Thought this article was worth reading though your critiques of it as a piece of writing may be good. For me the point that is most important is the subjective nature of experiencing the presence of God/the Holy Spirit/Heaven. Many people claim to experience this in corporate worship or while playing worship music privately or during whatever activity. And yes, I feel it too. But I would like to have objective knowledge regarding whether that's just a warm and reassuring feeling due to the music or genuinely the Presence of God. I suppose that if it were the latter I'd spend more time listening to worship music, which has it's moments for sure but generally I prefer other genres. I've seen people address this question skeptically or believingly and I think there's no definitive answer, becomes a matter of opinion.
It does seem somewhat ridiculous to put on worship music and paint a picture of Trump. I understand the Cyrus theory and suppose it's possible God is using Trump, though I am pretty skeptical there. And yes, Trump has done some very good things but some very bad as well. I'd have preferred a normal Republican. Though I'm not as negative about the Iran war as OP. Would be great for the people of Iran if their despotic regime were replaced by something better, provided that the human toll can be kept to a minimum. Though this effort could easily turn out very badly.
So many thoughts. You sent it, my phone pinged, now I'm trying to read it. If I get another hastily put together article like this though I'm blocking you. I like to know what people want to say, but no one should have to work this hard to figure it out honestly.
KEY QUESTION: So, where is the idolatry? Where are people worshipping the painting of Trump?
Or is the claim not idolatry but that because the woman painter claims she is guided by God's hands that she is equating her paintings with special revelation as divine inspiration? That's not a claim of idolatry then. And it's just note true.
She is clearly describing the subjective state of the worshipper, not the objective, canonical status of the resulting artwork. Seems like you are overlaying your problems with Charismatic theology onto her, basically, eisegeting the situation.
Can the woman not believe that God’s uses non-believers like Cyrus or Nebuchadnezzar to execute His will? And as an artist she may feel compelled by the Spirit to document or highlight a contemporary figure she believes is currently being used by God, without elevating that figure to a salvific status?
I'm not fan of what Macarthur called Charismatic Chaos either, but this isn't it unless we are missing some big reveal. Like, did someone dip it in gold and it's in a church where people dance around it slashing their wrists? That would have warranted a late night show up in my inbox post 100%.
Evangelicals in general and Charismatics in particular use the terminology, "God led me," "God told me," "God impressed upon my heart," etc. Yes the language can be problematic, no doubt. And yes people abuse the language for selfish ends or to manipulate people (I've had wives tell me God told them to get a divorce, or to be happy aka have an affair, or a single guy stalking a girl told me that God told him she would be his wife). Those are all fair game but you don't go after any of that. Your focus is "idolatry" of which there is none. And "inspiration" of which there is no semantic equivalent to theological inspiration of Scripture except what you read into it.
And...why is the article so confusing and hard to read? You have naked links instead of titles that are linked, lack of headers, subheaders, clarity. Opens talking about Iran war then says the article is not about Iran then ends talking about Iran. I think it's about Iran! I think you are frustrated that there is a group of People who commission Trump and see him as God's hammer of judgment and condone even applaud what he does and that irks you. Ok, well, write about that then.
Seems like you brain dumped some ideas, accidentally hit send, did not revise, and sent out a careless post that I am now reading when I'd rather be asleep. :) That's not your fault, I have compulsions lol.
You know you can just post this to AI and say, "As an expert essay writer make sure I have a clear intro, body, conclusion, supporting points, it follows a coherent flow, and makes sense." Then post. IMO.
Further on the war - perhaps I should have just said its about the war… frankly the internet is filling with posts condemning this war of aggression. To call Trump God’s hammer of judgment — would require him to actually being doing something that first just judgement. Attacking a nation that did not first attack you, and then claim it’s not a war — while you are dropping 2000 pound bombs on a city with 10 million civilians that have nothing to do with your war, is the height of hypocrisy. They dropped a bomb on a school, literally killing all the kids and teachers — was that God’s just judgement? Trump made a long list of campaign promises — and he is acting someone who was happy to lie to get into power and then go ahead and do the opposite. My concern here is with Christians taking “endorsement” (especially Spiritual Endorsement — of which this painting is) far too lightly. The US just brought us dangerously close to WW3
"it's about the war" = lol yup! Then write about that!
