Are the Gloves Coming Off??

[redleghunter]

I’m friendly with a good number of evangelicals and the unifying idea between them all is an “I don’t care anymore” attitude. Civility, conservative purity tests, insults, smears, they seem fed up with everything. Voting for Trump for them was an electoral middle finger to a system they’ve come to despise.

This.

Not only Evangelicals but most of the American middle class who work long hours, maybe two jobs and honestly pay their taxes.

I don’t understand why people don’t understand this. They cannot be shamed, guilt-tripped or bullied into voting for some other guy. Their anger seems to overrule everything else. The rest of you can hate that as much as you want but these tactics of “calling out their hypocrisy” have never worked.

This is true. The poll I keep posting on the Evangelical shaming threads show Evangelicals normally vote for the GOP Presidential candidate at a 80/20 spread. Been like that for Bush, McCain, Romney and now Trump.

If you’re determined to change things, you’ll need to try something new.

Yes the Evangelical shaming threads do have some effects though. It causes some to further entrench and also shows that they are smart enough to identify the false narratives coming from the SJW ultra-left.

Shaming, stereotyping and shouting down people is what the left condemns in their 'anti-bullying' curriculum. It is a physician heal thyself situation.

 

[redleghunter]

The problem was that vocal Christians and Christian leaders have openly supported a man that is an abominable image of Christ just because he is the lesser of two evils.

Frankly, it has been like this since American Christians had a right to vote (which was much later for women and Black Christians). Previous Presidential candidates were slave owners, participated in violent bloody military campaigns, were divorced previously and remarried, gave a passing mention of God to appease the masses, and even made sure the press covered them going to church. Pick one President who did not fit the above short list and we can add womanizing, adultery, lying, swindling (LBJ was an accomplished manipulator and 'spoils system' politician) etc. (fill in the blank).

By your narrow moral resume Christians should not vote for sinners. Then that means we should not vote. Ok I get it you would like to vote for the most "Christlike" candidate. When there are none, and frankly since we are all sinners you will find none, Christians should not vote. That is exactly what a lot of people would like to see. That is why some feel shaming will work. Christians will not vote or vote for a horse with no chance of finishing the race.

Then we should apply such to how we spend our money and where we shop. We would end up starving unless we make our own goods and raise our own food. Thus, you would be advocating we become the Amish who make their own things and don't vote.

 

[Fantine]

98cwitr, may you never experience the kinds of realities our family--and so many others---have. Downsizings, rightsizings, wrongsizings, mergers, acquisitions...

People like Mitt Romney of Bain Capital wanting to make some money for fat cat investors like himself---the workers be dam*ed. He had a car elevator he needed to build in his California home.

A company is bought with borrowed money. The debt is so heavy that hardworking, bright dedicated people like yourself get laid off in the hundreds and thousands. The company is then divided into little pieces. The little pieces are sold off bit by bit. Bain makes thousands. Fat cat investors celebrate with elevators for their cars. Hardworking, bright, dedicated people like yourself get news jobs at half the salary.

Are you 35? 40? Hasn't happened to you yet? Lucky. Keep voting Republican, it will happen sooner rather than later.

My husband was a corporate VP with company car, huge expense account, bonuses, etc. at age 32. Luckily we had enough perks and benefits from the good old days that we are now very comfortably retired, but when corporations put profits over people we got shuttled all over the country after being downsized, merged, etc. and eventually following one notch down the corporate ladder.

Talent doesn't matter--hard work doesn't matter--not when the venture capitalist chess masters decide to dismember the place where you did so well. While being dishonest and manipulative can help buffer you a little, do you really want to sacrifice your character because the people out to get you have none?

While I was always fairly liberal, I became a raging liberal because I know how workers should be valued, and I have enough of a conscience to want to see everyone with those opportunities. While we did fine at retirement, it was primarily because we were a few steps higher up when the first cataclysm happened.

We have a friend who worked for a company 33 years....she was given one weeks' severance for every year worked--up to 5? Have these people no hearts? No consciences? She got a new job after six months at half her salary.

No wonder why the happiest people in the world live in western Europe.

 

[redleghunter]

As far as I'm concerned if those two represent the best candidates for the (largely American viewpoint) "Leader of the Free World" then I think it's probably a good time to start learning Russian.

I have not encountered such wisdom in the entire DC metro area.

No really you make a good point.

