Posted on 11/29/2015 6:12:20 AM PST by Kaslin
I understand the tremendous popularity of Donald Trump in America in 2015.
He is a larger than life reality TV star; he is incredibly rich and not beholden to anyone; he is fearless and speaks his mind; he articulates the frustrations and anger of millions of his countrymen; he gives the impression that he can fix our economy and will put an end to illegal immigration; he is not a Washington insider; he could be a strong leader who could face down our global enemies; he can even be winsome and self-effacing at times.
Yes, I do understand all this to the point that, for some weeks, I wondered to myself if I could get behind Trump as a candidate. And the question still remains, if the presidential race was between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, could I cast a vote for Trump? (I could not possibly vote for Hillary Clinton.)
But let's not deal in hypotheticals now. The immediate question is: Should evangelical Christians support Donald Trump as the Republican candidate? I do not see how we can if the Word of God is to be our guide and if it's important to us that a candidate have a solid moral compass and a biblically based worldview and I mean to be our president, not our spiritual leader, since we are electing a president, not a pastor or priest.
The Scriptures teach that out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks (Luke 6:45), and so Trump's consistent pattern of reckless speech points to deeper issues which could make him unfit for the office of the presidency.
I'm not just talking about his silly attacks on Megyn Kelly (blood), Carly Fiorina (face), and Marco Rubio (sweat) or his more serious attacks on Mexican immigrants (accusing the many of what the few do) and others. I'm talking about his character assault on Ben Carson, comparing him to a child molester who has pathological problems and, most recently, his apparent mocking of the disability of New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski.
Worse still, rather than apologizing for his most recent remarks, he claims he is being unfairly attacked for his comments and alleges that he doesn't even know what Kovaleski looks like. Is he lying?
Notice that he referred to Kovaleski, who suffers from arthrogryposis, which visibly limits flexibility in his arms, as a "nice reporter," before saying, "Now the poor guy, you've got to see this guy," flailing his arms as he pretended to be Kovaleski.
Is this the man you want to be our president? The warnings in Proverbs are strong: "Do you see a man who is hasty in his words? There is more hope for a fool than for him" (Proverbs 29:20). And, "A fool gives full vent to his spirit, but a wise man quietly holds it back" (Proverbs 29:11).
We need a statesman, not an irresponsible flame thrower, and one can be a strong political leader who is cutting and fearless with words think of Winston Churchill without making a fool of oneself.
What of Trump's claim that, "I have no idea who this reporter, Serge Kovalski is, what he looks like or his level of intelligence," and, "Despite having one of the all-time great memories, I certainly do not remember him"?
If this is true, why did he refer to him as a "nice reporter" and what did he mean when he said, "Now the poor guy, you've got to see this guy"? And did he merely flail his arms mocking someone who, he claimed, couldn't quite remember things correctly this was Trump's defense or was he making fun of Kovaleski's arms? (Watch for yourself and you be the judge as to whether he is telling the truth.)
Kovaleski, for his part, states that, "Donald and I were on a first-name basis for years. I've interviewed him in his office. I've talked to him at press conferences. All in all, I would say around a dozen times, I've interacted with him as a reporter while I was at the Daily News."
How could Trump have forgotten someone with Kovaleski's condition?
Trump pointed to the large sums he has given to help people with disabilities, and I don't doubt that he has, nor do I doubt that he cares about the disabled and handicapped.
But what is undeniable is that he is often irresponsible and reckless in his speech, something that could be utterly disastrous for the president of the United States of America. As noted by Jay Ruderman, an advocate for the disabled, "It is unacceptable for a child to mock another child's disability on the playground, never mind a presidential candidate mocking someone's disability as part of a national political discourse."
Yet there's something that concerns me even more when it comes to evangelicals supporting Donald Trump and that is the issue of pride, the sin that is often at the root of a host of other sins (Isaiah 14:11-15), the sin which God resists (James 4:6), the sin which leads to destruction (Proverbs 16:18).
