Trump Proof Evangelicals Are Losing Their Religion?

[PureX]

At issue is a variation of, does the end justify the means?

It is, does a good result justify the one who brought it about?

It seems as though we are being told that since Trump doesn't act like a Christian those things his administration has brought about that are in harmony with Evangelical beliefs, should be ignored.

That is pure baloney.

Trumps behavior is deplorable much of the time. Yet he strongly supports the right to life and is appointing judges throughout the federal judiciary that reflect my view of how they should administer the law.

Lets turn it around and say that in the future a president is elected who has led an exemplary Christian life, she is morally spotless. However, in office she supports nothing that is important to Evangelicals.

So then, should she get the undivided support of Evangelicals not because of her deeds while in office, but because she is a good Christian woman?

No

I have no illusions about Trumps schoolyard behavior, it is wrong and non Christian.

But his administration is doing things that are important to me and my beliefs.

I can walk and chew gum at the same time. I can say his behavior is shoddy and non Christian.


I can say at the same time that he is doing some very good things from my evangelical perspective.

I choose to decry his behavior, and accept what his administration is doing that is good.

It's what evangelicals want that is causeing the rest of us to define them as being non-Christian. And it's also their willingness to make a pact with the devil to get what they want, and to hell with what anyone else wants. Even to the point of deliberately appointing biased and corrupt politicians and judges.

 

[columbus]

If it's applied to a particular poster, perhaps it should be.

"If", "perhaps", "should".

Tom

 

[sun rise]

Nah. Twas mental compartmentalization IMO.
People can tolerate great faults in politicians because it's war
against the other side.

Yes, that's true.

At issue is a variation of, does the end justify the means?

The thesis of the article is that the means are not leading to the desired end. Instead of increasing Christian virtue, the means are leading to a non-traditional-Christian end.

 

[columbus]

It's what evangelicals want that is causeing the rest of us to define them as being non-Christian. And it's also their willingness to make a pact with the devil to get what they want, and to hell with anyone else.

That's not true.
I totally think that the Christian basket of deplorables are the true Christians!

Violence. Xenophobia. Greed. Self-righteouness. Legalism.

That's Christianity.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

"If", "perhaps", "should".

Tom

I don't make or enforce the rules.
So I'm circumspect about how things are or should be.
(My advice carries less than no weight.)
Also, I must tread lightly on this topic.

 

[columbus]

I don't make or enforce the rules.
So I'm circumspect about how things are or should be.
(My advice carries less than no weight.)
Also, I must tread lightly on this topic.

Ya darned weinie.
I've survived over 50 warnings.

Get up off your knees!

Or buy a bottle of lube
Tom

 

[PureX]

That's not true.
I totally think that the Christian basket of deplorables are the true Christians!

Violence. Xenophobia. Greed. Self-righteouness. Legalism.

That's Christianity.
Tom

That's your own bias. Like saying all blacks are lazy, shiftless, and given to criminal behavior because they are black. Sure, some are lazy, shiftless and criminally minded. But it's not all of them, or even most of them. And it's not because they have black skin. They are a small minority within the group that chooses to misrepresent their race in a bad way. And you're buying into it because you want to believe the misrepresentation.

Every large group of humans will have it's share of 'deplorables'. Among Christians, they are those who have turned their religion into their God, and their blind adherence to it into their own self-imagined divine righteousness.

 

[columbus]

That's your own bias. Like saying all blacks are lazy, shiftless, and given to criminal behavior because they are black. Sure, some are lazy, shiftless and criminally minded. But it's not all of them, or even most of them. And it's not because they have black skin. They are a small minority within the group that chooses to misrepresent their race in a bad way. And you're buying into it because you want to believe the misrepresentation.

Ah.
You play the race card.

If I cared more I'd post a bunch of Trump videos. Trump your race card.
But I don't. I fully expect Trump to keep doing what he's doing.

I fully expect the USA to keep becoming less great. And I expect the TeaParty folks to eventually blame it on Trump's successor, like they blamed the domestic and foreign policy disasters of the Bush administration on Obama.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

Ya darned weinie.
I've survived over 50 warnings.

Get up off your knees!

Or buy a bottle of lube
Tom

You have the advantage of being a gay liberal with a husband.
I'm the lowest of the low....old white cismale libertarian who voted for Trump.
They'd call me "dirt" if they didn't fear offending dirt.

 

[PureX]

Ah.
You play the race card.

An analogy is not, "playing the race card". Grow up.

I fully expect the USA to keep becoming less great. And I expect the TeaParty folks to eventually blame it on Trump's successor, like they blamed the domestic and foreign policy disasters of the Bush administration on Obama.
Tom

Of course they will. Otherwise they'd have to see themselves as having been totally duped, and used, like the fools that they are.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Not just "some," but rather quite a large number it seems. Also, I just remembered some other articles I read weeks ago and some personal experience as well, American Catholics are also huge supporters of Trump. Mexican Catholics not so much.

