Since you’re still reading this after seeing the title, thanks for being willing to consider my argument. For those who reached the same conclusion months or years ago, I hope that my thoughts resonate with you. But the group I would especially like to address are the Christians who believe that a biblical world view should inform our politics and who voted for Trump in previous elections for the sake of Christian principles. Though I have never voted for Trump, I believe that you and I share very similar core values. My interpretation of those values has led me, a life-long Republican, to once again abandon the Republican nominee. I write this in order to entreat you to seriously consider taking the same step.
I remember the days when Republicans asserted that the character of a leader mattered more than party affiliation. In the name of “character matters,” they agreed with Democrats to seek the impeachment of President Nixon. He knew they would follow through on that commitment and stepped down from office before it could happen. In the name of “character matters,” Republicans declared President Clinton unfit for office and voted to impeach him. With President Trump, the logic twisted. And thousands of Church leaders and self-professed moral crusaders have gone so far as to herald Donald Trump as “God’s anointed.”
The nature of the current presidential campaign is indeed unprecedented. Never before has a presidential nominee faced a litany of felony charges while at the same time running for office. Never before has a plethora of current and former leaders within a political party endorsed the opponent’s nominee because they consider their own nominee to be not only unfit to hold office, but to pose a genuine threat to the democratic process. And never before has the conservative Christian coalition of voters stood so steadfastly behind a candidate who demonstrates core character qualities that are opposed to the fruit of the Spirit.
I have written in previous blogs about how we got to this point. The political right-wing has for decades preached the doctrine that conservatives are an abused class, mocked by the political left and misrepresented in the so called “mainstream media.” When I read or listen to right-wing news sources, I understand why the sense of grievance has grown. The charge that “everything is rigged against us” is relentless and works its way under the skin. Trump, more than any politician before him, harnessed that grievance to his advantage. Conservative Christians, who are often quick to identify evidence of religious persecution from their fellow citizens and political leaders, were predisposed to Trump’s messaging.
Trump also harnessed the theologically conservative Church’s opposition to abortion (even though Trump’s personal stance on the subject wavers according to the context he finds himself in). I have many friends who voted for Trump largely because they anticipated that his Supreme Court nominations would overturn Roe v. Wade. I admit that the constant drumbeat of “protecting women’s reproductive rights” from the Democratic ticket wears on my spirit. I maintain the conviction that the fetus is not a part of the mother’s body, but a developing human person in its own right. Like many of my Christian brothers and sisters, I believe that placing some restrictions on abortion is a valid and just expression of public policy. But Trump’s opposition to abortion remains politically motivated, at best. And now he sees fit to pull back from the topic and “let the states decide.”
Abortion is an important moral issue and government’s role in restricting it will continue to be debated. What should not be up for debate, however, is the peaceful transfer of power under constitutional law. Despite the revisionist history that the MAGA movement would thrust upon us, Donald Trump engaged in a conspiracy to overthrow a valid election. He did so in the plain sight of the American people. He continues to assert baseless claims of election fraud to this very day. No matter what policy planks you may favor or what party you prefer, Donald Trump is not a credible option as a candidate for president. He broke his covenant to defend and protect the constitution of the United States. That disqualifies him. Regardless of whatever else he may claim.
When Jack Smith’s Immunity Filing was released this week, the degree to which it impacted you probably depends upon your previously held convictions. For those who followed the January 6th Committee hearings two years ago, there were no bomb-shell revelations in this filing. It simply served as a confirmation of the testimony given under oath in the hearings. The filing is indeed remarkable, however, in that it relies on the sworn testimony of multiple Trump administration insiders who did not testify in the January 6th congressional hearings, including testimony from former Vice President Pence.
It continues to shock me that the findings of the January 6th Committee are so easily swept aside by so many of my fellow believers. Therefore, I would like to make one last appeal before the next election: please read the Filing on Presidential Immunity. Smith was asked to file this brief because of the Supreme Court’s recent decision granting the US president presumed immunity for “official acts” while performing the duties of the presidency. At the court’s behest, Smith responded to the question of whether Trump’s behavior on and leading up to January 6th constituted official acts or acts as a candidate for office. Smith’s filing gives us a unique window into Trump’s mindset and behavior by recounting examples from the testimony of subpoenaed witnesses before a grand jury.
