Evangelical Pastors Chastise Christians for Supporting Donald Trump

Trump4by Patricia L. Dickson2/27/16
Some Evangelical Pastors and Christian leaders have recently decided to publicly chastise Christians for supporting presidential candidate Donald Trump. These Christian leaders cite Bible verses to support their rationale in an attempt to shame members of the Christian community to not support Trump.  According to these good shepherds, Trump is an immoral and indecent man.  To support  his characterization, Bryan Fischer, a compassionate man of God, and host of “Focal Point”, cited all of Trump’s past and present moral failures:

This is a candidate who has openly and unapologetically boasted of his many sexual conquests and who famously cheated on wife number one by ensconcing the woman who became wife number two in a penthouse apartment at one of his casinos in Atlantic City. 

He told Howard Stern in 1997 that sleeping around was “my personal Vietnam,” where he routinely and repeatedly dodged the bullets of sexually transmitted diseases. But, he proudly proclaimed, “I feel like a great and very brave soldier” who courageously faced that risk without flinching.

He was the first casino owner in American history to put a strip club in a casino. And he did this not in the distant past but in 2013. 

Over the last several decades, he has over-leveraged four different business enterprises into bankruptcy and yet wants us to believe he’s just the man to do something about our $19 trillion federal debt.

All the things that Mr. Fischer cited about Mr. Trump are factual, however; I am wondering if he warned his readers about President Obama during the 2008 and 2012 campaign. To be fair, I did google other writings by Mr. Fischer where he has been critical of President Obama since he’s been in office. However; I could not find any articles where Christian leaders publicly warned Christians not to support Obama during both of his campaigns. Mr. Fischer says that informed, educated, and discerning evangelicals are the only demographic group with enough numbers to knock the Trump Train off the tracks. If that is the case, why didn’t the evangelicals knock the Obama train off its tracks and keep him out of the White House? Could it be that these same discerning evangelicals voted for Obama twice?  Where was this large group of evangelicals when homosexual and lesbian marriage  was shoved down our throats? Where was the concerted outcry from the evangelicals when the undercover videos of Planned Parenthood negotiating the sale of baby parts surfaced? Could these leaders not find any Bible verses to cite?

After nearly eight years of the Obama Presidency, the majority of the Christian leaders have been silent. Now, all of a sudden the sheepish Christian leader Max Lucado wants to flex his evangelical muscles.  Max Lucado claims he usually stays out of politics but decided to break his silence because of Trump (he remains silent on Obama). He says that people don’t attend church to hear his views on a presidential candidate, however in the case of Trump he states the following:

In this case, it’s not so much a question about particular policies or strategies about government or even particular opinions. It’s a case of public derision of people. It’s belittling people publicly. It would be none of my business, I would have absolutely no right to speak up except that he repeatedly brandishes the Bible and calls himself a Christian.

It’s a high stakes thing from my perspective because people make decisions about Christ on the basis of Christians and how we behave. If he’s going to call himself a Christian one day and call someone a bimbo the next or make fun of somebody’s menstrual cycle, it’s just beyond reason to me.

Where is Mr. Lucado when President Obama calls republicans names (at least the majority of Trumps insults are via twitter)? Obama supports abortion and homosexual marriage and yet he claims to be a Christian. Mr. Lucado does not seem to have a problem with that.  Senator Ted Cruz holds up a bible also. He gave God the glory for winning in Iowa after his campaign circulated an (untrue) message that Ben Carson had dropped out of the race and told his supporters to caucus with Cruz (not to mention all the other questionable campaign tactics). In addition, Mr. Lucado supports open borders under the guise of Evangelical Immigration.

As for Mr. Trump’s sins, are these men of God not supposed to pray for him? Where is their compassion for the lost? Does the Bible not tell us to pray for others? In fact, I pray every day (sometimes more than once) for our country and especially Mr. Trump. Donald Trump is the only candidate that has received death threats. His campaign reported that he wears a bullet proof vest every day.  He is the only candidate that the leaders of China and Mexico, as well as the Pope, have commented on. That alone tells me (even if he is not the most moral man) that he is doing something right and he needs our prayers. The Black Pastors that met with Trump at his Trump Towers in New York said that he was very humble and receptive of their concerns about some of his antics. They also said the Trump was not at all like he appears in public.

