Hello, my friends,

We have had quite the week as a nation, haven’t we? I just want to start off with a word of encouragement. Things are super chaotic right now, but it doesn’t define our fate. I am reminded every day how many people are committed to the work of goodness and compassion in our world. I’m reminded every day that there are people actively committed to fixing the issues in both our churches and our nation. All of you are among those people in my life! The helpers of the world just don’t get the same amount of airtime in our society as the chaos makers do. So, please, do not let the chaos make you lose hope. Look for the helpers. We still have voices to be heard and a share in deciding our future together. Be encouraged and do not be afraid.

With all that has happened since last weekend, I want to think with you today about something that has been on my mind for a long time. It is the topic of how human free will is handled in much of the mainstream theology we are hearing these days. From the assassination attempt to legislation supported by many Christians, you’ll notice that human free will is handled in a very specific way. So I want to ponder this with you in hopes of coming away better equipped to notice when human free will is being suppressed theologically and we navigate political issues.

But first, here are some resources to consider:

​-My Response to the viral post about Leviticus blood rites. If you've been on social media since last weekend, you may have seen a post using several passages of Leviticus talking about priestly blood rites to frame what happened to Donald Trump's ear as divine consecration. You can read my response to this post through the link above.

​-The roots of poverty in America by Throughline. The United States is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, yet over 10 percent of people – nearly 40 million – live in poverty. It's something we see, say, if we live near a tent encampment. And it's also something we feel. More than a third of people in the U.S. say they're worried about being able to pay their rent or mortgage. Medical bills and layoffs can change a family's economic status almost overnight. These issues are on the minds of Democrats and Republicans, city dwellers, and rural households. And in an election year, they're likely to be a major factor when people cast their votes for President.

In this episode, they talk with Pulitzer Prize-winning author and sociologist Matthew Desmond, whose book Poverty, By America, was paradigm-shifting for me. It helps explain why poverty persists in the United States, how it's holding all of us back, and what it means to be a poverty abolitionist. I highly recommend both this episode and his book.

​-The Cost of Discipleship by Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Even though we come from different theological perspectives, Bonhoeffer has been a major influence on me, especially in my pastoral theology. As you probably know, Bonhoeffer was on Hitler's SS list of people to imprison because he condemned Hitler and warned against his rise to power. After a brief time teaching theology in America to escape the SS, he decided to go back when to be a pastor to his people. He was later hanged. He pastored his people up until the very end. He has always been an inspiration to me to keep pointing to the ways of Jesus, no matter how brutal the powers that be become.

His book "The Cost of Discipleship" is one I try to read every year. He asks questions like, what can the call to discipleship, the adherence to the word of Jesus, mean today to the businessman, the soldier, the laborer, or the aristocrat? What did Jesus mean to say to us? What is his will for us today? Drawing on the Sermon on the Mount, Dietrich Bonhoeffer answers these timeless questions by providing the dichotomy between "cheap grace" and "costly grace." The audiobook is currently free, but other options are available as well.

​

Okay, onto today’s topic.

​

"Free Will For Me, But Not For Thee."

​
Last weekend, the nation sat stunned by the assassination attempt on Mr. Trump’s life. As I have said on all my public platforms, political violence is evil and should be clearly condemned. It isn’t the way to peace. It doesn’t solve our problems, it just creates more of them. It perpetuates violence rather than peace.

May our prayers go out to all who were harmed, especially for the family of the retired firefighter who lost his life. May we also pray for the shooter's family who are grieving in many different ways I’m sure. May our prayers also be for our nation and how this event has impacted our current political climate.

Social Media's Reaction

Almost immediately after the shooting, people with huge social media accounts, like Marco Rubio, who is followed by 4.5 million people on Twitter (x) alone, started saying that “God saved Trump” and “this was divine intervention.”

This narrative was also followed by a surge of memes, videos, and articles on social media that expressed that same message.

As I reflected on what I was seeing, my reaction was complex and was mixed with discouragement.

I was honestly thankful that Trump’s life wasn’t taken. Not only for the reason that whenever a life is spared, I think we should be thankful and give praise to God. But I was also thankful because I suspect that his martyrdom would have most likely unleashed a backlash of political violence, further harming others and our future moving forward.

I was then pretty troubled and discouraged by the “God saved Trump” narrative I was seeing because it seemed to be conveying something different than just gratitude for a life saved. Especially given that other lives were lost.

While the words at face value said “God saved Trump,” given all the theological and prophetic mythology that has been created around his pursuit of power, with many who follow him claiming that he is “God’s chosen one,” this phrase seemed to express more than just thankfulness. It seemed to express that this was a divine confirmation of the theology that has been built around his pursuit of the Whitehouse.

