There are 61,000,000 white evangelicals in the US. 49,000,000 voted for Trump in 2020. That was 67% of Trump's total vote of 74,000,000. About one-half of white evangelicals live in the South. They tend to be ill-informed and less educated than the average American. They are on the far-right fringes of Christianity, basically identifiable with fundamentalists, with both groups reading the Bible as literal. They key on hellfire and damnation while paying lip service to the Christian ideal of loving thy neighbor.

Their claim to support Trump on “pro-life” grounds is a religious feint and masks their true propensity toward nationalism and racism.

Conservative commentator and evangelical Christian David A. French writes: “We know that opposition to abortion rights motivates white Evangelicals far less than their leaders’ rhetoric would suggest. Eastern Illinois University’s Ryan Burge, a leading statistician of American religion, has noted that immigration drove Evangelical support for Donald Trump more than abortion.”

Many essentially see politics as a great battle between White, Christian America and the multiracial, religiously diverse reality of 21st century America. Government is there not to produce legislative fixes to real-world problems but to engage their enemies on behalf of White Christianity.

Other statistics connected to white evangelists bolster the view that racism or defense of white supremacy is at the heart of the Republican Party. PRRI's (Public Religious Research Institute) chief executive Robert P. Jones writes:

Among voters who hold an unfavorable view of the Black Lives Matter movement, believe the U.S. criminal justice system treats all people fairly, or believe that racism is a minor problem or not a problem at all, more than eight in ten voted for Donald Trump.

The fixation with defining the United States as a White Christian nation is on full display nightly on Fox News, where replacement theory — not abortion or gay rights — drives so much more of the conversation, says Jennifer Rubin.

In this context, White evangelical Christians’ attraction to the thrice-married philanderer Trump is understandable, as is their support for the cruelest immigration policies (e.g., child separation) and the anti-Muslim travel ban – even the claim of forbidding “Merry Christmas”. It’s all about race and religious identity, not policies founded on Christian values.

Their minority status is what has fueled the MAGA movement. Because they can never win (at least in a democracy with free and accurate elections), their political venom will not abate.

The aims of White evangelicals run smack into the American ideal that “all men are created equal” and constitutional protections that allow no bias against any particular religion or racial group. In that regard, they have become deeply antidemocratic.

Until the emergence of Trump, they had been self-contained in their rural worlds of religion. With Trump, they have emerged as a potent and dangerous political force.

If there is any hope for this group, it lies with the fraction of White Evangelists who do NOT fit the MAGA category and believe truly in the core message of Christianity and Jesus Christ.

Ill-informed opinion. Nothing more. And as is often the case, he's guilty of plagiarism such as here. "The fixation with defining the United States as a White Christian nation is on full display nightly on Fox News, where replacement theory — not abortion or gay rights — drives so much more of the conversation, says Jennifer Rubin.

In this context, White evangelical Christians’ attraction to the thrice-married philanderer Trump is understandable, as is their support for the cruelest immigration policies (e.g., child separation) and the anti-Muslim travel ban – even the claim of forbidding “Merry Christmas”. It’s all about race and religious identity, not policies founded on Christian values."

https://www.blueridgemuse.com/node/62181

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Ill-informed opinion. Nothing more.

---

You call it ill-informed opinion, yet you could not successfully challenge a SINGLE point made !!

Calling it plagiarism is not an argument against the truth of what is written.

I don't have to refute it. It's your claims, so it's up to you to document them. "Says Jennifer Rubin," scarcely qualifies as documentation.

Pointing out your plagiarism is an argument in favor of basic honesty. You do it repeatedly. It's a bad look, and it's such a simple problem to fix that I'm surprised you haven't stopped. Citing a source and using quotation marks is about as easy as it gets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I don't have to refute it.

---

Obviously, because you can't.

Quote:

---

Pointing out your plagiarism is an argument in favor of basic honesty.

---

The far larger point is that you are unable to refer to the points made so you deflect to plagiarism. This is not new for you.

If you complain about plagiarism, you do the same thing in spades and you have been doing it for many, many months. Physician, heal thyself.

You are a plagiarist, which is to say you are dishonest, and even moreso when out of desperation and embarrassment from having been caught repeatedly, you claim it of me. Alas, we both know you cannot demonstrate a single instance.

It's funny because I can usually tell when you are doing it. Your writing is good but not THAT good, and so when I see material like you posted above, I am immediately suspicious. It's easy enough to verify. A simple Bing search gets the job done in just a few minutes.

You want me to refute the rantings of that great expert on all things evangelical, Jennifer Rubin? Uhm, I think it's not really necessary. I can't imagine any greater waste of time.

Make an appeal to some solid documentation and we can go from there. I'll even make a start for you. The great majority of white evangelicals oppose both abortion and radical preferences for the LGBT folks. Quite naturally they would not vote in favor of the radically pro-abortion and pro-LGBT silliness team of Harris/Biden.

Please note that the wording was all mine and I have provided a link to the data I used. I try to be a good example to you.

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-...rtion-n1109446

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You are a plagiarist, which is to say you are dishonest, and even moreso when out of desperation and embarrassment from having been caught repeatedly, you claim it of me. Alas, we both know you cannot demonstrate a single instance.

---

In addition to being a plagiarist, you are easily the nastiest person on this board. Not a single person supports you as you pull all your nasty tricks including lying and changing horses in midstream - not to mention your fervent and ridiculous claim that snakes talk.

Where in scripture does it say you are not a plagiarist. Prove that you're not a plagiarist. You claim you are not - prove it.

Oh calm down. You have plagiarized repeatedly. I have not. Instead of getting ugly, just stop doing it. Easy solution. Pointing out your plagiarism is not being ugly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Oh calm down. You have admitted to plagiarizing. Instead of getting ugly, just stop doing it. Easy solution. Pointing out your plagiarism is not being ugly.

---

Can't prove it, can you? Well, you had your chance. Your true nature is here for all to see. Ignoring/Changing the subject won't help you this time.

Second chance:

Where in scripture does it say you are not a plagiarist. Prove that you're not a plagiarist. You claim you are not - prove it.

I have not plagiarized. There’s your proof

You have plagiarized just recently in this thread. There’s your proof.

Case closed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I have not plagiarized. There’s your proof

---

Try again. A lie/denial from you is not proof.

Third chance:

Where in scripture does it say you are not a plagiarist. Prove that you're not a plagiarist. You claim you are not - prove it.

He ran away.

Guess he didn't like getting a taste of his own medicine.

What bugs me is that fundamentalist Christians have stolen the evangelical adjective from Lutherans. Many Lutheran churches have "evangelical" in their name -- e.g., St. John's Evangelical Lutheran Church. Lutherans want to spread the Gospel, thus evangelize. And now "evangelical" means what? Definitely not spreading the Gospel!

Quote:

---

He ran away.

---

I posted on 12/5. You replied all of 20 days later, so perhaps a little patience would be in order.

Where Athos has plagiarized.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showth...95#post3873195

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showth...64#post3875864

Now if...if...if you can document where I have lied, plagiarized, changed horses in midstream, or claimed that snakes talk, then we can discuss it. Until then, as I said earlier, case closed.

You do get the award for the absolutely most bizarre question in AMHD history. "Where in scripture does it say you are not a plagiarist." And you amplified the decidedly peculiar nature of the question by asking it 3 times.

Quote:

---

And now "evangelical" means what?

---

Good question. This is what Luther said. I like it.

Quote:

---

"For Luther, the gospel of grace saves us apart from any works of the law. As his colleague Philip Melancthon wrote, “The Law shows the disease, the Gospel the cure.”[7] The Bible is full of law and gospel, command and promise. The New Testament is not simply gospel, while Old Testament law. As Luther says of the Old Testament: “Here you will find the swaddling cloths and the manger in which Criest lies, and to which the angel points the shepherds [Luke 2:12].”[8]

As a general tendency, Luther admits that the Old Testament emphasizes law, while the New Testament highlights grace. But the Old Testament still promises the Gospel (e.g. Gen 3:15), while the New Testament conveys commands to help us restrain the flesh. In this sense, the categories of law and gospel and the broader categories of command and grace help us make sense of how to read the whole Bible.

The Gospel is God’s approval of us on the basis of God clothing us with the righteousness of Christ. In his 1520 treatise, On The Freedom of the Christian, Luther uses the analogy of marriage. When a bride marries a bridegroom, everything she has belongs to him; and the bridegroom shares with her his whole life. In the Gospel, we give up entirely our sin and Christ gives entirely his righteousness. We are then by this union justified by faith. An alien (foreign) righteousness becomes ours by faith.

Christ is our righteousness. Any works done after our justification matter, according to Luther, because it pleases God (not salvifically) and because we need to love our neighbours. A good tree, he avers, produces good fruit. The law does not need to threaten us anymore. The moral law, however, still guides us in our Christian walk. Hence, Luther will include the Ten Commandments in his catechisms."

---

https://ca.thegospelcoalition.org/co...20whole%20life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Good question. This is what Luther said. I like it.

---

Unfortunately, the fundamentalists who stole the evangelical adjective aren't using it in that sense at all, never referring to efforts to bring the Gospel to unbelievers. Thus, my question: "And now 'evangelical' means what?"

(P.S. Lutherans are rethinking that adjective and are considering removing it from church names or replacing it with a different adjective.)

Quote:

---

never referring to efforts to bring the Gospel to unbelievers.

---

Not sure why you say that. The evangelicals I am familiar with (Southern Baptists, for instance) are fully committed to missions and gospel preaching. They also do a lot of good work in disaster relief efforts and assisting the poor. Who are you referring to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Not sure why you say that. The evangelicals I am familiar with (Southern Baptists, for instance) are fully committed to missions and gospel preaching.

---

Do they tout themselves as evangelicals?

They do.

Quote:

---

Evangelical: Southern Baptists are Evangelical, meaning they adhere to the belief that while humanity is fallen, the good news is that Christ came to pay the penalty for sin on the cross. That penalty, now paid in full, means God offers forgiveness and new life as a free gift. All who receive Christ as Lord may have it. The message is so vital that telling it is like sharing a cure for cancer. One could not keep it to himself. Evangelism and missions have a supreme place in Baptist life.

---

https://www.learnreligions.com/south...beliefs-700524

Southern Baptists = White evangelicals

So? Are we to be racially prejudiced about such things?

You do realize the vast majority of Lutherans are white? They are, in fact, considerably less diverse than the SBC crowd. How are Lutherans addressing that?

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...igious-groups/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So? Are we to be racially prejudiced about such things?

---

Are they racially prejudiced?

Not that I know of, though in my experience most people, probably including you and me, harbor some racial prejudices of some sort.

But we are going astray. I'd still like to know who you were thinking about when you, in reference to evangelicals, said, "never referring to efforts to bring the Gospel to unbelievers?"

You also did not comment on your VERY racially segregated church affiliation.

"You do realize the vast majority of Lutherans are white? They are, in fact, considerably less diverse than the SBC crowd. How are Lutherans addressing that?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You do realize the vast majority of Lutherans are white?

---

Yes, that is true. Black Lutherans, partly because of their energetic style of praise and worship (vs. the dour, unemotional German white version), have formed their own congregations and attached schools. I was very fortunate in the '60s to do my student teaching at a Black Lutheran school in a Chicago neighborhood. Above the altar was a magnificent statue of a Black Jesus.

So how are Lutherans addressing that? You seemed to be critical of the SBC folks but very tolerant of segregation amongst your own church. Is that a fair analysis?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Now if...if...if you can document where I have lied, plagiarized, changed horses in midstream, or claimed that snakes talk, then we can discuss it.

---

It is up to you to prove that you haven't.

Have you so soon forgotten that it has been YOUR demand for others to prove a negative? Have you forgotten that you consistently challenged others to prove something by quoting where in scripture it can be found? Have you forgotten that you stated here in black and white than snakes talk?

Remember that what you have posted in these pages will never go away and will haunt you whenever you deny what you have written.

You want to discuss these things. What is there to discuss? Your denying them just adds to your bed of lies. Lie down in it if you wish.

You use scripture like a weapon to impale anyone you disagree with. Remember that Satan can quote scripture just like you do.

Rather can continuing to deflect from the questions you so love when they fit into your skewed commentary, here they are again for YOU to answer now that they put you on the spot where you find it uncomfortable so you deny and lie.

Where in scripture does it say you are not a plagiarist. Prove that you're not a plagiarist. You claim you are not - prove it.

Quote:

---

Where Athos has plagiarized.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showth...95#post3873195

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showth...64#post3875864

Now if...if...if you can document where I have lied, plagiarized, changed horses in midstream, or claimed that snakes talk, then we can discuss it. Until then, as I said earlier, case closed.

You do get the award for the absolutely most bizarre question in AMHD history. "Where in scripture does it say you are not a plagiarist." And you amplified the decidedly peculiar nature of the question by asking it 3 times.

---

Go on all you want. Until you document as I did of you, the case is closed.


BTW, I have never asked you to prove a negative. That's another one you would have to document for me to believe. Why do these unsubstantiated and false allegations seem to be a habit with you? Is it somehow linked to your willingness to plagiarize?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Why do these unsubstantiated and false allegations seem to be a habit with you?

---

Unsubstantiated? False?

Then it should be child's play for you to prove from scripture that you are not a plagiarist. If not scripture, then prove you are not a plagiarist from any source your heart desires.

How does that dish taste when it is served to you?

This has become past ridiculous. I called you out for plagiarizing which you clearly did. Instead of simply saying that plagiarism on an obscure website visited by never more than a half dozen people is not a big problem, a position I would likely have agreed with, instead we get such childish nonsense as you have posted above. You have been able to document nothing, so I'll leave you in your vain search of the Bible to see if it mentions anything about a person in the 21st century committing plagiarism, a search which you can be assured will be undertaken by no one else on the face of the earth and wisely so. Perhaps you should ponder that. Good luck.

I had hoped WG would continue the conversation about evangelicals and the almost entirely white Lutheran church, but I suppose that won't take place. Too bad. It was interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So how are Lutherans addressing that? You seemed to be critical of the SBC folks but very tolerant of segregation amongst your own church. Is that a fair analysis?

---

I'm not critical of the SBC folks, no more than the LCMS dour German Lutherans. SB worship styles are actually much closer to Black worship styles than Lutheran are. Thus, to attract non-whites, a new more all-inclusive Lutheran church body, the ELCA, was formed in 1988.

Wikipedia:
The word Southern in "Southern Baptist Convention" stems from its having been organized in 1845 in Augusta, Georgia, by Baptists in the Southern United States who split with northern Baptists (known today as the American Baptist Churches USA) over the issue of slavery, with Southern Baptists strongly opposed to its abolition.^[4] After the American Civil War, another split occurred when most freedmen set up independent black congregations, regional associations, and state and national conventions, such as the National Baptist Convention, which became the second-largest Baptist convention by the end of the 19th century.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sout...ist_Convention

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I had hoped WG would continue the conversation about evangelicals and the almost entirely white Lutheran church, but I suppose that won't take place. Too bad. It was interesting.

---

WG was busy with, among other activities, eating her dinner. Why so negative?

Quote:

---

WG was busy with, among other activities, eating her dinner. Why so negative?

---

Didn't mean to come across negative. You had just seemed to drop out. That's all. No harm intended.

I think most of the vastly majority white protestant organizations are trying, to some degree, to reach other groups. It's not going to be easy. The drug rehab outfit I go to on Sunday mornings is overwhelmingly white but we do have some black men. Everyone seems to mix together well enough.

If you didn't intend to be critical of the SBC folks, then why did you post your quote about the unsavory beginnings of the SBC? At any rate, the SBC had it's racist past at about the same time as the Democrat party. Oh well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Didn't mean to come across negative. You had just seemed to drop out. That's all. No harm intended.

---

It hadn't been that long!!!!

Quote:

---

I think most of the vastly majority white protestant organizations are trying, to some degree, to reach other groups. It's not going to be easy. The drug rehab outfit I go to on Sunday mornings is overwhelmingly white but we do have some black men. Everyone seems to mix together well enough.

---

Yes, and whites need to reach out more. That's what I especially loved about my library job(s). That library was (is) a much-loved community center, the community being composed of every race and nationality you can think of. Once someone opens the front door and walks inside, all grievances disappear.

Quote:

---

If you didn't intend to be critical of the SBC folks, then why did you post your quote about the unsavory beginnings of the SBC? At any rate, the SBC had it's racist past at about the same time as the Democrat party. Oh well.

---

Some of them are still white, racist Republicans. And don't forget about the two parties flip-flopping ideologies.

Quote:

---

Yes, and whites need to reach out more. That's what I especially loved about my library job(s). That library was (is) a much-loved community center, the community being composed of every race and nationality you can think of. Once someone opens the front door and walks inside, all grievances disappear.

---

I doubt that to be the case. Grievances don't disappear simply because someone walks through a door.

Quote:

---

Some of them are still white, racist Republicans. And don't forget about the two parties flip-flopping ideologies.

---

Strange how you confine racism to whites only and repubs only. Very strange indeed. Biden has made racist remarks. HC made racist remarks. Sharpton is a major league racist. So is Jesse Jackson. All of them are...dems!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I doubt that to be the case. Grievances don't disappear simply because someone walks through a door.

---

Work in public libraries for thirty years. Then we will talk. A black teenager would hold the door open for a Chinese grandmother and also for a Latina pushing a baby stroller. A fat, bald white guy would help pick up the books a Black child.dropped.

Quote:

---

Strange how you confine racism to whites only and repubs only.

---

I didn't. And I was born and raised among them, went to their SBC VBS every summer. Again, don't forget the flip-flop.

Quote:

---

Work in public libraries for thirty years. Then we will talk. A black teenager would hold the door open for a Chinese grandmother and also for a Latina pushing a baby stroller. A fat, bald white guy would help pick up the books a Black child.dropped.

---

I could say the same thing about working in schools for 34 years. But the things you described certainly don't indicate a dropping of grievances among everyone who just walked through the doors.

Quote:

---

I didn't. And I was born and raised among them, went to their SBC VBS every summer. Again, don't forget the flip-flop.

---

Of course you did. You were very specific about whites and repubs being racists. "Some of them are still white, racist Republicans." And if a flip flop resulted in the lowest unemployment amongst blacks in history, then we sure need more flip flops!! The only black SCOTUS justice was appointed by a repub. First black woman elected to statewide office in Virginia is a repub. First black woman as NSA was a repub. First black chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and first black Secretary of State was a repub. Yep. Hooray for flip-flops!

And then there is Joe Biden.

1. Biden lectured about the fears that blacks may have of the vaccine, attempting to point to historically shameful episodes when they were subjected to inhumane medical experiments. “They are used to being experimented on—the Tuskegee Airmen and others,” Biden said. In this, he confused legendary World War II fighter pilots with a long, notorious governmental study of syphilis among black men—the Tuskegee Experiment which was, incidentally, conducted by a democrat administration.

2. In 2007, he referred to Barack Obama as “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean.”
3. In 2006, he said, “You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.”
4. Way back in 1977, he said that forced busing to desegregate schools would cause his children to “grow up in a racial jungle.”
5. And, of course, who could forget this? "At a campaign event in Iowa, Biden told supporters “poor kids are just as bright and talented as white kids.” He quickly corrected himself after some applause by adding: “Wealthy kids, black kids, Asian kids.”

https://www.heritage.org/progressivi...racist-remarks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You have been able to document nothing

---

It is not my job to document anything - it is your job to prove exactly where in scripture it says that you are not guilty of plagiarism. You say you are not a plagiarist- so prove it outside of scripture. How many times will you refuse to prove you are not a plagiarist?

Hint: Google the goose and the gander.

Quote:

---

It is not my job to document anything

---

You cannot document what amounts to nothing more than conjecture. It's why I said, "Ill-informed opinion. Nothing more."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I could say the same thing about working in schools for 34 years. But the things you described certainly don't indicate a dropping of grievances among everyone who just walked through the doors.

---

When they walked through those library doors, grievances were dropped. I never heard or heard about, saw, or was involved in a heated argument, fistfight, shooting while inside library walls. And part of our training was learning how to avoid and prevent any outburst from occurring.

Grievances are held in the heart. You have no access to their hearts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Grievances are held in the heart. You have no access to their hearts.

---

Why are you being so negative? This is why I disappear.

The library gives them a place to put those grievances aside. Healing can begin.

You say you want a discussion. That’s what this is. Disagreement is not negativity.