Iran has been enriching uranium far beyond the 3.67% limit set by the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal since 2019, when it began progressively violating the agreement's terms in response to U.S. withdrawal and reimposed sanctions. By 2021, it was enriching to 20% purity at the Fordow facility, and by late 2022, it had advanced to 60% purity. That means they can bridge the gap and have nuclear grade uranium in 1-2 weeks, and a nuclear warhead in 6-8 months. No one actually knows what they have hidden underground except they can confirm there is hidden material unaccounted for, so the idea is, if this is what you know and can document and validate err on the side of caution and about a decade of warnings and do something about it.
But out of curiosity: When would you prefer the U.S. take action? After they already have the warhead in an underground bunker ready to launch? And when we drop a bunker buster bomb on it and it kills thousands of civilians, would you also likely be on here still saying "Oh there was a better way!"?
I don't see anyone whose all flustered about Iran answering these questions. All the arguments are ad hominem and emotional and come from people who evidently have no idea about the last decade of sanctions and covert ops to stop Iran.
"They dropped a bomb on a school..." = I'm assuming you have the internet and fact check yourself yes? Or is your blog just about emotional rants that have no grounding? I would think given your blog's name you would be directly discussion just war theory and whether Iran bombings fit and do it with some objectivity, but again, idk, maybe emotional reactions are your thing.
Google: The evidence so far: The school was adjacent to (or in close proximity to) an IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) naval/coastal defense compound. Evidence from satellite imagery, geolocated videos, munitions patterns, and U.S./Israeli operational divisions (U.S. focused on southern naval targets, Israel on western missile sites) strongly points to a precision airstrike targeting the military site. It is not even confirmed whether it was US or Israel and some reports from Iranians on the ground claim an IRGC rocket misfire (probably unlikely).
But yes, innocents in the school were collateral and to me all collateral is a tragedy no doubt. And all war has collateral. I presume when Obama killed nearly 300 innocents in collateral strikes, including a wedding, including a 16 year old US Citizen in a 2011 Yemen drone strike you were equally ranting about it or is this just reserved for Trump?
And When have we ever been close to WW3? With the Houthis? lol. Not worried. That's leftist propaganda that plays on the news 24hrs a day. What has proven credible to justify such a claim? WW3 with whom? We just stopped WW3 for a few more years with bombings in Iran though.
I hate all foreign wars. I don’t favour any us presidents. All wars of aggression are immoral acts of injustice. Makes no difference whether they were started by the left or of the right. Dropping 2000 pound bombs on a city with 10 million civilians is utterly bankrupt. Finally the US was 36 trillion dollars in debt before Trumps second term - his new term has added another 3 trillion already — the US can really not afford more wars
So, let me say I too don't think we need to be in any extra wars. There are all sorts of reasons why and I do think that would make a great piece to post and unpack. But that is not what you posted. So my reaction is to what you posted. Hence...
"Dropping 2000 pound bombs on a city..." Isn't your channel "rational answers"? How is this misrepresentation rational? The entire argument is emotive in the article and your responses. So when will you use reason?
Factually, the U.S. and Israel did not indiscriminately drop 2,000lb bombs on Tehran. The strikes were targeted at Iran’s nuclear facilities, missile infrastructure, and senior regime figures. While some attacks hit western Tehran, the campaign focused on military and political assets, not carpet‑bombing civilian neighborhoods!
And just because you think all wars are immoral does not make it so. Again, what is the rational argument here? You are a pacifist then? Ok, you can deny the fallen reality of war but Solomon doesn't, "A time for war, and a time for peace.” Nor does God, "For there is no authority except from God… for he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” (Rom. 13). Amen. Iran and all their Hezbollah resources need God's wrath.