Trump seems to have little understanding of what it means to ask God for forgiveness, while his very open, unashamed boastfulness is part and parcel of his persona. Trump and pride seem to walk hand in hand, quite comfortably at that.
So, while I do understand why many Americans are behind Donald Trump and while I do believe he could do some things well as president, I cannot understand how evangelicals can back him, especially when we have a number of solid, God-fearing, capable alternatives.
(For my video commentary on this, with the relevant clips from Trump, click here. The ugly comments from Trump supporters are quite telling.)
I get it. The point is, Jesus wasn’t afraid to call a name or characterize people, that it would “hurt heir feelings” if He spoke the truth.
Simple answer to follow up: “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
Yes, you’re right. Good comparison.
He already knew she was a sharp cookie, from her first question, and later statements. I think he was provoking her, to see what she would say. And of course making a powerful statement about Jews vis-a-vis Gentiles.
Like Trump’s comments, it brought more attention to his name and his message—in this case, for all time.
Somehow most black Christians are convinced that they should always vote Democrat. I wonder how the vote bundlers pull that one off.
Headline the next day: “Trump Says He Has Sinned—and Fallen Short of the Glory of God!”
They wouldn’t bother to say “Like Everybody Else.”
I think Trump is not a Christian based on his inadvertent testimony.
There was a great scene, buried in all the gore, in "Passion of the Christ" in which Jesus as a young man was drawing water for Mary and playfully splashed her.
They’d be playing into his hands if they did.
Repartee, definitely. The English guy who was given this to translate got a plum assignment.
Close, but you're missing the point.It doesn't matter that *some* Christians support your candidate. Some always will. what you want, as a Conservative, is the candidate that most of them are going to be comfortable voting for. Otherwise you are in fact, supporting division among their ranks - Splitting the votes of the largest voting bloc in America is a dumb thing to do. And even 10% missed is enough to lose the general, as Romney (and I would say McAin't too) can attest.
true, there may be many others that are supporting him, but does that make the Christians that are supporting him any less Christian? Or the others any less important?
Forgive me, but yes. In my mind, anyone who is devout, who lives by Biblical precepts, will have trouble voting for Trump. Take away his election year speeches and look at his life, and what he has stood for, and one cannot see many of the values that Christians look for, and one can see support for things and organizations that Christians oppose.
Bear in mind that I am not speaking in judgement, but in statistics. I don't care about voter's individual faith - That is way above my paygrade - But the tendency is definitely for Christians to deny Trump. What is left is low-info Christians, and those to whom their faith is secondary.
What I’m hearing is that Christians should support Cruz because he says he’s a conservative Chritian, but yet if he is weak on certain issues with respect to other candidates, that doesn’t matter?
First, I don't think he's weak on anything.
Secondly, because I believe that a person must be guided by a strong moral compass, it is the primary thing I look for... and it is foremost in predicting a given outcome in any situation. Ergo, his moral fiber will innately guide him.
Thirdly, Cruz does not 'say' he is Christian. His history does. He walks the walk. Now, no one can judge his heart, but his actions speak much louder that his speeches.
So we get a candidate that is very strongly religious, but is weak on borders, illegal immigration, etc., that’s ok?
Ted Cruz is not weak on borders and immigration. If it were not for Ted Cruz, almost single-handedly, and against his party's wishes, immigration would already be a moot point.
Indeed. I wish you well : )
“You think Obama is out of control? Imagine Trump. Seriously”
Let’s wait and see how the Trummp thing plays out. I seriously don’t know.
Forgive me, but yes. In my mind, anyone who is devout, who lives by Biblical precepts, will have trouble voting for Trump. -
sorry...but I know many people you just described and they, would not have any trouble pulling the lever for him...at this point.
