[paradox]

"the phenomenon that the white Evangelical church has become increasingly enmeshed to the Republican Party."

I

What about Reagan?

[stokesjokes]

Best I can find is that 2/3 of white evangelicals voted for Reagan in 1980, compared to 80% for Trump in 2016. This doesn’t really tell us anything useful regarding the points in that article, because it is about policy support- research is showing that white evangelical Christians basically say they agree with everything from the Republican Party from a policy standpoint. They’re not talking about which candidates they support, but the positions themselves.

[paradox]

Best I can find is that 2/3 of white evangelicals voted for Reagan in 1980, compared to 80% for Trump in 2016. This doesn’t really tell us anything useful regarding the points in that article, because it is about policy support- research is showing that white evangelical Christians basically say they agree with everything from the Republican Party from a policy standpoint. They’re not talking about which candidates they support, but the positions themselves.

Are you aware of the fact that Bill Clinton won Evangelical vote back in 1996? Bottom line is that working people care about jobs and paying bills--some happen to be Evangelicals.

[rtb72]

Best I can find is that 2/3 of white evangelicals voted for Reagan in 1980, compared to 80% for Trump in 2016. This doesn’t really tell us anything useful regarding the points in that article, because it is about policy support- research is showing that white evangelical Christians basically say they agree with everything from the Republican Party from a policy standpoint. They’re not talking about which candidates they support, but the positions themselves.

Could this be in part due to what the left embraces as policy/ideology. They removed "God" from their 2016 platform. They have demonized any person the past four years (including calling Christian fake/phony), and labeled them as the most disgusting of human form, because many support the ideologies of the right, who by circumstance is headed by Trump the past four years. I was called a phony Christian by a local Methodist pastor, FWIW. If one poses a close comparison of the two platforms and, by extension the PACs and donations that support the entities....I think it would be hard to reconcile evangelicals with the Democrat party at all. Should evangelicals or Christians be fully aligned with the Republicans....I don't think so. No party for that matter. But if the two choices are either or.....then I guess you have to go with the "lesser of two evils".

[stokesjokes]

Best I can find is that 2/3 of white evangelicals voted for Reagan in 1980, compared to 80% for Trump in 2016. This doesn’t really tell us anything useful regarding the points in that article, because it is about policy support- research is showing that white evangelical Christians basically say they agree with everything from the Republican Party from a policy standpoint. They’re not talking about which candidates they support, but the positions themselves.

Are you aware of the fact that Bill Clinton won Evangelical vote back in 1996? Bottom line is that working people care about jobs and paying bills--some happen to be Evangelicals.

Right, and what the research is saying is that kind of thing would be impossible in today’s climate. The evangelical church is being formed and molded into the evangelical/Republican church.

Some of French’s concerns about this:

“The backlash [from leaving the GOP] was so intense that I remember telling my wife that it was easier being a Republican Christian in Cambridge, Massachusetts than being an independent Christian in Columbia, Tennessee. In my entire life, I had not experienced direct and personal hatred and intolerance like I experienced from other Christians, including Christians who’d known me for decades.“

“What’s the cultural effect of a very, very Republican Christianity? It’s way too simple to say that it impairs the ability of Christians to reach their friends and neighbors. In some places it enhances the church’s appeal and integrates Christians within their community. In other places it creates a host of challenges and needlessly alienates Christians from their fellow citizens.“

“This unity of church and party imbues all political disputes with an intensity far beyond their true eternal weight, and it does so on issues up and down the Republican platform, including on matters far beyond the classic culture war issues that allegedly define and motivate Evangelical political involvement. “

“When party identification merges with church identification, political cohesion fosters religious intolerance. “

[stokesjokes]

Best I can find is that 2/3 of white evangelicals voted for Reagan in 1980, compared to 80% for Trump in 2016. This doesn’t really tell us anything useful regarding the points in that article, because it is about policy support- research is showing that white evangelical Christians basically say they agree with everything from the Republican Party from a policy standpoint. They’re not talking about which candidates they support, but the positions themselves.

