Thank Goodness, God Can’t Control Elections!
I don’t think God wanted Donald Trump to be elected President of the United States.
Of course, I’m not certain about this. Or certain about much of anything. So I could be wrong. But I evaluate this election the best I can. And a theology of uncontrolling love helps me do that.
A theology that says a loving God can’t control makes sense when voters elect candidates I think are bad for the world. In this essay, I’ll identify five reasons the notion that God can’t control is helpful. And I talk about the problems that arise when thinking God is omnipotent.
1. The God who can’t control isn’t to blame for bad election results.
When a candidate is elected who I think is bad for the country, I don’t think God caused or allowed the results. I think God called citizens to vote for better candidates. But a God of uncontrolling love can’t coerce free creatures. This God can’t guarantee election outcomes. And this is good news, because we don’t have to blame God for bad election results.
2. Our feelings of anger, pain, sadness, and frustration make sense if God is uncontrolling.
Many of my friends have negative feelings after Trump’s election. That’s natural. If God is omnipotent, however, God either caused or allowed Trump to be elected. This means the negative feelings we have do not align with God’s will. But if God is uncontrolling, our negative feelings align with bad election outcomes.
3. An uncontrolling God feels negative emotions when elections harm.
Not only are our negative feelings warranted in a theology of uncontrolling love, but this view says God suffers with us. God gets mad, sad, and frustrated when we choose something other than the loving best possible. It’s encouraging to know that an empathetic God suffers with us. Both God and us can have these negative feelings without acting to harm in light of them.
4. Uncontrolling love theology says God doesn’t leave us when disaster happens.
The God of uncontrolling love moves through time like we do. This God works with creation to squeeze whatever good can be squeezed from the bad God didn’t want in the first place. God seeks to redeem, in collaboration with us and creation. An uncontrolling God of love doesn’t abandon us in the ashes of disaster. This God consoles us, while empowering us to take the next steps.
5. Uncontrolling love theology supports activism.
Uncontrolling love theology does not call us to sit by, passively accepting whatever happens. Instead, the God envisioned in this theology works to overcome evil with good. And this God needs creaturely help. Consequently, an uncontrolling love theology matches the intuitions of activists who work to make the world a better place. What we do matters.
Uncontrolling love theology does not consider God omnipotent. When harmful candidates are elected, this theology says, thank goodness, God is not in control. The rest of this essay comes from my book, The Death of Omnipotence and Birth of Amipotence:
God Picks Political Leaders?
Some point to biblical passages as support for the claim that God picks political leaders and systems. “Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities,” the Apostle Paul tells readers in Rome, “for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves” (Rom. 13:1-2). Adolf Hitler realized the benefits of this argument, and he was fond of calling God, “The Almighty.”[1]
When believers agree with those in power, Paul’s words provide evidence God also agrees. The ruler is divinely sanctioned. They ignore Jesus when he says, “the kings of the Gentiles lord it over them . . . but not so with you” (Lk. 22:25-26). When believers don’t like a leader or political system, they appeal to other biblical passages that justify opposition to earthly authorities.
The Authority of an Almighty God
Some leaders capitalize on the implications of omnipotence by invoking God as the basis of their authority. This brings disastrous results.
One of the more notorious is the so-called “Doctrine of Discovery,” issued by Pope Nicholas V to King Alfonso of Portugal. Here, the Pope sanctions the “discovering” and colonizing of lands and the subjugation of Indigenous people, including “reducing their persons to perpetual slavery.” He issued this decree “by the authority of Almighty God conferred upon us,” and says we should trust “in Him from whom empires and governments and all good things proceed.” He warns that no one “infringe” or “contravene” his permission, else that person “incur the wrath of Almighty God.”[2] Because so many have invoked an omnipotent God to justify their oppression of others, postcolonial and liberation theologians today are rethinking divine providence.[3]
More recently, Evangelical Christians claimed an omnipotent God appointed Donald Trump as President of the United States. Trump aligned himself with Evangelicals because doing so secured votes for his campaign and support for his policies. Doing so also granted Trump, in the minds of some, divine authority. The logic of omnipotence leads naturally to thinking God puts leaders in power, so it’s not surprising Evangelicals would say God put Trump in the White House. What should surprise us is when other Christians accept omnipotence but criticize Evangelicals when they follow its logic.
