|
Hello my friends, Many of you have asked me to write on the Epstein files and how we got here theologically. As I thought about your questions, I couldn't help but make the connection between the theology I was given from my boyhood church about King David's sin and how many who claim to follow Jesus are prone to defend the powerful over the powerless. So, I want to reflect on that dynamic with you today. PAST ARTICLES -Nationalism and Patriarchy Go Hand In Hand. In this article, I explore the relationship between patriarchy and Christian nationalism, especially through Doug Wilson and his church here in Idaho. -Why You Won't Hear 1 Samuel 8 Advocated By Christian Nationalism In this article, I explore the context of 1 Samuel 8, where Israel demanded a king and how it relates to the theology of mainstream Christian nationalism today. -Yes, I Am My Brother’s Keeper. In this article, I explore the context of Genesis 4 and Cain's response to God about being his brother's keeper and how it relates to a lot of the responses around caring for one another in our time today. With Lent beginning on February 18th, I wanted to let you know about my devotional for that season below:
The Epstein files and The Theology of Excusing Kings.One of the most poisonous theologies in Evangelical Christianity and other segments of Christianity is the theology around King David’s sins. It sentimentalizes him. It focuses on the shepherd boy. It celebrates the giant slayer. It focuses on him being “the man after God’s own heart” (1 Samuel 13:14). And then it rushes past 2 Samuel 11 to focus on his repentance. This theology also presents Bathsheba as a seductress, a willing participant, and an adulterer. But Scripture tells a different story. We are told that from his rooftop, David saw a woman bathing. Bathsheba. Then the text says he “sent and took her.” (2 Samuel 11:4) According to the Torah, a woman was considered ceremonially unclean during her menstrual cycle. “When a woman has a discharge… she shall be in her impurity seven days.” (Leviticus 15:19) At the conclusion of that period, she was to wash herself. After sunset, she would be considered ritually clean again (Leviticus 15:28). The Biblical narrator makes this clear to remove ambiguity. She was “purifying herself” the text says, according to Levitical law. That detail also confirms that the child conceived could only be David’s, not Uriah’s. This act of bathing then was obedience to God’s covenant law. Bathsheba was observing Torah. She was not seducing anyone. Looking now to the palace of the king, it would have been elevated above surrounding areas, giving David a vantage point ordinary citizens would not have had. The text places responsibility on David: “In the spring, when kings go out to battle… David remained at Jerusalem.” (2 Samuel 11:1) The king should have been with his armies. So, he was somewhere he should not have been, at a time he should have been elsewhere, looking from a position of elevated power into private space. The problem is not that Bathsheba bathed. The problem is that the king watched. From here, all of 2 Samuel 11 intentionally structures the Hebrew verbs to place all agency with David: He saw. He sent. He took her. Bathsheba receives action. She does none. “He took her” is the key verb here. The Hebrew verb laqach (“to take”) used here regularly refers to “Seizing” and “Claiming” and “Taking a woman without her agency” throughout the rest of the Hebrew Bible. It is the exercising superior social/economic power. It is the same verb used for: Abduction (Genesis 34:2), royal seizure (1 Samuel 8:11-17), taking property by force (Exodus 22), and taking a woman into a king’s harem (Esther 2:8). In royal contexts, “take” implies coercion. There is no scenario where a king “takes” a woman and she has the power to refuse. Biblically and linguistically, laqach marks Bathsheba as acted upon, not participating. The text doesn’t describe adultery. It describes abuse perpetrated by the king. He sent. She was brought. He took. There is no language of mutuality. Only authority. Bathsheba is not given a voice in the narrative. David is king. She is summoned. In the ancient world, refusing the king was not an option. It was rape. Even the prophet Nathan in his rebuke compares what David did as slaughtering an innocent lamb for his own selfish purposes.  And when the resulting pregnancy from this abuse threatens exposure, David orchestrates the death of her husband, Uriah. Not in a moment of rage, but through calculated political manipulation (2 Samuel 11:14–15). Abuse. Cover-up. Weaponized authority. Murder. True Repentance And yet how often have we heard this framed as simply “David’s moral failure,” as though it were a lapse in judgment rather than systemic, intentional exploitation? Yes, David repents when confronted by Nathan (2 Samuel 12). But repentance does not erase consequences or harm caused. Even his repentance written in Psalm 51:4 should give us pause. David says to God, "against you and you alone have I sinned," which isn't true. He has sinned against Bathsheba, her husband, his unborn child, his family, and the people he has been appointed to lead. Samuel 12:10, tells us that the sword does not depart from his house. As we read on in 2 Samuel, we read what is rarely preached from pulpits. When David’s daughter Tamar is sexually assaulted by her half-brother Amnon (2 Samuel 13), the text says: “When King David heard of all these things, he was very angry.” (2 Samuel 13:21) David gets angry, but as we read on we see he does nothing about it. No justice. No protection. No accountability. In fact, the opposite happens. Tamar is silenced. Amnon is protected. Power shields power once again. So much for his repentance. And Absalom, Tamar’s full brother, responds to this injustice against his sister with violence and eventually rebellion. Leading a full on insurrection against King David, forcing him to flee the palace. Having taken the palace, even Absalom, in his anger, publicly violates all his father’s concubines (2 Samuel 16:22). The vulnerable again and again become instruments in a male dominated power struggles. This is not random family dysfunction. This is what happens when abuse is excused at the top. It metastasizes and signals to others in power that it is acceptable. The pattern is unmistakable: when leaders treat women and children as tools of authority and conquest, the entire culture absorbs it. And often normalizes it. This theology isn’t abstract. Somewhere along the way, portions of the Church learned how to preach David’s