"God bows down to Donald Trump"

[R.P. McM]

How are there Christians who believe this?

There aren't.

The people who believe this aren't Christians. (Except in their own imaginations.)

Sure they are. Do they meet the moral and theological parameters? Probably not. But if we applied such a standard, the pews would be empty. So, assuming they self-identify as such, that's exactly what they are.

No no no no no no no no NO. I was told again and again, adamantly, confidently and aggressively, that trans people don't get to decide how they are identified based on their feelings, that the FACT that they meet the biological definition of a man means that they cannot be considered a woman. I was told by these same "christian" trumpanzees that our logic dictated that they could self-identify as an attack helicopter and we would have to respect that identity, and that obviously that was ridiculous as the biological facts didn't show they were a helicopter.

These people do NOT follow the teachings of Christ. They are not christians. That's an objective fact. They spent all this time and energy screaming about how you have to meet the proper definitions or else it doesn't count. Why the f__k should we now accept that they FEEL like they are christians, based on no actual facts?

If we limit the definition of "Christian" to "people who follow the teachings of Christ," there are no Christians in this country.

[T'Chenka]

How are there Christians who believe this?

There aren't.

The people who believe this aren't Christians. (Except in their own imaginations.)

Sure they are. Do they meet the moral and theological parameters? Probably not. But if we applied such a standard, the pews would be empty. So, assuming they self-identify as such, that's exactly what they are.

No no no no no no no no NO. I was told again and again, adamantly, confidently and aggressively, that trans people don't get to decide how they are identified based on their feelings, that the FACT that they meet the biological definition of a man means that they cannot be considered a woman. I was told by these same "christian" trumpanzees that our logic dictated that they could self-identify as an attack helicopter and we would have to respect that identity, and that obviously that was ridiculous as the biological facts didn't show they were a helicopter.

These people do NOT follow the teachings of Christ. They are not christians. That's an objective fact. They spent all this time and energy screaming about how you have to meet the proper definitions or else it doesn't count. Why the f__k should we now accept that they FEEL like they are christians, based on no actual facts?

If we limit the definition of "Christian" to "people who follow the teachings of Christ," there are no Christians in this country.

Sounds about right, or close to it. Maybe they should come up with a new name for their religion that isn't sacrilege. Christ and Trump are not compatible without a heaping portion of cognitive dissonance.

[Fuzzy Bear]

How are there Christians who believe this?

There aren't.

The people who believe this aren't Christians. (Except in their own imaginations.)

Sure they are. Do they meet the moral and theological parameters? Probably not. But if we applied such a standard, the pews would be empty. So, assuming they self-identify as such, that's exactly what they are.

No no no no no no no no NO. I was told again and again, adamantly, confidently and aggressively, that trans people don't get to decide how they are identified based on their feelings, that the FACT that they meet the biological definition of a man means that they cannot be considered a woman. I was told by these same "christian" trumpanzees that our logic dictated that they could self-identify as an attack helicopter and we would have to respect that identity, and that obviously that was ridiculous as the biological facts didn't show they were a helicopter.

These people do NOT follow the teachings of Christ. They are not christians. That's an objective fact. They spent all this time and energy screaming about how you have to meet the proper definitions or else it doesn't count. Why the f__k should we now accept that they FEEL like they are christians, based on no actual facts?

If we limit the definition of "Christian" to "people who follow the teachings of Christ," there are no Christians in this country.

1.  The above is simply not true.  There are many such people.  That many are voting for Trump, and even more are not voting for Biden, does not mean they are not following the teachings of Christ.  That millions do this anonymously, out of the range of the camera lens or microphone, does not make this false.

2.  Following the teachings of Christ, first and foremost, involves believing that He is who he says he is.  Fully God (the Son of God and the 2nd person of the Godhead).  Fully Man, sent to Earth as the Perfect Sacrifice for OUR sins (not his).  The Way, the Truth, and the Life, and the only way by which a man comes to the Father.

