Christian principles in relation to government

Just ran across this article, This Is Not of God’: When Anti-Trump Evangelicals Confront Their Brethren , about some evangelicals who call themselves Red Letter Christians who are protesting Trump's presidency as contrary to the spirit of Christ. One of their leaders is a Shane Claiborne who keeps wanting to confront the pro-Trump evangelicals at Liberty University in Virginia but keeps getting rebuffed.Red Letter Christians refers to the fact that some Bibles put Jesus' directly quoted words in red, so this group consider themselves to be representing Jesus against other Christians they regard as not living as Christians. They emphasize work among the poor, missions and so on. Claiborne calls the pro-Trump evangelicals "Toxic Christians" who, in the words of the author of the article, endorse "Mr. Trump’s program of deporting immigrants, fanning racial tension and passing a tax deal benefiting the rich."This is likely to be a very incendiary subject unfortunately so I'm hesitating about posting it at all. I'll probably be the only one on the pro-Trump side, and GDR along with everybody else will side with the Red Letter people as being the true Christians.But I'll present a brief defense of my view here. As usual I see the problem as a confusion between what Jesus calls us as individuals to do, which the Red Letter people represent in a general way, while the pro-Trump people operate on the level of government and law in this fallen world, supporting programs that we think best serve a nation in this fallen context. Jesus gave guidelines for individuals, spoke of us as citizens of another country, made a distinction between what is owed to Caesar or the governments of this world, and what is owed to God. He did not in any way condemn Christians who serve in a governmental capacity, such as the Roman Centurions who believed and converted in His time. They weren't asked to give up their jobs and they weren't asked to turn the other cheek or go the extra mile in their capacity as servants of Caesar, they were there to keep order and there is no hint that their work was considered to be in any way contradictory with their faith in Christ.Nations must operate by law, but Jesus addresses individuals. His influence nevertheless has influenced law in a merciful direction over time, but governments can't turn the other check, only individuals can, and if governments did it they would be betraying their main purpose which is the protection and organization of the people. Jesus didn't come to abolish the Law of God, He came to fulfill it, and nations must operate by Law.To address this specific topic, I have a problem with how it's all characterized in the first place, as "Trump’s program of deporting immigrants, fanning racial tension and passing a tax deal benefiting the rich."First note the usual Liberal spin on the term "immigrants." Trump's administration is not "deporting IMMIGRANTS, but ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. Leaving out that term "illegal" is a big fat red flag. As he said recently, a nation can't be a nation without borders, but the left wants to destroy borders and destroy nations as a result, particularly the United States. Trump wants legal orderly immigration, and that's his job as the servant of the people of the nation. The anarchy promoted by the opposition can't be defended as anything Jesus would support.Also I've heard that some of the more unfair laws concerning deportation were not Trump's doing but actually done by the Democrats, laws that separate parents from children for instance, and Trump recently asked that those laws be rescinded.All the "fanning of racial tension" I've seen originates on the Left and does not come from Trump.And taxes benefitting the rich are for the purpose of increasing the prosperity of the nation. We can argue about whether or not it's the best policy but that's it's purpose, not to benefit the rich at the expense of the poor as the Left always spins it, but to benefit the whole country which also benefits the poor. It's the policies of free enterprise that made America the richest nation on earth. We won't stay rich if all we do is give it away. You have to make money in order to have money to use for the sake of the poor.So that's a sketch of this hot topic. I hope it doesn't give me a heart attack.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Let's not move too rapidly from the general to the specific. For one thing I don't keep up with economics either in general OR specific, but I know there is plenty of conservative economic theory that supports Trump's thinking. Whether it is being applied rightly or not, or whether it seems to be working in a specific situation or not, aren't really topics to discuss on this thread, the Trump Presidency thread is more for that discussion I would think. For this thread I'd just like to keep it on the table that there is a conservative point of view that supports Trump's aims economically and otherwise and that's what we all voted for. It contrasts with the complaint made by the "Red Letter" people who are really objecting to his conservative policies which are shared by the other half of the country from the one they represent. In other words it's not right to protest Trump himself on giving the rich a tax break, or illegal immigration either; it's overall conservative policy.It ought to be clear enough as a general statement that taxing the rich so high they take their businesses to other countries doesn't benefit the nation, and it ought to be common sense that having policies that are top-heavy on the side of supporting welfare programs without an increase in sources of wealth doesn't benefit the nation either.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I don't want to defend conservatives as individuals or specimens of humanity, certainly not on the basis of "righteousness," and I hope to avoid like the plague anything having to do with Trump as a person because it's his policies that conservatives voted for, not his personality. (Just as an aside, Ann Coulter who wrote a book lauding Trump back in the beginning, recently said she knew when she wrote it that he was a "shallow, lazy ignoramus" but that she'd waited thirty years for someone to come along and say the things he said, and I think that sums up the conservative position on this. Policy, not personality.And I do generally accept that conservative policies are superior to liberal policies for governing a nation, because I do believe that they allow for the creation of wealth which is what created America's great wealth, and in any case conservatives in general take this position and that's why Trump got elected. The feeling was that Obama had sold the nation down the river as it were, that if we kept on that path we'd end up on the level of the Third World, and in this light Trump's campaign proposals were the desperately needed antidote. I'm happy if anyone sees that globalism is a problem and WANTS to protect us from it. I'd like to keep the conversation on that level. As you say scripture seems to suggest it is inevitable, but I don't want to get fatalistic about it, we should fight it with everything we've got and hope it won't happen for a few million years (my only context for approving of the idea of millions of years). Oh there are lots of things coming down that I could list but I don't want to take the thread in that direction. I hope we can get into the basics of how far Christian principles apply to government at all (and I changed the title of the thread to say that, by the way) as the Red Letter group clearly think they should. We used to be Christian, we are getting far from it.I bit off a lot to chew in these two topic proposals and I'm going to have to move carefully and slowly if I'm to survive it.