A Benevolent Dictator?
A common retort to this argument says God differs in a crucial way from human rulers: God is perfectly good. Human leaders are not. “There are no absolutely good people,” say some, “but we worship an absolutely Good and Omnipotent King.”[4] God is a Benevolent Dictator. To put it another way, controlling tyrants cause harm, but controlling Love does not.
This argument falters for many reasons, but I’ll mention two. First, it ignores our first-hand experience as agents with power and freedom.[5] If omnipotence means God exerts all power or controls others, God cannot be omnipotent and creatures have power and freedom. And if benevolence is always persuasive, “Benevolent Dictator” is a contradiction. Dictators don’t persuade, they control.
Second, when pointless pain and unnecessary suffering occur, believers rightly wonder why an allegedly good and omnipotent King does not stop them. The Benevolent Dictator must be asleep. Claiming an all-powerful God differs from powerful kings by being consistently good fails to align with our experience of genuine evil. A benevolent being who can stop evil does stop it.
Conclusion
To worship God as omnipotent, therefore, is explicitly or implicitly to endorse the ruler or political system of the day.
[1]. Karl Barth, Dogmatics in Outline, G. T. Thompson, trans. (New York: Harper, 1959), 48.
[2]. Pope Alexander VI’s Demarcation Bull, May 4, 1493. Also known as “The Doctrine of Discovery.” https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/spotlight-primary-source/doctrine-discovery-1493 (Accessed 1/6/22)
[3]. For example, see Ekaputra Tupamahu, “A Decolonial View of God,” in Uncontrolling Love, Lisa Michaels, et. al., eds (Grasmere, Id.: SacraSage, 2017) and Randy S. Woodley, Indigenous Theology and the Western Worldview: A Decolonialized Approach to Christian Doctrine (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 2022).
[4]. Jonathan Foster portrays controlling divine power as “Omnipotence” with a capital O. See his Theology of Consent: Mimetic Theory in an Open and Relational Universe (Grasmere, Id.: SacraSage, 2022).
[5]. Among books arguing for the irreducibility of freedom, see Jeffrey F. Keuss, Freedom of the Self (Pickwick, 2010); Timothy O’Connor, Persons and Causes (Oxford, 2002).
Newsletter
For a 200-page book of Thomas Jay Oord's best-selling writings and to receive his newsletter, add your email address...
Comments
There’s a lot in here I agree with, Tom. But (you knew there’s a “but”) these elections have also shown that God’s ability to influence us is rather limited. I am reminded of an idea from WW2:
Naturally, the common people don’t want war … but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country. – Hermann Goring”
And that’s exactly the principle that we we have seen at play. One could also quote Rene Girard’s scapegoat mechanism.
But even when granted that most people mean well (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humankind:_A_Hopeful_History) the problem remains that a few do not and they create havoc. I don’t think North Koreans are all bad people, but their leader is. Same with the Russians, the Iranians and so forth and so forth.
So even when you have a well meaning population, they may get stuck with a dictator. Even if he got elected in a democratic way. IS God to blame? No, we have been given at least some freedom of choice. But apparently, it always seems easier for evil to spread than for people to follow the Nazarene.
Which brings me to the point that after 2000 years, I see very few followers of the Way. It’s like the CotN: we have institutionalized entire sanctification, but the truth is, it is actually quite rare and Wynkoop’s “credibility gap” is only getting wider and wider.
So I’m waiting for Jesus to return. The people of Israel had to wait for 400 years for the Lord to step in and liberate them. I don’t know how long we’ll have to wait but as yet, that’s apparently more than 2000 years. Yet, als psalm 44 has it:
All this has come upon us, yet we have not forgotten You
There are still those who
Wait for the Lord; be strong, and let your heart take courage; wait for the Lord! (Psalm 27:14)
And in the mean time, Jesus told us to love our neighbour and our enemy. That’s quite a job already.
