 |
| America's Dream of a Fair and Equitable Democracy is unwanted by Maga-Evangelicals wishing to destroy it's civil government to be replaced by a religious empire of their own making |
A History of Christian Governance <-- the capstone to all below (esp read part III)
Part 2 - Jesus' Empire of Love v Maga's Empire of Hate <--Examining Maga Beliefs, Part 2
Part 1 - Maga-Evangelicalism's Unloving Doctrines of God and People <--Examining Maga Beliefs, Part 1
The Evolution of God: From Polytheism to Monotheism <-- Divine Revelation in Process
 |
| Maga-Evangelical Christianity wants to replace American Decmocracy with it's own Christian Empire of Hate and Oppression |
- First, is this a fair assessment as historic evangelicalism has always had trouble with explaining its doctrine of theodicy. (sic, how good and evil can exist in the same divine space)
- And secondly, as demonstrated by maga over the past twenty years, it is quick to oppression and violence towards those of difference.
Yes, your framing of the contrast between the God of love in Process Theology and the God of power (even evil) in MAGA-influenced evangelicalism is fair in terms of broad theological and historical trends.
Would you like to explore how these theological differences shape political and social ethics?
You said:
Great starting point. Ezekiel 25–32 contains oracles against various nations—Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt—pronouncing divine judgment for their sins, often through war, conquest, and destruction.
Process Theology Interpretation:
Process Theology, with its focus on a God of love and persuasion rather than coercion, would not take these chapters as literal divine commands for violence. Instead, it would see them as ancient Israel’s theological reflection on suffering and justice. In this view:
- Symbolic Justice: These judgments symbolize the consequences of nations acting unjustly towards their own people and to those nations around them, rather than God directly inflicting punishment.
- Human Freedom & Responsibility: The destruction described would be seen as the natural result of oppressive and evil human choices rather than divine wrath.
- God’s Relational Nature: God works within history, seeking to guide nations toward justice and peace, but does not unilaterally impose it.
In short, Process Theology would interpret these passages as reflections of Israel’s struggle with imperial domination and suffering, rather than endorsements of divine violence.
MAGA Evangelical Interpretation:
MAGA-influenced evangelicalism, with its emphasis on divine power, judgment, and nationalism, might read these passages more literally and through a political lens:
- God as a Warrior: These chapters would reinforce the idea that God actively punishes enemies of His chosen people, legitimizing strong nationalistic policies.
- Moral Retribution: The destruction of foreign nations would be seen as a warning against secularism, liberalism, or opposition to what they view as God’s will.
- End-Times Lens: Many MAGA evangelicals, influenced by dispensationalism, might read these judgments as foreshadowing modern geopolitical struggles, seeing America (or Christian nationalism) as the new chosen people.
Thus, while Process Theology would emphasize divine persuasion and moral consequence, MAGA evangelicalism would likely use these texts to justify authoritarian power, retributive justice, and nationalistic fervor.
Would you like to go deeper into any of these interpretations, or apply them to modern events?
 |
| Maga-Evangelicalism wants it's own Empire. Could this be the Roman/Babylon Empire spoken of in the book of Revelation? |
You said:
MAGA Evangelical Interpretation of Ezekiel 25–32
MAGA-influenced evangelicalism, which blends nationalism, dominionism, and apocalyptic thinking, would likely interpret these passages in the following ways:
-
Divine Retribution & Nationalism – These chapters would be read as a justification for God's direct intervention against enemies. Just as God punished Israel’s historical enemies, many in the MAGA movement see divine judgment as coming upon America’s perceived adversaries—whether liberals, secularists, immigrants, or foreign nations that oppose American dominance.
-
America as the New Israel – MAGA evangelicals often equate America with biblical Israel, seeing it as uniquely chosen by God. They might read Ezekiel’s condemnations of foreign nations as a prophetic parallel to America’s struggles against perceived external and internal enemies (e.g., China, Islam, LGBTQ+ movements, or the "deep state").
