David French Article

[Reformed]

An Open Letter to Trump's Evangelical Defenders

The National Review's David French is a good, penetrating writer. In this short article, he asks some hard questions of evangelicals. His basic question is, "Do the ends justify the means?" The one quote from French's article that stands out to me is:

"Yet there are numerous Christians of real influence and prominence who not only won’t dare utter a negative word about the president, they’ll vigorously turn the tables on his critics, noting the specks in his critics’ eyes while ignoring the sequoia-sized beam in their own."

I have witnessed this in church, with friends and family, Christians on social media, and by some here on the Baptist Board. Criticize President Trump and you will face a harsh backlash that is anything but Christ-like.

So, really, this is not about politics, it is about how Christians should respond to politics. It is about who Christians make alliances with and the unintended consequences of those alliances. It is about asking the question as to whether the manner of our political involvement advances the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

[I Love An Atheist]

The National Review wrote this just eleven years ago after Jerry Falwell died. It was not without any criticism but was much more multi-sided and balanced. Why the one-sidedness in the age of Trump?

The Moral Majority of the Story | National Review

 

[Reformed]

Why the one-sidedness in the age of Trump?

We may be here for a while to exhaust answers to your question.

David French's article exposes the hypocrisy and compromise resident in Evangelicals who will accept no criticism of Trump, even from other Christians. My Twitter feed explodes with caustic verbal bombs directed towards Christians from other Christians whenever the president is called out on his (as a friend of mine wrote). "adulteries, mendacities, and sandbox bullying". I would have respect for the Christian who calls out the President on his moral lapses while at the same time approving of some of his policies. I get the "binary choice" argument many Christians gave to defend their voting for Trump. But why do these same professed-Christians feel it is acceptable to imitate the president by viciously attacking other Christians who share their opinion? Do the words of James mean nothing?

James 3:8-10 8 But no one can tame the tongue; it is a restless evil and full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; 10 from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be this way.

 

[FollowTheWay]

An Open Letter to Trump's Evangelical Defenders

The National Review's David French is a good, penetrating writer. In this short article, he asks some hard questions of evangelicals. His basic question is, "Do the ends justify the means?" The one quote from French's article that stands out to me is:

"Yet there are numerous Christians of real influence and prominence who not only won’t dare utter a negative word about the president, they’ll vigorously turn the tables on his critics, noting the specks in his critics’ eyes while ignoring the sequoia-sized beam in their own."

I have witnessed this in church, with friends and family, Christians on social media, and by some here on the Baptist Board. Criticize President Trump and you will face a harsh backlash that is anything but Christ-like.

So, really, this is not about politics, it is about how Christians should respond to politics. It is about who Christians make alliances with and the unintended consequences of those alliances. It is about asking the question as to whether the manner of our political involvement advances the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I believe that the current association between Evangelical Christianity and the Republican party is doing a great deal of harm to the church and to the people who accept this association. As is noted in a comment, this did not start with Trump. It has been going on since Reagan or perhaps earlier.. But Trump is a giant leap in the disaster that this belief represents.

 

[Rob_BW]

It's the controversy driven economics of media in this digital age.

Gotta get them clicks.

 

[I Love An Atheist]

We may be here for a while to exhaust answers to your question.

David French's article exposes the hypocrisy and compromise resident in Evangelicals who will accept no criticism of Trump, even from other Christians. My Twitter feed explodes with caustic verbal bombs directed towards Christians from other Christians whenever the president is called out on his (as a friend of mine wrote). "adulteries, mendacities, and sandbox bullying". I would have respect for the Christian who calls out the President on his moral lapses while at the same time approving of some of his policies. I get the "binary choice" argument many Christians gave to defend their voting for Trump. But why do these same professed-Christians feel it is acceptable to imitate the president by viciously attacking other Christians who share their opinion? Do the words of James mean nothing?

James 3:8-10 8 But no one can tame the tongue; it is a restless evil and full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; 10 from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be this way.

Do you think as Christians we should be scolding the president for his adulteries? When I learned about the adulteries, I thought to myself that they are between Donald, Melania, Stormy (or whoever), and God.

It's so hard to care about a fresh outrage every day especially when so many of them are lied about and exxaggerated.

Trump is not a perfect man, to put it mildly, but there will come a time when we'll have to look at him as what he became in office rather than what he was in the past. Melania too. Likely they are being transformed now that they are in office, whether we ever wanted them there in the first place or not.

Why are so many things being dredged up from his past? Has he been caught in any adulteries during his campaign or during his presidency?

