Posted on 02/07/2019 11:23:08 AM PST by SeekAndFind
In a recent Christian Post editorial, Napp Nazworth claims that evangelical Christians who voted for Donald Trump have compromised their witness and hurt the work of the gospel. He also believes that evangelical leaders who have been brought into Trump’s inner circle have become nothing more than useful idiots (my words), being duped by the allure of power.
With all respect to Napp, whom I honor as a committed Christian and fine journalist, I believe he has overstated his points and confused the roles of politics and the gospel.
Before sharing my perspective, however, let me make clear that: 1) to the extent evangelical supporters of Trump have looked to him to change the moral fabric of the nation, we have made a gross miscalculation; 2) to the extent evangelical leaders have excused the President’s bad behavior (especially in the present, with his tweets and his treatment of others), we have compromised our moral authority (a major point made by Napp); and 3) to the extent evangelicals have exchanged voting for praying and preaching, we have lost sight of our mission.
As the author of the book Donald Trump Is Not My Savior: An Evangelical Leader Speaks His Mind About the Man He Supports As President, I am under no illusions when it comes to our Commander in Chief.
That being said, I differ with Napp’s thesis for four principle reasons.
1. First, he confuses our vote for a political leader with our personal morality and witness. He wrote, “Before the election, I warned my fellow evangelicals to not vote for Trump, that associating with a person of Trump's character would damage us.”
But you can vote for someone without tying your soul to that person. You can vote for someone with reservation, even expressing that publicly. You can vote for someone while having a moral difference.
One of the main reasons I voted for Trump (after opposing him strongly in the primaries) was because I was voting against Hillary Clinton.
I felt she would be a staunch opponent of our religious liberties, a zealous advocate for abortion, and a supporter of radical LGBT activism.
In my view, her presidency could have negatively affected our country for many years to come, impacting our kids, our grandkids, and beyond.
Despite my very real concerns about Donald Trump, I hoped he would keep his promises in these key areas (along with supporting Israel). Thankfully, he has, which is why I’m still glad I voted for him, despite the collateral damage.
In the last two years, I have had serious gospel conversations with Trump-hating non-believers, and when I explained why I voted for Trump, expressing my reservations as a Jesus-follower, those I spoke with were able to separate my vote for Trump from my witness for Jesus.
2. Second, some evangelical leaders have made a positive impact on the president without compromising their moral authority at all.
One of my dearest friends is close to President Trump, and on several occasions, he has lovingly rebuked Trump in strong and clear terms. My friend’s public ministry goes on just the same, affecting as many people as he has for years, and he remains unimpressed by the lure of the White House, having been in different presidential circles over the years.
And he is not alone. There are strong evangelicals on the Cabinet, along with strong evangelical voices like former Ambassador Nikki Haley, who often spoke with prophetic clarity to the UN on behalf of Israel. And there is Vice President Mike Pence, who recently penned a strong article condemning the infanticidal comments of Virginia Governor Northam, calling his position “morally reprehensible and evil.”
This is highly significant, helping to energize the pro-life movement as well. How different things would be if Hillary Clinton had been elected!
3. Third, I believe Napp downplays the role of the courts in American society.
It is not just the Supreme Court that Trump is impacting. He is also impacting many other federal courts, again, with the possibility of changing the face of the courts for the next one to two generations.
Before Trump, we were facing a rising tide of judicial tyranny – what Mark Levin famously called Men in Black – a tyranny that was rewriting the Constitution and threatening our most fundamental liberties.
And while having better justices in the courts will not win the lost or bring revival – who ever thought it would? – it will protect some of our most cherished liberties and institutions.
Martin Luther King, Jr., once said, “The Christian gospel is a two-way road. On the one hand, it seeks to change the souls of men, and thereby unite them with God; on the other hand, it seeks to change the environmental conditions of men so the soul will have a chance after it is changed.”
We might say today that, while we seek to change the souls of men, we also want to preserve our right to live in accordance with our faith.
Not only so, but in my view (and the view of many), the issue of abortion is today’s slavery issue. How will we respond?
If Trump were a strong anti-slavery candidate in the 1850s, I would have voted for him. And I would have had no problem giving a Christian reason for doing so.
Napp argues that, at best, overturning Roe v. Wade would merely push the battle back to the States. But that is something we already know and we already embrace.