-
Militarism & End-Times Thinking – Ezekiel’s judgments, often involving destruction by foreign conquerors, fit well with MAGA evangelicalism’s embrace of military strength and apocalyptic rhetoric. They might see modern wars (or even domestic political struggles) as part of a cosmic battle between God’s people (conservative Christians) and the forces of evil (any opposition).
-
Prosperity & Dominion – The destruction of Tyre (Ezekiel 26–28) could be interpreted as God’s judgment against economic arrogance, but MAGA theology might instead read it as a warning against secular globalism. Conversely, Ezekiel’s promises of Israel’s restoration would reinforce their belief that America must be restored to its supposed Christian foundations through political power and cultural dominance.
How This Differs from Traditional Evangelicalism
While historic evangelicalism has always had an eschatological dimension, it has not always been tied so explicitly to American nationalism or the embrace of political power. MAGA evangelicalism, however, sees these biblical judgments as templates for modern political warfare—where cultural and political opponents must be defeated, not converted. This shift away from personal faith toward nationalistic theocracy makes Ezekiel’s violent imagery particularly appealing to Maga's worldview.
Would you like to explore how these interpretations influence practical policies or cultural attitudes?
------
You said:
No. Rather, let's explore the historical and theological development of these contrasting views of God...
ChatGPT said:
1. The Shift Toward a God of Control & Retribution
In some forms of MAGA-influenced evangelicalism, God is portrayed as a powerful ruler who demands absolute obedience, punishes enemies, and blesses those who uphold a specific nationalist or theocratic vision. This idea did not emerge in a vacuum but developed over time through various theological and political influences:
- Puritan Theocracy (1600s-1700s) – Early American Puritans saw themselves as a "city on a hill," believing in a God who blessed their obedience and punished disobedience. This laid the groundwork for a covenantal nationalism where America was seen as a chosen nation.
- Manifest Destiny & Civil Religion (1800s) – The belief that God ordained American expansion fueled a sense of divine mission, often at the expense of indigenous peoples and others. This reinforced the idea that God works through military and political dominance.
- Cold War Evangelicalism (1950s-1980s) – Evangelical leaders aligned with political power, framing America as a bulwark against godlessness (communism, secularism). The idea of a God who fights culture wars became deeply ingrained.
- Post-9/11 & MAGA Nationalism (2000s-Present) – Evangelical nationalism intensified, with some leaders portraying God as backing a militant, authoritarian approach to culture. This God demands dominance over pluralistic society and is often invoked to justify oppression of difference.
2. The Relational & Loving God in Process Theology & Jesus' Teachings
In contrast, Process Theology and Jesus' own teachings emphasize relational power, persuasion, and love rather than coercion and violence. This view sees God as:
- Persuasive, Not Coercive – God influences creation through love and relational engagement rather than raw power (John 1:14, Philippians 2:5-8).
- Committed to Redemption, Not Domination – Jesus' ministry was one of healing, reconciliation, and suffering alongside humanity (Luke 4:18-19, Matthew 11:28-30).
- Honoring Difference – The early church was radically inclusive, bringing Jews, Gentiles, and outsiders into a new spiritual family (Galatians 3:28, Acts 10:34-35).
3. The Theological Conflict: Power vs. Love
At its core, MAGA-influenced evangelicalism skews toward a theology of power and retribution, whereas Process Theology and Jesus' message focus on love, relational healing, and peacemaking. The MAGA view often projects its own political ambitions onto God, seeing divine blessing as tied to national or ideological supremacy, which contradicts:
- Jesus’ rejection of worldly power (John 18:36, Matthew 4:8-10).
- The Beatitudes, which bless peacemakers and the meek (Matthew 5:5,9).
- Paul’s vision of Christ’s power as self-giving love (Philippians 2:6-8).
Conclusion: A Choice Between Two Theological Paths
The current theological divide is not just about culture or politics—it is about the very nature of God. Is God a violent enforcer of power, as some MAGA evangelicals portray, or is God the loving, relational force seen in Jesus' life and Process Theology? This question has profound implications for how faith interacts with society, justice, and the future of religious thought.
