A Question for Evangelicals.

[Gracchus]

Do evangelicals and other Christians really believe that a habitual liar, serial adulterer, and defaulter on contracts, who tears children from their parents and has them put in cages, can lead them toward the Kingdom of Heaven? Is that what Jesus would do?

[Clownboat]

This poses a false dichotomy. A heart surgeon is not required to have good character, be honest, have decent personal values or good judgment except in regard to heart surgery. A leader must inspire and have ethics that at the very least enable him to put the country far ahead of his own personal interests.

IMO, you play pretend to think that prior presidents didn't have selfish interests at play. I don't see why this is special for just Trump.
It's also false to claim that a leader must inspire and have ethics.
lead·er
/ˈlēdər/
noun
1.
the person who leads or commands a group, organization, or country.

Trump has shown repeatedly that he cares only for himself, not the country.

Slander

His constant lying is not just bad because of the lies

Slander

the lying reveals a corrupt character

Slander

an inability to objectively assess problems

Slander

so the correct solutions may be found. Trump can't do this.

Not slander. Seems like opinion.

He cannot objectively look at a situation, analyze and solve it because he does not have the good of the country in mind at all. He only thinks about self aggrandizement, avoiding responsibility, and declaring victory. It is as if he believes saying something makes it so.
This puts Trump in a category that goes far beyond policy and blue vs. red politics. He is a menace to democracy itself. One would think any reasonable person could see this fact, regardless of political affiliation.

More slander?
These types of posts don't help me understand how Trump is doing as a president. Should I trust the old timers around me that were one time democrats or internet posters that slander and poison the well?

I'm open to being shown that Trump is the worst president in American history, but guess what, it might take more than name calling, but name calling is what I observe.

Bottom line, you can call my heart surgeon every name in the book and it will not necessarily prevent me from using them. It sure doen't inform us if said hear surgeon is qualified though.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 2 by Wootah]

Well, that doesn't answer the question, does it? Especially, since Ms. Clinton is not running for office this time. So, as of right now, you can't vote against her again.

Perhaps, you would be so good as to answer the question actually asked? If I didn't see you were a Christian, I would be inclined to think that you were deliberately prevaricating. But of course you would not consciously bring Christianity into disrepute by bearing false witness. That would be a bad fruit from what is supposed to be a good tree, and I have been told that is not possible.

Let me answer like this: Suppose there was a heart surgeon that I needed that was a habitual liar, serial adulterer, and defaulter on contracts, who tears children from their parents and has them put in cages.

Are you saying I should not use his skills of heart surgery?

This poses a false dichotomy. A heart surgeon is not required to have good character, be honest, have decent personal values or good judgment except in regard to heart surgery.
A leader must inspire and have ethics that at the very least enable him to put the country far ahead of his own personal interests. Trump has shown repeatedly that he cares only for himself, not the country. His constant lying is not just bad because of the lies; the lying reveals a corrupt character and an inability to objectively assess problems, so the correct solutions may be found. Trump can't do this. He cannot objectively look at a situation, analyze and solve it because he does not have the good of the country in mind at all. He only thinks about self aggrandizement, avoiding responsibility, and declaring victory. It is as if he believes saying something makes it so.
This puts Trump in a category that goes far beyond policy and blue vs. red politics. He is a menace to democracy itself. One would think any reasonable person could see this fact, regardless of political affiliation.

Your posing a false standard for what I want in a politician at least. I don't look to politicians for leadership. No politician has to be a leader. Looking for leaders in politicians is not recommended. I can understand of course why we do, it is the Messiah complex and we look for the Messiah everywhere, in politics, sport, entertainment.

I just want Trump to do what he said and on that count, he is not.

[Deeogee]

[Replying to Gracchus in post #1]

How about ask the same type question for one who kills preachers.

The apostle Paul killed Christians and some of them were preachers.

Ac 22:4 And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women.

Ac 26:11 And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

1Co 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

Ga 1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:


With all this in mind the Lord used Paul to write about 3/4 of the NT.

[bluegreenearth]

[Replying to Gracchus in post #1]

I can appreciate the obvious contradiction between Trump's character and the Christian ideological role model. However, if Evangelicals and other Christians are supporting Trump in order to have their religious doctrines imposed on everyone else, then the real problem is the failure to understand that their religious freedom is contingent upon keeping church and state separate. Therefore, Evangelicals and every other religious person should be endorsing the political leader who would be more inclined to respect the separation of church and state rather than pander to the theocratic ambitions of a some exceptionally vocal representatives from the dominant religious majority.

Granted, I'm fully aware that it is mainly the issue of legalized abortion that compels most Evangelicals to support Republican candidates regardless of their disreputable backgrounds. However, they are also ignoring the fact that most Republican politicians had no moral problem with supporting legalized abortion prior to and through the Reagan Presidency. This is because, at that time, the majority of Republican politicians still valued and respected the need to keep their theological beliefs out of public policy. They may not have personally advocated for abortion, but most of those Republicans understood where the laws legalizing abortion did not encourage or compel anyone to have an abortion or prevented Pro-Life advocates from exercising their freedom to publicly discourage people from choosing the abortion option. In other words, it used to be more about representing all their constituents and not just those in the majority or those who happened to share their particular religious perspective. Furthermore, they accepted the fact that criminalizing abortion would only lead to an increase in unsafe "back alley" abortions. So, as much as they disliked the abortion option, it was the lesser of two evils for them to legalize and regulate safe abortion procedures.

Lastly, many Republicans knew that for the government to legislate based on a theological perspective would be to open the door for future theocratic legislation which they couldn't guarantee would always be in line with their particular religious values. So, modern day Republicans and Evangelical Christians would do well to consult the rationale of their predecessors who voted for bills that didn't perverse the concept of religious freedom and what it would mean for religious freedom to have those laws repealed or replaced by laws functioning as an official government endorsement of a particular religious tradition. As the saying goes, "Be careful what you ask for."

[woodtick]

[Replying to Gracchus in post #1]