Whether or not Trump ever faces trial as a defendant for his criminal conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election depends upon the result of the election on November 5th. But Christians who hold that “righteousness exalts a nation” (Proverbs 13:34) must make a decision based on the best available evidence. Smith’s document, though somewhat technical, is eminently readable. I recommend reading Section I which gives the outline of the government’s case. It takes up the first 85 pages, but double spaced and with abundant footnotes, it goes pretty fast. It offers compelling evidence that the former president knew that he had lost the election and nonetheless proceeded to push various theories of how the vote could be declared illegitimate. In Smith’s words:
Following election day and throughout the charged conspiracies, the defendant, his co-conspirators, and their agents spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election, and that he had actually won. These lies included dozens of specific claims that there had been substantial fraud in certain states, such as that large numbers of dead, nonresident, non-citizen, or otherwise ineligible voters had cast ballots, or that voting machines had changed votes for the defendant to votes for Biden. And the defendant and co-conspirators continue to make these unsupported, objectively unreasonable, and ever changing claims even after they had been publicly disproven, or after advisors had directly informed the defendant that they were untrue. (page 10)
The document goes on to cite multiple specific conversations and activities witnessed by Trump officials that confirm this judgment. It offers clear and compelling evidence that Trump began a program of disinformation months before the election. (To cite one example, at the Republican National Convention, he brazenly contended, “The only way they can take this election away from us is if this is a rigged election.”) Smith’s filing demonstrates that Trump was intimately involved in each step of the conspiracy: the spurious arguments in the courts alleging fraud, the fake elector scheme, the pressure on Pence to refuse to allow the electoral votes to be certified, right down to the physical assault on the capitol. Many of the details are chilling. In response to an aid, informing Trump that his tweets regarding Pence were endangering the vice president’s life, Trump allegedly replied, “So what?”
In our highly polarized political environment, I realize that your gut level response to that revelation may be the all too common, “Fake news!” But allow me to reiterate: the document lays out the merits of the government’s case against Trump on the basis of sworn testimony. The charges that are brought rely on witnesses with first-hand knowledge of the events, not hearsay evidence. Upon their testimony it becomes abundantly clear that Trump knowingly participated in a scheme to defraud the citizens of the United States of their votes.
Admittedly, the case has not been tried in a court of law. If it reaches trial, it is likely that Trump’s defense will be that he was merely going along with the advice of his lawyers and that he truly believed the narrative about massive election fraud. We may never see the day in court, but I urge you to read the document and judge the weight of the testimony for yourself. Because of the High Court’s ruling regarding immunity, we have the rare privilege of getting a bird’s eye view of the prosecution’s case before it goes to trial. I contend that responsible voters who care about Christian principles have a responsibility before God to read the credible source material.
A few weeks ago I came across this verse in my daily reading: “If a ruler listens to falsehood, all his officials will be wicked.” (Proverbs 29:12) The passage declares the inevitable moral deterioration that occurs within a government when those in authority willfully embrace a lie. Not only the ruler is affected, but all his officials along with him. The proverb is, of course, a hyperbolic statement. Not every single official will necessarily succumb. But there exists an inexorable tendency for corruption to spread. Every bold lie adds to the superstructure. Every claim of being treated unfairly supports the prevailing victim narrative.
The MAGA movement under Trump has effectively overwhelmed the old guard Republican Party. As evidenced in J. D. Vance’s unwillingness to admit in the debate last Tuesday that Joseph Biden is the rightfully elected president of the United States, the lie of a stolen election has become party orthodoxy. Those who, immediately following January 6th, declared that Trump’s incitement of an insurrection was a bridge too far are now either absent from the party or have succumbed to the party narrative. “All his officials [have] become wicked.”
