Note: What follows is a lengthy conversation on impassibility/classical theism and a host of other related subjects which I touch only in a small scale. These posts come from my facebook page where I engage hundreds of people daily on a host of topics. If you are looking for patristic debates on patripassionism, you are not going to find it here, but you will find some introductory words on what I view as important to frame our political thinking. Additionally, I added some additional comments made by some fine theologians and thinkers that corroborate my original proposal.
I am not one to defend the president’s theological quandaries. In fact, if our 45th president has any theological background, it stems from the mainline PCUSA church which, with minor exceptions, has been smelling like putrid fish for at least 50 years.
So, when the president talks about “Two Corinthians,” which incidentally is a thing in a certain European island , or when he can’t quote a New Testament verse when asked, or a host of things that make Trumpianism so abrasive and simultaneously comical, I am not looking to gain theological insights. I have 16 years of formal theological training and keep a fairly good company of friends to consult in times of inquisition. But let’s get one thing clear, leftism (contrary to classic liberalism) is a scourge. J. Gresham Machen was making this case long ago and I think that we can all agree that the Democratic platform no longer loves Kennedy and Carter. Your grandmomma’s Democratic party is now owned by the ANTIFA kid sitting next to you in your local community college criticizing grammar for being an expression of white privilege. Well, ain’t that sweet!
Leftism without hesitation wishes to cancel Christ from culture; there is still within the system a modicum of sanity that realizes that the biblical Christ will ruin their agenda. Make no mistake: political battles are deeply theological battles and leftism as an ideology has chosen the way of death for unborn humans, secularism for its curriculum, and they are constantly berating the value of people like me in their kingdom. Oh, please don’t get me wrong, leftists are deeply shaped by religious ideals, but not the “Jesus is Lord” kind, the one that dethrones Jesus and puts Caesar on the throne.
All of this leads me to Trump’s controversial and viral statement that a Biden presidency would hurt the Bible and hurt God. The liberal media had a stroke followed by several minor convulsive episodes. “But Biden is a Catholic!” Yes, I am sure he is, but any Catholic priest worth his Vatican wouldn’t allow Biden to take communion and some clearly have not. The implication is that how dare Trump claim a Biden presidency would hurt the Bible and God since Biden was raised in that religion thing and claims to have his faith as “the bedrock foundation of his life.”
Without delving too much on the virtues and vices of another Trump term, we should note that if Trump’s assumptions about a general reality where Christendom does play a free role is correct, and if Biden’s four years is a variation of Nancy Pelosi meets AOC, then, our 45th is not too far from the truth. Yes, a Biden presidency would hurt the Bible; no, not physically or spiritually or in whatever dimension Biden lives, but in the clear sense that truths of the Bible would be clearly mocked on national television from midnight to midnight under a Biden presidency and the Church would be constantly sued for all sorts of ethical positions. On that point, I have no doubt. Of course, Trump would do well to pick up that accurate book and meditate on it day and night, but at least, the man breathes some level of common grace oxygen that keeps him on our side of the fight for most issues.
But what about the claim that a Biden presidency would hurt God? Again, there is about a 0.0000001% chance that Trump has ever touched Bavinck or Hodge, but take the man at his words directly, and again, he is not too far from the truth. In fact, there is a plethora of faithful theologians who would affirm his statement at a theological and sociological level. If your rationale is that the biblical language is purely anthropomorphic and reveals only the fact that language condescends in order to speak of God, well, you have yourself a safe interpretation. But there are a host of solid theological voices who would affirm that there are things that happen in this world that “grieve” God (Eph. 4:30; I Thes. 5:19) and there are things that make God “regret and relent” (Gen. 6). And, by the way, we can safely stay about 3,500 miles away from abhorrent views of theology (Open Theism, as an example) and still uphold these clearly taught truths. Yes, God can hurt and he can suffer and the clearest example of this is that our Trinitarian theology means that when Jesus suffered, God suffered. They are not two separate Jesus-es. His humanity is not divorced from his divinity. We call this the hypostatic union. God the Son, Jesus, suffered through the humanity that he assumed, but he never ceased to be God himself.