Our Country is literally going to hell.  While some political pundits and writers are worried that it might be too late for the Republican establishment to stop Trump, I am more concerned that it might be too late for the Church to save our country.  If our country is to be saved, it will be Christians that will save it. If the church had been doing its job, the country would not be in this condition. Now all of a sudden evangelicals want to complain about Donald Trump. Trump is not the cause of the current state of America or the world. I lay all the fault at the feet of the Church. It is the cowardly Pastors that refused to preach about the sins of homosexuality, abortion, adultery and fornication (all lead to the breakdown of the family) out of fear of offending someone and losing money that are to blame for this country’s condition. Until Christians repent and turn from our wicked ways, there is no hope for the world.

2 Chronicles

and My people, who are called by My Name, humble themselves, and pray and seek (crave, require as a necessity) My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear [them] from heaven, and forgive their sin and heal their land.

The Bible says that judgement must start in the house of God:

1 Peter 4:17

 For it is the time [destined] for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not respect or believe or obey the gospel of God?

It is time for the Church to start doing its job.


PatriciaDicksonPatricia Dickson blogs at Patricia’s Corner.
About Author Author Archive Email • (1360 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Evangelical Pastors Chastise Christians for Supporting Donald Trump

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    However; I could not find any articles where Christian leaders publicly warned Christians not to support Obama during both of his campaigns.

    Well, you may indeed smell the burning embers of a hypocrite. It’s likely that if Mr. Fischer aimed little criticism toward Obama it’s because Obama is black and thus didn’t want to appear to be a racist…or because it would piss off his parishioners who were also (whatever their race) invested in the race game through the presidency.

    If that is the case, why didn’t the evangelicals knock the Obama train off its tracks and keep him out of the White House? Could it be that these same discerning evangelicals voted for Obama twice? 

    I don’t attend church. And if I do so in the future, it will be as a sort of undercover reporter. I’m interested to see what goes on in there. I’ve heard several accounts recently of the evangelical churches where “evangelical” equates with “liberal.” Maybe they’re not making Baptists like they used to.

    Contrast that with a black preacher I know who is a very good man and who has counseled that homosexuals, for instance, should not be preaching the Gospel from the pulpit. He’s not a flamer. His reasoning is sound: Homosexuality is pretty far off the scales regarding sin and we need our religious leaders to set a much higher standard than that.

    Personally, I’m not as concerned with Mr. Trump’s sins as I am with his apparent lack of even a semi-conservative political philosophy. I think he’s grounded in “New York Values” and has little idea about our country other than what he’s picked up in the entertainment media. A Trump presidency would be pop-governance just as the Obama presidency has been Cultural-Marxist governance. The difference is that Trump doesn’t hate this country. And as a friend of mine astutely wrote:

    But part of me wonders if an egomaniacal capitalist pig is exactly what the country needs right now. I mean maybe the bigger the asshole, maybe, just maybe, the better the economy will do. Certainly the inverse has been true, the more politically correct, the more leady from behindy… the further the country goes in the shitter.

    I don’t think he’s wrong.

  2. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    He is the only candidate that the leaders of China and Mexico, as well as the Pope, have commented on.

    One of the best cases to be made for Trump is that he was criticized by the pseudo-Pope, Francis.

    They also said the Trump was not at all like he appears in public.

    Rush Limbaugh has repeatedly said that the Trump you see in public is a lot different from the much nicer one out of view of the cameras. That’s a heck of a lot better than the reverse.

    I am more concerned that it might be too late for the Church to save our country.  If our country is to be saved, it will be Christians that will save it.

    It probably is too late for the church (or Church) to save our country. These institutions are way off track, sort of like our public schools. When both were small and local, they functioned as good organs of the community. But now they are an impediment (either to good morals or a good education).

