Civil disagreement

Dear editor:

Mr. Cunningham (Sept. 27) sends a strange rebuttal to my Sept. 9 letter where

I was challenging his shaming Ms. Jones for questioning that our president could have been chosen by God.

I was basically stating that though the scripture he cited written by St. Paul about obeying rulers because they were anointed by God, the ancient world and the modern world of Europe and America are vastly different. In other words, they cannot be compared in terms of politics.

When we brought a democratic republic secular in nature to the “New World,” our founders left behind any notion of divine appointment. They instituted our democratic way of electing leaders. Eventually, European countries had already begun to do the same by electing prime ministers, though most retained a church and state relationship. The USA founders wanted church/state separation because of the religious policies of the old country that caused much persecution of individual believers. The colonists, unfortunately, had continued to mix church and state. When the new country was created, the colonies one by one had to give it up.

Curiously, Mr. Cunningham begins his latest missile stating that “we cannot compare our culture with that which the Apostle Paul experienced.” Perhaps Mr. Cunningham did not read my letter carefully. It seems we actually agree, but he still insists that President Trump was appointed by God, and even that Hitler was appointed by God. I am still attempting to fathom how he can reconcile these attitudes.

I appreciate Mr. Cunningham’s writing in a civil tone. I believe these days too many hot, slandering words are being used by opposing camps concerning the upcoming election. I should hope we Christians can continue to agree to disagree. John W. “Doc” Crawford Hot Springs