Know the Truth

Every now and then. I get a question from someone who asks how it is that I can be both an Evangelical Christian and also generally supportive of the Democratic party rather than the Republicans.  Sometimes the question is worded as a general assumption that being Evangelical is simply part of being Republican, or that being Republican automatically makes you Evangelical, as if there are political beliefs which must be accepted in order to also be Christian.  Others ask with the assumption that if I've accepted the reasoning behind certain Democratic party positions, or the science behind COVID-19, I should drop the Christian beliefs and convictions because they're not consistent.  

Drop the assumptions, be open-minded and I'll explain. 

There Are Plenty of Democrats in Evangelical Churches

My personal convictions are my own, not tied to trends or intended to fit in someone's box.  However, being Christian in an Evangelical tradition and also supporting Democratic candidates for public office is not as rare as the media makes it sound.  The polling data makes a big deal out of the fact that white Evangelicals have been overwhelmingly Republican, going as high as claiming that 84% of those who self-identify this way voted for Trump in 2020.  First of all, I question the accuracy of that figure.  Second, not all Evangelicals are white.  

In my own circle of friends made over a lifetime, most of them active and committed to their membership in an Evangelical church, I can identify, by their own words and actions, at least a third who regularly vote for Democrats, and half who didn't support Trump either time.  That's anecdotal, but its my experience.   

Classifying what constitutes "Evangelical" is different according to most media sources, some of which use the term exclusively applied to white or predominantly white churches while separating out Latino and Asian Evangelicals, and labelling African Americans as belonging to "historically African American" churches.  I use a set of core theological and doctrinal beliefs to identify Evangelicals, primarily those who believe in personal redemption characterized by a confession that "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" (I John 4:2), belief that the text of the 66 books of the Old and New Testament canon are the measure of truth without error, and are authoritative for all Christian faith and practice and over all of the ministry of the church, and which place an emphasis on what is called Jesus' "great commission," which is to preach and teach the gospel leading to the conversion and instruction in the faith of those who are not Christians.  

The conversion experience itself is at the core of Evangelical theology.  It's not just a matter of acknowledging the authority of the teachings of Jesus, it's a matter of personal repentance and spiritual regeneration as a human being, created in God's image, is restored spiritually by a confession of belief in Jesus as the "Christ."  

Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.  I John 3:15

Little children, let us not love in word or talk, but in deed and in truth.  I John 3:18 [emphasis mine]

That's my theological definition of "Evangelical."  What that means is that more than half of American Evangelicals are not "white" by race or ethnicity, but are African American, Hispanic or of Asian descent.  The overwhelming majority of African Americans, 90%, regularly vote Democratic, as do 65-70% of Hispanics and 60% of Asian-Americans.  Added to the 16-20% of white Evangelicals who aren't Republican and I believe it is safe to say that at least half of American Evangelicals vote for Democrats running for office.  

The Trump Factor

It's hard for me to understand how Evangelical Christians could abandon their principles, especially since so many of them were outspoken against Bill Clinton's moral failures, to give such unqualified support to Donald Trump.  For people who claim to rest the foundation of their faith on Biblical truth, the support of Trump by Evangelicals is evidence of a collapse of orthodoxy.  The excuses that were used, "I'm not voting for a pastor-in-chief," or the old argument of voting for "the lesser of two evils" were appalling.  

Trump's record of immoral behavior, business and financial cheating and his disregard for the law in favor of making money is his character.  It's an image he chose, and carefully crafted at every opportunity.  He had an affair on his first wife with the woman who became his second wife, who got pregnant while he was still married to the first wife.  He had an affair on his second wife with wife #3 though apologists claim he was in the process of getting a divorce, which wife #2 disputes.  In between, Trump openly brags about multiple affairs, "hundreds," according to his own words.  

He's hung out with Evangelical leaders, but hasn't ever publicly declared anything that Evangelical Christians staunchly define as "repentance and confession" leading to a conversion or salvation experience.  In fact, he has, on multiple occasions, declared his belief that he doesn't need one.  The character traits he exhibited during his presidency, lying being the most pervasive and obvious, along with character assassination, are defined as "anti-Christ" by one of the Apostles in the early church.  And in spite of the support from some Evangelical leaders, he picked a "word of faith" heretic, Paula White, as his "spiritual advisor," someone who equates the pursuit of worldly wealth with spiritual blessing. 

January 6th

I wouldn't ever have voted for Trump under any circumstances.  But if there's one single event that seals the deal, especially with a big majority of voters, including some white Evangelicals, it was January 6th and his behavior leading up to that event.  He completely disqualified himself and exposed himself for who he really was with all of that.  There's no respect for the Constitution, or the government, it was all about him and his ego couldn't handle the defeat.  We will likely never know how much he was personally enriched by being President, illegally and unconstitutionally of course, but his attempt to overthrow the government and extend his Presidency beyond constitutional limits provides all of the necessary evidence to conclude that the man is a danger to the nation and should spend the rest of his life in prison. 

This event is not consistent with a literal interpretation of the Bible, specifically three passages, two authored by the Apostle Paul in Romans 13:1-7, and Titus 3:1 and one by the Apostle Peter, I Peter 2:13-17.  It is a demonstration of intolerance for the free expression of people who hold different political perspectives which make a democracy like the United States, with constitutionally protected rights, work like it's designed to do.  For a Christian claiming to be spiritually connected with God, participating in the January 6th insurrection would be an act of open rebellion, inconsistent with any Evangelical belief.

