White Theology and White Power XIII

The biblical Cyrus is an unusual figure to place at the center of American presidential theology. Cyrus the Great was a Persian ruler, not an Israelite king. In Isaiah 44 and 45 he appears as an instrument through whom exiled Judeans could return and Jerusalem could be restored. Isaiah even calls Cyrus God’s “anointed,” while making clear that Cyrus does not know the God who is using him. The theological emphasis is therefore not on the Persian king’s holiness. It is on God’s freedom to accomplish divine purposes through a ruler outside the covenant community.[1]

That biblical precedent became politically important after Donald Trump’s rise. Charismatic leader Lance Wallnau helped popularize the argument that Trump could function as a modern Cyrus: a morally unconventional ruler whom God might nevertheless use to protect religious liberty, appoint judges, support Israel, oppose abortion, and create political space for conservative Christian priorities. The analogy became one way of explaining how Christians who had emphasized character in political leadership could support a candidate whose character did not fit their previous expectations.[2]

The strongest form of that argument deserves to be taken seriously. Scripture does not teach that only morally exemplary people can govern or that God works only through people who consciously serve God. Biblical history contains flawed kings, foreign rulers, reluctant prophets, compromised leaders, and political actors who become instruments of purposes larger than themselves. Democratic voters also routinely choose among imperfect candidates and may reasonably decide that abortion, judicial appointments, religious liberty, immigration, economic policy, national security, or support for Israel outweigh serious concerns they have about a candidate’s personal conduct.

Political compromise is not theological corruption.

The deeper problem begins when prudential support becomes prophetic authorization.

A Christian can say, “I know this candidate has serious flaws, but I believe his policies are preferable to the alternative.” That is an ordinary political judgment, open to argument and reconsideration. Something changes when the claim becomes, “God has raised up this particular ruler for this particular national mission.”........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)