Could this be in part due to what the left embraces as policy/ideology. They removed "God" from their 2016 platform. They have demonized any person the past four years (including calling Christian fake/phony), and labeled them as the most disgusting of human form, because many support the ideologies of the right, who by circumstance is headed by Trump the past four years. I was called a phony Christian by a local Methodist pastor, FWIW. If one poses a close comparison of the two platforms and, by extension the PACs and donations that support the entities....I think it would be hard to reconcile evangelicals with the Democrat party at all. Should evangelicals or Christians be fully aligned with the Republicans....I don't think so. No party for that matter. But if the two choices are either or.....then I guess you have to go with the "lesser of two evils".

Yeah, the left has done absolutely nothing to reach out to evangelical voters. Hilary had the opportunity in 2016 when many were so reticent to embrace Trump and didn’t even try. But what we’re seeing isn’t just evangelicals voting for Republicans, we’re seeing evangelicals embracing the entire Republican Party line. This is on things like immigration, refugees, climate change, social programs, 2nd amendment, etc, too, things that don’t have a clear “Biblical” position, or, in some cases, that the left has more traditionally “Biblical” positions.

That’s what worries me- that spiritual formation in the evangelical church is being done more by cable news than by Christian voices.

[paradox]

That's an oversimplification.

[stokesjokes]

feel free to explain

[paradox]

The caricature that is being promoted is misleading. It implies that these "other Christians" are somehow less enlightened.

Rather than look at it that way, it may be more helpful to try to understand why and how different people arrive at different conclusions. As fallible mere mortals, capable of "overcommitting" to particular positions, then it would have to cut both ways. Right?

[TH Spangler]

My faith and political concerns touch but are separate. I don't want a politician to pastor my house of worship and I don't require a politician to be a religious leader. If I made a list of what I want from each the list would touch but be overall different. I also pull away from these categories people group us in. White this, black this. More comfortable with Jew and gentile.

My faith is global, my politics is local.

[stokesjokes]

The caricature that is being promoted is misleading. It implies that these "other Christians" are somehow less enlightened.

Rather than look at it that way, it may be more helpful to try to understand why and how different people arrive at different conclusions. As fallible mere mortals, capable of "overcommitting" to particular positions, then it would have to cut both ways. Right?

Of course it would have to cut both ways as far as influence goes, but you’re not interacting with the data. You seem to operate off of impressions or where you personally stand, as if you’re offended by what the data suggests. I am also offended by what the data suggests, but that doesn’t mean I should dismiss the data. I’m trying to understand why the data says there’s no daylight between Republican and evangelical policy positions down the line, the implications of that, and what we can do about it.

[stokesjokes]

My faith and political concerns touch but are separate. I don't want a politician to pastor my house of worship and I don't require a politician to be a religious leader. If I made a list of what I want from each the list would touch but be overall different. I also pull away from these categories people group us in. White this, black this. More comfortable with Jew and gentile.

My faith is global, my politics is local.

But shouldn’t your faith inform your politics? Shouldn’t it inform everything about you?

[paradox]

Maybe, he cares about his 401K? Does he need a Bible verse to back that up?

[paradox]

What do the "experts" say about Al Gore? In '96 Clinton won the evangelical vote. However, Gore was known as the guy that implied that evangelicals had a third chromosome. I'm thinking, he probably hurt his chances with that one.

[TH Spangler]

Maybe, he cares about his 401K? Does he need a Bible verse to back that up?

I also care about politicians accepting fake jobs, money from foreign countries to offshore out middle classes future. And our technology, manufacturing etc.

[stokesjokes]

Yes, the way you interact with money should be informed by your faith, 100%.

But still I am not talking about voting for particular candidates and you guys don’t seem interested in discussing the actual issue at hand here, preferring to talk about individual candidates or things you don’t like about the other side.

Why do you think the research is showing that evangelicals toe the party line on every issue? If it’s about policies and not parties or individual candidates, why is this strict adherence to Republicanism going on? What do you make of it? Do you think it’s good or bad?

