Donald Trump, a 77-year-oldĀ Bible salesman from Palm Beach, Florida, has emerged as the nationās most prominent Christian leader. Trump is running for president as a divinely chosen champion of White Christians, promising to sanctify their grievances, destroy their perceived enemies, bolster their social status, and grant them the power to impose an anti-feminist, anti-LGBTQ, White-centric Christian nationalism from coast to coast. That Trump doesnāt attend church and has obviously never read the book that he hawks for $59.99, seems of interest exclusively to his political opponents.
What might catch the attention of some evangelical conservatives, however, is that Trumpās ostentatiousĀ embraceĀ of White Christian militantism coincides with a precipitous decline in religious affiliation in the US. According to the Public Religion Research Institute,Ā one-quarterĀ of Americans in 2023 said they were religiously unaffiliated. āUnaffiliatedā is the only religious category experiencing growth. In a single decade, from 2013 to 2023, the percentage of Americans saying that religion is the most important thing, or among the most important things, in their life plummeted to 53% from 72%.
The cornered rat has entered the chatā¦
The more the āChristiansā try to prevent change, the more people they will drive away from the church.
Donāt do that, they are indeed Christians not āChristiansā. I donāt accept the no true Scotsman fallacy, these people are indeed Christian, they are the dregs of what that religion teaches. Own it, fix it, donāt just claim everyone who sucks in your religion isnāt a ātrue Christianā
I disagree with this on the basis that Christ explicitly teaches His followers to Love unconditionally, care for the vulnerable and needy, and makes an example of those who use the sanctity of the Temple for personal gain. People who call themselves āChristianā while very deliberately doing the exact opposite of the things Christ taught are very literally not āTrue Christiansā, because they do none of the things commanded of them by Christ. This differs from the āNo True Scotsmanā because there is a whole specific list of criteria differentiating a True Christian from a false one.
I also remember Jesus telling his followers to sell their properties and buy swords. Also remember them violently lopping off a Roman soldiers ear (why does god incarnate need armed followers?) and Jesus himself being violent in the temple. Jesus was an apocalyptic cult leader, trying to get himself martyred by pissing off the religious authorities and by calling himself king while in a Roman province. Disturbing the pax Romana during a pilgrimage month, when the Roman Legion was called in to the city to keep pace during Passover.
Not disagreeing with your point, but the soldierās ear probably isnāt the best example. Luke 22:49-51:
I agree for the most part, and I left the Catholic Church I grew up in for that and many other reasons.
However, isnāt Christās message supposed to be āyou shall love your neighbour as yourselfā? When it becomes āhurt your neighbour as much as you canā does it make sense to still call it Christianity?
Since itās been that way basically from the beginning though, maybe well meaning Christian people should just step away and start over.
Iāve always understood āneighbourā in this context to mean āfellow Christianā. Everyone else is fair game.
Thatās theologically insane. Itās been doctrine at times and is how catholic slaving was justified, but it flies in the face of one of the recurring themes of the gospels: that you need to love your enemies and people you donāt like. Thatās the point of the Good Samaritan, itās the at the time equivalent of āa priest and a well respected christian ignored an injured Christian, but then some random Muslim guy showed up and just helped this stranger just because he was hurt, be like the Muslim guyā
I get your point. Mine is that thereās the ideal and the reality. Iāll give the title to the ideal and let the self righteous know they are pretenders.