“God saved Trump” was just the beginning of a sentence that seemed to finish with, “so that he could be re-elected and fulfill God’s plan.”

I think this is why this narrative was shared so widely, even in the face of others being injured and others even losing their life at the same rally. God neglecting to save them didn’t seem to matter as long as “the chosen one” was saved.

What troubled me most was what this kind of public theology communicates to our world about us Christians. It seems to paint a picture of a very preferential God.

As I mentioned before, whenever lives are spared, it is a good and right thing to praise God.

But what is also important is for us Christians to realize the precedent set by so many prominent Christians in our society today.

Christians who consistently respond with “thoughts and prayers” after every school shooting rather than demanding action and change to confront the continued threat of gun violence in our country.

Christians that show such ardent support for Israel and the more than 1,400 lives it has tragically lost, but who seem unwilling to stand up for the more than 38,000 lives of Palestinian children and their families who have been lost.

Christians that seem to demand harsh treatment of immigrants, even though not knowing their lived experiences or even while they suffer and die at our border.

Then social media is flooded with comments about how God saved a presidential candidate that so many Christians have shown their unquestioned loyalty for, all while the world watches on.

If you didn’t believe in God and you heard people talk about God saving certain people in power but who seemed to just look the other way while powerless people died, would that be the kind of God you’d want to worship or reject?

Our public theology paints a picture of the kind of God we believe in, whether we like that or not. If the picture of God we paint for the world fits really neatly into our partisan loyalties, that is when we really need to honestly think about what it is we are actually worshiping: God or our partisan politics.

Who Gets Free Will and Who Doesn’t

This kind of public narrative also reveals the heart of the kind of theology that shapes much of our political discourse today.

If you notice, a lot of theological discourse elevates the sovereignty of God and the need for human obedience to all that God has commanded, no matter if people believe in God or not.

This is because a lot of our mainstream theology, especially the theology of Christian Nationalism, is rooted in a form of Calvinism. Specifically, the belief in an absolutely sovereign God who has predestined all things to happen just as they do. This God is believed to shape our every single moment according to their plan. This God has also decided from the beginning who will be saved and who will be damned. Because of course, this God is all-knowing and all-powerful.

As you might imagine, this theology often leaves very little room for human free will, if at all. After all, if you are already among the damned, you do not have a choice in the matter, no matter how much you may not want to be damned.

This is why the mainstream theological response sounds like “God saved Trump” rather than “Thank God the shooter missed.” It places all the weight on God’s power and orchestration of every moment for a particular outcome while neglecting the free agency of human beings.

As a Christian in the Wesleyan/Arminian tradition, I don’t ascribe to the predestination or the kind of sovereignty applied to God in this form of Calvinism.

Wesleyan theology has a different starting point. Instead of beginning with sovereignty being God’s primary characteristic, Wesleyan theology begins with love being God’s primary characteristic.

Whereas Calvinism sees God’s sovereignty (power) as dictating all that God does and all that we do, even how God loves and acts in the world, Wesleyans see God’s love as dictating all that God does, even God’s sovereignty over the world.

So it’s less a matter of IF God is “all-powerful” and “all-knowing.” Both Wesleyans and Calvinists agree on those beliefs. Rather, it is HOW God is “all-powerful” and “all-knowing” where we part ways.

God created humanity with free will and because of God’s love does not violate that gift, even in how God acts in the world.

I believe we see this all throughout the Bible. God seeks to partner with humanity even in Genesis, freely calling humanity to partner with God’s will for the world that was established before creation. We don't see God forcing Adam and Eve to obey God’s will, but rather, God “walks with them in the garden” and gives them instruction. The very act of telling Adam and Even what not to do implies that they have the freedom to do otherwise. Human beings always retain the freedom to partner with God’s will or work against it, even to our own detriment. That is the gift and danger of human free will. It's beautiful and it's messy.

So, as a Wesleyan, I would see “divine intervention” regarding the assassination attempt very differently. I would see it in the constant urging of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the shooter to not go through with the plan in every moment along the way. From waking up that morning to right before he pulled the trigger, I believe the Holy Spirit was urging him to choose a different, life-giving path.

I also believe that Mr. Trump’s free will decision to turn his head while speaking when the shots rang out played a role in saving his life too.

I believe in a God that constantly urges and calls us to a life-giving, peace-making path, but does not impose God’s own will upon us. It is still up to us, as free agents, to choose that life-giving way or not. To walk with God or not.

