Christianity Today: Trump Should Be Removed

[Particular]

Except that is not what they are doing. They are saying repent or be removed from the presidency. Again, you are confusing state issues and church issues.

If President Trump is not a Christian, he is not subject to the moral standards of Christianity. If he is a Christian, being in leadership, we hold him to the same standard of any leader in the church. He is not exempt.
I don't live under "the ends justify the means" ethic.

 

[Calminian]

Therefore, the CT call about Trump should not be the call for removal but for prayer.

Winner!

I'm not going to say I know for certain Trump is not a believer. He's certainly changed drastically over the decades for the better, but there is much doubt. That's why I pray for him.

But the idea that we reject him and remove him from office for not being a Christian yet, or not being a perfectly polite polished politician is beyond silly. He was hired to do a job and is doing it fantastically.

Firing him for not being a Christian? Would we do this to anyone else? Fire our doctor, gardener, mechanic because they didn't pass a doctrinal statement? Is the what God wants us to become? What a terrible testimony.

 

[Particular]

Christ said, don't judge lest you be judge, and for good reason. By taking this hardline nitpicking Trump's sins, you've brought yourself under a microscope, and you're not fairing well. Same is true of CT.

You take Jesus out of context. Go re-read the passage.

 

[Particular]

I deleted my post, because it went beyond being gracious to buzzards.

Here is my opinion.

Were Trump a member of my assembly, then certainly there would be some discipleship training. He is not.

Were he a Baptist (although he did recently attend) then there may be some obligation to consider. There was such a review made when Carter enjoyed the comforts of the people’s house. It came down to his own assembly, though.

Trump, imo, is unnecessarily abrasive.

That shows a lack of fruit by the Holy Spirit.

Trump is also narcissistically inclined.
So his single focus is self.
If it is good for him it is good for the country.
What he can discern the country desires will, in turn, keep him powerful feeding his needs as he graciously bestows what may be necessary to keep his narcissistic personality fed.
Narcissistic personalities have a single goal. Themself.

The Scriptures present that God continues to move in the working of leaders to do His will. Accordingly, He is well in control of Trump.

What the believers response is and must be, is prayer.

Therefore, the CT call about Trump should not be the call for removal but for prayer.

Removal is not ours to determine, but prayer is certainly what Scriptures desire.

If God wants him removed then removed he will be, until then we are to pray.

CT was wrong (has been for some time) in lack of focusing upon the Scripture principles and delivery of such principles without personal agenda to the readers.

Again, my apologies to the noble buzzards.
They do what few would desire to do, aren’t even paid to do, but do thrive on the misfortune of others.

What you describe is called "Machiavellian Principles" as outlined in "The Prince." If you haven't read it I suggest you read it.
President Trump, like many rulers, uses Machiavellian Principles to perfection.
My disagreement with your position is this: As a world leader and a proclaimed Christian, President Trump is called to account by all Christians across the globe. When he speaks and acts, he represents Christ on a global scale. He may be too immature in his faith to recognize this. Godly leaders should call him to account and to repentance in these areas. Silence is not good for him nor for the church universal.
We agree that God has placed President Trump in his position and God can remove him as God wills. We can wait upon God to act. I can even agree that calling for President Trumps removal is a step too far. But,. I can also say calling him to repentance is the Christian duty.

 

[xlsdraw]

If President Trump is not a Christian, he is not subject to the moral standards of Christianity. If he is a Christian, being in leadership, we hold him to the same standard of any leader in the church. He is not exempt.
I don't live under "the ends justify the means" ethic.

You claim authority that you do not possess. Leave the judging to God. You would have likely dethroned King David for his transgressions. But God wouldn't and didn't. Would not King David have slew the unjust man that the prophet Nathan described? And that unjust man was God's servant King David. Who are we to judge who God chooses to utilize?

 

[Particular]

You claim authority that you do not possess. Leave the judging to God. You would have likely dethroned King David for his transgressions. But God wouldn't and didn't. Would not King David have slew the unjust man that the prophet Nathan described? And that unjust man was God's servant King David. Who are we to judge who God chooses to utilize?

Every Christian has authority to call out sin.
Here is the precedence:

Galatians 6:1-10 Brothers,if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor. For each will have to bear his own load. Let the one who is taught the word share all good things with the one who teaches. Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap, if we do not give up. So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith.

 

[Revmitchell]

Every Christian has authority to call out sin.
Here is the precedence:

Another dishonest and strawman post from you

 

[Particular]

Another dishonest and strawman post from you

What?