The alternative, which we are witnessing in front of our eyes, is the push to extend abortion “rights,” up to and including infanticide. Which do we prefer?
That, again, is why I can vote for Trump without compromising my moral authority. I was also voting for the lives of the unborn.
Napp writes, “But backing Trump won't end abortion. Just the opposite. In aligning with Trump, pro-lifers are only extending the time that will ultimately be required to end abortion because they're losing their moral authority to speak on this issue.”
To the contrary, the pro-life push under Trump has only highlighted the moral bankruptcy – and radicality – of the pro-abortion position, thereby clarifying our moral differences.
Of course, I agree that we will put an end to abortion on demand only by changing hearts and minds. But that also presupposes that, once someone’s heart is changed, they will then vote accordingly.
4. Fourth, while it is true that some of our witness has been hurt by evangelical leaders who defend Trump at every point, overall, I believe it is largely the leftwing media that is driving this narrative.
They are the ones shouting at every turn, “You must renounce Trump if you want us to take you seriously! No Christian can stand with Trump!”
I for one refuse to play this game (as I articulated in some of the chapters in my aforementioned book).
The fact is that this same media was mocking our position before we ever voted for Trump.
And I don’t believe for a split second that if we suddenly renounced him that these media leaders would say to us, “Please, share your views on abortion and homosexuality and the Bible. We would love to hear what you have to say.”
Not a chance.
Moreover, this same media despises Vice President Pence, in particular, because of his strong Christian views.
Had he been our president (or, if he one day becomes president), evangelicals supporting him would be accused of seeking to set up a theocracy, and we would be vilified day and night.
In sum, I believe we make a grave, fatal mistake if we look to the President to bring spiritual renewal or moral reformation to America. Perish the thought.
And I believe if we excuse his ungodly conduct or feel the need to become his defenders in chief, we do compromise our moral authority.
But if we give our souls to our Savior alone, to Him who died for us so we might live for Him, and if we give the President our vote, our witness remains firm and our integrity uncompromised.
I have no disagreements with your above post.
Warm Freegards,
SF
John 3:16 is NOT the beginning of the Gospel, but Romans 1:18-22:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.
.
I’ve just one point to make:
“Jesus” was rarely nice.
He was bluntly truthful at all times, thus gathered no friends from the ranks of the adversary’s children (Pharisees and their followers)
Be “gentle” only to the extent that the truth of Yehova can be so.
.
.
I have to rate this screed as a BARF.
Michael Brown knows not of what he speaks.
Donald Trump emulates our savior far better than does Brown.
Brown should read Matthew 10:34 first before he writes one word on any subject.
.
RE: I have to rate this screed as a BARF.
That is not a very helpful statement unless you can give us your reasons for saying so. That is just a rant.
RE: Donald Trump emulates our savior far better than does Brown.
Really? Having been unfaithful to your wife emulates our Savior?
RE: Brown should read Matthew 10:34 first before he writes one word on any subject.
I fail to see how his article conflicts with Matthew 10:34.
It’s not as if Brown does not acknowledge the existence of conflict and evil when you follow Jesus Christ.
In fact, the OPPOSITE is true. Brown KNOWS that such conflict exists, therefore he writes this article AS PART OF THAT BATTLE.
RE: the “nicer-than-Jesus” variety of “gentle” believers. He gets walked over as a result.
You should read more of Brown’s articles and listen to his Line of Fire radio program before you jump to such a conclusion. If there’s anything you can get out of them, it is this -— HE DOES NOT GET WALKED OVER AND CONFRONTS THE ENEMY’s LOGIC HEAD ON.
If Christians DON’T vote AGAINST the most evil candidate(s), they have allowed the un-godly to choose the victor.
Your above statement is precisely what the author is arguing for, but you summarized it well.
“My initial comment is found up-thread at #27. My question was this:
“ WHO DEBATES A MORON?””
That was a rhetorical question undeserving of an answer.
You are arguing to argue. Why not answer S&F’s question and quit standing on this rhetorical question of yours?
I HAVE listened to Brown, and read his articles. He is tragically far too conciliatory toward the most military sodomites at times. He even APOLOGIZED for past “mistreat” of homosexuals in society, sounding alarmingly close to the “me-too” slushes who slink away as if guilty.
If you want a specific example, I can find it later.
RE: . He even APOLOGIZED for past “mistreat” of homosexuals in society,
Because THERE WERE MISTREATMENTS in the past.