[RubberMallet]

historically governments have abused religion to control its populous. I think the underlying issue is the perception that one party wants the government to regulate and oversee everything. and another party sees that as a dangerous precedent. key emphasis on "perception". the idea is that anything the gvt can do, private enterprise can do cheaper and more efficiently. especially when it comes to social safety nets. The reality is somewhere in the middle obviously.

now you can also factor in the idea that the democratic party is inclusive to a fault. inclusion by subtraction is unpopular with the people who are feeling left out. once again i'm not talking reality but perception.

the easy answer is abortion and may be a big part of it. but we talked about that a few pages ago, here or in some other thread.

[SumItUp]

@stokesjokes What issue/s do you think the Democrats have right and the Republicans have wrong from a Biblical perspective?

[stokesjokes]

I think an easy one is treatment of immigrants and refugees. We can even narrow that down to just refugees. In the last 4 years we have a seen drastic restriction on refugee entry despite no evidence that refugees pose any kind of security threat. In fact, the amount of persecuted Christian refugees we have accepted in the last 4 years has dropped by 90%.

And you would expect at least to not see monolithic agreement on things like climate change, social programs, or gun control, since a Biblical argument can be made for these as well, although I wouldn’t put either side in the “clearly Biblical” category on any of these.

[stokesjokes]

https://www.worldvision.org/refugees-ne ... t-refugees

Here’s a good synopsis from WorldVision about our Biblical duty to refugees.

[Jonathan Carone]

And you would expect at least to not see monolithic agreement on things like climate change, social programs, or gun control, since a Biblical argument can be made for these as well, although I wouldn’t put either side in the “clearly Biblical” category on any of these.

This is one of my issues with it. There's a biblical case to be made for each of these on both sides of the political spectrum. There's plenty of room for Bible believing Christians to disagree politically, economically, and socially, but the way things have moved the last 4-6 years, if you don't fall in line with the Republican policies on those things, you're a liberal who follows a fake version of Christianity that isn't as just or as noble as the Republican version.

I don't understand how evangelicals have gotten so dogmatic that the Republican way is the only way that is acceptable as a Christian. It's not that one is more right than the other. It's the inability to accept something as different as a disagreement and not an existential right or wrong.

[Purple Haize]

Best I can find is that 2/3 of white evangelicals voted for Reagan in 1980, compared to 80% for Trump in 2016. This doesn’t really tell us anything useful regarding the points in that article, because it is about policy support- research is showing that white evangelical Christians basically say they agree with everything from the Republican Party from a policy standpoint. They’re not talking about which candidates they support, but the positions themselves.

Jimmy Carter was a pretty outspoken Christian

[paradox]

Yes, the way you interact with money should be informed by your faith, 100%.

But still I am not talking about voting for particular candidates and you guys don’t seem interested in discussing the actual issue at hand here, preferring to talk about individual candidates or things you don’t like about the other side.

Why do you think the research is showing that evangelicals toe the party line on every issue? If it’s about policies and not parties or individual candidates, why is this strict adherence to Republicanism going on? What do you make of it? Do you think it’s good or bad?

It's neither good nor bad. Just not that illuminating. "Progress for Data" is more of the same "shame on evangelicals" analysis that we see after every election. But, Clinton '96 is proof that Dems can win the evangelical vote.

The exit polls may not have asked the right questions. Do people view the left as overly-authoritarian and elite? Is suppression of free speech going on? Is there a perception that elites are so convinced of their own virtue, that they can no longer tolerate opposing views? These questions loom large for evangelicals. But they were never asked.

[stokesjokes]

Idk, man, 1996 was 24 years ago in a very different climate.

My question would be: sure, evangelicals may share all these concerns about the left, but why does that mean they also have to embrace every position on the right?

[Jonathan Carone]

Why am I a “dang libruhl” because I think climate change is real and think we should be doing things to care for the planet?

Why am I less of a Christian because I think sensible gun control legislation is a conversation we should be having?

In what way am I a Marxist who isn’t a true Christian because I think we should be providing healthcare and other opportunities to low income parents?

These are all things said to me or about me over the last few years by Christians who didn’t even bother to ask the motivation behind why I feel this way. We have lost the ability to disagree with each other and still realize we’re one in Christ.