    I realize that it’s likely sacrilege to most Christians to think that you don’t need a church. Well, you really don’t. You need, God, Christ, and a few sincere like-minded people to study with and bounce ideas off of. We sort of do that here. I think the only way to Christ is through the analogous version of “home schooling.” But, hey, if you want to learn the Leftist Ten Commandments (equality, diversity, multiculturalism, environmentalism, sustainability, Kumbaya, tolerance, social justice, socialism, and moral relevance), there are plenty of brick-and-mortar churches to choose from.

    Churches around this country are morally and intellectual corrupt and confused. They are (in the words of Dennis Prager) “nice” but not good.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      I realize that it’s likely sacrilege to most Christians to think that you don’t need a church. Well, you really don’t. You need, God, Christ, and a few sincere like-minded people to study with and bounce ideas off of

      Christ said,

      For where two or three gather in my name, there I am with them.

      The Church is not a building, it is not an a hierarchical institution with headquarters in Rome, Moscow, Canterbury or in Nashville.

      It is the body of Christ which is all who are Christian.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    It is the cowardly Pastors that refused to preach about the sins of homosexuality, abortion, adultery and fornication (all lead to the breakdown of the family) out of fear of offending someone and losing money that are to blame for this country’s condition. Until Christians repent and turn from our wicked ways, there is no hope for the world.

    In my not so humble opinion, Christians have been fed a hill of beans regarding their role in forming society. For all intents and purposes, the Marxist paradigm has been shoved down their throats and they’ve acquiesced to its. Too many have come to believe what Obama prefers: Churching should stay inside churches and never enter the public square.

    I’ll grant you this is a difficult subject. And if someone wants to do a seminar on it, it wouldn’t be a bad subject. I’m fairly well schooled in this and suppose others are too. But who is teaching the intricacies of faith and morals beyond the bumper sticker slogans (such as “separation of church and state”)? If we are not to get our morals from Oprah, Howard Stern, People Magazine, or sitcoms, then we must have confidence in a moral system that is superior to all these sources.

    My favorite of the Ten Commandments is probably “Do not take the Lord’s name in vain.” And this is perhaps the greatest protection of religious faith, for without this prohibition it is to easy for men (and it is usually men) to use the prestige of God for their own purposes, knowingly or unknowingly (it is very easy to fool yourself or rationalize that “God” wants you to do such-and-such).

    A theocracy in America is not what we want. And neither apparently did God want the Hebrews to go crazy even though, I believe, their system of government were a theocracy of sorts. The only protection against the opposite of “The devil made me do it” (which is “God commands me to do this”) is a very conscious process of discernment about what God supposedly wants vs. what is simply your wishes.

    But at the end of the day one has to decide between abortion and “Thou shalt not kill.” It is highly offense to more and more people these days to bow to any moral derived from a Biblical source because they see it as simply a fraud or ancient superstition compared to the “enlightened” Progressive who use “reason” and “science” . . . to kill us by the hundred million (which is what collectivists did last century).

    At the end of the day, people of good faith (as opposed to Muslim faith, for instance) must have the brass balls to stand by their good morals and infuse them, second hand, into written laws. At the very least, they must speak out in public, and not just in church (but also in church where, of course, it should start).

    • Rosalys says:

      “It is highly offens(iv)e to more and more people these days to bow to any moral derived from a Biblical source because they see it as simply a fraud or ancient superstition…”

      Actually, it has always been highly offensive for the ungodly to bow to any moral derived from the Bible, because there are a bunch of “thou shalt not”s in there. They only like the commandments when it somebody else-alized.

      “Don’t YOU steal from ME!”

      “YOU lied to ME!”

      That takes care of #8 and #9. Most of these people are also okay with #6 in most cases, except when it comes to the unborn, or terminally ill, or terminally unhappy human. These are the provisional 3 commandments.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Well said, Rosalys.

        One of the firm consequences of socialism is that the center tends to move from self to others. It moves from personal responsibility to collective responsibility. That, of course, easily results in everything being else-ized. (Hopefully Tim can add that to our growing ST lexicon. I like it.)