But What About the Social Agenda? 

Getting past all of the rhetoric which has gone to extremes as a result of the instant availability of social media, 24 hour, round-the-clock cable news networks and the conspiracy theorists and propagandists like Rush Limbaugh carving out their "niche," neither political party lines up well with Christian beliefs in general, much less with any specific sect or branch of Christianity.  

I could spend a lot of time on the history of Christian influence in the American government, including Jefferson's "wall of separation" phrase when he assured the Baptists that there would not be a "state church" supported by the government as there was in the European nations.  But let's cut to the chase. 

The fight over abortion rights is at the top of the list when it comes to issues gaining the support of voters on behalf of Republican candidates for office.   Were it not for this specific issue, there would be fewer Republicans in state houses and Congress, because many of them have been elected to office based on their public support for what they term as a general "pro-life" position.  But that support is almost universally interpreted as laws restricting or preventing access to an abortion, and opposition to any other means of providing medical and emotional support for women who are prone to choose abortion as an easy way out of a bad situation. 

And yet, since this became a rallying point for Republicans, back during the Reagan administration, the number of abortions performed in the US has only declined on two occasions, both during the administrations of Democrats in the White House and both times when financial assistance and social programs were put in place which provided health care and financial resources for women which gave them options other than abortion to resolve circumstances forcing a bad decision.  Whether they were in an abusive relationship, lacked education to make good choices or were simply living in poverty, the Clinton and Obama administrations succeeded in getting abortion numbers down significantly. 

You would think that among Evangelical churches and denominations there would be a plethora of agencies and organizations working to reduce the abortion totals by helping women in poverty get up on their feet and away from the circumstances in which they feel trapped.  You'd think that there would be adoption agencies which operate on contributions, buffering the cost of adopting children for families who can't afford the steep price tag.   You'd think that, but you would be wrong.  Such agencies and institutions do exist, but they are few, far between and not really capable of providing the kind of resources necessary to make a real difference. So how sincere, really, is the opposition to abortion rights and the desire to see abortion on demand end, if those who are hollering the loudest politically are dong the least that can be done, instead of the most.  

Control and Change the Narrative

The childhood taunt beginning with "sticks and stones" is defiant, but it's not really sound reasoning.  The fact of the matter is that taunts, name-calling and words do inflict pain and they can ruin reputations and be decisive in moral decisions.  The Republicans have used terms like "baby killer" to characterize elected officials who support abortion rights to their advantage.  And while that kind of name-calling, character assassination and exaggeration is not something Christians can support with any Bible doctrine, they indulge in it as well.  

That's where the narrative has to change.  If a Democrat who supports legislation that allows a woman to choose an abortion is a "baby killer" by definition, so is a Republican who refuses to use the government resources at their disposal to slow down the abortion rate, or an Evangelical who won't support an adoption agency or any kind of minimal care for women who consider abortion solely because they are left alone and in poverty.  At least that's the place to start. 

Sometimes the focus just gets twisted and put in the wrong place.  Would any Democratic party politician be unhappy if abortion clinics went out of business because women had resources to make a different choice? 

The American Democratic Republic

A republic is simply a representative form of democracy.  Nothing changes the fact that the United States is a democracy.  And even though it hasn't always been practiced the way that it is written, the constitution guarantees individual rights for all Americans, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, religious beliefs or lack thereof, and it includes all of the choices they make which have not been determined to be prohibited by law because they interfere with someone else's individual rights.  There is no religious "test" for being American and there is no religious requirement.  

What that means is that the churches are free to exist, preach what they choose and how they choose, worship, distribute Bibles, get on the media, go to church when and where they like and believe whatever they choose to believe.  It also means that other citizens are free to not attend church, not be Christians, not follow the Bible's teaching, be atheists or agnostics and not share the same principles or practices at all.  They have the same constitutionally guaranteed rights as everyone else.  In spite of what some people might think, this is not a white Christian nation and it never has been, which is a clear indication that isn't what God ever intended.  

If rights are denied to some citizens, in spite of their equality, then they can be denied to any citizens in spite of their equality.  "Equal rights" is still a future goal, not a present reality.  There was still a lot of the influence of the old European aristocracy when the constitution was written and there have always been tendencies to go back in that direction, where only those who merit rights by their wealth are able to have them.  And shouldn't Christians be in the middle of the push for equality, instead of on the side of aristocratic arrogance? 

Taking Responsibility for Changing Perceptions

One of the main motivations behind this blog is to point out some of the distortions and inconsistencies between Trumpism and true Evangelical Christianity.  It takes knowing something about both to do so and instead of talking past people because of fixed points, there needs to be dialogue.  The reason many Evangelicals are attracted to Republicans, and through the GOP to Trump, is that far too many of them have no idea what they really believe when it comes to their faith, or they ignore their own pastors and theologians and turn Christian beliefs into superstitions or twist them to suit their own purposes.  Those who jump on the Trump political wagon tend to be those who are professing Christians because of what they think they can get out of it, not to be part of a true church that actually believes the teachings of Jesus and commits to the confession of I John 4:1-3.  

Undermining the false pretenses and assumptions of the Evangelical political right does not in any way undermine Christian confession or theology.  I would argue that following Trump and the political right not only undermines and cheapens Christianity, but using it for worldly political gain is anti-Christian.  I would also argue that the purpose of setting the record straight is not to make Evangelical Christianity a branch of the Democratic party either.  

"If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."  Christ Jesus, John 8:31b-32, ESV