Jeffress doesn’t represent my views as an American, an evangelical or a pastor. He’s done great damage to the historic First Baptist Church of Dallas, to evangelicalism and to the Church at large. He needs to start speaking for himself and less for “the rest of us”.
About 20 years ago we had a President who was caught in immorality with a young intern, accused of sexual harassment and assault, and found guilty of lying under oath yet was re-elected because “things were good” in the country.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
I don’t, per Jim, approve of teaching Trump from the pulpit, but Jeffress is correct that Trump is in office precisely because he isn’t a normal politician who accepts the status quo as inevitable. The same thing is why we liked Reagan; he didn’t simply accept the status quo, either.
You don’t have to like Trump’s character (I don’t) to see something to like in that.
I’ll always remember watching Clinton, on television, shake his finger at a reporter and say, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky!”
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Not too long ago, we had a president who was popular and personable, a very likable guy. But his agenda was opposed to what most Christians believe: pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-big government, anti-Christian, pro-Muslim, pro-open borders, anti law enforcement, anti-constitution, etc. A good many evangelical Christians supported him because they liked him, ignoring the destructive nature of his principles. Many were astounded that anyone could ignore his agenda, and support him simply because of his personality.
More recently, we have a president who is not popular nor personable. In many ways, he’s very unlikable. And yet, his policies are almost completely what most evangelical Christians support. Pro-life, pro-constitution, anti-big government, pro-Christian, pro-freedom, both religious and economic, etc. Many are astounded that anyone could ignore his agenda and oppose him simply because of his personality.
I don’t, per Jim, approve of teaching Trump from the pulpit, but Jeffress is correct that Trump is in office precisely because he isn’t a normal politician who accepts the status quo as inevitable. The same thing is why we liked Reagan; he didn’t simply accept the status quo, either.
You don’t have to like Trump’s character (I don’t) to see something to like in that.
Seriously, you are comparing Trump to Reagan in this way? Trump had never held any elected office. Reagan was the twice elected Governor of the state of California, past President of SAG, ran for President unsuccessfully against an incumbent before his successful campaign and was a political commentator for years. People who voted for Reagan (like me) did not do so as a “protest vote”, but because he had a clearly defined philosophy and agenda which he could articulate like few others. Trump is a political chameleon who is wholly unprincipled and driven primarily by his own narcissistic personality (and because of that, did not get my vote). The comparison between the two just doesn’t work in this case.
DL: obviously there are some huge differences between Trump and Reagan. What I am getting at is that when it came to the Soviet Union and other atrocities, Reagan had the notion that the USSR and its minions did not have to last forever. This was heresy by the standards of most people on both sides of the aisle.
Regrettably, I am a few years too young to have voted for Reagan. :^)
Discussion
NewJeffress speaks
Jeffress doesn’t represent my views as an American, an evangelical or a pastor. He’s done great damage to the historic First Baptist Church of Dallas, to evangelicalism and to the Church at large. He needs to start speaking for himself and less for “the rest of us”.
NewTrump Accomplishments
I do not agree with President Trump on all issues. He has, however, accomplished a number of things I applaud.
Ending USA funding of abortion in other countries.
Lowering taxes
Strong economy
Strong Stock Market.
Business friendly.
More military spending.
Ending ISIS in Iraq and Syria.
Ending numerous excess regulations.
Actually saying and writing the word Christmas.
Christian friendly.
Nominating conservative Supreme Court justice, and numerous other conservative judges.
Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and supporting Israel.
Opposing the Iran deal, and supporting freedom protestors in Iran.
Cuts to United Nations.
Opposing Paris accord on Global Warming.
Getting tough with North Korea.
Trump administration arguing in Supreme Court in favor of a Christian baker’s right to not design a wedding cake for same-sex wedding.
As Cal Thomas says, “Character matters, but so do results.”
So Robert Jeffress supporting Donald Trump may not be so bad after all.
David R. Brumbelow
NewHistory Repeating Itself?
About 20 years ago we had a President who was caught in immorality with a young intern, accused of sexual harassment and assault, and found guilty of lying under oath yet was re-elected because “things were good” in the country.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
NewI don't fault Jeffress for supporting Donald Trump ...
I don’t fault Jeffress for supporting Donald Trump … but for using the pulpit of his church to support Trump
Twitter
Jim's Doctrinal Statement
NewYou know, he's right
I don’t, per Jim, approve of teaching Trump from the pulpit, but Jeffress is correct that Trump is in office precisely because he isn’t a normal politician who accepts the status quo as inevitable. The same thing is why we liked Reagan; he didn’t simply accept the status quo, either.
You don’t have to like Trump’s character (I don’t) to see something to like in that.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
NewClinton
I’ll always remember watching Clinton, on television, shake his finger at a reporter and say, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky!”
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
NewSame song, second verse?
Not too long ago, we had a president who was popular and personable, a very likable guy. But his agenda was opposed to what most Christians believe: pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-big government, anti-Christian, pro-Muslim, pro-open borders, anti law enforcement, anti-constitution, etc. A good many evangelical Christians supported him because they liked him, ignoring the destructive nature of his principles. Many were astounded that anyone could ignore his agenda, and support him simply because of his personality.
More recently, we have a president who is not popular nor personable. In many ways, he’s very unlikable. And yet, his policies are almost completely what most evangelical Christians support. Pro-life, pro-constitution, anti-big government, pro-Christian, pro-freedom, both religious and economic, etc. Many are astounded that anyone could ignore his agenda and oppose him simply because of his personality.
Hmmm. Does anyone see a pattern in this?
G. N. Barkman
NewBert Perry wrote:
Seriously, you are comparing Trump to Reagan in this way? Trump had never held any elected office. Reagan was the twice elected Governor of the state of California, past President of SAG, ran for President unsuccessfully against an incumbent before his successful campaign and was a political commentator for years. People who voted for Reagan (like me) did not do so as a “protest vote”, but because he had a clearly defined philosophy and agenda which he could articulate like few others. Trump is a political chameleon who is wholly unprincipled and driven primarily by his own narcissistic personality (and because of that, did not get my vote). The comparison between the two just doesn’t work in this case.
NewKing
I look forward to Jesus’ second coming, where we’ll all have a real King, who rules with holiness, justice, righteousness and might.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
NewVs. Reagan
DL: obviously there are some huge differences between Trump and Reagan. What I am getting at is that when it came to the Soviet Union and other atrocities, Reagan had the notion that the USSR and its minions did not have to last forever. This was heresy by the standards of most people on both sides of the aisle.
Regrettably, I am a few years too young to have voted for Reagan. :^)
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.