I submit that the most responsible choice for Christian Republicans in the upcoming election is to join Elizabeth Cheney and countless other Republicans and vote for the Harris/Walz ticket. Not because we are convinced that the Democratic Party has the best ideas, but because we recognize that Donald Trump is a “splintered reed of a staff, which pierces the hand of anyone who leans on it!” (2 Kings 18:21)
I still have hope for the Republican Party, but not so long as Trump is the party leader. I have proudly witnessed the bravery of various former Trump administrative officials and Republican leaders who are standing up for principle over party. It seems to me, they represent the most sane and capacious minds in my party—those least driven by an insider mentality. They are also the most hopeful. Sadly however, many of those who stand on principle have been driven from office by an electorate that is drunk on Trump wizardry. The only real hope for the Republican party is an exorcism of Trump’s lies. And that will only happen if he and those who amplify his deceit are soundly defeated at the polling places.
Liz Cheney spoke to her fellow Republicans at the Kamala Harris rally in Ripon, Wisconsin:
So help us right the ship of our democracy, so that history will say of us, “When our time of testing came, we did our duty and we prevailed because we loved our country more.”
Let us join her in that unprecedented but necessary path. I am convinced that my Christian duty demands it.
Steve Pecota - a Pastor in Seattle 
Well said. In Washington there was an active moderate Republican group: Mainstream Republicans of Washington. Dan Evans was one of the founders. I have not found a similar group here in California.
Yes, Gary. I am so thankful for the moderate voices that still belong to the party. I fear they are becoming fewer and fewer.
Thanks, Steve. I
Steve, I think better of you than to quote the brief of a hyper-aggressive prosecutor who has lost every major case he has prosecuted that has found its way to SCOTUS. The allegations in the brief have not been cross-examined and it is simply irresponsible to come to judgment on the matter until both parties have had a chance to address it.
Additionally, Trump was impeached twice for the “insurrection” and was twice acquitted. Enough of the rhetoric.
You have the right to vote for the candidate of your choice. But the allegation that those of us who support Donald Trump are irrational is ludicrous.
I support the freedom to practice my faith without intimidation or fear of governmental interference or reprisal. Trump ✅
I support stronger border policies and LEGAL immigration. Trump ✅
I support returning criminal illegal migrants to their country of origin. Trump ✅
I support energy independence. Trump ✅
I support less taxes. Trump ✅
I support Israel and their right to defend themselves as they see fit. Trump ✅
I support laws against trans-gendering our children. Trump ✅
I support policies against teaching CRT in our schools. Trump ✅
I support policies against mandating DEI hiring and support meritocracy. Trump ✅
I support our constitutional republic and reject the socialist/Marxist agenda of the left. Trump ✅
I support our first amendment right to freedom of expression. Trump ✅
I support our second amend right to bear arms. Trump ✅
I support an end to the weaponization of our goverment against its people and political opposition. Trump ✅
I support a strong military absent the negative influence of DEI policies. Trump ✅
I support the right of people to buy the kind of vehicle they want – NO EV MANDATES. Trump ✅
I support secure and safe elections by voters who are legal citizens of the USA. Trump ✅
I support marriage between a man and woman, and that there are only two genders. Trump ✅
I support a ban on men participating in women’s sports. Trump ✅
I support the deportation of pro-Hamas students who are here on education visas to their country of origin. Trump ✅
I support the protection of Social Security with the elimination of taxes on SS payments. Trump ✅
I support our police and their execution of their lawful duties. Trump ✅
I could go on and on, but which of these do you find irrational? In this modern Babylon, the left seeks to intimidate us and demand our obeisance. Right now it’s “bow or be shouted out” but the only natural progression of their views is the fiery furnace or the lion’s den for those that oppose.
Be very careful about who you choose to align with. The left’s values are not ours.
Jim Stockman
Thanks for your response, Jim. I can understand your list of policies where you see Trump as the better candidate. If he were a “normal” candidate, I would agree with you on many or perhaps most of them. But Trump has proven himself to be an unreliable and self-absorbed leader who is has little grasp of policy and brazenly disregards the rule of law. The left’s values are not mine. But as many of his former cabinet members have observed, Trump endangers the security of our nation and of our allies. For me, the choice is simple.
When Trump was president we had no wars, the economy was better and the Supreme Court brought down Roe. Have you considered the possibility that the democrats have weaponized the justice system against their political opponent? What if your assumption that Trump is actually guilty of an insurrection is wrong?
Molly, you are right: If my conclusion about the insurrection were wrong, my conclusion would fall apart. But I trust the testimony from multiple members of Trump’s inner circle that his actions leading up to and on January 6th were sinister and deliberate.