        This is why liberal rallies and such tend to have garbage strewn all over. Somebody else will clean it up.

  4. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    It is the cowardly Pastors that refused to preach about the sins of homosexuality, abortion, adultery and fornication (all lead to the breakdown of the family) out of fear of offending someone and losing money that are to blame for this country’s condition. Until Christians repent and turn from our wicked ways, there is no hope for the world.

    I am still waiting for a Christian to refute the thesis of my earlier article, link to which is just below.

    http://www.stubbornthings.org/can-a-christian-support-homosexual-marriage/

  5. Timothy Lane says:

    An interesting article and responses so far. I will note that given evangelical voters’ concentration in the GOP these days, they could do little to block Obama, especially in 2008 (unless turnout was genuinely low among them). Further, in 2008 it wasn’t known how far to the left Obama was (though many us at least strongly suspected it). 2012 was a different matter. In many ways, Patricia’s criticism is much like that made against the Peron pope’s attack on Trump. He has no objection to fake Catholics like the Wicked Witch of the West (Nan Pelosi, the San Francisco freak), who supports abortion on the basis of her (supposedly Catholic) religion and also supports the full homosexual agenda (and pederasty as well, joining NAMBLA marches). What has Trump done to compare with the damage the liberals do?

    I don’t support Trump, though I expect to vote for him in November if (as seems most likely) he wins the nomination. (On the other hand, in Kentucky I might be a bit freer to consider a conservative independent. If Trump is having a hard time here against the Fire Witch, he’s doomed anyway.) But I do wonder about people who complain (rightly) about his moral record while ignoring what the liberals seek to do to them and anyone who openly supports the Christian moral code. Trump didn’t support Kim Davis — but it was the liberals who forced her into that situation.

    Incidentally, I will point out that David Limbaugh, in Jesus on Trial (which I’m currently reading) explains that an evangelical is a member of any church that believes salvation comes from faith in Jesus and supports spreading the Good News.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Let us know how that book goes. Here’s from an Amazon review:

      He writes, “We must not casually remake Jesus in the image in which we prefer to see Him or which conforms to the popular culture’s misperceptions about Him. Our politically correct culture may, presumptuously, choose to recast Jesus as indifferent to sin and saccharine sweet, no matter the circumstances, but this Jesus is God, and God cannot look upon sin. What do these revisionists make of the Jesus Who made a whip of cords and drove the moneychangers out of the Temple (John 2: 15)? … What do the revisionists say about the Jesus Whom Paul describes as “revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus ” (2 Thess. 1: 7– 8)? What of the difficult moral standard Jesus laid down in the Sermon on the Mount? Did He show indifference to sin there?” Limbaugh rightfully concludes: “This idea that Jesus is meek, mild, indifferent, and non-judgmental is the stuff of pure myth.”

      • Timothy Lane says:

        I may do a review of it here. One thing I will mention is his discussion of a Vietnamese Christian who was planning to escape the country. Some Communists were curious about possible plans, and naturally he lied to them. But he felt guilty, and when they asked again he told the truth — only to learn that they wanted to escape with him and his fellow Christians. And when a storm came up and threatened their boat, it was the (former) Communists who saved them with their superior seamanship skills.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I read most of the Kindle sample of “Jesus on Trial” last night. Limbaugh is a humble and engaging writer. I don’t know if I’ll buy the book, but it’s priced right at under $10.00.

      He certainly exposes some of my stumbling blocks. I mean, if push comes to shove, I don’t buy that the Bible is the divine word of God. It could be inspired here and there. But it just seems too fragmentary….the work of culture, not God. I’m in the stage David mentioned: He believes in a Creator but not one particularly active in our lives.

      But Limbaugh noted that many of his own doubts were dispelled when he actually read the Bible rather than reading about the Bible or other people’s opinions about the Bible. He makes a good case in the free sample section just in terms of his approach. This would appear to be a well-written book by a man with a sound mind. That’s rare these days.