Take away his election year speeches and look at his life, and what he has stood for, and one cannot see many of the values that Christians look for, and one can see support for things and organizations that Christians oppose. -
That is true...there are things that I’m not happy with however, he, as we all, are sinful and fallen and are always able to be redeemed. We have disappointed before and will continue to be if we put our faith in man...
“Bear in mind that I am not speaking in judgement”...”What is left is low-info Christians, and those to whom their faith is secondary. -
Not speaking in judgment? How do you know they are LICs and their faith is secondary?
First, I don’t think he’s weak on anything. -
respectfully disagree with you. As I posted in other similar threads he had a couple of significant miscalculations, mistakes, or whatever you want to call it on votes this past year. I’ve seen all the excuses, etc., but have a hard time trusting someone who may be so calculating and that requires outside donors (yes, I know he receives a good deal of private donations, and that speaks volumes to his support, but those donations are not what is going to keep him in the race...he’s going to need big $$ donors, and they are going to expect something in return).
Secondly, because I believe that a person must be guided by a strong moral compass, it is the primary thing I look for... and it is foremost in predicting a given outcome in any situation. Ergo, his moral fiber will innately guide him. -
No disagreement here...but we do not know what is in someone’s heart.
Thirdly, Cruz does not ‘say’ he is Christian. His history does. He walks the walk. Now, no one can judge his heart, but his actions speak much louder that his speeches. -
ok. So what does that mean when it comes to the issues of the day? Is he going to support building a wall and deportation of those that are here illegally?
Ted Cruz is not weak on borders and immigration. If it were not for Ted Cruz, almost single-handedly, and against his party’s wishes, immigration would already be a moot point. -
Sorry, beg to differ...the issue is at national prominence now because of one person, and one person only. And it’s not Cruz.
That's okay because we need folks to vote for Cruz in the primary to make a Trump/Cruz ticket more likely.
AND YET.....Trump has raised a family of wonderful kids. Not a bad apple in the bunch. All are clean-cut kids who are business oriented doers. Take a look at many kids of rich men and many are spoiled rotten drug addicts. The Kennedy and Hilton families are just a couple of the many examples. So where it really matters in the case of character, Trump passes with flying colors.
I’m talking about what comes out of his mouth, i.e., the boorish, narcissistic things he says, and the substantive things he is not able to say.
My judgement is more affected by Walk the Walk rather than Talk the Talk.
Thank you.
Trump is the first presidential candidate in our history whose background is entirely in sales and marketing - "selling the sizzle".
And boyohboy, has Free Republic ever bought it!
Just like the "partners" in various Trump development ventures who eventually wound up holding a big ol' bag of bupkis.
sorry...but I know many people you just described and they, would not have any trouble pulling the lever for him...at this point.
Well, I see something different from you : I don't know *anybody* - Not in my family, my extended family, my church, my extended Christian environment, my business, nor my extended business environment - I don't know a single person that will vote for trump. They may well be there, because politics is not always the topic, but where it has been the topic, he doesn't have their vote. Where I am at, folks like y'all seem to be a rarity.
[roamer_1:]Take away his election year speeches and look at his life, and what he has stood for, and one cannot see many of the values that Christians look for, and one can see support for things and organizations that Christians oppose.
That is true...there are things that I’m not happy with however, he, as we all, are sinful and fallen and are always able to be redeemed. We have disappointed before and will continue to be if we put our faith in man...
True enough, and a reasonable way to treat the man, but certainly not the way to treat the candidate. What we have to go by are his record and his election year promises - If you discount his record, what do you have left? I am all for redemption - but I need not believe in 'road to Damascus' conversions, especially those which coincide conveniently with the election season.
If he means it, let him prove it. When his record starts looking like his promises, then I'll believe it, and he has a shot at my vote... but that surely will not be this time around - not in the primary, and not in the general. His record is liberal, and I will not vote for a liberal.
[roamer_1:] Bear in mind that I am not speaking in judgement”...”What is left is low-info Christians, and those to whom their faith is secondary.
