Posted on 12/10/2019 8:48:01 AM PST by SeekAndFind
I found Michael Brown’s response to my op-ed, “Are Evangelicals Who Support Trump Fools?” further proof that evangelicals who back Trump are foolish when it comes to how they view the President.
According to Merriam-Webster, foolish means “having or showing a lack of good sense, judgement, or discretion” and fool means “a person lacking in judgement or prudence.” Whether you say someone is being foolish or acting like a fool, Brown’s op-ed gave me no rational or biblical reason to think evangelicals who support the president are being anything other than both when it comes to their perception of the most powerful man in the world.
I read and re-read Brown’s op-ed, thinking the whole time about the old Wendy’s commercial, “Where’s the beef?” What is Brown’s beef with what I wrote? The best I could come up with is when he says, “Thurman seems blind to his (Trump’s) strengths and his potential to help America greatly.” I assume this is Brown’s main problem with what I wrote — that I’m blind to what’s good about Trump. From there, he goes on to call me out for being hypocritical about the whole matter given that I criticize evangelicals for being blind to Trump’s defects as president. Brown’s criticism is disconcerting on two levels.
First, why is Brown talking about me given that my op-ed was about evangelicals who foolishly support Trump in spite of the fact that he is a deeply mentally and morally disturbed person? This is a common tactic employed by many Trump supporters — go after the accuser rather than the accused.
I don’t have the space to go into it in much detail, but many of the people who disagreed with my op-ed (either at the end of my article, writing me via email, or calling me on the phone) said I was a baby-killer, immoral, disgracing the cause of Christ, and not even a Christian. Those were the nicest criticisms I got. Personally, I am growing sick and tired of Trump-supporting evangelicals attacking the messenger rather than the message. To fire back at the many disturbing aspects of what I said about Trump with “Well, he’s got some strengths, and you’re too hypocritical to acknowledge them” is weak at best.
Second, Brown is making an erroneous assumption about me, in this case that I am “blind to his (Trump’s) strengths and his potential to help America greatly.” I’m not blind to Trump’s strengths. I don’t believe he has any. I agree with Peter Wehner in his op-ed in the Atlantic, “Trump is Not Well,” that Trump is “a terribly damaged person, a broken man, a person with a disordered mind.” Please, don’t talk about his strengths when he has none. And, I’m not blind to Trump’s “potential to help America greatly.” I believe his malignant narcissism makes him a serious threat to harm America greatly. Honestly, hasn’t he already?
If Trump is a malignant narcissist as many of us believe, he is an evil person and has no redeeming qualities. Throughout human history, we have seen one evil person after another cause great harm to our world. Would anyone look at an Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Putin, or Kim Jong Un and say they have “strengths” in the sense of positive character traits? When are Trump-supporting evangelicals (and Republicans in general) going to admit they have hitched their wagon to someone with a severely disordered personality about whom nothing good can be said characterologically?
Trump-supporting evangelicals need to be much more discerning about the difference between someone doing good (for example, some of Trump’s court appointments have been positive) and Trump having strengths. Whatever “good” Trump has done in the eyes of evangelicals, I don’t believe it is coming out of any characterological strengths, because, once again, I don’t believe he has any. I believe that everything Trump does is based on whether or not it will fire up his base, further empower him, and ensure his staying in power.
Let me approach this from a different perspective. I would like to challenge Brown and the others who criticized the op-ed I wrote to come up with one positive character trait Trump possesses. Just one. Remember, I’m not talking about the good things he has done. Doing a good thing doesn’t automatically mean there is an underlying positive character trait in play. I’m talking here about a positive trait — something good about his character that shows up in his actions on a regular basis.
Please, take me up on my challenge. Give me one single example of a true positive trait in our current president. Go to the Fruits of the Spirit (love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control). Do any apply to Trump? Go to the Beatitudes (poor in spirit, meek, mournful, thirsting for righteousness, merciful, pure of heart, a peacemaker, persecuted for righteousness sake). Do any of the these apply to Trump? Go to the Ten Commandments (no other gods before God, no graven images/no worshipping them, don’t use God’s name in vain, remember the Sabbath, honor your father and mother, do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness against your neighbor, and do not covet you neighbor’s house, wife, servants, or anything that belongs to him or her). Has Trump spent his life trying to obey these commandments or regularly breaking them with no sign of godly sorrow that leads to repentance? I think Brown and all those who support Trump know the answer to these questions but are simply unwilling to admit it.
Brown says “Trump’s very evident shortcomings are what mark him as a man raised by God,” comparing him as other evangelicals have done to King Cyrus in the Old Testament. I simply don’t know what to say to that. From my perspective, it is a fallacious and unbiblical argument at best. Brown goes on to suggest that Trump defeating all his primary challengers and the fact that so many leading evangelicals supported him when he ran for president (“How is it, I wondered, that so many good people could be duped?”) are further evidence that Trump was raised by God to be president. Again, I have no idea how a person having dangerous mental and moral defects, abusively bullying his way through the 2016 primaries, and being supported by so many “good” people is a biblical basis for arguing that Trump is God’s choice for the White House and that evangelicals are supposed to support him.