The deliberate burdens the current administration has placed on American citizens is unconsionable. Their policies are antichrist – I won’t list them because we all know. The only truth Harris has spoken is that we need to move forward “unburdened by what has been.” We need to unburden ourselves of the corruption of this current administration.
God seems to see more value in Trump than some. His life has been spared twice. Seems to me there’s a higher purpose appointed for the man. I encourage you to honestly ask Him why. And, even if I could not vote for Trump for “conscience sake,” I would rather abstain than cast a vote for the evil that currently reigns. It is not a choice between two, but three. Trump, Harris, or stay home. I’d rather see a pastor I once respected encourage the third option over Harris.
Jim, thanks for staying in dialogue. And you’re right, there are three choices. In 2016 I voted for an alternative candidate. In 2020 I thought the stakes were high enough that I voted for the Biden ticket. I obviously don’t see the last four years as an unmitigated disaster, even thought I disagree on principle with some policy decisions. The thing that compels me to vote again for a Democrat is the conviction that Trump could cause grave harm to our nation and our allies. But you and I see it very differently.
well put Steve. I wish more people could see they are drinking the kool aid that will destroy democracy.
Thoughts from another pastor, if you’re willing to listen.
Jim Stockman
Thanks, Jim. I’ll check it out.
Do you honestly believe that Harris/Walz are qualified to lead our country? Have you studied her positions and voting record in the state of California and her opinions of the LGTQ community? Doesn’t this go against everything we have ever been taught about the word of God in these matters? You have left me stunned and confused.
Thanks for your comments, Teresa.
The simple answer is, yes, I believe they are much more qualified to lead our nation than Trump/Vance. It’s not that I concur with many of the policies of the Democratic Party. It’s just that the Republican Party has shown itself to be unreliable and reactionary. The fact that a Republican candidate for office must swear allegiance to the lie that Trump didn’t legitimately lose the 2020 election is an indicator of how far we have fallen.
Moral issues matter. On policy, I remain committed to conservative values. But a head of state must adhere to democratic norms and protocol. I cannot with a clear conscience vote for a former President who makes personal phone calls to Vladimir Putin, a practice that no previous President would not consider in their wildest dreams. That is just one example of many.
Thanks for a reasonable take, without the histrionics on display from both camps. I once again have no candidate for President that I trust with my vote.
I understand your position, Roger. I pray we will have a reasonable Republican candidate in four years.
Well presented. I really like the way you articulated your position on abortion. Me, too.
I watched TV all day on Jan 6. By evening, the only vote for Trump I’d cast is for prison. The discoveries since confirm it.
I don’t like Harris-Walz positions; I dread Trump.
Thank you, Dave. I think that pastors have it especially tough in knowing how to respond to the current political environment. Do we speak up? If so, how straight should we be? But in the end, the stakes of this election are exceptionally high.
Thanks, Steve… reading the document you posted was an eye-opener. I agree with your well-written and thoughtful conclusion. Praying for clear-sightedness in the coming month.
Thank you, John.
I’ve never liked Trump and I won’t argue with your main point here against him on a biblical basis. I’d more or less agree. But if you think there’s no coherent Christian reason to vote for Trump and somehow think there is one to vote for Harris, then I think you need to spend some more time researching her policies. Nor would I blame you for not knowing her policies, as it took her campaign more than 50 days to announce *any* official policy positions after she won the nomination and nearly every one of them announced was in contradiction to the policies she ran on in 2020. In 2019 a liberal think tank rated her voting record as the most extreme member in the entire Senate, which is saying A LOT.
Some of the policies pushed through by Biden/Harris in the last 4 years:
Prosecution of pro-lifers under the FACE Act
-Biden admin penalizing foster parents who don’t affirm trans identity
-Dysphoric children confiscated from non-affirming parents
This is in addition to the destruction of our federal government’s checks and balances she has called for if she wins in openly declaring desires to pack the Supreme Court or to eliminate the filibuster to force through nationwide abortion.
Walz pushed through a change in a law in his state which stopped requiring doctors to provide life saving care to living babies who survived a botched abortion and were alive outside the womb. Since then, there’s at least 19 babies on record in his state who were murdered/left to die AFTER birth.