How do you know he hasn't repented to God in private? I know it seems unlikely that he has. But does he owe us all a press conference or a tweet storm about it, if he has?

 

[Reformed]

Do you think as Christians we should be scolding the president for his adulteries? When I learned about the adulteries, I thought to myself that they are between Donald, Melania, Stormy (or whoever), and God.

It's so hard to care about a fresh outrage every day especially when so many of them are lied about and exxaggerated.

Trump is not a perfect man, to put it mildly, but there will come a time when we'll have to look at him as what he became in office rather than what he was in the past. Melania too. Likely they are being transformed now that they are in office, whether we ever wanted them there in the first place or not. Why are so many things being dredged up from his past? Has he been caught in any adulteries during his campaign or during his presidency?

How do you know he hasn't repented to God in private? I know it seems unlikely that he has. But does he owe us all a press conference or a tweet storm about it, if he has?

If you pay attention to the Stormy Daniels affair, the President has been caught being less than truthful. The manner in which he speaks to and about his political adversaries is demeaning. But this really is not about the President; it is about the Christians that support him and how they respond to other Christians who do not. This is what I am trying to draw attention to. Christians are attacking Christians because one side does not fawn all over the president. Some of these Christian-on-Christians attacks are vile in nature. All of this is being played out in front of a mocking world. Again, it is not about the president. He is just the conduit for this sad chapter in church relationships.

 

[I Love An Atheist]

If you pay attention to the Stormy Daniels affair, the President has been caught being less than truthful. The manner in which he speaks to and about his political adversaries is demeaning. But this really is not about the President; it is about the Christians that support him and how they respond to other Christians who do not. This is what I am trying to draw attention to. Christians are attacking Christians because one side does not fawn all over the president. Some of these Christian-on-Christians attacks are vile in nature. All of this is being played out in front of a mocking world. Again, it is not about the president. He is just the conduit for this sad chapter in church relationships.

I don't think Christians should be attacking Christians just over criticism of Trump, either.

But the David French article was not about that topic.

I'm sorry you have been subjected to vile attacks. I scrupulously avoid Twitter, myself.

Well, then, criticize away. I will not attack you. (I have a limited attention span for rehashing stale talking points left over from the campaign, though.)

 

[Reformed]

But the David French article was not about that topic.

Yet, French wrote this (which I quoted in the OP):

"Yet there are numerous Christians of real influence and prominence who not only won’t dare utter a negative word about the president, they’ll vigorously turn the tables on his critics, noting the specks in his critics’ eyes while ignoring the sequoia-sized beam in their own."

The article was about Evangelicals embracing pragmatism when it comes to the President.

And by the way, I have not spent my time criticizing the President. I did most of that during the election cycle. I pray for our president and want him to lead in a godly manner.

 

[church mouse guy]

French is a #NeverTrump. Trump was not my choice. Some Republicans disliked Reagan because he was divorced and remarried, but the American people decided in the Clinton case that multiple adultries did not preclude a president from serving. Everyone knew that Trump was a playboy, a casino owner, and a wheeler dealer. Who defends those things except to say that no one cares?

French had a chance to run for president and he declined it. Why didn't he stand up?

 

[Reformed]

French is a #NeverTrump. Trump was not my choice. Some Republicans disliked Reagan because he was divorced and remarried, but the American people decided in the Clinton case that multiple adultries did not preclude a president from serving. Everyone knew that Trump was a playboy, a casino owner, and a wheeler dealer. Who defends those things except to say that no one cares?

French had a chance to run for president and he declined it. Why didn't he stand up?

What do your comments have to do with the article or the OP?

 

[church mouse guy]

What do your comments have to do with the article or the OP?

What do you mean? Will Fundamentalists and Evangelicals be hurt for supporting Trump? Undoubtedly. Do #NeverTrump people such as French, who declined to run and who knew that Trump was a playboy, casino owner, and wheeler dealer, care? Not a bit. In 1964, the GOP was told that if they voted for Goldwater, there would be a war in Viet Nam; some of them did anyway, and sure enough there was a war in Viet Nam.

French is illogical.

 

[Reformed]

What do you mean? Will Fundamentalists and Evangelicals be hurt for supporting Trump? Undoubtedly. Do #NeverTrump people such as French, who declined to run and who knew that Trump was a playboy, casino owner, and wheeler dealer, care? Not a bit. In 1964, the GOP was told that if they voted for Goldwater, there would be a war in Viet Nam; some of them did anyway, and sure enough there was a war in Viet Nam.

French is illogical.

You do not get it.