Does it ever occur to Brown that the flip side of his argument is just as compelling? Is it possible that Trump ended up in the Oval Office empowered by spiritual forces of darkness and that God permitted him to be president but didn’t desire it? And, is Brown oblivious to the fact that a lot of “good” evangelicals strongly oppose Trump being president. For every Franklin Graham, there’s a Peter Wehner, author of The Death of Politics. For every Jerry Falwell, Jr., there’s a Ben Howe, author of The Immoral Majority. For every Ralph Reed, there’s a Bandy Lee, author of The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump. For every Mike Pence, there’s a Max Lucado, pastor and popular Christian author of almost 100 books.
I’m anticipating a similar response to this op-ed that I got last time — a smattering of “I’m glad you said it and completely agree with you” but a greater number of “Who in the world do you think you are, you arrogant, godless man?” I’m also anticipating that some Trump-supporting evangelicals will call me out for judging Trump (“Do not judge, or you will be judged,” Matthew 7:1). Scripture teaches us not to be judgmental toward others, meaning that we are to avoid any hint of looking down our noses at others as if we are better than them and make sure we take the plank out of our own eye before presuming to point out the speck (in Trump’s case, the plank) in someone else’s eye. I take full responsibility for making numerous judgments about Trump in my op-eds, but I want you to know that I am fully aware of the fact that compared to Christ none of us, me included, are any better than him.
I’d like to restate, one final time, the major points in my first op-ed so there is no confusion about my stance on Trump and the evangelicals who support him:
*Trump is a malignant narcissist, and, consequently, an evil person. He is not different in degree as many evangelicals seem to think, he is different in kind.
*As an evil person, Trump is extremely dangerous and poses a grave threat to our democracy and the world at large.
*Trump’s mental and moral pathology are only going to worsen over time, causing even more damage to everything he touches.
*Trump is unwilling to acknowledge that he has any serious flaws (he won’t even admit to having minor ones) and is militantly unrepentant before a Holy God.
*Evangelicals who support Trump (defined in my op-ed as those who “continue to hold Trump up as a great leader, say he is God’s chosen one for the presidency, applaud his appalling words and actions, ignore his glaring moral defects, and enable his dangerous presidency to continue by giving him their time, talents, and treasure”) are being foolish and being played for fools by Trump and his sycophants.
Brown and I can’t both be right. Trump is either a person who is “as flawed as he is” as Brown believes or someone who is truly evil as I believe. Trump is either a King Cyrus-type figure as Brown believes or a malignant narcissist as described in 2 Timothy 3:2 as I believe. Trump either has a great deal of potential to help America as Brown believes or a great deal of potential to harm America as I believe.
If Trump is just a deeply flawed person doing the best he can to run the country, we evangelicals should give him our full, undivided support and do everything we can to make his presidency a success. If Trump is evil and doing the best he can to tear our country down for selfish and malevolent reasons, we should have nothing to do with him, remove him from office as quickly as possible, press the reset button, and get someone elected to the presidency who truly shares our core values as Christians.
Chris Thurman, Ph.D., is a psychologist and author of The Lies We Believe.
Since I have not read your response ( and do not know whether it is forthcoming ), I thought I’d like to post my response to the author.
He said: “If Trump is a malignant narcissist as many of us believe, he is an evil person and has no redeeming qualities.”
Even if he exagerrated statement above is true ( which it is not ), I’d like to ask him — WHAT IS OUR ALTERNATIVE in 2016?
Should we vote for the opponent who:
1) Threatened and intimidated the woman who her husband raped?
2) Used her party’s money to fabricate a fake dossier on her opponent so that the country would be plunged into 2 wasted years and millions of dollars in an investigation that went nowhere? ( What is that commandment about not bearing false witness again, Mr. Thurman?)
3) Refuses to answer for abandoning our soldiers when they needed help in Benghazi and then lying about the cause of the attack to their families?
4) Endanger the national security of our country by putting Sensitive National information on a private server in order to hide her dealings to enrich herself, her husband and their foundation?
5) Concoct a lie to justify the firing of an innocent man named Billy Dale, in Travelgate, who was bankrupted trying to defend himself only to be acquitted later?
6) Supports the killing of babies up to the time of birth? (Trump has shown that he is one of the MOST PRO-LIFE Presidents this country has ever seen ).
7) Supports the appointment of judges and justices who will refuse to protect our religious freedoms? (Trump is doing the OPPOSITE of what Hillary planned to do ).
8) Said she supported traditional marriage, only to change her mind and now strongly support the redefinition of marriage?
IS THAT WHO EVANGELICALS SHOULD SUPPORT MR. THURMAN?
AND SUPPORTING A WOMAN WHO DOES ALL THE ABOVE IS NOT SUPPORTING EVIL?
What this writer does not get is this — we are not given black and white choices in elections but a choice between flawed individuals.