There are many who claim to be Christ who don't believe in part 2.  Many are here.  They believe in the teaching of some cool hippie who was all for love and having people giving up stuff for the poor, etc, and who was opposed to the religious establishment of his day.  The Bernie Sanders Jesus.  That view downplays his claims of being the Son of God who states that EXCLUSIVE belief in him as the ONLY way to salvation is (A) something they don't want to accept, and/or (B) the part of the deal that requires people to have as their hero someone who went crazy in the end.  That's the part many don't accept and downplay.  "If only he wasn't such a kook with this Son of God schtick!"  That's where a lot of people are at.  You can't be a Christian and reject Jesus's claims of who He is. 

[T'Chenka]

They believe in the teaching of some cool hippie who was all for love and having people giving up stuff for the poor, etc, and who was opposed to the religious establishment of his day.  The Bernie Sanders Jesus.  That view downplays his claims of being the Son of God who states that EXCLUSIVE belief in him as the ONLY way to salvation is (A) something they don't want to accept

This is me you're describing, except I don't claim to be a christian. I like to say "Jesus was a great and wise man, as was Gandhi."

[Brittain33]

I’m not a Christian, so this isn’t intuitive to me. Help me understand. If all that matters is accepting Jesus as the Son of God for salvation, but all of his teachings about caring for the poor and weak, living simply, turning the other cheek aren’t relevant and don’t mean anything, then why bother having and studying the New Testament? Why did God waste everyone’s time having Jesus proclaim a moral code and advise people how to live a moral life, if it didn’t matter and wasn’t important to follow? Seems kind of strange if the only point of Jesus was to come down and tell people “you must achieve salvation through me, full stop” for him to mess things up by taking about morality and babbling on in the Sermon on the Mount, etc.

[Fuzzy Bear]

They believe in the teaching of some cool hippie who was all for love and having people giving up stuff for the poor, etc, and who was opposed to the religious establishment of his day.  The Bernie Sanders Jesus.  That view downplays his claims of being the Son of God who states that EXCLUSIVE belief in him as the ONLY way to salvation is (A) something they don't want to accept

This is me you're describing, except I don't claim to be a christian. I like to say "Jesus was a great and wise man, as was Gandhi."

So how do you get around Jesus saying he was the Son of God?  That he would rise again from the dead?  That belief on him is necessary for the remission of sins?

Having worked on a psychiatric unit at one time in my life doing emergency admission work, I can tell you that there are lots of crazy people who claim the sort of things about themselves that Jesus claim.  Would you take them seriously if they said the cool Bernie Sanders stuff Jesus said while remaining properly medicated?  (Even then, such people still be open to say the outlandish, because psychotropic meds may regulate mood, but they don't regulate thought; they'd merely be disturbed, but better-behaved or more calm.)  That's a serious question, because you can't bifurcate Jesus Christ in the way you do.  You can't take the Bernie Sanders part of Jesus that leftists find attractive and like to cite without the rest of what Jesus said, let alone what Jesus said about who He is.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I’m not a Christian, so this isn’t intuitive to me. Help me understand. If all that matters is accepting Jesus as the Son of God for salvation, but all of his teachings about caring for the poor and weak, living simply, turning the other cheek aren’t relevant and don’t mean anything, then why bother having and studying the New Testament? Why did God waste everyone’s time having Jesus proclaim a moral code and advise people how to live a moral life, if it didn’t matter and wasn’t important to follow? Seems kind of strange if the only point of Jesus was to come down and tell people “you must achieve salvation through me, full stop” for him to mess things up by taking about morality and babbling on in the Sermon on the Mount, etc.

To the Pharisees and Scribes, it was, indeed strange.  And threatening.  (That's not snark; that's how the religious establishment of when Jesus was on Earth reacted to him.)

The "moral code" that was given to people was The Law.  The Law was the curse; no person, of their own power, could possibly fulfill all of the Law.  Having sinned, no person could ever stand blameless before a Perfect and Holy God.

Christ did not DELIVER the Law; that part was done by Moses.  Christ came to show sinful Man their insufficiency and fulfill their need for a Savior.  He was the Perfect Sacrifice to cover the sins of sinful man; every sin every human being that will ever live will commit.  This was his purpose for being "made flesh" and "dwelling amongst us".  SOMEONE had to live a sinless life to be a perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world.