I could go on and on.
In summary, sure I agree with you on Trump. But there’s just as strong of a Christian argument against Harris and I think to deny that is either ignorance or delusion.
Thanks for engaging, Ryan. I think you and I are fairly close to each other in terms of values. The democratic party has been far too quick to jump to negative conclusions about parents who stand in the way of their minor children’s choices. For example, I think allowing minor children to take hormone blockers against their parent’s will is a tragedy. Or when schools allow children to present as trans at school without informing the parents. It’s almost as if they imply that the state can do a better job raising children than their parents can. Some of the policy decisions of the Biden/Harris administration are genuinely contrary to Christian values. If there were a “normal” alternative to vote for, I would vote differently. Unfortunately, the Republicans have nominated two men whose stated agenda is to abuse the power of the office.
Exactly what “stated agenda” has been made by either Trump or Vance to “abuse the power of the office?”
Trump states openly that he wants to use the justice apartment to punish his political adversaries. This is more than an idle threat. Recent reporting by the NY Times has demonstrated that Trump already specifically targeted Jim Comey and Andrew McCabe through the instrument of the IRS. If not for a cabinet that kept Trump’s base nature in check, the abuse of the justice system would have been even more profound. Trump intends to use the justice department, which has since Nixon maintained a careful separation from the president himself, as an instrument for carrying out his wishes.
Is it your allegation that Biden/Harris did not use the justice system against Trump and Americans with conservative values?
The Biden/Harris debacle used the justice system to attack Catholics, peaceful protestors at abortion clinics (who ended up with 5 YEAR SENTENCES), school board protesters, and any largely Republican POV with reckless abandon, and on and on. They want to take children away from parents who oppose their kids transitioning. They attack pro-life pregnancy centers.
I guarantee Trump will not do any of that, just like he didn’t in his first term. Trump said he was going to lock Hillary up. Venting rhetoric that never happened (and probably should have). He has a tendency to run his mouth, and I’m not a fan of that. Bottom line, he didn’t do it.
A vote for Harris/Walz is, in my opinion, a vote for the most hedonistic, self-absorbed, corrupt candidates in modern history. There is not one redeeming grace that is consistent with Scripture that I can find in the Harris/Walz ticket that will benefit Americans. And if anyone thinks for one minute that this godless woman is qualified to be Commander-in-Chief of our DEI infused military, they have another thing coming. She will take us into war and we will be defeated. We may end up in war anyway because the current administration’s policies have us at the door. I’d much rather have a leader who supports Israel than one who clearly does not.
Please stop listening to Morning Joe and The View. Please stop reading the NYT – it’s left-wing propaganda. I believe his views on the matter are best expressed in the following quote, taken from NBC News – another left-wing spreader of lies:
“WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences,” Trump wrote. “Please beware that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials.”
His point is clearly that people who have broken the law throughout this process will face the consequences. And well they should.
Jim, recent reporting by the NY Times demonstrates that Trump already began a campaign of retribution against his political enemies during his first term of office. He is more than blow and bluster. He is intent of hurting anyone who he perceives as having wronged him. And he does not limit his retribution to those who have broken the law. James Comey is a man of character and a faithful public servant. Trump went after him with a vengeance because he didn’t like his intelligence conclusions.
In response to your disparagement of the NY Times. The Times has a long tradition of careful editing. It leans left, yes. But it documents its reporting. It is a reliable news source for which I am deeply grateful.
The Times editorial board also, as you know, believes that Trump is utterly unfit to be president again. Based not on a whim, but on careful research and analysis.
Audience members: “Jesus is Lord!”
Kamala Harris: “Oh, you guys are at the wrong rally.”
Kamala Harris: “No, I think you meant to go to the smaller one down the street.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuenBfv82oA
Steve, I’ll restate again that I agree with you on Trump but you’re coming across as incredibly biased because you’re clearly not applying the same arguments to Harris that you’re saying disqualify Trump. You say you can’t vote for him because he wants to use the justice system against his opponents? Obama/Biden weaponized the IRS against Christian organizations. Biden/Harris’s justice system has openly targeted their political opponents over the last 3 and a half years.
