I’m intending to focus in on the specific question about how US Evangelicals should respond to the political situation concerning Donald Trump and the Republican/Democrat parties shortly.[1] However, first of all, it is worth teasing out the theology behind my thinking a little further.
This means that we need to think about the nature of the world that we live in and the kind of instructions God’s Word gives for living in it. In that respect, our starting point is “what kind of world did God’s people live in when Scripture was written? That’s why the questions we’ve been asking so far have been important.
What we have seen, is that this Fallen World is under Satan’s rule. The Empires of this World belong to his kingdom, he is the “anti-king-of-kings” if you like. This means that they are idolatrous in their worship. Biblical literature portrays them as beasts, we might say that they are beastly. And yet, at the same time, we are told that rulers are “God’s servant for good”[2] and that they “are sent by him [God] to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.”[3]
This reflects two things expressed in Reformed Theology and Apologetics as “The Antithesis” and “Common Grace.” On the one hand, we recognise a stark distinction between people outside of Christ and those in Christ. Those outside of Christ belong to Satan’s kingdom, those in Christ to God’s. On the other hand, we see God’s common grace along with General Revelation at work, they are still able to know something about him and his ways, they still benefit from the overflow of his goodness.
This also means, that we can legitimately talk about distinctions between degrees of evil and Satanic influence both in terms of institutions and individuals. I guess we might see this as a mirror of sanctification in the believer. God’s people and therefore God’s kingdom grow and mature in holiness, Satan’s kingdom and unbelievers grow and mature into ungodliness. In fact, we might expect the empires of this world to descend deeper and deeper into depravity. That’s certainly what we see of ancient empires. I think we can see that in modern Western civilisation and I wonder too if we shouldn’t be surprised to see that at a lower level in the life-cycle of political parties.
It’s important to emphasise here that this is not about a “things were better in the olden days” view. Rather, it is simply a recognition of spiritual gravity, that the trajectory tends to be downwards for institutions but this also means that we can expect a kind of waxing and waning. Nor is it intended as pessimistic. Rather, we sing with the hymn-writer:
“So be it Lord, your throne shall never, like earths proud empires pass away.” (The Day Thou gavest”)
Now having said all of that, there is another piece of the jigsaw that we need to put in place. It’s all to do with where we are meant to fit in with the kingdom and empires of the World. Some Christians believe that our aim should be in effect recover and improve on Christendom. This may be seen as a form of Christian Nationalism. In other words, our expectation should be for God’s Kingdom to take earthly form to rival the Empires of this World. This probably reflects a post-millennial eschatologically and is likely to link to theonomism. That is on one end of a spectrum of thought and even many of those who hold such a view would it as a long term goal. At the other end of the spectrum are those who would see our job as to withdraw as much as possible from the influences of this world by getting on quietly with the work of the gospel. There are a range of views in between that to differing degrees see the need for Christians to live out being part of God’s kingdom or alternative society and the need and opportunities to have influence on the world and specifically the communities and nations where God places us.
How does the Bible encourage us to think? Well, there is a point in biblical history where you see the first approach overtly at work. God’s people come together as a physical, earthly kingdom as the people of Israel living in the promised land, obeying God’s law and enjoying the protection of his anointed king. However, throughout much of Scripture, the image changes. God’s people find themselves scattered as exiles into the nations and empires of this World.
When the New Testament writers address God’s people, it is the “exile” motif that they primarily draw upon.[4] So when Peter writes instructing Christians on how to live in relation to rulers and authorities (whether emperors, governors or their own masters at a localised level), he writes to
“God’s elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces o of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia”
The Jewish Christians among them are of course literal, physical exiles. However, there is a deeper spiritual sense in view. So in the immediate context of chapter 2’s instruction on submission, Peter says:
11 Dear friends, I urge you, as foreigners and exiles, to abstain from sinful desires, which wage war against your soul. 12 Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.
Now, the biblical motif of exile means that we have a model to work with from the whole of Scripture. What were the exiles from Israel and Judah meant to do? Well, first there is a sense in which they longed for home and prophetic messages from before and during exile were meant to keep up that hope of return. It is important for us to think in that sense too. It’s not that “this world is not my home, I’m just a passing through” in the physical sense of we are biding our time until we all get to heaven. Rather, we expect the renewing of Creation here and Christ’s return and physical reign here. It’s that “this World” in terms of its values, priorities and its ruler is alien to us.
Secondly, the exiles were told
“7 But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.”
So a quiet separation off and disengagement isn’t intended. We are meant to engage with the society in which God has places us, and not just evangelistically. We are to seek the good of the people and place where we are. For some people, like Daniel and Esther, or Jospeh before them, this meant God putting them into places of influence so that they could direct the affairs of the Empire and encourage the rulers to listen to God. This was both for the good of the people among whom God’s people lived and for the well-being of God’s people.
In a modern day democracy, we all have a degree of that type of influence. We can vote, write letters to our representatives, sign petitions etc. Some of us can get involved in helping to form public opinion by writing or getting involved more formally in think tanks and party politics. A few Christians will have the gifts, talents and opportunities to pursue things further, standing for election and getting into government.
However, for the majority of us, those kinds of opportunities will not come our way. So, what do we do? Well I suggest that we do exactly what Paul and Peter say. We get on living godly lives, submitting to those in authority except where they seek to compel us to go against what God says.
[1] I’ve also written an article about why as a British Evangelical I sometimes talk about US politics. but for those who might say TLDR the specific reason here is that what might be said about the specific US context can help us think about our own contexts. We also need to look at how we handle God’s Word and theology.
[2] Romans 13:4.
[3] 1 Peter 2:14.
[4] I haven’t read Preston Sprinkle’s book but I suspect that this is the direction he takes things.
Faithroots 