But it is by the GRACE of God that we are forgiven of our sins and by GRACE that we are EMPOWERED by the Holy Spirit to live for God and do His Will.  It is the Spirit of God that resides within a Believer that enables a Believer to actually live out the commands of God.  And Jesus stated that there were two (2) great commandments; to Love God with all ones heart, soul, mind, and strength, and to Love thy Neighbor as thyself.  "The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:40, New Living Translation) 

Think that's easy?  It's really not, but Christians are doing this every day, often with no notice other than critical notice.  They don't do it for credit, and many are quite anonymous.

Are Christians alleviating poverty?  A wealthy man in my town and a former Pastor of mine went down to a small area in Ecuador and built a church.  But they built more than a church; that town has clean drinking water now due to their efforts.  A Christian brother in my Sunday School class has flown supplies to devastate areas as part of a ministry; it's a risky job and not every airport is LAX.  I know personally many missionaries that do missionary work not only abroad, but in America, and they not only win converts; their sacrificial efforts have fed hungry people and enabled people to receive medical care. 

People who trash Jerry Falwell on this cite act as if these servants of God don't exist, but they do, and they make this world a better place in concrete ways. 

[Joseph Cao]

I’m not a Christian, so this isn’t intuitive to me. Help me understand. If all that matters is accepting Jesus as the Son of God for salvation, but all of his teachings about caring for the poor and weak, living simply, turning the other cheek aren’t relevant and don’t mean anything, then why bother having and studying the New Testament? Why did God waste everyone’s time having Jesus proclaim a moral code and advise people how to live a moral life, if it didn’t matter and wasn’t important to follow? Seems kind of strange if the only point of Jesus was to come down and tell people “you must achieve salvation through me, full stop” for him to mess things up by taking about morality and babbling on in the Sermon on the Mount, etc.

My understanding as a Christian: our first priority, as regards our salvation, should certainly be to recognise the role of Jesus as Son of God. Relative to our belief that we will ultimately enjoy an eternity with Christ in heaven, yes, that is all that "matters", because we do assume that what we do here pales in comparison with what is to come after death.

But this emphatically does not deal with what Christians are to do in their time "on earth", which is addressed by Christ through His teachings and the rest of the New Testament. What Jesus did here – and I may be paraphrasing a little – was to provide the rationale for the restrictive set of laws that were handed down to the Israelites in the Old Testament. The overarching principles of Christlike behaviour are to love God and to love your neighbour as yourself, and these are axiomatic to the rest of Jesus' teachings. We continue to study the New Testament and the rest of Jesus' advice on how to live a moral life because, like basically everyone prior to Jesus' ministry, we have trouble going from those two axioms (one of which was provided to Moses!) to the other theorems of Christian living.

Returning to the wider political question at hand, your question is a pretty common misconception of Christianity (and a valid one, because we really haven't done enough to address it either through words or actions). It's quite easy to see how the idea that Christians don't really care about morality would come about, just from observing how Evangelicals tend to interact in the political sphere. There is an argument to be made (and that has been made, by a number of Evangelicals) that it's too easy for the average Evangelical to focus on their personal salvation and lose sight of how a Christ-follower ought to act with regard to politics. But by that token, no self-respecting Evangelical would fall for the sign that Mr. Sander erected, since it goes against the basic tenets of Christianity. An Evangelical Republican voter believes that Trump's election was directly willed, or at least permitted, by God. They do not believe that Trump is somehow superior to God.

Then we have the opposite misconception of Jesus and Christianity: one that gets excessively caught up in interpreting Jesus' teachings as a hippiefied sermon on loving everyone and giving up all of one's possessions to the poor. There's nothing particularly wrong with those statements – in fact, Jesus got at these precise points many times during his ministry – but nowadays the people who push this interpretation tend to sideline or ignore the very central concept of Jesus' role in our personal salvation. Fuzzy is essentially right when he says that those who hold to this version of Jesus are essentially thinking of Him as His era's version of Bernie Sanders; I'd add that this falls into the same mistake that Jesus' own contemporaries made when they asked if He would LIBERATE ISRAEL!!!!1!11!! from Roman tyranny. Jesus' purpose was not to be a political leader, and the modern redistributionist interpretation of His teachings are not the be-all end-all of Christianity.