Not speaking in judgment? How do you know they are LICs and their faith is secondary?
Because no Christian I know would find his record to be satisfactory. Many folks aren't paying much attention yet - But they will, and as word gets out, I imagine he will lose support. What he is saying does not match what he has done. Again, look at ValueVoters - Those were politically aware and informed Christians (that is their purpose). More than in any other venue, he fell flat on his face. They weren't buying it. And neither am I, nor anyone that I personally know...
Again, I am not casting aspersions on you or anyone else - I am interested in it statistically - He is capable of carrying *some* Christians. But he will not *carry the Christians*, any more than Romney or McCain did. He will divide the house and split their vote. And then he will lose. He does not have what it takes to cause the Christians come out in force.
And that is *the biggest* disadvantage he could have. There is no organization around with as deep a standing network, nor one with anywhere near as many willing boots-on-the-ground, as the Christian Right intrinsically possesses. Without it he will fail.
[roamer_1:]First, I don’t think he’s weak on anything.
respectfully disagree with you. As I posted in other similar threads he had a couple of significant miscalculations, mistakes, or whatever you want to call it on votes this past year. I’ve seen all the excuses, etc., but have a hard time trusting someone who may be so calculating and that requires outside donors (yes, I know he receives a good deal of private donations, and that speaks volumes to his support, but those donations are not what is going to keep him in the race...he’s going to need big $$ donors, and they are going to expect something in return).
And we will remain in disagreement - His conservative record is rock solid... If there is anyone out there who is predictably Conservative, it is Cruz. Even if I give you the 'mistakes' (which I will not), they are exceedingly few in one of the most stalwart, adamantine records there are - And his record matches his promises with precision.
And as to his being obligated to his donors - He has been likewise obligated to his party, and on many things he stood nearly alone, and under great pressure, against the wishes of his party. I do not believe he will do otherwise in any condition, be it party or donors, or any other influence. He has the strength of character to do the right thing, and has proven it.
On the other hand, you seem willing to ignore the predominantly liberal record of Trump (quite like Romney, btw) to secure a mere handful of promises, which you have no guarantee that he has the ability or even the intention to keep. On what do you secure his promises?
I don't understand that at all.
[roamer_1:]Secondly, because I believe that a person must be guided by a strong moral compass, it is the primary thing I look for... and it is foremost in predicting a given outcome in any situation. Ergo, his moral fiber will innately guide him.
No disagreement here...but we do not know what is in someone’s heart.
True... All we can do is look at what they have done to determine what they will do - It's the only bellwether that we have.
[roamer_1:] Thirdly, Cruz does not ‘say’ he is Christian. His history does. He walks the walk. Now, no one can judge his heart, but his actions speak much louder that his speeches. -
ok. So what does that mean when it comes to the issues of the day? Is he going to support building a wall and deportation of those that are here illegally?
You can bet money Cruz will enforce the law. He always has. Why would he stop now? And he says the law on the books is sufficient. And I agree with that, btw. It isn't that we need new laws, but rather, that the laws we already have are enforced. That goes a long, long way toward fixing the whole Mexican enchilada. Is he going to feed you a load of crap and tell you his wall will be 10 ft higher than Trump's? Of course not. Because Trump's wall won't be built in the first place. It is pie-in-the-sky electioneering.
[roamer_1:] Ted Cruz is not weak on borders and immigration. If it were not for Ted Cruz, almost single-handedly, and against his party’s wishes, immigration would already be a moot point.
Sorry, beg to differ...the issue is at national prominence now because of one person, and one person only. And it’s not Cruz.
That's because Trump's bombast, fame, and money have given him the microphone. Where the rubber meets the road, very few (Conservatives all, btw) stood to stop amnesty. Very few took an anti-immigration stance - And Cruz, to his credit has always stood among them, and even led them.
Thanks for your reply.
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.