Posted on 06/20/2020 8:33:08 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Yep. Forgot that one
I’ll put the spirit of Donald Trump serving the Lord against the soulless “Plugs” Biden serving Satan.
I have enough toilet paper after stocking up during the covid scare.
Evangelicals have come through a tremendous amount of persecution over the centuries and a lot of this persecution has been via various governments and the Church of Rome.
As a result we have bags of experience with people telling us what sh*t they think we are. Evangelicals do beat ourselves up over our own sinfulness (believe me!) but just because we beat themselves up and not you, doesn’t mean we think you fart unicorns and rainbows. We do not. Evangelicals don’t like cancel culture because we’ve been there and we have the tee shirt. Evangelicals don’t like overly controlling government because the more controlling it is the easier it is to get on the wrong side of it. We’ve been there too, we have that tee shirt as well, and a very sad ripped up and bloody rag it is. Leftists are controlling. They have a lot of rules. It’s very easy to offend them because they seem to live to be offended because they are controlling and guilt is normally a good controller, unless you are an evangelical and already have a PhD in guilt and self-flagellation.
Did I mention we don’t believe leftists fart unicorns and rainbows?
I have heard of zero of these 30 leading scholars and theologians.
Ronald Sider's been around and well known in lefty Christian circles for decades. I remember him from the brief period I subscribed to Sojourner's magazine in the 80s.
Miroslav Volf is the only other name I've ever seen, and I couldn't tell you for anything what he is known for.
Can I ask a stupid question? Why does he talk about white evangelicals? He mentions white evangelicals more than once. What does race have to do with being an Evangelical Christian?
We all look alike to them? Because their inaccurate mental picture of what an evangelical is offends them.
I suspect they're as unwilling and unable to examine their own thinking, politics, lives and behavior as they claim "white evangelicals" are.
The choice is clear for me. I will never again vote for somebody with a “D” behind his or her name.
Been there for a long time.
One of them is our 'favorite' (sarc) pseudo-psychiatrist, Bandy X. Lee.
The one preview essay we get to read is a retread 01-Jun-2020 New York Daily News op-ed from Chris Thurman titled "Count Donald Trump's Hypocrisies."
I won't insult my liberal friends (who can find enough anti-Trump porn on ABCNNBCBS) by suggesting they read it.
The Left wants what may be called Just-Us ... that’s why the seriousness of the charges mainly goes one way ... and the magnanimity of the exonerations only the other.
Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God,and the authority that exist are appointed by God.
Good point. If that is the author’s “concern”, why doesn’t he ALSO write a book asking whether “Does Joe Biden’s behavior and policies fit with or contradict biblical norms?”.
I won’t hold my breathe waiting for that book to come out. Guess its only a “concern” when candidates are named ‘Donald Trump’. Funny how that works.
Also, I am a Christian but NOT evangelical, so I don’t get a hoot whether Trump measures up to “Evangelical” standards. My church’s theology is different. Hate to break the news to the mainstream media, but there are PLENTY of Christians in this country who do NOT identify as “Evangelical” in this country, and WE vote, too. The fact we’re ignored by the MSM won’t change that fact.
The “Evangelical” thing is the usual Christian stereotype of Republican base voters by a bigoted, Satanic, anti-Christian fakenews media.
Black Evangelical protestants tend to favor Democrats, and thus don't fit the media's stereotype of what "The evangelicals" think and believe, so they are simply ignored.
With Catholics, its the opposite. When they talk about "the Catholics" they ALWAYS mean anyone and everyone who self-identifies as "Catholic", even if that so-called "Catholic" was only baptized Catholic 30 years ago and hasn't been to church in years, so as a result "the Catholics" end up looking much more "liberal" in the media's mind.
If they identified "Catholics" the way they do "evangelicals" (and only counted white, regular-church going Catholics as "the Catholics"), the numbers would be similar and they'd find an overwhelming majority of "The Catholics" are voting Trump.
But that doesn't further their goal so "the Evangelicals" translates to "ONLY white people, and ONLY active church-going believers" whereas "the Catholics" translates to "anyone and everyone who CLAIMS to be Catholic regardless of background, ethnicity, and whether they actually believe in or practice anything the religion teaches")
Race is much more indicative stat than religion (with few Blacks voting GOP no matter their faith or lack thereof and a large majority of Hispanics voting rat also) so if you want useful voting data it needs to be “White Evan.” and “White Catholic”, I believe Trump got about 60% of the White Catholic vote, about the same as Whites at large.
I’d be interested in knowing the Hispanic split for Catholics vs Evangelical (whose numbers are growing it seems so people can remarry in a church after divorce).
How black "Evangelicals" can go around saying abortion is murder and homosexuality is an abomination, and then turn around and EAGERLY vote for candidates championing all that stuff is beyond me. I wish someone would confront Mr. More-Socially-Conservative-Than-Thou James Meeks and ask him how he felt about his hero Obama lighting up the white house as a rainbow to glorify homosexual "marriage" nationwide. Meeks loves to scream how evil it is, but I'm sure looked the other way when his BFF Obama endorsed it.
With Hispanics, I think the numbers are the opposite. Hispanic Catholics are extremely liberal and tend to overwhelmingly vote RAT. Hispanic "Evangelicals" are much more GOP friendly. I would like to seek the breakdown WITHIN protestantism by denomination (Hispanic Baptists, Hispanic Methodists, Hispanic Pentecostals, etc.) I think that would be more useful data that trying to figure out hispanic "Evangelicals" as a whole, since I've noted the term has basically become meaningless and the media just uses it as codeword for "right-wing Christian".
I've long disputed the argument that Hispanics overall are "very socially conservative". Maybe in spanish-speaking countries, perhaps. But American born Hispanics? Most of the ones I know think abortion and the homo agenda is fine and dandy, and again, if they were "voting Democrat for economic reasons", you would see socially conservative RATs win Dem primaries over socially liberal RATs in congressional districts that are overwhelmingly Hispanic. There would be a lot more pro-life Democrats in Congress now... TX-15, TX-16, TX-28, TX-29, and TX-34 alone are all 70%+ hispanic and should be electing a bloc of socially conservative RATs down there, but they are INSTEAD electing militantly pro-partial abortion RATS. Seems clear to me their base isn't batting an eyelash about it.)
In any case, how religion affects politics is far more complex than the way the media portrays it with their "Evangelicals = Trumpbots" narrative.
Voters who attend church on Sunday are heavily Republican. Even if it’s a liberal church. Even Congregationalists. Especially if it’s not an urban center. Doesn’t mean they’re conservatives.
Also doesn’t mean they’re reliable voters. Many show up once every 4 years.
People not in church on Sunday morning are heavily Dem.
The left hates Christians and wants them dead.
.
And voting for (or enabling by not voting against) a senile leftist enemy of their religion will be so much better ...
.
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.