And as regards what Dule and T'Chenka wrote earlier: the thing is that the definition of "Christian" is not "those who follow the teachings of Christ". You are a Christian if you have accepted Christ. The mark of a Christian in public and social spheres ought to be one who follows the teachings of Christ. One is more central to Christianity than the other, but that does not mean that the other isn't important. Similarly, a lot of Christians in politics – on the right and on the left – have forgotten one or the other of these two concepts.

[Omega21]

How are there Christians who believe this?

What's weird about it?

America is the home of televangelists and other religios weirdos.

[Brittain33]

Thank you both for your thoughtful responses. They were insightful for me.

[T'Chenka]

They believe in the teaching of some cool hippie who was all for love and having people giving up stuff for the poor, etc, and who was opposed to the religious establishment of his day.  The Bernie Sanders Jesus.  That view downplays his claims of being the Son of God who states that EXCLUSIVE belief in him as the ONLY way to salvation is (A) something they don't want to accept

This is me you're describing, except I don't claim to be a christian. I like to say "Jesus was a great and wise man, as was Gandhi."

So how do you get around Jesus saying he was the Son of God?  That he would rise again from the dead?  That belief on him is necessary for the remission of sins?

Lots of brilliant people are mentally ill or have opinions that are wrong. I'm sure the guy who invented the wheel believed the world was flat. Humans are imperfect and we can't forget that. Martin Luther King Jr. was a homophobe, and not a mild one either.

Having worked on a psychiatric unit at one time in my life doing emergency admission work, I can tell you that there are lots of crazy people who claim the sort of things about themselves that Jesus claim.  Would you take them seriously if they said the cool Bernie Sanders stuff Jesus said while remaining properly medicated?  (Even then, such people still be open to say the outlandish, because psychotropic meds may regulate mood, but they don't regulate thought; they'd merely be disturbed, but better-behaved or more calm.)

Seeing as I view Jesus as a philosopher, I can take seriously the good philosophy and discard the religious claims that he made.

That's a serious question, because you can't bifurcate Jesus Christ in the way you do.  You can't take the Bernie Sanders part of Jesus that leftists find attractive and like to cite without the rest of what Jesus said, let alone what Jesus said about who He is.

Sure I can. Just like I can take MLK Jr's ideas about race and equality and socialism  and leave the LGBTQ beliefs.


I know MANY christians that bifurcate the Holy Bible all the time, picking and choosing hich aee the "important rules and lessons" and which are the "rules and lessons that are in the book, but most people ignore them including my pastor so I pretend that God cares about those parts of the book less". This is the thinking that leaders to Trumpism.

[Fuzzy Bear]

They believe in the teaching of some cool hippie who was all for love and having people giving up stuff for the poor, etc, and who was opposed to the religious establishment of his day.  The Bernie Sanders Jesus.  That view downplays his claims of being the Son of God who states that EXCLUSIVE belief in him as the ONLY way to salvation is (A) something they don't want to accept

This is me you're describing, except I don't claim to be a christian. I like to say "Jesus was a great and wise man, as was Gandhi."

So how do you get around Jesus saying he was the Son of God?  That he would rise again from the dead?  That belief on him is necessary for the remission of sins?

Lots of brilliant people are mentally ill or have opinions that are wrong. I'm sure the guy who invented the wheel believed the world was flat. Humans are imperfect and we can't forget that. Martin Luther King Jr. was a homophobe, and not a mild one either.

Having worked on a psychiatric unit at one time in my life doing emergency admission work, I can tell you that there are lots of crazy people who claim the sort of things about themselves that Jesus claim.  Would you take them seriously if they said the cool Bernie Sanders stuff Jesus said while remaining properly medicated?  (Even then, such people still be open to say the outlandish, because psychotropic meds may regulate mood, but they don't regulate thought; they'd merely be disturbed, but better-behaved or more calm.)

Seeing as I view Jesus as a philosopher, I can take seriously the good philosophy and discard the religious claims that he made.

That's a serious question, because you can't bifurcate Jesus Christ in the way you do.  You can't take the Bernie Sanders part of Jesus that leftists find attractive and like to cite without the rest of what Jesus said, let alone what Jesus said about who He is.

Sure I can. Just like I can take MLK Jr's ideas about race and equality and socialism  and leave the LGBTQ beliefs.


I know MANY christians that bifurcate the Holy Bible all the time, picking and choosing hich aee the "important rules and lessons" and which are the "rules and lessons that are in the book, but most people ignore them including my pastor so I pretend that God cares about those parts of the book less". This is the thinking that leaders to Trumpism.

Just exactly how do they do that?  Which verses are important and which verses are avoided/minimized/not mentioned?

[T'Chenka]

They believe in the teaching of some cool hippie who was all for love and having people giving up stuff for the poor, etc, and who was opposed to the religious establishment of his day.  The Bernie Sanders Jesus.  That view downplays his claims of being the Son of God who states that EXCLUSIVE belief in him as the ONLY way to salvation is (A) something they don't want to accept

This is me you're describing, except I don't claim to be a christian. I like to say "Jesus was a great and wise man, as was Gandhi."

So how do you get around Jesus saying he was the Son of God?  That he would rise again from the dead?  That belief on him is necessary for the remission of sins?

Lots of brilliant people are mentally ill or have opinions that are wrong. I'm sure the guy who invented the wheel believed the world was flat. Humans are imperfect and we can't forget that. Martin Luther King Jr. was a homophobe, and not a mild one either.

Having worked on a psychiatric unit at one time in my life doing emergency admission work, I can tell you that there are lots of crazy people who claim the sort of things about themselves that Jesus claim.  Would you take them seriously if they said the cool Bernie Sanders stuff Jesus said while remaining properly medicated?  (Even then, such people still be open to say the outlandish, because psychotropic meds may regulate mood, but they don't regulate thought; they'd merely be disturbed, but better-behaved or more calm.)

Seeing as I view Jesus as a philosopher, I can take seriously the good philosophy and discard the religious claims that he made.

That's a serious question, because you can't bifurcate Jesus Christ in the way you do.  You can't take the Bernie Sanders part of Jesus that leftists find attractive and like to cite without the rest of what Jesus said, let alone what Jesus said about who He is.

Sure I can. Just like I can take MLK Jr's ideas about race and equality and socialism  and leave the LGBTQ beliefs.


I know MANY christians that bifurcate the Holy Bible all the time, picking and choosing hich aee the "important rules and lessons" and which are the "rules and lessons that are in the book, but most people ignore them including my pastor so I pretend that God cares about those parts of the book less". This is the thinking that leaders to Trumpism.

Just exactly how do they do that?  Which verses are important and which verses are avoided/minimized/not mentioned?

Lots of Old Testemant stuff, fenale inequality stuff, I could go on if I had more time right now.

[R.P. McM]

I’m not a Christian, so this isn’t intuitive to me. Help me understand. If all that matters is accepting Jesus as the Son of God for salvation, but all of his teachings about caring for the poor and weak, living simply, turning the other cheek aren’t relevant and don’t mean anything, then why bother having and studying the New Testament? Why did God waste everyone’s time having Jesus proclaim a moral code and advise people how to live a moral life, if it didn’t matter and wasn’t important to follow? Seems kind of strange if the only point of Jesus was to come down and tell people “you must achieve salvation through me, full stop” for him to mess things up by taking about morality and babbling on in the Sermon on the Mount, etc.

Many Christians, particularly rightwing Protestants, take this theological shortcut because tribalism is much easier than altruism. If faith is all that's required, and you aren't judged for being a nasty, miserly person, then "Christianity" is perfectly compatible with the values of Franklin Graham, Jerry Jr., Kim Davis, Rebekah Mercer, Donald Trump, et al.    

[Fuzzy Bear]

I’m not a Christian, so this isn’t intuitive to me. Help me understand. If all that matters is accepting Jesus as the Son of God for salvation, but all of his teachings about caring for the poor and weak, living simply, turning the other cheek aren’t relevant and don’t mean anything, then why bother having and studying the New Testament? Why did God waste everyone’s time having Jesus proclaim a moral code and advise people how to live a moral life, if it didn’t matter and wasn’t important to follow? Seems kind of strange if the only point of Jesus was to come down and tell people “you must achieve salvation through me, full stop” for him to mess things up by taking about morality and babbling on in the Sermon on the Mount, etc.

Many Christians, particularly rightwing Protestants, take this theological shortcut because tribalism is much easier than altruism. If faith is all that's required, and you aren't judged for being a nasty, miserly person, then "Christianity" is perfectly compatible with the values of Franklin Graham, Jerry Jr., Kim Davis, Rebekah Mercer, Donald Trump, et al.    

It's far from a "theological shortcut".

Faith in Christ IS all that is required for Salvation.  Now FAITH in Christ is the belief that he IS who he SAYS HE IS.  The King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

Do you believe who your boss is at work?  Do you take their dictates seriously?  Do you do things simply because your boss, under the authority of the company you work for, told you to do that?  And does your boss provide you with things that are necessary to get the job done?  Faith in Christ means believing that Christ not only really did die for their sins; it means that you really believe that He is all He says he is.  If one believes that Jesus Christ is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, they will act accordingly.

Franklin Graham's values include using the resources of his ministry to establish emergency medical facilities in Central Park for COVID-19.  Kim Davis, whom I believe to be something of an immature Christian, attempted to live her beliefs out in a tough situation; one that she didn't face when she began her job as Clerk of Court.  Rebekah Mercer is a major donor; why you threw her name in there is something I'm not sure of. 

As for Donald Trump:

https://bible.org/seriespage/29-workers-vineyard-matthew-201-16

1 For the kingdom of heaven of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire workers for his vineyard. 2 And after agreeing with the workers for the standard wage, he sent them into his vineyard. 3 When it was about nine o’clock in the morning, he went out again and saw others standing around in the market place without work. 4 And he said to them, “You go into the vineyard too and I will give you whatever is right.” 5 So they went. When he went out again about noon and three o’clock that afternoon, he did the same thing. 6 And about five o’clock that afternoon he went out and found others standing around, and he said to them, “Why are you standing here all day without work?” 7 They said to him, “Because no one has hired us.” He said to them, “You go and work in the vineyard too.”

8 When it was evening, the owner of the vineyard said to his manager, “Call the workers and give the pay starting with the last hired until the first.” 9 When those hired about five o’clock came, each received a full day’s pay. 10 And when those hired first came, they though they would receive more. But each one also received the standard wage. 11 When they received it, they began to complain against the landowner, 12 saying, “These last fellows worked one hour, and you have made them equal to us who bore the hardship and burning heat of the day.

13 And the landowner replied to one of them, “Friend, I am not treating you unfairly. Didn’t you agree with me to work for the standard wage? 14 Take what is yours and go. I want to give this last man the same as I gave to you. 15 Am I not permitted to do what I want with what belongs to me? Or are you envious because I am generous? 16 So the last will be first, and the first will be last.”

Donald Trump may have come late to the Vinyard.  His life before he came to the Vinyard is what it is, as is the lives of all that came before him.  He may, or may not, be saved.  If he's saved, he's a rather immature Christian, and I've not heard from Donald Trump a statement  that would constitute a confession of Saving Faith.  That does not mean he has not made one.

Why wouldn't God still be working on Donald Trump?  One can wail about the "Religious Right", but it's certainly possible that for all the times Donald Trump has been in church, his experiences running for President actually accomplished the task of bringing Trump to the point where he actually HEARD the Gospel and contemplated its meaning and what was actually required (and what was not required) to be saved.  It's not like Jesus hasn't pulled this off before:

Jesus and Zacchaeus
(Numbers 5:5-10)

1Then Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through. 2And there was a man named Zacchaeus, a chief tax collector, who was very wealthy. 3He was trying to see who Jesus was, but could not see over the crowd, because he was small in stature. 4So he ran on ahead and climbed a sycamore tree to see Him, since Jesus was about to pass that way.

5When Jesus came to that place, He looked up and said, “Zacchaeus, hurry down, for I must stay at your house today.”

6So Zacchaeus hurried down and welcomed Him joyfully. 7And all who saw this began to grumble, saying, “He has gone to be the guest of a sinful man!”

8But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord, half of my possessions I give to the poor, and if I have cheated anyone, I will repay it fourfold.”

9Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man too is a son of Abraham. 10For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

This IS the Gospel.  If Jesus Christ did not shed his blood for Donald Trump, he did not shed it for you or I.  If Jesus Christ gives you and I up to the last breath of life to confess our belief in Him and receive His Salvation, why would Donald Trump not get the same deal?  Acts 25:37 says clearly that God is not a Respecter of persons.  God doesn't think more or less of Donald Trump than he thinks of any other person that ever lived.

One reason I spend so much time responding to posts like this is that the vast majority of people here either (A) don't know what the Gospel actually is (Salvation by Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ), and/or (B) present it as some kind of Universalist doctrine where all "Good People" (defined by the poster, of course) are rewarded and "Bad People" (again, defined by the poster) are punished.  Indeed, they are more than punished; they are declared irredeemable in life.  It is a case of many not really thinking about what they are posting.  When people post that, they are actually asserting that Jesus Christ's Redemptive Work on the Cross was insufficient for some people's sins.  Those who have posted such things that say they believe Christ Is who He says He Is need to ponder that inconsistency.

[Brittain33]

I've not heard from Donald Trump a statement  that would constitute a confession of Saving Faith.  That does not mean he has not made one.

What would you estimate, as a percentage, the probability Trump has made a sincere confession of Saving Faith?

From what you have seen of his behavior and approach to issues, what reason do we have to believe he's capable of thinking that way? In light of what we've seen, it's no more likely he's made a confession of Saving Faith than that he's written a novel outshining all other works of literature, or secretly masterminded the rescue of thousands of trafficked children.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I've not heard from Donald Trump a statement  that would constitute a confession of Saving Faith.  That does not mean he has not made one.

What would you estimate, as a percentage, the probability Trump has made a sincere confession of Saving Faith?

From what you have seen of his behavior and approach to issues, what reason do we have to believe he's capable of thinking that way? In light of what we've seen, it's no more likely he's made a confession of Saving Faith than that he's written a novel outshining all other works of literature, or secretly masterminded the rescue of thousands of trafficked children.

It's honestly hard to say.  I'd give it a 50-50 chance.

Trump would be, very much, a new convert, and a new convert who is not being Pastored effectively.  It would take a very special pastor to be Trump's pastor; he'd be dealing with an ADHD adult with an enormous ego. 

I do believe that Trump has had some serious conversations about his lifestyle.  I note that the excesses of Trump's lifestyle (cheating and womanizing, the Stormy Daniels stuff) is all OLD stuff.  There's been no charges of Trump carrying on with other staff at the White House, and he doesn't have a Warren Harding lifestyle.  I do think that this is at least some evidence that he has been brought under conviction for his past sins.  He uses swear words, and that's an argument that he remains unsanctified in some areas, but there is, after all, only one Man without sin.  I'm not going to say he has, and some of his statements, as late as 2016, lead me to believe that he has not.  But there's evidence that he may have as well.

Ultimately, that's the part of life that God warns us against judging.  God, alone, KNOWS the true condition of Donald Trump's heart.  We only know what we see and hear.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The thing about Jesus the "moral philosopher" (Quid ergo Athenis et Hierosolymis?) is that he's really not unique and he's certainly not uniquely admirable. The "historical Jesus" is a self-aggrandizing and occasionally even violent apocalypticist who swings back and forth between preaching what was actually within the mainstream of Pharisee moral theology at the time (I'm sorry to use TV Tropes language for something so serious, but the Pharisees as portrayed in the Gospels are suffering from a historical villain upgrade) and demanding that people abandon their families and economic obligations to follow him around listening to more of this. The "Christ of faith" is the only Jesus Who's still a convincing moral exemplar once you dispense with the presupposition that you have to like the guy.

[T'Chenka]

The thing about Jesus the "moral philosopher" (Quid ergo Athenis et Hierosolymis?) is that he's really not unique and he's certainly not uniquely admirable. The "historical Jesus" is a self-aggrandizing and occasionally even violent apocalypticist who swings back and forth between preaching what was actually within the mainstream of Pharisee moral theology at the time (I'm sorry to use TV Tropes language for something so serious, but the Pharisees as portrayed in the Gospels are suffering from a historical villain upgrade) and demanding that people abandon their families and economic obligations to follow him around listening to more of this. The "Christ of faith" is the only Jesus Who's still a convincing moral exemplar once you dispense with the presupposition that you have to like the guy.