I have noticed that many of my wife's family, who happen to be Catholic given it is an Italian and Portuguese family, tend to be pro-Trump.

 

[columbus]

liberal

Liberal?

Seriously?
Tom

 

[Guitar's Cry]

First, people with the worst background can become a Christian, Paul was a murderer.

Trump is no example of Christian behavior.

As an Evangelical, I have a deep interest in political policy issues related to a great variety of issues.

The author of your article has a viewpoint, he does not represent, nor are his views 100% accurate related to any or all Evangelical Christians.

At issue is a variation of, does the end justify the means?

It is, does a good result justify the one who brought it about?

It seems as though we are being told that since Trump doesn't act like a Christian those things his administration has brought about that are in harmony with Evangelical beliefs, should be ignored.

That is pure baloney.

Trumps behavior is deplorable much of the time. Yet he strongly supports the right to life and is appointing judges throughout the federal judiciary that reflect my view of how they should administer the law.

Lets turn it around and say that in the future a president is elected who has led an exemplary Christian life, she is morally spotless. However, in office she supports nothing that is important to Evangelicals.

So then, should she get the undivided support of Evangelicals not because of her deeds while in office, but because she is a good Christian woman?

No

I have no illusions about Trumps schoolyard behavior, it is wrong and non Christian.

But his administration is doing things that are important to me and my beliefs.

I can walk and chew gum at the same time. I can say his behavior is shoddy and non Christian.


I can say at the same time that he is doing some very good things from my evangelical perspective.

I choose to decry his behavior, and accept what his administration is doing that is good.

I will continue to take the good with the bad, unless another candidate comes along that will support my beliefs in a stronger fashion than Trump.

Don't hold your breath

Thanks for your response!

It makes sense that Trump support would be focused on political issues and not on behavior, and this is something the article did bring up:

“No one I know of would argue that Donald Trump inculcates moral character,” Flynt says. “What has happened to American Christianity is there is this afterglow of what a candidate is supposed to represent. It’s no longer moral character. It’s policy positions on things that bother evangelicals.”

What surprises me is just how much they support him. There's an adoration that seems to go beyond that of politically supporting abortion. That may not be the case for you or other Evangelicals, but it does certainly occur.

Also, the article discusses the discrepancy between just how much political emphasis is put on abortion and homosexuality vs. civil rights and human welfare, despite lip service otherwise from the pulpit.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Something else to consider: why the adoration for Trump and not his Vice president who arguably encapsulates the morality of Evangelical Christianity more fully?

I suspect it is Trump's wealth and fame.

 

[Audie]

I came across this article and found it interesting:

How the Bible Belt lost God and found Trump | Financial Times



I have my thoughts on the article, but I want to know what folks think of the article before I taint the thread with my views.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I came across this article and found it interesting:

How the Bible Belt lost God and found Trump | Financial Times



I have my thoughts on the article, but I want to know what folks think of the article before I taint the thread with my views.

Was there ever a time when mainstream Evangelical Christianity wasn't cruel, hypocritical, and "unchrist-like?"

We're talking about the religion of the KKK, Phyllis Schlafly, George Wallace, and Tim Bakker. It's the religious group that brough us lynchings, "conversion therapy," Jesus Camp, and "a woman's place is in the home." It's never not borne bad fruit; some people today just aren't aware of its history.

 

[Terry Sampson]

One might call it the General Sherman syndrome, ie, despicable people fighting the good fight.

If'n you ain't gonna throw food at anybody OR yer gonna throw food at everybody, you may wanna look for a seat in the balcony, 'cause folks down here on the floor are going to town on one side or the other, not neither or both, and astute observations or not, you're libel to git dirty or worse, ... hurt.

 

[Ouroboros]

I have noticed that many of my wife's family, who happen to be Catholic given it is an Italian and Portuguese family, tend to be pro-Trump.

It doesn't surprise me. Apparently, Mexican Catholics aren't as favorable to Trump. I wonder why...

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Was there ever a time when mainstream Evangelical Christianity wasn't cruel, hypocritical, and "unchrist-like?"

We're talking about the religion of the KKK, Phyllis Schlafly, George Wallace, and Tim Bakker. It's the religious group that brough us lynchings, "conversion therapy," Jesus Camp, and "a woman's place is in the home." It's never not borne bad fruit; some people today just aren't aware of its history.

You are correct: it is a history fraught with hypocrisy and a focus on power rather than piety.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Are you suggesting that there are no discrepancies between conservative christian beliefs and Trump's behavior? Stop being a sniveling boot licker and look at things objectively.

Hey I didn't make the loaded OP.

Looks like TDS to me.