 

[Kaon]

I’m friendly with a good number of evangelicals and the unifying idea between them all is an “I don’t care anymore” attitude. Civility, conservative purity tests, insults, smears, they seem fed up with everything. Voting for Trump for them was an electoral middle finger to a system they’ve come to despise.

I don’t understand why people don’t understand this. They cannot be shamed, guilt-tripped or bullied into voting for some other guy. Their anger seems to overrule everything else. The rest of you can hate that as much as you want but these tactics of “calling out their hypocrisy” have never worked.

If you’re determined to change things, you’ll need to try something new.

And, voting for a stooge as a middle finger gesture is NOTHING NEW. Neither is apathy.

We understand it; it is just hackneyed. Why and how can you justify it, while at the same time claiming a cause for change? It is hypocrisy.

 

[Kaon]

Frankly, it has been like this since American Christians had a right to vote (which was much later for women and Black Christians). Previous Presidential candidates were slave owners, participated in violent bloody military campaigns, were divorced previously and remarried, gave a passing mention of God to appease the masses, and even made sure the press covered them going to church. Pick one President who did not fit the above short list and we can add womanizing, adultery, lying, swindling (LBJ was an accomplished manipulator and 'spoils system' politician) etc. (fill in the blank).

By your narrow moral resume Christians should not vote for sinners. Then that means we should not vote. Ok I get it you would like to vote for the most "Christlike" candidate. When there are none, and frankly since we are all sinners you will find none, Christians should not vote. That is exactly what a lot of people would like to see. That is why some feel shaming will work. Christians will not vote or vote for a horse with no chance of finishing the race.

Then we should apply such to how we spend our money and where we shop. We would end up starving unless we make our own goods and raise our own food. Thus, you would be advocating we become the Amish who make their own things and don't vote.

Are you being facetious, or purposefully insulting my intelligence?

By my narrow moral view? Can you justify before Christ knowingly and willingly voting for such incorrigible people? Let's not play this game as if hands are tied behind backs, and you are "forced" to vote for such men. God told you long ago you were never supposed to have men rule you in the first place.

If it is too intellectually, socially and financially inconvenient for you, then don't trust in God alone; vote for men and get what you pay for. But don't complain about the woe of a Christian that was considered human in the Western world. Your yoke should be easy; your kingdom is not of this world, right?


Why are you (and others) so involved in the affairs of the world - especially when everything has been written and everything has been told to you?

 

[thecolorsblend]

And, voting for a stooge as a middle finger gesture is NOTHING NEW. Neither is apathy.

We understand it; it is just hackneyed. Why and how can you justify it, while at the same time claiming a cause for change? It is hypocrisy.

When did I claim to favor change?? I viewed voting for Trump as the only logical choice because he was a non-status quo candidate campaigning against the status quo. In a lot of ways, that’s more or less how he’s governed too.

I said that shaming the evangelicals won’t work. And post #BakeTheCakeYouBigot, it won’t. If you want to defeat Trump, you’ll have to defeat his base. And if you want to defeat his base, you need something better than “But he’s un-nice! What a mean poopyhead!”

If that’s the best you’ve got, I don’t see how Trump loses in 2020.

 

[Kaon]

When did I claim to favor change?? I viewed voting for Trump as the only logical choice because he was a non-status quo candidate campaigning against the status quo. In a lot of ways, that’s more or less how he’s governed too.

I said that shaming the evangelicals won’t work. And post #BakeTheCakeYouBigot, it won’t. If you want to defeat Trump, you’ll have to defeat his base. And if you want to defeat his base, you need something better than “But he’s un-nice! What a mean poopyhead!”

If that’s the best you’ve got, I don’t see how Trump loses in 2020.

I didn't vote for anyone, and I don't see the demise of Christianity in the West, even the West itself, as stoppable - in fact, it is inevitable. This is evident based on the psychological warfare inflicted on the populations since the Korean War.

I don't doubt Trump will be president for another term, because this country is so easily controlled by division while claiming independence. It is the basis of the illusion of the foundation of the nation - a controlled and divided arm claiming to be free. So, while it may seem I am trying to give it to someone or some entity, I couldn't care less about what would make any group budge toward one side or the other. I am just making a commentary, specifically: that there is a deep hypocrisy within the evangelical community to support an incorrigible man because "what have you got to lose?"

 

[redleghunter]

Are you being facetious, or purposefully insulting my intelligence?