Would you like to explore specific biblical passages or historical examples that further highlight this contrast?
------
You said:
Yes, but also in the sense of not forsaking the middle ground of cultural difference.
ChatGPT said:
Good point. MAGA-influenced evangelicalism often interprets Ezekiel 25–32 in a way that forsakes any middle ground regarding cultural difference, seeing divine judgment as a model for how nations (or political movements) should respond to outsiders or those who do not conform.
No Middle Ground: The MAGA Approach to Cultural Difference
-
Binary Thinking (God’s Side vs. the Enemy’s Side) – MAGA evangelicalism tends to see culture through an us-vs-them lens. Just as Ezekiel condemns Israel’s neighbors without much room for reconciliation, MAGA theology often portrays America’s cultural "enemies"—immigrants, LGBTQ+ people, progressives, or even moderate Christians—as inherently opposed to God's will. There is no room for pluralism or peaceful coexistence, only domination or exclusion.
-
Theocracy and Divine Favor – The underlying assumption is that America, like ancient Israel, is uniquely chosen by God. This fuels a belief that those who oppose Christian nationalism are modern-day Moabites, Edomites, or Egyptians—deserving of judgment. Diversity is not seen as enriching but as a threat to purity.
-
Militarized and Apocalyptic Thinking – Ezekiel's visions of conquest and destruction can reinforce the idea that cultural conflicts must be fought with the same intensity as spiritual warfare. Some MAGA adherents frame political battles as a fight for survival, justifying rhetoric and policies that suppress difference rather than engage with it.
In this reading, Ezekiel 25–32 becomes less about ancient historical events and more about justifying a cultural war where only one side—MAGA Christianity—can be legitimate. The middle ground is abandoned, and any attempt at cultural co-existence is viewed as weakness or compromise with evil.
 |
| Jesus explains how a theology of love works in life and religion |
You said:
Yes, exactly. Jesus' approach to societal renewal, as seen in Matthew 16:18, is built on relational transformation and redemption, not the violent destruction of difference.
Jesus’ Approach vs. MAGA’s Burnt-Earth War on Difference
-
Building on Redemption vs. Destroying the "Other" – Jesus calls for a community founded on love, forgiveness, and reconciliation. His "rock" is not political conquest but his own atoning work and the transformed relationships of his followers. In contrast, MAGA evangelicalism often sees cultural renewal as a war—where difference must be eliminated, not redeemed.
-
Open Invitation vs. Rigid Theocracy – Jesus' church is open to all who follow him, transcending ethnic, national, and social boundaries (e.g., the Samaritan woman in John 4). MAGA evangelicalism, however, often operates as a theocratic exclusionary movement, defining Christianity in narrow, nationalistic, and ideological terms that reject outsiders.
-
The Cross vs. the Sword – In Matthew 26:52, Jesus rebukes Peter for using violence, stating, "all who draw the sword will die by the sword." Yet, MAGA theology often embraces militant rhetoric, seeing itself as carrying out God’s judgment, rather than embracing Jesus’ call to self-sacrificial love.
-
Prophetic Challenge vs. Political Control – Jesus challenged religious and political leaders who used God’s name for power, while MAGA theology often fuses religion with state control, demanding cultural dominance rather than calling society to authentic repentance and justice.
In short, Jesus builds a church on transformed hearts, not a crusade against cultural difference, whereas MAGA evangelicalism often mirrors the violent, nationalistic worldview found in Ezekiel 25–32 rather than the relational renewal Jesus offers.
You said:
Yes, Matthew 28:19 ("Go therefore and make disciples of all nations...") presents God's approach to spiritual renewal through invitation and transformation, not coercion and destruction.
Discipleship vs. Religious Jihadism
-
Invitation vs. Domination – Jesus commissions his followers to make disciples, not conquer nations. This process is relational, grounded in love, patience, and the Spirit’s work in human hearts. MAGA-influenced evangelicalism, however, often shifts toward coercion, where cultural and political dominance become substitutes for true spiritual renewal.