Is Galatians 6 wrong?

 

[Calminian]

You take Jesus out of context. Go re-read the passage.

I think Jesus wants you to drop your hatred of Trump for comments he made almost 4 years ago, that have even been forgiven by recipient of the comment. It's very sad you hold onto stuff like this.

 

[Particular]

I think Jesus wants you to drop your hatred of Trump for comments he made almost 4 years ago, that have even been forgiven by recipient of the comment. It's very sad you hold onto stuff like this.

I don't hate Donald Trump. I love him enough to tell him to repent. Do you love him enough to do the same?

 

[Calminian]

I don't hate Donald Trump. I love him enough to tell him to repent. Do you love him enough to do the same?

And you love him enough to remind him of 4 year old by-gone statements directed at someone else who's already reconciled with? With friends like you, who needs enemies?

 

[agedman]

Another dishonest and strawman post from you

Actually, you are wrong on both counts.

His post was not dishonest.

His post did not present a straw man, but specific instruction Paul gave.

What may be questioned is the authority of a member of one assembly calling out the public sins of one from another assembly.

That argument is not related because public sin by any believer needs to be public ally rebuked.

SBC preachers are weak in this area. They, like the IFB folks, would rather keep secretes that openly rebuke sin especially that of leadership.

I think CT was wrong. It has enough sin in its own house to be concerned about.

But neither do I give the sinful bluster of Trump a nod. It is wrong.

 

[Revmitchell]

Actually, you are wrong on both counts.

His post was not dishonest.

His post did not present a straw man, but specific instruction Paul gave.

I am not wrong. xlsdraw did not question calling a believer to repentance. particular knows it and tried to avoid that and redirect away from what was really said.

 

[agedman]

I am not wrong. xlsdraw did not question calling a believer to repentance. particular knows it and tried to avoid that and redirect away from what was really said.

You replied directly to particular, and particular spoke directly and with Scripture authority concerning what was posted.

You assumed that which was not.

 

[Revmitchell]

You replied directly to particular, and particular spoke directly and with Scripture authority concerning what was posted.

You assumed that which was not.

Actually I didn't since xlsdraw agreed with my explanation of his post. See I have reading comprehension skills. And just to further help you out xlsdraw was talking about removing a leader from office not calling a Christian to repentance. This is very easily understood by even a quick glance at his post. Not sure why this needs to be explained.

 

[Particular]

And you love him enough to remind him of 4 year old by-gone statements directed at someone else who's already reconciled with? With friends like you, who needs enemies?

Proverbs 27:5-6 Better is open rebuke than hidden love. Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy.

 

[Revmitchell]

Proverbs 27:5-6 Better is open rebuke than hidden love. Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy.

How convenient. Once again you intentionally leave out key points in someone else's post to carry your agenda. Guess what bub. There is no need for rebuke of someone who has "reconciled". But you wanted to ignore that word in his post. Why?

 

[agedman]

Actually I didn't since xlsdraw agreed with my explanation of his post. See I have reading comprehension skills. And just to further help you out xlsdraw was talking about removing a leader from office not calling a Christian to repentance. This is very easily understood by even a quick glance at his post. Not sure why this needs to be explained.

Certainly, I agree.

Reading comprehension is a skill not everyone learns nor consistently uses.

Did you see the FIRST line of particular’s post.

He did not refer to removal, he referred directly to the sinful behaviors.

The post was about behavior not removal.

Others may have been about removal, but this one was not.

Your claim was without merit.

Yes, reading comprehension is a very good skill, I used to teach that skill.

 

[Revmitchell]

The post was about behavior not removal.

xlsdraw's post was about removal. Here is his exact post:

"You claim authority that you do not possess. Leave the judging to God. You would have likely dethroned King David for his transgressions. But God wouldn't and didn't. Would not King David have slew the unjust man that the prophet Nathan described? And that unjust man was God's servant King David. Who are we to judge who God chooses to utilize?"


Sorry you are flat out wrong.

 

[Particular]

How convenient. Once again you intentionally leave out key points in someone else's post to carry your agenda. Guess what bub. There is no need for rebuke of someone who has "reconciled". But you wanted to ignore that word in his post. Why?

Point me to where Donald Trump has reconciled with God by repentance. I welcome his open repentance and encourage him to walk in step with the Spirit of God.
Tweet after tweet point to one who doesn't care about the attitude and spirit in which he speaks about others.
On a side note: How long would it be before Donald Trump was banned from the BB for his treatment of others?