However, that does not mean that he does not oppose their lifestyle. He even opposes their bullying tactics against Christian Businesses.
I’ve heard his show too many times to call him a sellout to the sodomites.
Besides Franklin Graham
I don’t care
And it was not the people who currently support him but the people that might be on the fence that they were concerned with.
So that is either a totally naive statement or you are being completely disingenuous.
I find your attempt to justify your lying and rumor mongering amusing. Perhaps along with your time spent in repentance you could meditate on Proverbs 6:16-19.
Giving a good reason as to why you support Trump EVEN if those past trysts were true is not apologizing,
Yeah it is. It is even PRE-appologizing. Which is much worse and gives support to democrats.
I will take you word that Napp Nazworth is not a democrat supporter. Of course I tend to be a "you shall know them by their fruits" and the fruits are pretty ugly. Not of lot of "love, joy, peace" to be found. But a lot of fretting over back fence gossip. A little more concentration on the Gospel and less on "Gossip" might improve their harvest.
RE: So that is either a totally naive statement or you are being completely disingenuous.
In what way? tell me. There indeed are evangelicals who were concerned with Trump’s morality. In what way was Brown’s response to them naive?
RE: I find your attempt to justify your lying and rumor mongering amusing
So, you’re telling me that Trump NEVER cheated on any of his wives? That all reports of say, his first affair with Marla Maples when he was married to Ivana are false?
Tell me why those reports would not be true when at that time, there was little reason for the press to hate him as he was not even in political office.
RE: Proverbs 6:16-19
Have you proven the above to be a lie? Or are you just trying to ignore the truth?
RE: Yeah it is. It is even PRE-appologizing. Which is much worse and gives support to democrats.
NOPE, not pre-apologizing. It is DEFENDING one’s actions. Do not confuse the two.
RE: A little more concentration on the Gospel and less on “Gossip” might improve their harvest.
Of course, but the concerns about Trump’s past trysts are NOT GOSSIP. His affair with Marla Maples was PUBLIC. Ivana said so ( unless you are now telling me that she is lying and Trump is not ).
Let’s support the Trump that we see today because his policies are the right ones. But please, let us not close our eyes to what happened in the past. It does us no favors to hide our head in the sand.
.
>> “That is not a very helpful statement unless you can give us your reasons for saying so.” <<
Essentially, his first four paragraphs are nothing but a jealous rant.
Not one of Yeshua’s Talmudim is perfect. Trump has not attempted to present a false front, but Brown does in this rant.
Trump has used his person and office in ways that few have ever done to advance our national ‘code.’
Can the pride!
.
RE: Essentially, his first four paragraphs are nothing but a jealous rant.
His first four paragraphs describes the rants of the person whose logic he is writing against, not his own. So, in effect you are siding with Michael Brown.
RE: Trump has used his person and office in ways that few have ever done to advance our national ‘code.’
Errrr... that’s essentially what Michael Brown is saying. Did you even bother to read his article?
RE: Can the pride!
Please READ the article before you comment and attack.
I didn’t mean to imply that Brown is a sellout to the sodomites. I’m just saying that he sugar-coats the truth too much to avoid offending.
It’s a deceitful straw man that the left incessantly uses by equating voting for Trump as endorsing his EVER action in life, both past and present.
You are right, Trump is a means of slowing down the cancer, or hopefully reversing it. Clinton would have been a bullet to the brain.
One thing that has impressed me about Trump is that he is tough - often crude but tough - and toughness is something I have seldom seen in Republican politicians in many election cycles. It is exactly what we need to withstand the current, vile character the modern Democratic Party. Trump has many Godly, conservative advisers, and I respect him deferring to these counselors for guidance on policy decisions.
It’s a deceitful straw man that the left incessantly uses by equating voting for Trump as endorsing his EVER action in life, both past and present.
You are right, Trump is a means of slowing down the cancer, or hopefully reversing it. Clinton would have been a bullet to the brain.
One thing that has impressed me about Trump is that he is tough - often crude but tough - and toughness is something I have seldom seen in Republican politicians in many election cycles. It is exactly what we need to withstand the current, vile character the modern Democratic Party. Trump has many Godly, conservative advisers, and I respect him deferring to these counselors for guidance on policy decisions.
I have no arguments with your above post.
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.