Maybe this is lazy of me, but I view being a philosopher as "developing and sharing ideas that current and future generations can use", so I don't take into account things that don't apply to future generations (ie, leave your family and job and physically follpw me around the Middle East).

[R.P. McM]

I’m not a Christian, so this isn’t intuitive to me. Help me understand. If all that matters is accepting Jesus as the Son of God for salvation, but all of his teachings about caring for the poor and weak, living simply, turning the other cheek aren’t relevant and don’t mean anything, then why bother having and studying the New Testament? Why did God waste everyone’s time having Jesus proclaim a moral code and advise people how to live a moral life, if it didn’t matter and wasn’t important to follow? Seems kind of strange if the only point of Jesus was to come down and tell people “you must achieve salvation through me, full stop” for him to mess things up by taking about morality and babbling on in the Sermon on the Mount, etc.

Many Christians, particularly rightwing Protestants, take this theological shortcut because tribalism is much easier than altruism. If faith is all that's required, and you aren't judged for being a nasty, miserly person, then "Christianity" is perfectly compatible with the values of Franklin Graham, Jerry Jr., Kim Davis, Rebekah Mercer, Donald Trump, et al.    

It's far from a "theological shortcut".

Faith in Christ IS all that is required for Salvation.  Now FAITH in Christ is the belief that he IS who he SAYS HE IS.  The King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

Yeah, you're a rightwing Protestant, and this is what you believe. I'm not quibbling with it. What I am suggesting is that for the vast majority of your counterparts, tribalism comes much easier than altruism. As they've proved time and time again. Which your particular brand of Christianity makes very easy. We can't and shouldn't forget that white supremacy was once (still?) an immensely cherished value of Southern, white, evangelical Protestants. They managed to work slavery into their theology, so we shouldn't exactly look to them as moral exemplars.

Franklin Graham's values include using the resources of his ministry to establish emergency medical facilities in Central Park for COVID-19.  Kim Davis, whom I believe to be something of an immature Christian, attempted to live her beliefs out in a tough situation; one that she didn't face when she began her job as Clerk of Court.  Rebekah Mercer is a major donor; why you threw her name in there is something I'm not sure of.

Billy Graham said disgusting things about Jews, Franklin Graham says disgusting things about Muslims and traffics in birtherism. Potato, potahto.

As for Donald Trump:

LOL. Don't even try — everyone outside of your (dying) tribe (correctly) perceives this particular brand of apologism as clownish. He is what he is, you are what you are.

[Hammy]

Can the Dems who post this stuff at least fact check it first? You're just giving the cons ammo while making yourself look like hypocrites in the process.

[Brittain33]

Can the Dems who post this stuff at least fact check it first? You're just giving the cons ammo while making yourself look like hypocrites in the process.

How does one fact check if God bows down to Trump or not?

[Brittain33]

https://twitter.com/TinTinResists/status/1229282297469423617?s=20

[Fuzzy Bear]

Here's a two part question:  Why should Evangelical voters find it to be the right thing to do to either (A) vote Democratic, or (B) either vote for a third party, abstain, write-in Franklin Graham, or any other course of action that would, in terms of real politics, keep Trump from getting a vote that would ordinarily go Republican?  Also, why should an Evangelical Christian PREFER a Democratic victory to a Trump victory?

[Brittain33]

Here's a two part question:  Why should Evangelical voters find it to be the right thing to do to either (A) vote Democratic, or (B) either vote for a third party, abstain, write-in Franklin Graham, or any other course of action that would, in terms of real politics, keep Trump from getting a vote that would ordinarily go Republican?  Also, why should an Evangelical Christian PREFER a Democratic victory to a Trump victory?

You're missing the third option, which would be to not have supported Trump in the 2016 primary nor unreservedly support him in 2020 to the extent that no viable Republican believed they had a chance to challenge him this year. We're not asking you to vote Democratic; we're calling out that your full-throated, enthusiastic support for Donald Trump ensured he would be the Republican nominee again in 2020 after the partial support you gave him in 2016 enabled him to sneak into the nomination with a plurality.