None of the above.

By my narrow moral view?

What I actually said was:

By your narrow moral resume Christians should not vote for sinners.

Which means as responding to your post I identified your central point. I did not call it a 'narrow moral view' but identified your use of a narrow moral resume for one who should aspire to President.

Can you justify before Christ knowingly and willingly voting for such incorrigible people? Let's not play this game as if hands are tied behind backs, and you are "forced" to vote for such men. God told you long ago you were never supposed to have men rule you in the first place.

Are you Amish? If so you should not be using a computer. Again, by your reasoning we should not be chatting on the internet as all of the internet providers freely promote sin in the form of sexual promiscuity, commercialism and exploitation.

If it is too intellectually, socially and financially inconvenient for you, then don't trust in God alone; vote for men and get what you pay for. But don't complain about the woe of a Christian that was considered human in the Western world. Your yoke should be easy; your kingdom is not of this world, right?

Your central point is now we should not vote at all?

Why are you (and others) so involved in the affairs of the world - especially when everything has been written and everything has been told to you?

By typing here you are involved in the affairs of the world. In fact you are responding to such exercising your First Amendment right to free expression. All created on the internet for people to communicate. The affairs of men built roads in pagan societies as well and Christ and His apostles used them. The affairs of men provide water treatment facilities, markets to buy and sell food and build homes for people to live in.

Based on your statements, I must conclude that (1) you have moral issues with Trump---join the crowd. (2) Christians should not vote at all because voting is getting involved in the affairs of mankind.

Did I properly identify your main points?[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[redleghunter]

Can you justify before Christ knowingly and willingly voting for such incorrigible people?

Sorry forgot to ask this above. Do you ask the people who voted for third trimester on demand abortion Hillary Clinton? Why are only Trump or GOP voters asked this question?

 

[redleghunter]

When did I claim to favor change?? I viewed voting for Trump as the only logical choice because he was a non-status quo candidate campaigning against the status quo. In a lot of ways, that’s more or less how he’s governed too.

I said that shaming the evangelicals won’t work. And post #BakeTheCakeYouBigot, it won’t. If you want to defeat Trump, you’ll have to defeat his base. And if you want to defeat his base, you need something better than “But he’s un-nice! What a mean poopyhead!”

If that’s the best you’ve got, I don’t see how Trump loses in 2020.

As you have probably noticed people are catching on to your comments and are now advocating not to vote at all.

Now the narrative is Christians should not vote because human government in general is evil.

 

[redleghunter]

I didn't vote for anyone, and I don't see the demise of Christianity in the West, even the West itself, as stoppable - in fact, it is inevitable.

We do agree on this. However, given a chance to check the very policies which lead to our demise, not voting I would consider is staying in a burning home when there are still escape routes. It's the "fire will get us anyway so let us burn" mentality which is actually more dangerous then selecting candidates which come closer to supporting the Constitution and religious liberty and justice.

Believe it or not, the Non-Western world relies heavily on the charitable works of the richer Western Christian churches. So do our local governments.

 

[Kaon]

Did I properly identify your main points?

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]


Not at all. Let me put it plainly.

1. Voting for the lesser of two evils to run your country - because you are "fed up," or trying to protest - is hypocritical and contradictory.

2. Openly and unapolagetically supporting an incorrigible man while claiming to follow a man that was Perfect is hypocritical, and contradictory.

3. The Amish may be on to something, but you certainly don't have to be that extreme in order to keep from being hypocritical. For example, recognizing a man is incorrigible and rejecting that as a platform worthy of a vote for the president of a country is much better than accepting it, and doubling down on apologies justifying the behviour.

4. Unfortunately, the evangelical culture of America has taken on the characteristics of hypocrisy and unashamed defense of otherwise indefensible activities.

5. The thing that really, and truth makes it so bad is that the culture remains ignorant or in denial of these things, and do not see the contradictions between justifying support for incorrigible men, and being an outward and paraded evangelical. This is especially haunting in the context of the history of the evangelical church.

 

[Kaon]

Sorry forgot to ask this above. Do you ask the people who voted for third trimester on demand abortion Hillary Clinton? Why are only Trump or GOP voters asked this question?

Oh, I have the same disdain for all hypocrites. However, many of those who voted for Hillary are not evangelicals, or Christians. Even, if they are, they are definitely attacked here - I have seen it.