For me, Wesleyan theology provides a better framework for understanding tragedies. It helps to pinpoint human action or inaction and where God may have intervened. But also equally important, it helps to pinpoint where God is now grieving over the harm caused by a misuse of our free will and is now seeking to partner with us to bring healing and restoration in the aftermath of tragedy.

A Different Political Theology

You see, this mainstream theology we often hear that seems to downplay human free will has a very distinct way of being applied in our political environment.

It envisions that God’s will functions within a strict hierarchy of power, which provides an absolute standard of truth by which every human being must abide. It provides a very neat and clean, cut-and-dry picture of what is believed to be right and wrong with very little patience for nuance or complexity.

This is why in this theological framework, telling people how wrong they are and even creating laws that they must conform to no matter what is seen as “loving” because they are now made to follow the “truth” which is for their best after all.

A good example of this is posting the Ten Commandments in Louisiana public schools and mandating that the Bible be taught in Oklahoma schools, giving people no choice over a religion being given preference in their education system. According to this mainstream theology, it is okay if people don’t like it because what is more important is that they are being exposed to “the truth of God.”

This theology also applies free will to certain people but not to others politically because of its hierarchy of power.

Take the theology around guns for example. Gun ownership is seen as a “God-given right,” by many thus the free will of the gun owner is fervently protected. Even when it comes to weapons of war, like an AR-15. Any proposed bans to AR-15s for civilian use are met with the rhetoric that “bans don’t work. It’s the sin of the human heart that causes mass shootings.” In other words, it is a misuse of human free will alone that causes mass shootings, rather than anything having to do with the access and proliferation of guns. All while gun violence has now become the number one cause of death among children in the United States.​

Now just replace the word AR-15 with the word abortion and we get almost the exact opposite stance. Many who are claiming a Christian stance on the issue of abortion politically are supporting near or total bans on abortion in the name of “protecting innocent life,” all while the rhetoric of “bans don’t work” conveniently disappears. Where gun owners enjoy their free will being protected, the free will of women is completely disregarded. The near-total bans are couched in rhetoric that “even one unborn life lost is too many.” What about the lives of women? Not to mention, where is this passion for life when it comes to school children who are gunned down?

This mainstream theology cannot help but support legislation to limit free will when it comes to abortion while advocating complete freedom of will when it comes to owning an AR-15, because it is centered on power and control, rather than love.

This theology is also centered on patriarchy. With women being the center of the abortion issue and men, who not only are the highest percentage of gun owners in America but who are also the most common perpetrators of mass shootings , it is hard not to draw the conclusion that according to this theology, God seems to want women to just “submit” while allowing men to be as free as they choose to be. Within both these issues in fact. Notice the absence of legislation towards men on the abortion issue, even though pregnancy wouldn’t be caused without their involvement.

When you have a theology that is built on a hierarchy of power with God at the top, then Jesus, then Christian men, then women and children at the bottom, these complex issues become simple equations of right and wrong, no matter who may suffer along the way in pursuit of “God's truth.”

I write these comparisons simply to invite you to listen to whose free will is being elevated or denied theologically in any given political issue. Notice how power, wealth, race, nationality, religion, or even gender influence whose will is allowed to be more free than others.

The paradox of our democracy is protecting individual freedoms while putting measures in place to prevent those same freedoms from harming others. My hope is that we who follow Jesus would shape our perspective of political issues through the lens of our love for our neighbors and compassion for them, rather than a lens of how people need to abide by a rigid interpretation of God’s law, no matter what the consequences may be.

We desperately need a theology of love, not of power.

Speaking of Hope

I want to end today’s newsletter by reminding you that you have free will! This is a reason to be hopeful. Despite all the forceful political rhetoric and doomsday projections, you still have free will. You are not locked into the whims of our current moment. Your fate is not sealed. Our fate is not sealed. We still have a choice and we still have a voice. Do not let fear convince you that our future is set in stone, whether we like it or not. God is still on the move and still seeking to partner with us towards what is good, true, and beautiful.

As we navigate this moment, especially alongside those feel trapped in their own fear, I believe it is crucial to emphasize the words from 1 John 4: "This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood. Do not be afraid, but let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear."

This message, calling us to reject fear and embrace love, is an act of free will to partner with God and it is more pertinent now than ever. It goes beyond the calls for unity and nonviolence we see in the media. Rather, it challenges us to embody the radical love of the resurrected Jesus and to stand firm in our faith, even when fear threatens to overwhelm us. As Matthew 24:12-13 reminds us: "Because of the increase of wickedness in this age of lawlessness, the love of most will grow cold. But those who stand firm to the end will be saved and preach the Gospel to the ends of the earth.”

May our political theology always begin and end with God's love.