Thanks, Hans.
Yes, our differences come down to me believing in a God who must persuade free will creatures if love is to win. And you believe in a God who can make love win without creaturely cooperation but, for some mysterious reason, your God doesn’t do so.
Your God will rescue at some later date. I don’t think a God who could rescue now but waits until later is perfectly loving.
Thanks again, friend.
Tom
I just came across your information and ordered God Can’t, so please bear with me as I am taking this all in.
Where I struggle most is what happens to the people who the good work, and who make the right choices. What happens when they are punished? I guess it’s not much comfort to me to say God consoles and does not abandon when there are so many problems that the average person cannot solve. I guess where I am coming from is that in my mind, I would rather have God fix these issues than just sit with me.
Again, I just ordered your book and look forward to reading it, as well as interacting here in the future.
Thanks for your vulnerable response, Monica. I can relate with wanting to have God fix things. But because that doesn’t happen (at least not enough or consistently), I speculate that God can’t fix problems singlehandedly.
Please post your thoughts or questions about God Can’t!
Tom
I certainly will. I was raised Catholic and at least still practice on the outside, even though I am desconstructing on the inside. The concept of a God who does not intervene came to my attention about 8 years ago, and it at least opened my mind to a better possibility than that of God as a slot machine or lottery ticket. I struggle with this daily, as it still feels God isn’t there or doesn’t care. And yes, I can get behind the concept that God needs humans to do good, but humans are limited. I look forward to reading the book and coming back with any questions I have.
Tom,
Thanks for sharing! I have been grappling with this issue for the past week. In particular, I am struck by the votes some people cast votes for (and this begins to point out my leanings) someone who is not fit to lead a nation state, let alone how some of them identify as “Christian” yet voted for someone whose policy recommendations are contrary to many of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth — pointing to my own tradition, I can think of no way that the policy recommendations meet the guidelines of the Catholic Social Tradition). (I will admit there are points of contention I have with CST, especially the judgements of the USCCB and the Vatican, but that is a conversation for another time.)
Frankly, as I have suggested elsewhere, I struggle with atheism for many reasons (which I will not outline here), but last week truly shook my faith, such as it is. That said, I appreciate your work because it helps kindle the spark of hope in the existence of a God deserving of worship.
Best,
Rob
Would it be an ORT thought then that one of the primary jobs of clergy is teaching people how to listen to God? So much of American Christianity is focused on morality, right action or being “above reproach”. But to pray, read scripture and really get to know who God is, that is not a primary push. I mean I guess this could be what “quiet time” is for??? Yet, how else can we know or be aware of Gods leading in our lives? What can we humans do to listen to God better?
Thought provoking. I have two thoughts. We’ll, a question and a thought.
Would you have been inspired to write this had Harris won?
Also, it is possible that Trump is ultimately God’s will if we consider that he is attempting to lead with unity this time, and has been very visibly working with advisors who care about the health, safety and vitality of America.
Not to say the world isn’t our neighbor, and God doesn’t create borders, etc…but in the analogy of the oxygen mask on an airplane, perhaps it is a good thing.
I’m waiting and seeing. I’m not a Trump supporter, either. Just like to see things at face value sometimes.
Hear, hear! At Brown Line Church, Tom, we’ve been visiting and re-visiting Jesus’ parable of the Persistent Widow as a scripture for this time. It demonstrates the God of uncontrolling love’s always present, never-delaying love, but acknowledges the reality of uncooperative, unjust judges. I’m always struck by the end when Jesus asks “but will the son of man find faith on earth?” Very open and relational — God’s character is sure, but God’s outcomes require our cooperation.
Thanks for saying this, Vince!
Thanks, Jim.
No, I would not have written this had Harris or some other candidate won the presidency.
Great questions, Jessica! I do think attuning ourselves to what we might think is God’s leading proves crucial. And this can take many forms.
THanks for your honesty, Rob. And I think I can understand your feeling of shock. I felt similarly.