It is Christians who are preaching a specific message, and largely supporting an incorrigible man - and, again, this is haunting in the context of evangelical church history.


Now, I personally have always stayed out of the abortion issue, because 1) I am not a woman, and 2) if it doesn't interfere with the commandments of God it isn't my problem. If someone comes to me and asks what my opinion is on abortion as it related to God and/or the law, then I will declare myself.

 

[Kaon]

We do agree on this. However, given a chance to check the very policies which lead to our demise, not voting I would consider is staying in a burning home when there are still escape routes. It's the "fire will get us anyway so let us burn" mentality which is actually more dangerous then selecting candidates which come closer to supporting the Constitution and religious liberty and justice.

Believe it or not, the Non-Western world relies heavily on the charitable works of the richer Western Christian churches. So do our local governments.

The entire world is a scam that is run by spiritual beings. We have been told this; we have to either take this for what it is, or telegraph it to some box to which we can get a hold. But, that is the reality if you are Christian.

As far as the illusion of the West giving charities... I will just say I vehemently disagree with that narrative.



Either way, all religion - including small cults, so-called "minor" religions, philosophies, and atheism will be gone. That is why it is problematic to even pollute your alignment by voting for someone that is playing an agent destined to cause calamity. No king is good; no king keep a nation from falling. The stories of David and Solomon are painful reminders of how human they actually are despite their renown among men.

My overall main point: we should not be involved in politics in the first place. Your vote and your good heart will be exploited. History tells you this; you must be wise as a those serpents (not saying you aren't) without be anywhere near as harmful and exploitative. Don't play the game set up for you to experience on ranges of tremendous failures in trust and faith put into it.

 

[thecolorsblend]

I didn't vote for anyone, and I don't see the demise of Christianity in the West, even the West itself, as stoppable - in fact, it is inevitable. This is evident based on the psychological warfare inflicted on the populations since the Korean War.

I don't doubt Trump will be president for another term, because this country is so easily controlled by division while claiming independence. It is the basis of the illusion of the foundation of the nation - a controlled and divided arm claiming to be free. So, while it may seem I am trying to give it to someone or some entity, I couldn't care less about what would make any group budge toward one side or the other. I am just making a commentary, specifically: that there is a deep hypocrisy within the evangelical community to support an incorrigible man because "what have you got to lose?"

I’ve been reading tripe like this online for twenty years now. There’s always some holier than thou art type essentially arguing that Christians shouldn’t vote because politicians are all rascals.

It’s a variation on “separate your religion from your vote”. And I should say a very unconvincing variation.

 

[thecolorsblend]

As you have probably noticed people are catching on to your comments and are now advocating not to vote at all.

Now the narrative is Christians should not vote because human government in general is evil.

...

I really should’ve read this post before sending my last reply. But here we are. And at least I’m not the only one who noticed that.

 

[thecolorsblend]

The entire world is a scam that is run by spiritual beings. We have been told this; we have to either take this for what it is, or telegraph it to some box to which we can get a hold. But, that is the reality if you are Christian.

As far as the illusion of the West giving charities... I will just say I vehemently disagree with that narrative.



Either way, all religion - including small cults, so-called "minor" religions, philosophies, and atheism will be gone. That is why it is problematic to even pollute your alignment by voting for someone that is playing an agent destined to cause calamity. No king is good; no king keep a nation from falling. The stories of David and Solomon are painful reminders of how human they actually are despite their renown among men.

My overall main point: we should not be involved in politics in the first place. Your vote and your good heart will be exploited. History tells you this; you must be wise as a those serpents (not saying you aren't) without be anywhere near as harmful and exploitative. Don't play the game set up for you to experience on ranges of tremendous failures in trust and faith put into it.

Illuminati confirmed?

 

[redleghunter]

1. Voting for the lesser of two evils to run your country - because you are "fed up," or trying to protest - is hypocritical and contradictory.

It can be, but if you are voting for a candidate who is Pro-Life and respects the free exercise of religion, then no it is neither hypocritical nor contradictory. Hypocritical would be if one did not support the candidate who supports the right to life for all humans at every stage of human life. Contradictory would be voting for the candidates which advocated on demand abortion at any stage of pregnancy.

2. Openly and unapolagetically supporting an incorrigible man while claiming to follow a man that was Perfect is hypocritical, and contradictory.

