Posted on 06/20/2020 8:33:08 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A new book consisting of essays by 30 evangelical Christians of different political and professional stripes is calling on white evangelicals to rethink their support for President Donald Trump in 2020 and warns the president is damaging the broader cultures perception of evangelical Christianity.
The new book, The Spiritual Danger of Donald Trump: 30 Evangelical Christians on Justice, Truth, and Moral Integrity, was released last Monday by Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Our plea is to white evangelicals to please take another look and ask, Does this person measure up to biblical norms? Ron Sider, founder of Evangelicals for Social Action, told The Christian Post. We are not telling you what to include. But please prayerfully think about that.
Even if you think the book will make you mad, given the title, I challenge you to read it and decide for yourself if there are any valid points that we are making there.
Wipf and Stock Publishers
Sider, who edited the book, is a longtime evangelical figure and an advocate for biblical solutions to social and economic injustices. He has published over 40 books, including Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger.
Sider said that his call is for white evangelicals to evaluate evangelicalisms biblically balanced agenda before they vote in 2020.
Exit polls from 2016 showed that about eight-in-10 self-identified white evangelicals or born-again Christians voted for the Republican candidate, Trump, in the 2016 election, while just 16% voted for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.
Sider said that evangelicals wondering what exactly a biblically balanced agenda is can turn to the public policy priorities of the National Association of Evangelicals, which he says calls for evangelical civil engagement to have a biblically balanced agenda.
The book is not a book to tell people how to vote, Sider stressed. It is a book to call people to think biblically about this election and about the character of candidates.
The book features commentary from Republicans, Democrats and Independents who work in a wide range of sectors: from university professors and theologians to a former congressman and a former CIA analyst.
Were not just left-wing Democrats, Sider said. We are a whole range of views begging American white evangelicals to ask this simple question: Does Donald Trumps behavior and policies fit with or contradict biblical norms?
Contributors include Baylor University Professor George Yancey, former Republican Congressman Reid Ribble, conservative speaker and author Vicki Courtney as well as scholars like the Ethics & Public Policy Centers Pete Wehner and John Fea of Messiah College in Pennsylvania, both of whom have regularly expressed their displeasure with the president in the media.
In their chapters, the contributors write about different areas of concern they have with the actions, policies or behaviors of the president.
Topics include Trumps instances of dishonesty, his past adulterous behaviors, his attacks on the media, the presidents past controversial statements on women, policies restricting immigration and refugee resettlement as well as his administrations policies to restrict welfare benefits, among other topics.
One of the most common biblical themes is Gods special concern for the poor. But that doesnt seem to be a significant part of his policy, argued Sider, who also serves as distinguished professor emeritus of theology, holistic ministry and public policy at Palmer Theological Seminary at Eastern University in Pennsylvania.
For many conservative Christians, they voted for Trump as a lesser of two evils in 2016. During the 2016 campaign, Trump made a concerted effort to appeal to conservative evangelicals concerns about the issues of abortion and religious freedom. His administration has done much to follow through with those campaign promises.
However, Sider warns that evangelicals should not be single-issue or dual-issue voters.
Ive always said I think those are very important issues. But if we are going to be biblical in our politics, we need to go back and ask: What is it that God cares about? Sider said. God cares about the sanctity of human life and justice for the poor. God cares about marriage and racial justice. God cares about sexual integrity and cares for creation and peacemaking and freedom. It is simply fundamentally mistaken to think that one issue overrides all others.
In his chapter, Yancey, a Baylor professor of sociology, admits that Trump spoke to the needs of conservative evangelicals in 2016 that were not being addressed by other politicians. They were concerns and fears that he, as an evangelical, shared.
Yancey, an African American, said there is credible fear that the radical political left has become hostile toward traditionally Christian views on issues like marriage and sexuality. Trump vowed to protect religious freedom at a time when many conservative Christians perceived their rights to uphold their beliefs to be dwindling in the face of secular culture and politicians.
I want to say to my Christian friends, especially the evangelical ones who most support Trump: I hear you. Christianophobia is real, Yancey wrote. I have studied and debated it with those who do not believe it exists. Trump has promised to protect Christians. The seeking of political control is one way to try to deal with Christianophobia. But it is the wrong way.
Yancey contended that Trump cant fix what troubles Christians because he can only offer a political solution while the issue is cultural.
What Trump can do is make the situation worse by turning culture against us further, he wrote.
He warned that if Christians do not push back on the disturbing attributes of Trump, then we will own those attributes.
For example, if enough Christians accept the perceptions of this leader then our faith will become known for not caring about the race-baiting statements of our president, Yancey contended. This will translate into Christians not caring about racism and people of color. The argument that we must vote for Trump as the less bad option will not save us from being labeled racist if we do not challenge Trumps race-baiting.
Yancey drew a comparison to how conservative Christians view Christians who support the Democratic Party.
Many conservative Christians accuse Democratic Christians of endorsing abortion because they vote for pro-choice candidates, he stated. If those Christians stay silent on this issue, then they have a point. But if Democratic Christians vote for Democrats despite and make it plain they opposed that plank of their political party, then they do not own the pro-choice label.
Courtney, a conservative southern woman and award-winning author who speaks at womens conferences, challenged evangelical Christians, even those who vote for Trump, to speak out when the president does something that doesnt meet the biblical standard.
You cannot stand for moral decency and express outrage over the objectification of women if you are willing to give Trump a free pass, she wrote. No one will respect your opinion.
I recently watched an example of this play out on Twitter in the aftermath of the 2020 Super Bowl halftime show. Franklin Graham tweeted concern that Shakira and J.Los performance was showing young girls that sexual exploration of women is okay. I share much of Grahams sentiment, but many were quick to call him out on a double standard.
She said some social media users responded to Graham with pull quotes from Trumps past comments on women.
The Franklin Graham Twitter exchange perfectly illustrates the larger-scale problem Christians face if they choose to ignore, minimize or make excuses for Trumps misogyny (and other immoral offenses), she wrote. No one will take Christianity seriously if we shout about the moral injustices of past presidents but are struck dumb when it comes to the moral injustices of the current one.
Sider fears that the broader culture is developing a negative view of Christianity.
Because of the close identity of white evangelicals and the behavior and actions of Donald Trump, I am worried about the long-term effect on the cultures attitude toward Christianity as a result of the failure of white evangelicals to say, Thats not acceptable, he said.
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, doesnt mean we think you fart unicorns and rainbows. We do not. Evangelicals dont like cancel culture because weve been there and we have the tee shirt. Evangelicals dont like overly controlling government because the more controlling it is the easier it is to get on the wrong side of it. Weve 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. Its 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 dont 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.