Thanks GDR. Well, Ben Carson had character but he didn't know anything. And there was Trump saying what conservatives had wanted to hear from a politician for decades. I do think he doesn't deserve what the Left is throwing at him in any case.However, the Red Letter people are wrong, they're really just liberals.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes, Phat, America's poor have always been way better off than the poor elsewhere because the nation has been so prosperous. Silly to think otherwise.

Yes, thanks, and I thought that was clear enough even for NN but I guess not. I've already argued it. Why doesn't he get it?

I was talking about the historical situation Phat, I don't want to get into current specifics on this thread, I really don't want to argue politics here. I'd like to keep it general. Although I've already lost my original idea of what I wanted to do here so I should just stop and rethink it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

As I believe I said, government is to follow LAW, but Jesus spoke to individuals about personal behavior. The Red Letter people are not talking about Law they are talking about Gospel and Gospel does not apply to government though Biblical Law does. I'm sorry I'm not up to more right now but I hope I can come back and do your post more justice.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The great majority of Christians think the Red Letter people are wrong. Jubilee and leaving part of your field for the poor is to individuals but it's a law directed to the entire community of the people of God. Jesus is always only talking to His individual followers, and how could He be addressing people in this fallen world anyway who don't follow His teachings?Here's an example from the PBS series "The Crown," where the young Queen Elizabeth wants to do the Christian thing toward her Nazi sympathizing Uncle, the King who had abdicated his throne to marry a divorcee but also publicly aligned himself with Hitler. She has an audience with Billy Graham and asks him about the necessity of forgiving our enemies without explaining the situation she had in mind. Graham gave her the advice I think he would give to her as an individual thinking about a personal enemy, that forgiveness is necessary, but I have to suspect if he knew the circumstance he wouldn't give that advice.Is it necessary in your mind that acting as head of state she should forgive a traitor to her country? Can she forgive an enemy of the state who isn't her personal enemy?I don't think so, do you?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I thought we were debating the applicability of Jesus' teachings to government in contrast to the Old Testament laws. I think the example of forgiving the traitor illustrates my general point, that the Red Letter people are wrong. Sure, you can apply the principles of Jubilee and leaving something for the poor from the Old Testament, but that is not what the Red Letter people are talking about, which should have been clear from the OP.Perhaps I misunderstood you.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

If Korea should bomb San Francisco, should Trump turn the other cheek on behalf of the nation?

Nobody is advocating mistreating them in any way at all, but if they are here illegally, by disobeying our laws, they need to be dealt with as lawbreakers. Christ says nothing about punishing anyone because He is not addressing government and Law, but governments have the job of punishing lawbreakers.There is really something wrong with YOUR logic.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I told you what our laws ought to be. Please follow the argument.

I believe Trump made it clear that he doesn't approve of separating families at the border, and that this is done under Obama's law, not his. I think he should have anticipated that and corrected it a while back myself.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Look, this thread is about the theology of the Red Letter group which I'm arguing is clearly wrong and I haven't seen a reasonable argument to the contrary. Jesus did not address government or legal questions, He addressed His own disciples, period. His teachings were quite enough down the centuries to change the face of civilization for the better through individual action. If you want Biblical principles for running a government they are abundant in the Old Testament, and thoroughly merciful and humane laws they are too. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.