This is incongruent. One is the Son of God and King of all Creation, the other is a nation's president under the US Constitution.

I've noticed we are only speaking of Trump now, what happened to the other candidate?

3. The Amish may be on to something, but you certainly don't have to be that extreme in order to keep from being hypocritical. For example, recognizing a man is incorrigible and rejecting that as a platform worthy of a vote for the president of a country is much better than accepting it, and doubling down on apologies justifying the behviour.

You conflate two separate things. You call it hypocritical to vote for a man based on his moral character and somehow combine that with a political platform. The two are not the same. One is a personal character and the other is a defined political party platform. Were you alive in the 90s when Bill Clinton was president?

4. Unfortunately, the evangelical culture of America has taken on the characteristics of hypocrisy and unashamed defense of otherwise indefensible activities.

Why are you attacking Evangelicals who are the most giving, proportionally, than any other Christian (or secular) group worldwide? What exactly are you demonizing Evangelicals for? Taking a stand on religious freedom? Taking a stand to protect human life? Wanting the airways and sea lanes open so they can spread the gospel and bring material aid to those in need? Which one of these desires of Evangelicals in voting for president should they be ashamed of?

5. The thing that really, and truth makes it so bad is that the culture remains ignorant or in denial of these things, and do not see the contradictions between justifying support for incorrigible men, and being an outward and paraded evangelical. This is especially haunting in the context of the history of the evangelical church.

Your unfounded fulminations are noted, but unsubstantiated.

You should instead be asking what the Barna Election 2016 survey calls "Notional Christians" the questions you ask. Evangelicals voted roughly the same (survey says lower) for Trump as they did for Bush, McCain and Romney.

The real story and who you should be taking your self-righteous zeal out on are Notional Christians:

While some media analysts have claimed that the evangelical vote for Trump was unusually large, the survey data do not support that claim. The 79 percent that evangelicals awarded to the GOP nominee was actually the lowest level of evangelical support for a Republican candidate since Bob Dole lost to Bill Clinton in 1996, garnering 74 percent of their support. The 79 percent figure earned by Trump in this election was slightly lower than the 81 percent given to Mitt Romney in 2012. Which was previously the lowest level of evangelical support for a Republican candidate since Dole.​

[...]

Last Two Months Turned It Around
Upon comparing the data from a national poll by Barna Group in early September with the election survey conducted in November, the differences show what a difference two months can make in the minds of voters.

There was minor movement toward Donald Trump during those two months among both evangelicals (an eight-point gain in his lead over Clinton) and non-evangelical born again Christians (a three-point increase in his lead).

Surprisingly, Trump’s biggest jump in support during the home stretch came from notional Christians. While that segment preferred Clinton by 12 points in September, they wound up siding with Trump by a two-point differential. That represents a 14-point gain in the final two months among the numerically-largest pool of religious voters.

Clinton finished strongly, in terms of total votes received, partially because of a huge rise in support among people aligned with non-Christian faiths. Her margin of preference increased among that group from seven points in September to a whopping 51 points on Election Day – a 44-point climb in eight weeks! Unfortunately for her campaign, the other-faith segment was the smallest of the five primary faith segments, rendering that growth in support significant but not enough to seal the deal.

Another shocking twist during the last two months was the shift of allegiance to Trump among atheists and agnostics. Trump gained 10 percentage points on Clinton among this group.​

In a nutshell? The numbers that mattered in the Trump victory came from historically Democrat leaning Notional Christians and atheists.

What's a Notional Christian?

Notional Christians are people who consider themselves to be Christian but they have not made “a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today” or believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they have confessed their sins and accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior.​

I don't think I need to put up the survey's definition of atheist. All other group definitions are at the survey link:

https://www.barna.com/research/notional-christians-big-election-story-2016/

Maybe I will start a thread which asks "Why did Lukewarm Christians and Atheists abandon Hillary?"

Edit: @thecolorsblend pinged since I addressed some of his content as well.

 

[redleghunter]

Now, I personally have always stayed out of the abortion issue, because 1) I am not a woman, and 2) if it doesn't interfere with the commandments of God it isn't my problem. If someone comes to me and asks what my opinion is on abortion as it related to God and/or the law, then I will declare myself.

Exodus 20:13 is a commandment. And last I checked humans even at the earliest stages of development are either male or female.

Then declare yourself. Abortion is the pre-meditated termination of a human being. That violates God's Law.