservative Christians. we need to be able to identify and avoid authoritarianism.
No comments:
Post a Comment