🛡️ Defense of U.S. Action Against Iran (Romans 13 Rationally Applied)
Legitimate Authority: Romans 13 affirms that rulers are established by God to restrain evil. The U.S. government, acting through its elected president and military, has legitimate authority to wield the sword. Furthermore, they have been working from an expanded definition of "imminent" for 20 years so this is not unique to Trump.
Punishing Wrongdoers: Iran’s regime has killed 30k thousand protestors, sponsored terrorism (Hezbollah, Houthis), and pursued nuclear weapons in violation of agreements. Romans 13 says rulers are “avengers” against such wrongdoing.
Protecting the Innocent: By striking Iran’s nuclear program and leadership, the U.S. is protecting millions from a potential nuclear war. This fulfills the state’s God‑given duty to defend life. Yes, collateral life is lost. Yes that is always tragic. Yes that is also part of war.
Preventive Justice: Even if Iran had not yet attacked, Romans 13 allows rulers to act against those preparing evil. The sword is not only reactive but also preventive when danger is imminent.
So, not immoral by biblical standards which I think outweigh your personal view of morality.
We could also apply e.g.,
Doctrine of Double Effect: Developed by Aquinas this says an act can be moral if the intention is good, even if it has unintended harmful side effects. The fact that all U.S. bombings are against hostile targets NOT innocents and that AI was used to better analyze these targets to minimize the cost of innocent human life tells me that this applies.
Proportionality Principle: Morality weighs the good achieved against the harm caused. If preventing nuclear war saves millions, but tragically costs hundreds of innocent lives, proportionality makes the act morally permissible.
Now you could argue that the loss of ANY innocent life is immoral.
Problem: In real life, almost any large‑scale action (war, policing, even medical policy) risks unintended harm. If any harm makes the whole act immoral, then no collective action could ever be moral.
Personally, I think there are national priorities here that Trump should be focused on, and economic realities as you mentioned, and while I do think Iran was an imminent threat, I think we had time and a wiser approach would have been to bring it to the U.N. and exhaust those means first. But I don't see many people making those arguments.
Thanks for your detailed and lengthy response. My issue is with both, her subjective claims of “divine sanction” — just read her website to get the full picture, and the implications of what she did. It’s not what she did per say, but what is left unsaid. A worship song is playing, people are singing (to God..) and she is painting her Political leader — I am not claiming she thinks Trump is Jesus — naturally — but she and the audience clearly does believe Trump has been sent by God. That being a totally subjective claim — Christians should be very very very careful about making such claims. So in that sense I am absolutely in theological disagreement. I spent a long period of my younger self in a Cult, and this has all the tell tale signs.. Watching the war on Iran unfold, I can’t help but noticing that Trump is turning out to be just another War Monger — you may disagree — but having a Christian paint him and the backdrop clearly suggesting what I claimed — It is indeed “an idol” being bowed down to. One does not have to physically kneel before an idol, for it to be one… the emphasis is what is wrong here..
"She and the audience clearly believes...Christians should be very very very careful about making such claims" = whose making these claims? where? Trumps first term I'd say that was true based on polling data and many articles written about Trump as Cyrus. He lost to sleepy joe in part because of a turning away of a chunk of the Evangelical vote. This time around? idk, I run in right wing circles and it's mixed. Anecdotal evidence but no more or less than what you present.
"I'm not claiming she thinks Trump is Jesus" = Your article mentions idolatry in the title so false worship of a false savior is implied and strengthened in how you wrote. I'm not sure how anyone else could get another take away from it.
But what's wrong with the claim that God raised up and is using someone? Cyrus? Nebuchadnezzar? Raised up and used by God. Pharoah? Same thing. There were an overwhelming number of black Americans who thought God raised up Obama. I agree...but probably to punish the nation not help it.
Thought this article was worth reading though your critiques of it as a piece of writing may be good. For me the point that is most important is the subjective nature of experiencing the presence of God/the Holy Spirit/Heaven. Many people claim to experience this in corporate worship or while playing worship music privately or during whatever activity. And yes, I feel it too. But I would like to have objective knowledge regarding whether that's just a warm and reassuring feeling due to the music or genuinely the Presence of God. I suppose that if it were the latter I'd spend more time listening to worship music, which has it's moments for sure but generally I prefer other genres. I've seen people address this question skeptically or believingly and I think there's no definitive answer, becomes a matter of opinion.
It does seem somewhat ridiculous to put on worship music and paint a picture of Trump. I understand the Cyrus theory and suppose it's possible God is using Trump, though I am pretty skeptical there. And yes, Trump has done some very good things but some very bad as well. I'd have preferred a normal Republican. Though I'm not as negative about the Iran war as OP. Would be great for the people of Iran if their despotic regime were replaced by something better, provided that the human toll can be kept to a minimum. Though this effort could easily turn out very badly.
So many thoughts. You sent it, my phone pinged, now I'm trying to read it. If I get another hastily put together article like this though I'm blocking you. I like to know what people want to say, but no one should have to work this hard to figure it out honestly.
KEY QUESTION: So, where is the idolatry? Where are people worshipping the painting of Trump?
Or is the claim not idolatry but that because the woman painter claims she is guided by God's hands that she is equating her paintings with special revelation as divine inspiration? That's not a claim of idolatry then. And it's just note true.
She is clearly describing the subjective state of the worshipper, not the objective, canonical status of the resulting artwork. Seems like you are overlaying your problems with Charismatic theology onto her, basically, eisegeting the situation.
Can the woman not believe that God’s uses non-believers like Cyrus or Nebuchadnezzar to execute His will? And as an artist she may feel compelled by the Spirit to document or highlight a contemporary figure she believes is currently being used by God, without elevating that figure to a salvific status?
I'm not fan of what Macarthur called Charismatic Chaos either, but this isn't it unless we are missing some big reveal. Like, did someone dip it in gold and it's in a church where people dance around it slashing their wrists? That would have warranted a late night show up in my inbox post 100%.
Evangelicals in general and Charismatics in particular use the terminology, "God led me," "God told me," "God impressed upon my heart," etc. Yes the language can be problematic, no doubt. And yes people abuse the language for selfish ends or to manipulate people (I've had wives tell me God told them to get a divorce, or to be happy aka have an affair, or a single guy stalking a girl told me that God told him she would be his wife). Those are all fair game but you don't go after any of that. Your focus is "idolatry" of which there is none. And "inspiration" of which there is no semantic equivalent to theological inspiration of Scripture except what you read into it.
And...why is the article so confusing and hard to read? You have naked links instead of titles that are linked, lack of headers, subheaders, clarity. Opens talking about Iran war then says the article is not about Iran then ends talking about Iran. I think it's about Iran! I think you are frustrated that there is a group of People who commission Trump and see him as God's hammer of judgment and condone even applaud what he does and that irks you. Ok, well, write about that then.
Seems like you brain dumped some ideas, accidentally hit send, did not revise, and sent out a careless post that I am now reading when I'd rather be asleep. :) That's not your fault, I have compulsions lol.
You know you can just post this to AI and say, "As an expert essay writer make sure I have a clear intro, body, conclusion, supporting points, it follows a coherent flow, and makes sense." Then post. IMO.
Further on the war - perhaps I should have just said its about the war… frankly the internet is filling with posts condemning this war of aggression. To call Trump God’s hammer of judgment — would require him to actually being doing something that first just judgement. Attacking a nation that did not first attack you, and then claim it’s not a war — while you are dropping 2000 pound bombs on a city with 10 million civilians that have nothing to do with your war, is the height of hypocrisy. They dropped a bomb on a school, literally killing all the kids and teachers — was that God’s just judgement? Trump made a long list of campaign promises — and he is acting someone who was happy to lie to get into power and then go ahead and do the opposite. My concern here is with Christians taking “endorsement” (especially Spiritual Endorsement — of which this painting is) far too lightly. The US just brought us dangerously close to WW3
"it's about the war" = lol yup! Then write about that!
Iran has been enriching uranium far beyond the 3.67% limit set by the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal since 2019, when it began progressively violating the agreement's terms in response to U.S. withdrawal and reimposed sanctions. By 2021, it was enriching to 20% purity at the Fordow facility, and by late 2022, it had advanced to 60% purity. That means they can bridge the gap and have nuclear grade uranium in 1-2 weeks, and a nuclear warhead in 6-8 months. No one actually knows what they have hidden underground except they can confirm there is hidden material unaccounted for, so the idea is, if this is what you know and can document and validate err on the side of caution and about a decade of warnings and do something about it.
But out of curiosity: When would you prefer the U.S. take action? After they already have the warhead in an underground bunker ready to launch? And when we drop a bunker buster bomb on it and it kills thousands of civilians, would you also likely be on here still saying "Oh there was a better way!"?
I don't see anyone whose all flustered about Iran answering these questions. All the arguments are ad hominem and emotional and come from people who evidently have no idea about the last decade of sanctions and covert ops to stop Iran.
"They dropped a bomb on a school..." = I'm assuming you have the internet and fact check yourself yes? Or is your blog just about emotional rants that have no grounding? I would think given your blog's name you would be directly discussion just war theory and whether Iran bombings fit and do it with some objectivity, but again, idk, maybe emotional reactions are your thing.
Google: The evidence so far: The school was adjacent to (or in close proximity to) an IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) naval/coastal defense compound. Evidence from satellite imagery, geolocated videos, munitions patterns, and U.S./Israeli operational divisions (U.S. focused on southern naval targets, Israel on western missile sites) strongly points to a precision airstrike targeting the military site. It is not even confirmed whether it was US or Israel and some reports from Iranians on the ground claim an IRGC rocket misfire (probably unlikely).
But yes, innocents in the school were collateral and to me all collateral is a tragedy no doubt. And all war has collateral. I presume when Obama killed nearly 300 innocents in collateral strikes, including a wedding, including a 16 year old US Citizen in a 2011 Yemen drone strike you were equally ranting about it or is this just reserved for Trump?
And When have we ever been close to WW3? With the Houthis? lol. Not worried. That's leftist propaganda that plays on the news 24hrs a day. What has proven credible to justify such a claim? WW3 with whom? We just stopped WW3 for a few more years with bombings in Iran though.
I hate all foreign wars. I don’t favour any us presidents. All wars of aggression are immoral acts of injustice. Makes no difference whether they were started by the left or of the right. Dropping 2000 pound bombs on a city with 10 million civilians is utterly bankrupt. Finally the US was 36 trillion dollars in debt before Trumps second term - his new term has added another 3 trillion already — the US can really not afford more wars
So, let me say I too don't think we need to be in any extra wars. There are all sorts of reasons why and I do think that would make a great piece to post and unpack. But that is not what you posted. So my reaction is to what you posted. Hence...
"Dropping 2000 pound bombs on a city..." Isn't your channel "rational answers"? How is this misrepresentation rational? The entire argument is emotive in the article and your responses. So when will you use reason?
Factually, the U.S. and Israel did not indiscriminately drop 2,000lb bombs on Tehran. The strikes were targeted at Iran’s nuclear facilities, missile infrastructure, and senior regime figures. While some attacks hit western Tehran, the campaign focused on military and political assets, not carpet‑bombing civilian neighborhoods!
And just because you think all wars are immoral does not make it so. Again, what is the rational argument here? You are a pacifist then? Ok, you can deny the fallen reality of war but Solomon doesn't, "A time for war, and a time for peace.” Nor does God, "For there is no authority except from God… for he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” (Rom. 13). Amen. Iran and all their Hezbollah resources need God's wrath.