You seem pretty well read on Trump’s positions. You are either not interested or are purposely ignoring Harris when she has the exact same problematic stances on things that you say disqualify Trump.
Again, thanks for engaging. I haven’t seen clear evidence that Biden has weaponized the justice system. If you’re talking about prosecuting Trump, the Biden administration was very careful to distance itself from the prosecutions. They followed precedent by allowing AGs and special prosecutors to truly act independently. They even allowed the Trump appointed special prosecutor who was looking into Hunter Biden to continue in the role and did not intervene. I can’t imagine Trump doing the same.
To compare Biden/Harris in their approach to justice and Trump’s approach as equally flawed ignores the facts.
But coming back to my central thesis: Trump actively and deliberately engaged in a conspiracy to overturn a fair and valid election. This was a betrayal to his oath of office. He was impeached for that action. The Republicans in the Senate lacked the courage to ratify the impeachment. In my opinion, this was a significant dereliction of duty. Now it is up to the voters to rectify their cowardly deferral.
“Abortion is an important moral issue and government’s role in restricting it will continue to be debated. What should not be up for debate, however, is the peaceful transfer of power under constitutional law’.
You’re lost. You view the peaceful transfer of power as more important that abortion. You are truly lost.
Kerry, thank you for expressing your opinion.
Steve,
We live in two different worlds…on this planet. Fortunately, in the next world none of this will matter.
I disagree with you on so many points. I wish we could engage in point by point discussion. I am going to respond to 3-4 of the points that I have read.
Before that I would ask you to read my series: Why a Christian SHOULD Vote for Donald Trump – A Response to: “Christians Supporting President Trump is Hypocritical”
on patheos.com:
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/earlychristianhistorymatters/2024/09/why-a-christian-should-vote-for-donald-trump-to-be-president/
The first thing I will say is that the Republicans should not have gone after Clinton the way they did. I was a young man then and I joined in, but now at 65yrs old with tons more knowledge of the world – Bill Clinton was a fairly good President. Like with most Democrat Presidents, I did not like his foreign policy, but he governed fairly well.
One of the points I make is that liberals are hypocritical when they go after Trump for his sexual “sins” and comments yet overlook Clinton, JFK, GH Bush and a few other Presidents who have had sexual trysts.
It is a sad truth that powerful men get away with things like this, but Trump’s errors in this arena do not stack as high as Clinton’s. The other Presidents did their sexual deeds while in office – even while sitting at the resolute desk. Trump’s are mostly old accusations and Joe Biden has some of these just as bad…yet nobody was upset with him.
You question Trump’s true stance on abortion. Fine. He held more liberal views in his past. He promised to put up conservatives for SCOTUS – he did it. Poor Brett Kavanaugh had to endure being dragged through the gutter just as Thomas had been.
You fault Trump for pulling back? I fault the conversative states for passing such stringent laws after 50 years of Roe v Wade. I thought they acted too quickly as well. It backfired. The culture reeled when Roe hit it; these aggressive laws immediately after Roe was struck down was doing the exact same thing on the other end. Trump is historically correct – it should always have been in the state courts, the test labs for the Republic.
January 6. I am sure that you are aware that the Democrats contested the election in 2000 and again in 2016. It is a constitutional right to challenge the election. The difference was that the Dems could not get a Senator to stand with them and sign the petition – the Republicans had that…but then the “rioting” started.
You touted the January 6 Commission. That was a dog and pony show. They denied Republicans the right to seat people on the commission. The Democrats chose two Repubs, Cheney and Kinsinger, who had both voiced loudly their disgust with Trump prior to Jan6. The Commission did not allow Repubs to call witnesses, Pelosi refused to release all the video. It was a joke.
When the Republicans had their J6 Hearing Christopher Wray, under oath, refused to answer straightforward questions about whether the FBI had undercover agents there on J6. There has been more than three clips of video to confirm that indeed FBI agents were there…and there is evidence that they urged people in the crowd to get violent.
There is also video of Pelosi admitting that Trump had urged her to get National Guard troops into the Capitol in the build up to J6, but Pelosi refused. Why?