      Still, if I have to be honest (as opposed to being dishonest), I soured on church as a kid. The whole motif of church just doesn’t do it for me. The entire gist of the formal language and the way God is talked about doesn’t resonate with me. As Limbaugh noted, one must get over the “me, me, me” aspect and acclimate oneself to what actual is. And he believes the God written about in the Bible is a good and real description.

      That said, I can kinda-sorta understand the libtard Kumbaya approach to Christianity. In part, I think it’s an attempt to relate these parchment-dull subjects to our own humanity. I *get* that maybe there are other overall ways to approach this and absorb it. I haven’t found mine yet. But I may yet give this book a read. I think I’ll wait to see if it’s good enough for Timothy to do a review.

  6. Lucia says:

    Which parts of my religion should I stop exercising in public? Should I stop being kind, or respectful? How about self-control? Generosity? Honesty? The big secret about Christianity vs Liberals is that liberals are attracted to the virtues of God but repelled by the idea of God. They think God denies them their free will. They hate hypocrisy but demand that Christians be hypocrites by being Christian only within the walls of a church.

    Christians know that sin is harmful because of the results to our lives and those in our sphere of influence. But the consequences of sin sometimes can’t be seen at the surface, and takes time to destroy, like dry rot in a foundation. Unfortunately, most people aren’t interested in learning why sin is harmful because they want quick fixes to their problems and will make decisions based on their feelings. Many Christians have come to Jesus to get out of their guilt feelings or problems in their lives, only to learn that the trials don’t go away, they just change form. The Christian walk is difficult, as the early Christians learned, and many Christians are not equipped to stick with it.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      The big secret about Christianity vs Liberals is that liberals are attracted to the virtues of God but repelled by the idea of God.

      I think what defines liberal Christianity (what I also call “pseudo-Christianity”) is narcissism. Christianity is seen primarily as entertainment. Church is a place to go to feel good about yourself, not to be challenged and reform yourself.

      I’m not a fan of 100% non-stop fire and brimstone as sold by some preachers (although not much anymore these days). There’s a skillful alchemy that any pastor must perform, mixing the loving and accepting aspects of Christianity with the “thou shalt not” aspects. You just can’t have holy without the whole thing.

      Christians should accept and come to appreciate the grittier and absurd aspects of life even while having one set foot in a more glorious vision. This exactly describes St. Francis, for example, who could wash the feet of lepers but never make of lepers a mere mascot, reducing them to a symbol of tangibly proof of his own righteousness, as modern social-justice Christians do with “the poor.”

      I do think the Christian walk is difficult. But I doubt that 90% of Christians have even been shown the path.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        I do think the Christian walk is difficult. But I doubt that 90% of Christians have even been shown the path

        They have been shown the path, they just choose to tiptoe past it.

  7. Rosalys says:

    I am probably going to pull the lever for Cruz in the primary, but I will vote for Trump in November, because he, in all likelihood, will be the nominee. But, I’m not nearly as bothered by the idea of a President Trump as many of you here are. I’m not a Trump-ette, and I will not be voting for him because I think he is a Christian. Had I been old enough back in 1964, I probably would have voted for Barry Goldwater – and maybe would today; and he was an atheist! I supposed that Ronald Reagan was a Christian, but he didn’t go to church on Sunday much, if at all, while in the White House. I felt no pressure to vote for Jimmy Carter because he was Christian (albeit of the ultra liberal variety, about which I have my doubts – but at the time I didn’t know this) and I’m glad I didn’t because he proved to be the worst president in history, before the current soiler of the office.

  8. SkepticalCynic SkepticalCynic says:

    I am no expert on anything but I think that though there is something about church and state separation in some of the founding documents, the church may be separated from the state but the state is definitely not separated from the church. The pastors of my past and present churches did not/will not touch on politics in their pastoral sermons. The IRS will yank a church’s tax free status. The IRS specifically states that a church may not in any way affect legislation or may not interfere with political campaigns (& keep its exemption.) And, I hope you will not take personal offense to this but Black churches regularly violate these requirements while no white church that I have ever attended has done so. It has been a double standard for a long time. Were I able to get it to happen, I would have every single church that followed Christian principles to violate those rules until every pastor was in prison and they had to build more prisons to accommodate them along with all of the newly ordained pastors that replaced them. Churches everywhere should have rose up against this violation of our rights when it was first passed. Our freedoms have been taken one at a time and every one of us have allowed it to happen.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      In fact, such calls have been made, for pastors to openly defy the IRS. Many did, and no one was arrested. These days, a pastor who refuses to discuss politics is doing so by choice, not out of fear of the IRS. This could change as liberal christophobia becomes more significant politically.