 

[church mouse guy]

You do not get it.

I "get" the quixotic nature of #NeverTrump people like French, who didn't want to run when he had the chance. I have never said that Trump's business and personal life in the past were good so French has a real straw man there, which as a lawyer he should know. And I understand that Fundamentalists and Evangelicals will pay a price for voting for Trump. Some of them voted for Romney, too, and he is a cultist. Some of them voted for Hillary and she is an enabler. French would criticize people for voting for enablers, too--not to mention cultists.

Most #NeverTrump people are leaving the GOP.

 

[Covenanter]

What do you mean? Will Fundamentalists and Evangelicals be hurt for supporting Trump? Undoubtedly. Do #NeverTrump people such as French, who declined to run and who knew that Trump was a playboy, casino owner, and wheeler dealer, care? Not a bit. In 1964, the GOP was told that if they voted for Goldwater, there would be a war in Viet Nam; some of them did anyway, and sure enough there was a war in Viet Nam.

French is illogical.

If I remember rightly, Goldwater wasn't elected, & had nothing to do with the war in Vietnam, except for being widely misquoted for advocating the use of nuclear weapons.

Over here US Evangelicals are giving "evangelical" a bad name for their political support of Trump & Zionism.

 

[Revmitchell]

I have witnessed this in church, with friends and family, Christians on social media, and by some here on the Baptist Board. Criticize President Trump and you will face a harsh backlash that is anything but Christ-like.

I have to tell you I am flat out tired of being misrepresented and seeing Trump supporters in general being misrepresented. The quoted statement above is a clear dishonest misrepresentation and it is unChristian. What Trump supporter ever said do not criticize Trump? Can a single supporter of Trump be quoted as saying Trump should never under any circumstances be criticized?

I doubt a singe quote can be provided. What happens though is supporters see the type of criticism leveled and the manner in which it is done. The criticism has been nothing short of completely nasty. This coming from those who call themselves Christians. Take Russell Moore for instance. What in the world did he call evangelicals who voted for Trump? His name calling was "Trump supporters came from the “Jimmy Swaggart wing” of evangelicalism,". Further of leadership he said "Southern Baptist leaders who met with Trump were “drinking the Kool-Aid.”

What I am sick to death of is Christians who are anti Trump who pretend they are above the fray (like your post here) while ignoring all the criticism of Trump and his supporters. I find it dishonest and I find your post here dishonest. You and Moore and all the fake news folks over at SBC Voices aren't fooling anyone but yourselves.

 

[Revmitchell]

Further, Moore lied, Trump never courted white supremacists.

 

[church mouse guy]

Further, Moore lied, Trump never courted white supremacists.

I saw Richard Land and liked him but I never liked Moore so I agree with you 100%.

 

[church mouse guy]

If I remember rightly, Goldwater wasn't elected, & had nothing to do with the war in Vietnam, except for being widely misquoted for advocating the use of nuclear weapons.

Over here US Evangelicals are giving "evangelical" a bad name for their political support of Trump & Zionism.

I like you lot, but be practical. The USA is bankrupt and moving our embassy to Jerusalem saves a couple of bucks.

Fundamentalists have been attacked hourly since they first began using that name. How do you account for their survival?

 

[I Love An Atheist]

Yet, French wrote this (which I quoted in the OP):

"Yet there are numerous Christians of real influence and prominence who not only won’t dare utter a negative word about the president, they’ll vigorously turn the tables on his critics, noting the specks in his critics’ eyes while ignoring the sequoia-sized beam in their own."

That was not the main theme of the article. Although you are making it the main theme of your OP, you also linked to the article, which said so much more.

The article was about Evangelicals embracing pragmatism when it comes to the President.

I thought the article went well beyond accusing Evangelical Trump supporters of too much pragmatism. I thought it went so far as to implicitly advocate for separatism, quietism and antinomianism.

I think it's worth discussing these topics, but I don't like to argue about them in a way that sets up false dichotomies.

Jesus was both God and man.

The Lord's Prayer talks about God's will being done both on Earth and in heaven.

I don't want to go to either extreme: of denying the material world at the expense of the spiritual world, or denying the spiritual world at the expense of the material world.

And by the way, I have not spent my time criticizing the President. I did most of that during the election cycle. I pray for our president and want him to lead in a godly manner.

I don't pray for him, but lately I've been thinking I should, because he sure has a lot of evil, powerful enemies arrayed against him; as well as quite a few hysterical mobs. That's good that you pray for him. I know the Bible tells us to pray for our leaders, and I should start doing it.