repentance louder than his abuse. We created a theology where powerful men are “imperfect vessels,” but women and children are often collateral damage. And that theology did not stay in the way we preached the Old Testament. It shaped how many Christians responded in 2016 when the Access Hollywood recording surfaced, in which Donald Trump boasted about grabbing women sexually because of his fame and power. Many of us thought: Surely this is the line. Surely this is when the majority of Christians will withdraw their support of him. It was not. Over 80% of white evangelical voters supported him in 2016 and again in 2020. The tape did not change that. Multiple public allegations of misconduct did not change that. In 2023, a civil jury found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation in the case brought by E. Jean Carroll. It did not change that. Support remained. Excuses multiplied. “It’s political.” “It’s a witch hunt.” “God uses flawed men.” “Just look at King David.” And with each defense, many in the Church unintentionally catechized the next generation into this lesson: If someone is powerful enough, useful enough, or politically valuable enough, accountability becomes optional. Most recently, public comments from figures like Pam Bondi, defending the president while dismissing criticism in hearings related to investigations around Jeffrey Epstein, have reinforced this perception for many watching. Especially when survivors in the room stood and raised their hands to say they had been ignored by the administration, Bondi blatantly ignored them too. All with a cross hanging around her neck. She exemplified what this theology teaches. Loyalty to power should outweigh any concern for victims. Also, it should be made clear, when any theology teaches that men are default authorities and women and children are subordinate, we should not be surprised when abuse is minimized and loyalty to male leadership eclipses justice. Jesus did not treat women and children as expendable. He protected the woman caught in adultery from public stoning (John 8 ) He received Mary of Bethany as a disciple (Luke 10:39). He revealed His resurrection first to women (All four gospels). He reprimanded his disciples from shushing and turning children away saying, “Let the little children come to me” (Matthew 19:14, Mark 10:14, Luke 18:16) He said “If anyone causes one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” (Matthew 18:6) He did not weaponize power. He relinquished it (Philippians 2:5–8). This is who the Church claims to follow. Our Public Witness I still have people messaging me and commenting declaring their undying support in the president and this administration. Even in light of the past and all that is coming out. They minimize, downplay, or even excuse. Many from those who claim to follow Jesus. If our Christianity causes us to protect the powerful and ignore the powerless, that’s when we know we are following someone other than Jesus. Micah 6:8 does not bend for proximity to power. It says, “What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God.” Justice is not partisan. Neither is accountability. The prophets never told Israel, “Protect the king at all costs.” They spoke truth to power. Nathan was sent by God and stood before David and rebuked him. Who is standing before the powerful today? Who is standing before us? Are we listening? Christians must be unambiguous: Abuse of power is sin. Sexual exploitation is sin. Harming children is a sin. Harming women is a sin. Silencing victims is sin. Excusing the sin of the powerful perpetuates the sin of the powerful. And any theology that normalizes male dominance while dismissing the suffering of women and children is poisonous. If we have downplayed David’s abuse to preserve the myth of the anointed leader, we must repent. If we have defended modern leaders more fiercely than we have defended the vulnerable, we must repent. If our political loyalties have made us numb to the cries of the abused, we must repent. Judgment begins with the household of God (1 Peter 4:17). The credibility of our witness depends not on our unbending loyalty to kings but on our listening to the truth spoken to the powerful by the prophets God sends over and over again to advocate for the poor, marginalized, and oppressed. The world is watching. And so are the wounded. And so is the next generation. And so is God. A Prayer for Courage Holy God, Forgive us for softening the sins of the powerful You sent Nathan to speak truth to power. Cleanse our theology of every lie Make us a people who do justice, love mercy, May our repentance be real. Amen.
|
I have spent the majority of my life in Evangelical Christian spaces. I have experienced a lot of church hurt. I now write to explore topics that often are at the intersection of politics and Christianity. My desire is to discover how we can move away from Christian nationalism, religious fundamentalism, and church hurt to reclaim the Gospel of Jesus together. I'm glad you're here to join the conversation. I look forward to talking with you.
Hello my friends, Given all that transpired this last week, at the intersection of Christianity and politics, from the nature of the National Prayer Breakfast and House Speaker Mike Johnson using scripture to frame the administration's position on immigration, I thought it would be fitting to reflect on the kind the kind of community Jesus is called his followers to embody in Matthew 5:13-20. Before we move on to our reflection, with Lent beginning on February 18th, I wanted to let you know...
We are seeing the “mark of the beast” play out in real time before our eyes. Let me explain. Revelation 13 talks about two beasts, not just one. This is really important. Probably one of the best ways I have learned to think about this passage is through word pictures. The author is inviting us into grand imagery to make a point. He is asking us to engage our imaginations fully. The “beasts” aren’t the point in and of themselves. What the beasts represent is the point. So, in Revelation 13,...
Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, recently used the Bible to uphold the administration’s position on immigration enforcement (Link to his post is below). What is most troubling about his defense of the administration’s immigration enforcement is not simply his conclusions, but the way the argument itself is framed. Again and again, opposition to current immigration policy and enforcement is caricatured as a desire for “open borders,” lawlessness, or disregard for public safety. That framing...