    • pst4usa says:

      Actually there is a large movement today to do just this. Pulpit Freedom Day, over 200 churches do this every year and it is growing fast. On one Sunday, (sorry I do not know the date in advance, but David Barton advertises it every year), the call goes out for churches to preach about politics from a biblical perspective, they record those sermons and send them to the IRS and dare the IRS to do anything about it. There is an army of attorneys lined up just waiting to take on the IRS and to date the IRS has never taken anyone to court, they will not because they know they will lose. The IRS has intimidated some churches to buckle under their great bullying tactics, but not anymore. So all it will take is one, and the stupid UN-constitutional Johnson amendment will be tossed out as it should have been back in the late 50’s or early 60’s, back when LBJ was a senator.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        I’d read that we had Lyndon the Bane to thank for that little atrocity. (I once had the chance to meet LBJ after my father’s death. Having recently read Haley’s A Texan Looks at Lyndon, I chose not to. I’ve never regretted that decision.)

        Paul Boller mentions a revealing anecdote about the Bane. It seems that a political science professor asked a question on a test about what the Constitution says about education. Liar Lyndon, not knowing his material, wrote a bunch of horse-krugman, and the professor marked him wrong, noting that it never mentions the topic. So later, the petulant president noted all he had done in passing education bills (which actually accomplished little if anything), and suggested that this was the answer. Of course, passing bills doesn’t change what the Constitution says, but not to the Bane.

  9. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    Trump has now come out in favor of perverts being able to use whichever bathroom they feel like using at any given moment.

    He has also stated he would allow abortions in the cases of rape, incest and danger to the mother’s life. That last exception is the one through which the Left has been driving bulldozers for decades.

    Maybe the pastors were on to something!!!

    Now that only he has the mathematical possibility of gaining 1,237 votes on the first ballot, I think Trump is taking a Left Turn. (Showing his true “New York Values”)

    In my opinion, this will damage both him and the party.

    Him, because all those “conservatives” who support him may figure out he is a typical Democrat and leave him,

    The Party, because when these people bolt, they will probably not take part in the national election, thus giving it to Hillary. Thank you Donald and Trumpkins.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Yes, but if it wasn’t for Trump, caving to the Left on social issues wouldn’t even be being discussed.

      [Anway…well said, Mr. Kung.]

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        Someone else who sees the writing on the wall.

        http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/04/22/starnes-donald-trump-is-not-conservative.html?intcmp=hpbt2

        As I have mentioned before, I believe Trump a complete cynic who panders to the naive’ and other cynics like himself.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          “The problem with what happened in North Carolina is the strife and the economic punishment that they’re taking,” he said on the “Today Show.”

          With all due respect, the problem in North Carolina was big business trying to bully and intimidate moms and dads who want to protect their daughters.

          Right on, Starnes. Trump spoke with all the moral obtuseness of a libertarian.

          Mr. Kung, you suspect that Trump knows what he’s doing. I think this is who he really is. Maybe the difference is somewhere in the middle.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            Note that when Cruz was explaining “New York values” sometime back, one point he made was their materialistic worldview. Money is what really matters to them — hence Trump’s reaction to events in North Carolina (a state that voted for him on Super Tuesday II).

    • Timothy Lane says:

      But as long as Trump builds that wall and deports every single illegal alien, Ann Coulter wouldn’t care if he performed abortions in the White House (or so she once said, and I believe it). And if he doesn’t manage to accomplish what they want? That’s a heavy price for feeling good about themselves (or, in other words, acting like liberals).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *