Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Why are Christians voting for Donald Trump?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Now that Trump is the presumptive nominee of the republican party, I would like to ask and reword the OP question in light of that. Why should a Christian vote FOR Trump? I know why Republicans will vote for Him mainly AGAINST Hilary but I would like to know specifically why for a Christian. (I've always registered as an Independent so party loyalty answers really do not work for me). What Christian values or accommodations can we see under Him that we cannot also get with Her (I realize she is a murderer, socialist light, etc.) If we chose "the lesser evil this cycle like we have every cycle will it simply perpetuate the problem we have had? Should a Christian write in Cruz or vote third party this election cycle as a protest even if it means Hillary gets the presidency? If all Christians voted constitution or libertarian in large numbers this cycle would it encourage more next cycle and put the parties "on notice" to change? Just some thoughts. Trying to decide.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Doesn't the Word of God teach you not to yoke with unbelievers Mr. Young?  

 

As for Hillary being "socialist lite" that is entirely false.  She is now and has always been a hardcore communist.  The United States Constitution is her avowed enemy and the people of this nation, according to Hillary, exist to serve the will of the government.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Never said I was voting FOR Hillary. I also already have heard all the arguments about needing to vote AGAINST her. However I am exploring other options. I want to know why I as a Christian, with no party affiliation, should vote FOR Trump (regardless of the anti-Hillary arguments). Or IF a Third party vote (Constitution/Libertarian) or a write in for Cruz as protest AGAINST BOTH Trump and Hilary had viability.

Obviously not voting for Trump means Hilary may get in this cycle but frankly I don't want to ride the Trump/Republican train slowly to the same Hilary destination. The more who get off now the better it will be for Constitutional Conservatives later. Otherwise in four years there will be the same call to vote AGAINST and the same bad options, just as it has been for the last several cycles.

Edited by John Young
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

After looking further into Trump, there is no way as a Christian I could possibly vote for him and not be endorsing evil, and of course Hilary is even worse.  I just as firmly believe it would be un-scriptural to NOT vote at all.  Therefore, I am forced to either vote 3rd party if a viable option is available or if not, vote a write in candidate, but I believe as a Christian I MUST vote.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

As Charles Spurgeon said: "Of two evils, choose neither." It is a fact that there is no lesser of two evils in the choice of Trump or Hillary.

I agree totally with you, 2b (other than I believe they are equally evil). That is why we will be voting for Cruz. While there is a Libertarian candidate who seems to be for liberty, the Libertarian platform is a little too lawless for me. Full libertarianism equals chaos. And full libertarianism is for open borders. I'm against that, because I believe God set us up in nations. That is why I cannot vote for Gary Johnson (besides the fact that he is pro-abortion - only in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother, but murder is still murder - and pro-same/sex marriage...both issues should be left to the states constitutionally, yes, but I will not vote for someone who personally believes either).

I have always believed that one should vote for the candidate that is most constitutional. That immediately eliminates both Trump and Hillary. Biblical principle eliminates them even stronger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

U

3 hours ago, HappyChristian said:

As Charles Spurgeon said: "Of two evils, choose neither." It is a fact that there is no lesser of two evils in the choice of Trump or Hillary.

I agree totally with you, 2b (other than I believe they are equally evil). That is why we will be voting for Cruz. While there is a Libertarian candidate who seems to be for liberty, the Libertarian platform is a little too lawless for me. Full libertarianism equals chaos. And full libertarianism is for open borders. I'm against that, because I believe God set us up in nations. That is why I cannot vote for Gary Johnson (besides the fact that he is pro-abortion - only in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother, but murder is still murder - and pro-same/sex marriage...both issues should be left to the states constitutionally, yes, but I will not vote for someone who personally believes either).

I have always believed that one should vote for the candidate that is most constitutional. That immediately eliminates both Trump and Hillary. Biblical principle eliminates them even stronger.

CNN reported a couple days ago that Cruz dropped out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
21 minutes ago, LindaR said:

Ted Cruz is a Dominionist.  He is being endorsed by NAR/Dominionist Mike Bickle (International House of Prayer-IHOP) and Mormon Glenn Beck.

7 Mountain Politics and Theology

 

And this has concerned me, as well. Cruz, as a Christian, has been welcoming of the endorsements of Catholics, Dominionists and Mormons, and it really doesn't matter whom. Of course, as a southern Baptist, it isn't a surprise he might not be very discerning. But see, THIS is exactly why I have wondered if a constitutionalist atheist would be better as President than a Christian, because most vocal "Christians" who go into politics and want the presidency tend to be of the Dominionist stripe, which is dangerous and unbiblical. 

I don't really expect, in this day and age, our president to be a believer, at least not an heavily active one. I know that sounds crazy, but just what KIND of 'Christian" do we want in? It is enough they say they are, like Obama did? Like Jimmy Carter? Cruz has clearly been corrupted by the political process the same as any other candidate or politician. What I like about Trump is he is who he is-while he sort of pretends to be Christian, I suspect it is more of the "Christian because I'm an American" sort. he doesn't play it up much. But he IS making constitutional stands, at least in his campaign. And he was correct when he declared that the bathroom issue should be a state issue, not a federal issue.

It also seems to me that he will probably be very pro-business in his stances, since it will behoove him, and the free market will benefit from it. Maybe he will get rid of some of the heavy taxation that has driven so many businesses out of the country, get off the back of the oil and coal and steel industries and bring some manufacturing back. Again, as a businessman, it is in HIS interest-it is also in ours.

Christians ought to be preaching the gospel, teaching the lost and the saved, exhorting the word of God. Swath mentioned not yoking with unbelievers-I believe taking up political positions to be exactly that: the country would be better served by believers praying for their leaders, not trying to be them. Be not many masters. If we prayed for them, and for our country, and kept otherwise to the work of Christ, our country would benefit far more than having a 'Christian' of some sort in office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
28 minutes ago, 2bLikeJesus said:

Okay..what in the world is a Dominionist?  That's a new one on me...

 

Dominionism is not new....it was around in the late 70s and early 80s and had its beginnings in the Charismatic movement.
 

A WORKING DEFINITION of DOMINIONISM

The belief that we (mankind) have a mandate to build the “kingdom of God” on earth, restoring paradise, by progressively and supernaturally transforming ourselves and all societal institutions, through subduing and ruling the earth by whatever means possible, including using technology, science and psycho-social engineering; and then and only then will a “Christ” manifest his presence on earth.

What is Dominionism? by Sarah Leslie

Read the links I posted on the 7 Mountain Politics and Theology and Will Christians Replace Commitment to the Gospel for Commitment to a Unified Dominionist Agenda to "Save the Country?








 



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Dominionism, in one form or another, has been a long held view which was actually very popular in the North around the time of the American "civil war" and remained so until after World War One. After the carnage and ugliness of that war Dominionism waned in popularity but began it's rise in acceptance again during the "conservative" political rise of the late 70s and 80s.

For mostly financial reasons, campaigns no longer just end and candidates no longer just drop out. By declaring a suspension of their campaign, these campaigns can legally continue to raise money (most often in an attempt to pay down their debt, but in some cases to try and end with a surplus which they can sock back for another run).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Suspending also means they can re-renter the race. And it means they are still on primary ballots. And still on the ballots at the national convention. 

And just FYI regarding donations, Cruz has begun sending money back to people. No, obviously not all of it, but most likely the most recent donations. Haven't heard of any of the other candidates doing that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Dominionism is the belief system behind the Reconstructionist and Reformed movements of theology.

Puritans, after whom the reformed theology movement is patterned, believed that they were literally creating a new Israel, complete with adherence to the OT law. They are actually considered the original proponents of Dominionism - in a nutshell the idea that Christians can get Christ to return sooner by setting up a theocracy and forcing people to follow "righteousness."

Reconstructionists deny that they are dominionists, and yet they actually are. Rushdoony was the founder of the movement. In point of fact, the Christian school movement was the brain child of Reconstructionists. They believed that the schools would raise a generation of righteous children who would take over society for God. Of course, that isn't how they put it, but that was the idea. 

But, just as we see in history, the Puritan movement did not create righteousness. It created self-righteousness. So, too, did the Christian school movement.  

Because of what Dominionism is, it is easy to accuse someone who is a Christian and in politics of being a dominionist. But that is not always an accurate appellation. 

Just because someone believes that it's a good thing to have Christians involved in different areas of society (like government) does not mean that particular someone believes that the OT law needs to be imposed on everything. Nor does it mean that particular someone believes that Christians are supposed to purify all aspects of society in order to usher in the millennium.

Yes, we are to be witnesses for Christ. But that does not mean that we aren't to be involved in things like government. How ridiculous is it to think that just because we are Christians, we are to sit back and let the ungodly create and enforce our laws, create and run all businesses, etc and so forth. That is actually the mentality many people have, and labeling an involved Christian - one who actually believes and follows the Constitution (and that alone should convince anyone who understands dominionism that he is not a dominionist) - as a dominionist is a good way to revile the person and cause folks who don't look beyond a few articles "proving" involvement to be convinced that person is evil.

edited to add: Interestingly enough, regarding Christian schools, Baptist history is absent from the education. Baptists were the ones responsible for our Bill of Rights. They understood persecution and knew what political oppression did. However, in Christian school education, the Puritans are the ones presented as being proponents of liberty. Look at textbooks used to teach history in Christian schools and you'll see that Baptist influence on this country - which was huge - is completely absent. Puritans are lifted up. It is no surprise that the Reformed movement has taken such hold in Christianity. It is the outgrowth of Reconstructionism.

Now, I want to clarify: I attended Christian schools as a child. I did receive an excellent education, and I am thankful for that. And I was not taught the Calvinistic worldview. But I also was not taught anything about the Baptists (even in the Baptist schools I was in). Religious history was all about the Puritans and Pilgrims. No mention was ever made of the persecution of other beliefs the Puritans practiced. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...