Evangelicals are BETTER OFF choosing the flawed person who supports the causes Evangelical care about.
If Thurman prefers Evangelicals to support Hillary, he better give us his reasons as to why he thinks it is the better alternative.
God raised up King Cyrus as an ANNOINTED KING. Even though he was not Jewish. Clearly, God can use President Trump to support his people.
When it comes to worshipping idols, bearing false witness and coveting other people’s stuff I think the author should direct his criticism against the Democrats.
When it comes to worshipping idols, bearing false witness and coveting other people’s stuff I think the author should direct his criticism against the Democrats. [AND THE MEDIA]
RE: Please, take me up on my challenge. Give me one single example of a true positive trait in our current president
JUST THESE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD (I’M SURE THERE’s MORE):
1) He kept his word to Evangelicals. He appointed Judges and Justices who uphold the law instead of legislating from the bench.
2) He kept his word about being supporting the protection of unborn babies.
3) He kept his word about protecting the borders of this country from illegals who refuse to respect our immigration laws.
4) De-regulated and did away with government rules that were crushing the life of businesses big and small, resulting in the unleashing of risk taking an creating an economic boom with the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years — all to the benefit of ALL RACES.
Now, let me turn the question around to the author. WHAT WOULD THE RESULTS OF ELECTING THE ALTERNATIVE BE?
Right, go with the pedos and the rest of the perverts instead.
Who else were we to support?
The baby killing democrat candidate?
I am going to try and post on this guys article, but I will post here first for my FP family.
Self-control - President Trump does not smoke or drink.
Love - I see self evident, and proclaimed love for his children, for veterans, for first responders.
Forbearance- Iran still exist although President Trump had forces in the air and sea ready to destroy it.
Joy- Really, have you actually seen Trump speak at a rally?
Kindness - How about asking the 3 falsely imprisoned vets Trump just pardoned? How about asking the people released under the First Step Act?
I could go on about peacemaker, generous, and others, but the real point is your fallacious statement “Remember, I’m not talking about the good things he has done.”
Everyone on the face of the earth can only be judged by what they do. Only God knows if they have a positive character trait, if they are doing it from positive motives. Mr. Thurman, why did you write this article and what positive motive did you have? Or are you just shilling for the Democrat nominee?
This slip of the tongue belies his Trump Derangement Syndrome. He apparently expects us to join him in bashing Trump.
This Thurman is wrong, as he says at the end. What a load of my tag line.
Popular traditional Jewish teachers like Rabbi Reuven Wolf, Rabbi Mendel Kessin, Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi and others have no problem pointing out that Pres. Trump represents King Cyrus, or Roman Emperor Antoninus (who secretly converted to Judaism), or is ‘the good that is in Esau’ the brother of Jacob.
They also have no hesitation to call the maniacal opposition to Trump Satanic.
RE: Kindness - How about asking the 3 falsely imprisoned vets Trump just pardoned? How about asking the people released under the First Step Act?
SEE ALICE JOHNSON as one of the first beneficiaries among others:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44400441
and here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40sHIfh8k80
See another: Matthew Charles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1_8ZAtX_Mg
Does this show a person with an evil heart Mr. Thurman?
“ Evangelicals who support Trump (defined in my op-ed as those who “continue to hold Trump up as a great leader, say he is God’s chosen one for the presidency, applaud his appalling words and actions, ignore his glaring moral defects, and enable his dangerous presidency to continue by giving him their time, talents, and treasure”) are being foolish and being played for fools by Trump and his sycophants.”
Mathew 5:22 comes to mind.
22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
>>>in spite of the fact that he is a deeply mentally and morally disturbed person<<<
Opinions are opinions and facts are facts. The Author seems to lack that understanding.
Fact based opinions are lacking when it comes to the Left.
Today’s Pharisees.
The author admits President Trump’s actions are wonderful but that, somehow, the fruit of his actions is growing on the poisoned tree of his character. The problem is that character is inferred from actions. One cannot be said to have a wonderful character that is bereft of good works. A study of Jesus would help the author immeasurable.
Hard to follow this logic unless we start with the realization that Chris Thurman hates President Trump. The rest follows easily.
I was looking at a Henry lever-action 45-70 the other day. I really liked it, but I had to ask myself, “What am I going to do with it? Hunt buffalo?”
RE: >>>in spite of the fact that he is a deeply mentally and morally disturbed person<<<
After Iran shot down our Drone in the gulf, we could have attacked Iran and destroyed their air defense system.
“We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die,” Trump said in a series of tweets last June.
Upon hearing the projected death toll for Iran ( a minimum of 150, some civilians), Trump said, he decided that the strike was not “proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone.” The president said he put a halt to the operation 10 minutes before the strike was set to begin.
Question to Mr. Thurman: Would a deeply mentally and morally disturbed person have the presence of mind, resolve and self-control to do what Trump did?
This article is about as juvenile as it gets, and demonstrates the extent to which politics, no matter how impactful to humanity, is still not much more than a glorified Game of Thrones to most people. Until things get hot, of course.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.