-
Spiritual Authority vs. Political Power – In Jesus’ model, renewal comes from teaching, baptizing, and walking with others in faith. It does not involve forcing conformity through legislation, violence, or exclusion. The MAGA approach, however, often mirrors religious jihadism—demanding external obedience, punishing dissent, and wielding state power to enforce a narrow vision of Christianity.
-
Love of Enemies vs. Eradication of Opposition – Jesus taught to love and pray for enemies (Matthew 5:44), a stark contrast to the MAGA mindset that often seeks to crush political, religious, and cultural opponents. The Great Commission is an act of grace, not holy war.
Process Theology's View
Process Theology would emphasize that God’s love is persuasive, not coercive. Discipleship aligns with this because it involves freedom, relational growth, and ongoing transformation, not a one-time forced conversion or nationalist religious agenda.
Would you say this difference in approach explains why MAGA Christianity is so quick to demonize and attack "the other"?
You said:
You're absolutely right. Civil constitutions, especially in democratic societies, are designed to protect religious and cultural differences, fostering peace through dialogue and cooperation. However, MAGA-influenced evangelicalism often rejects these civil protections, seeing them as obstacles to establishing a so-called "Christian nation." This ironically betrays Jesus' own teachings on bearing burdens and making peace.
Jesus’ Call to Burden-Bearing and Peacemaking (Matthew 5:9, Galatians 6:2)
-
Burden Bearers, Not Culture Warriors – Jesus and the early church emphasized serving others (Galatians 6:2, “Bear one another’s burdens”) rather than dominating them. The Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5) calls for peacemakers, the meek, and those who suffer for righteousness—not those waging a holy war. MAGA’s approach, by contrast, sees secularism, multiculturalism, and pluralism as enemies, demanding dominance rather than dialogue.
-
Peaceful Coexistence vs. Theocratic Control – Civil constitutions ensure that religious freedom applies to all, not just one group. This aligns with Jesus’ ethic of voluntary faith and moral persuasion, rather than state-enforced religion. MAGA theology, however, often rejects these principles, equating religious difference with moral decay and demanding the government impose Christian nationalism—a contradiction to Christ’s model of persuasion and love.
-
Jesus and the State: “My Kingdom Is Not of This World” (John 18:36) – Jesus refused political theocracy, telling Pilate that his kingdom operates differently. MAGA’s vision of a theocratic America contradicts this, seeking political power to enforce their version of Christianity rather than trusting in Christ’s example of non-coercive transformation.
-
Forsaking the Good Samaritan Ethic – One of Jesus’ clearest teachings on cultural difference is the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37), where compassion, not conquest, defines godliness. MAGA-influenced Christianity often ignores or outright rejects this ethic when it comes to immigrants, Muslims, LGBTQ+ people, or any "outsiders" they see as a threat. This is a complete departure from Jesus' model of engaging with difference through love, not war.
The Tragic Irony of MAGA’s Rejection of Jesus’ Ethics
By opposing civil protections for difference, MAGA evangelicalism ironically undermines its own claims to Christian faithfulness:
- It demands religious supremacy while ignoring Christ’s way of suffering servanthood (Philippians 2:5-8).
- It treats political power as the solution while rejecting Christ’s refusal of worldly dominance (Matthew 4:8-10).
- It fosters division and hatred rather than reconciliation and sacrificial love (Romans 12:18).
Conclusion: A Call Back to Christ
Jesus’ vision for renewal is discipleship, not domination. The gospel thrives through persuasion, love, and moral example—not government coercion or religious warfare. MAGA’s jihadist approach to cultural difference is a direct rejection of Christ’s mission, replacing the cross with the sword and the Great Commission with political conquest.
Would you like to explore how different historical theocratic movements have made similar mistakes?
You said:
Got it! I'll file this under Process vs. MAGA Theology for future reference. Looking forward to your rewrite. Peace!
No comments:
Post a Comment