🛡️ Defense of U.S. Action Against Iran (Romans 13 Rationally Applied)
Legitimate Authority: Romans 13 affirms that rulers are established by God to restrain evil. The U.S. government, acting through its elected president and military, has legitimate authority to wield the sword. Furthermore, they have been working from an expanded definition of "imminent" for 20 years so this is not unique to Trump.
Punishing Wrongdoers: Iran’s regime has killed 30k thousand protestors, sponsored terrorism (Hezbollah, Houthis), and pursued nuclear weapons in violation of agreements. Romans 13 says rulers are “avengers” against such wrongdoing.
Protecting the Innocent: By striking Iran’s nuclear program and leadership, the U.S. is protecting millions from a potential nuclear war. This fulfills the state’s God‑given duty to defend life. Yes, collateral life is lost. Yes that is always tragic. Yes that is also part of war.
Preventive Justice: Even if Iran had not yet attacked, Romans 13 allows rulers to act against those preparing evil. The sword is not only reactive but also preventive when danger is imminent.
So, not immoral by biblical standards which I think outweigh your personal view of morality.
We could also apply e.g.,
Doctrine of Double Effect: Developed by Aquinas this says an act can be moral if the intention is good, even if it has unintended harmful side effects. The fact that all U.S. bombings are against hostile targets NOT innocents and that AI was used to better analyze these targets to minimize the cost of innocent human life tells me that this applies.
Proportionality Principle: Morality weighs the good achieved against the harm caused. If preventing nuclear war saves millions, but tragically costs hundreds of innocent lives, proportionality makes the act morally permissible.
Now you could argue that the loss of ANY innocent life is immoral.
Problem: In real life, almost any large‑scale action (war, policing, even medical policy) risks unintended harm. If any harm makes the whole act immoral, then no collective action could ever be moral.
Personally, I think there are national priorities here that Trump should be focused on, and economic realities as you mentioned, and while I do think Iran was an imminent threat, I think we had time and a wiser approach would have been to bring it to the U.N. and exhaust those means first. But I don't see many people making those arguments.
Thanks for your detailed and lengthy response. My issue is with both, her subjective claims of “divine sanction” — just read her website to get the full picture, and the implications of what she did. It’s not what she did per say, but what is left unsaid. A worship song is playing, people are singing (to God..) and she is painting her Political leader — I am not claiming she thinks Trump is Jesus — naturally — but she and the audience clearly does believe Trump has been sent by God. That being a totally subjective claim — Christians should be very very very careful about making such claims. So in that sense I am absolutely in theological disagreement. I spent a long period of my younger self in a Cult, and this has all the tell tale signs.. Watching the war on Iran unfold, I can’t help but noticing that Trump is turning out to be just another War Monger — you may disagree — but having a Christian paint him and the backdrop clearly suggesting what I claimed — It is indeed “an idol” being bowed down to. One does not have to physically kneel before an idol, for it to be one… the emphasis is what is wrong here..
"She and the audience clearly believes...Christians should be very very very careful about making such claims" = whose making these claims? where? Trumps first term I'd say that was true based on polling data and many articles written about Trump as Cyrus. He lost to sleepy joe in part because of a turning away of a chunk of the Evangelical vote. This time around? idk, I run in right wing circles and it's mixed. Anecdotal evidence but no more or less than what you present.
"I'm not claiming she thinks Trump is Jesus" = Your article mentions idolatry in the title so false worship of a false savior is implied and strengthened in how you wrote. I'm not sure how anyone else could get another take away from it.
But what's wrong with the claim that God raised up and is using someone? Cyrus? Nebuchadnezzar? Raised up and used by God. Pharoah? Same thing. There were an overwhelming number of black Americans who thought God raised up Obama. I agree...but probably to punish the nation not help it.