There is a divine hurt in light of evil human practices, and I think the case is clear. And of course, to add to the hilarity of the situation, it is puzzling that the same leftists accusing the current president of violating some noble theological principle are also the same people who have been working overtime to repeat the old Nietzsche song “God is Dead!” Well, you can’t support death, seek to oppose every biblical norm and then act like a fundamentalist in your defense of the immutability of God.
Look, there is plenty to criticize about Trump, but when it comes to the general idea that this country would do better under Biden, I demur. This country only has a chance if the Church is allowed to do her work of proclamation and lives her piety in the public square. I believe a Biden presidency would hurt the country and grieve the Spirit.
Additional comments:
Rich Lusk:
Thanks for writing this Uri – these are not easy topics to address.
As I see it, a Christian can justify a vote for Trump as an act of self-defense, if nothing else. We can have a pretty good idea of what of what a Biden presidency would be like, and there’s no doubt he would be a puppet of the radical progressives who now control the Democrat party. That would be considerably worse for the country, the culture, and the church, than anything we would get from a Republican Presidency. Of course, the Republicans in general are spineless cowards who do not follow through on their promises (eg, defunding Planned Parenthood), but even so they are benign compared to the left which most certainly wants to cancel Christianity. And Trump has actually been more of a fighter for good causes than Republicans in general. The Democrats have become radically anti-Christian. And so, again, in general I would say Christians voting for a Republican are (at the very least) acting in self-defense, whereas as a Christian voting for a Democrat is engaging in self-harm.
Trump is a hugely problematic person – but Biden is too, which would be obvious if his sexism and racism were put under the same microscope as Trump’s character issues. But of course the media covers for Biden while lying and exaggerating about Trump. Trump’s tweets are often embarrassing. But policy wise, which counts most, Trump has been quite reasonable, even through a very difficult stretch. A vote for Trump is not an endorsement of the man or his theology; it’s just the prudent recognition that he is less problematic than the alternative. I wish we had better candidates, but even so, I do not think there is anything like moral equivalence between the Democrats and Republicans at this point. The issues of abortion, religious liberty, law and order in our cities, etc. make that clear.
Plus, with Trump, we get Pence, and he seems to be a good man — certainly a better man than Trump (or Biden or whoever Biden picks as his running mate). Pence appears to be a man of solid character and orthodox faith. Having him close to the levers of power and waiting in the wings is a comfort.
and another from Lusk:
…we need to teach our youth so they understand what’s happening. If Trump did what Clinton did in office, I’d be just as quick to insist on his resignation/removal. But while both Clinton and Trump are notorious sexual sinners, their sins are not identical. They are being held to the same standard but are not guilty of identical sins. And, for the record, I think we should be critical of Trump’s past, his so-called “locker room talk,” etc. I have no idea how much he has changed over the course of the years but I see no evidence he has done something *in office* comparable to Clinton. Of course, Biden also has issues in this area….though the media does not seem interested in investigating.
I’m sure there are many evangelicals who are too “all in” on Trump. I would say we should support Trump when he does something good, and criticize him when he does something dumb. But the vast majority of evangelicals and Reformed folks I know who will vote for Trump are, if anything, silent supporters of Trump rather than boisterous cheerleaders. Most of them would not even tell an anonymous pollster they plan to vote for Trump, much less put up a sign, wear a hat, etc. The segment of the evangelical church that has gotten too enthusiastic about Trump would probably be that way (to varying degrees) with any Republican candidate (though Trump may generate a little more boisterous enthusiasm because of his style). The issue in this case is an over investment in national identity which stems from an under developed ecclesiology. This has been a persistent feature of American politics for a long time. I address the problem here:
http://www.trinity-pres.net/essays/American%20History-1.doc
Steve Wilkins:
Excellent, thank you Uri. We are now in the position of voting for that candidate who will allow the church the most freedom to pursue its calling. Which candidate (on any and every level) will be most inclined to allow the Church to pursue the great commission and proclaim the truth of God? Which candidate is most inclined to oppose evil and tyranny? That one should receive our vote. Voting is not an endorsement of a candidate’s moral character, it’s an effort to get leaders who are most likely to protect the Church against ungodly attacks and protect the citizens from overt tyranny.