This is certainly unprecedented ground we are walking on. The felony charges against Trump have been the result of prosecutors on a mission – take him out so he cannot be the POTUS. The NY DA ran her campaign on “I’m going to get Trump.” You want me to read Jack Smith’s filing? He is known to be a loose canon prosecutor.
Great constitutional lawyers/scholars have spoken out against the prosecutions of Trump: Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz being two that come to my mind immediately.
I think what saddens me most is how you imply that Christians who disagree with you (and there are multiplied millions) are deceived. It sounds judgmental. That saddens me. I tried really hard to avoid that in my articles because I know Christians who disagree with my view on Trump…and I know that they love God.
Realize that for me what I see coming from the other side is FAR WORSE than an egotistical man (probably every single POTUS has a healthy ego or he would not run for that office). I could go down the list of things the Dems push that my Christian convictions cannot abide, but I have already seen the reasons in the comments of others.
Trump did not cause this division – that is my second article…and an important one.
Trump is like many other visionary leaders: has an ego, says things that are rude and/or crude, speaks in hyperbole…he is in good company. Churchill was hated for the same reason. So was Steve Jobs. As is Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos. That is my third article.
I am not trying to justify Trump. I am answering how/why I will vote for him. His enemies stand for horrible things…darkness.
If you think “wizardry” and “exorcism” are words that you should use against fellow Christians, beware. THAT can be the accuser of the brethren. Oh, I see the demonic… but it’s not Trump. It’s not you.
And it is dragging us down into the abyss.
Al Baker, Ph.D.
Early Church History
Continental Theological Seminary
Hi Al, sorry to be delayed in getting to this. I jst opened up my wordpress today for the first time in a few weeks. I’ll wait to respond to your points until I have read your blog. I look forward to it. You’re obviously a serious thinker and have carefully examined the data.
Hi Al,
I did read your blogs on Patheos. First of all, let me say I appreciate that you’re backing up your conclusions with research and that you really try to put things into historical perspective. It’s certainly true that Trump “didn’t start the fire” (little shout-out to Billy Joel). In my writing I’ve often called attention to the decision during Reagan’s administration to rescind the fairness doctrine in broadcasting. That contributed massively to the current polarized environment. And as you point out, mean spirited and hyperbolic statements are not the sole purview of Donald Trump. It happens on all sides, no question. And I agree with you that Trump’s comments are often taken out of context and then the press bares down on one little phrase such as “there were good people on both sides” or “Hitler did some good things.”
I thought it was fair of you to compare Trump’s extremism to comments that have been made by other societal and political leaders. But after that our views depart. I think you’ve normalized Trump like much of the right wing media has done. It’s not simply that Trump is a firebrand or that he speaks his mind or that he used hyperbole or that he deliberately offends. It’s the fact that Trump broke democratic norms again and again. Because I’m retired, I was able to watch the first impeachment trial in it’s entirety, and the second, and the January 6th hearings. Unlike what you said, none of these were “dog and pony shows.” In my opinion, it is nearly impossible to listen to Colonel Vindman’s testimony or to that of Marie Yovanovitch and not come to the conclusion that these were serious public servants with genuine integrity, who understood the ins and outs of international relations well and who had no axe to grind. They recognized a genuine breach of acceptable conduct by the president when they saw it and they called attention to it. Based on normal standards for determining the credibility of witnesses, they passed with flying colors. And with their unique insider knowledge about how foreign policy is conducted, they knew right away that what Trump was doing was dangerous.
The response of the Republican Party? To normalize Trump’s behavior. To claim that the call to Zelenskyy was an ordinary form of business.
That pattern continued throughout Trump’s presidency and beyond. In your blog you essentially follow the same path. You mention various political and business figures who demonstrate character traits similar to Trump. Yet you fail to reference the members of his own cabinet who consider Trump to be not only until to serve, but a genuine threat to our democratic system.
What do you do with the witness of Kelly and Milley and Mattis? These are not only men of stellar character, they are exceptionally well qualified to judge the inner workings of Trumps administration. If they say he is a threat to democracy, that must be taken seriously. Trump is not a “normal” candidate. If some of his own cabinet members actually go so far as to use the label “fascist” to apply to Trump, then one had better have convincing evidence if one seeks to disprove the assertion. I, for one, don’t see any.