Andrew Sandlin:
Uri, your account of God’s grief and other emotions is supremely biblical. Philosophical theism has offered us a god more resembling Gnosticism’s impersonal deity.
Drew Maney:
Also remember some of the people in his Cabinet. Betsy DeVos is doing great things in the de-centralization of education. And, Ben Carson has done some wonderful things to formally recognize that the humanity of the unborn.
Uri Brito, you want to save Christ in culture. A question is, if means you prefer will achieve that objective. Where you decry “the way of death for unborn humans,” others might say you are advocating death for born humans who refuse to carry a pregnancy.
You fulminate against “leftists” who will enthrone Caesar. Jesus is remembered to have said to give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God. I guess you would like God to take over what belongs to Caesar; when that has been tried in many ways, including in our land, many people have felt it did not work out real well.
You allege that, under a Biden presidency, “truths of the Bible would be clearly mocked…..” I say, So? Jesus allowed himself to be mocked. Are not Jesus’ followers to pick up his cross?
You assert that the “Church would be sued….” Now, the right-wing church clearly has all sorts of resources with which to contest lawsuits. I suggest, we have social issues arising in the secular arena that are very hard to work out (for people with hearts). Adjudicating those issues is a formal way to start trying to work them out.
Of Trump, you say “the man…. [is] on [y]our side….” I wonder, at what cost to your side is he on your side?
As you continue: Oh, gosh, I guess nobody is anyone who is unfamiliar with “Bavinck or Hodge.” I do not know these figures and, as yet, you have not persuaded me that I am missing anything. You go on to say that “Trump.. is not too far from the truth.” That would be a “truth” that says we must not allow to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.
When you proceed to write “the same leftists… are also the same people who… repeat the old Nietzsche song ‘God is Dead!’”, I find this to be more overheated rhetoric. Yes, there are people who claim a rational basis for believing there is no God. If one can refrain from freaking out and, instead, listen respectfully, one may find they have much with which to support their views. I consider one can allow them that, and still believe.
Where you maintain that “leftists…. support death,” with “death” presumably being a euphemism for abortion here, opponents would claim to support the life of women and of families who, for whatever reason, are unready and unprepared to have a child. They would also want to protect women from having to birth a fetus that is unable to survive.
I ask, will it injure God to have Joe Biden as President? Will it detract from the god-ness of God? A “yes” answer to these questions, in my understanding, puts a lid on a can of social worms with the hope that they will all just wither and die in there; but what I have metaphorically termed as “social worms” here are actual people with real hurts and grievances and desires for full lives of dignity. An effort to try to repress all of their experience reflects, in my view, a serious lack of love and a refusal to be a neighbor to all of these other people. A “no” answer to the questions affirms, in my understanding, that God is not mocked. If anyone believes that complete human personhood begins at conception, instead of understanding that an embryo is at first just a fertilized egg that develops and grows into readiness to begin a life of personhood, I think the full-personhood-at-conception believer can be more persuasive, and win more hearts and more completed pregnancies, by allowing to opponents their due.
Now, issues of gender identity may be quite perplexing; I do think that when people try to have a commitment to each other, that says something. The matter of the Colorado wedding cake could be an assault on principles, or an assault on people’s identities. To enforce acceptance of who people are by law can result in an empty façade. However, people might reexamine their principles, and ask if a verse in Romans preempts the Love Commandment. We are finding that gender identity issues have been repressed and squelched over time. A God of Love might counsel us to navigate these issues with gentleness and kindness, although such qualities may come very hard for some of us at some times.