Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. A Joke or a Parable?

 

There was once a faithful man who prayed every day and completely trusted in God’s goodness. However, he lived in a flood plain and the forecast was grim — 40 days and 40 nights of rain. When the governor declared a voluntary evacuation, the police drove through the man’s neighborhood encouraging people to leave over their loudspeakers, but the man replied, “God will provide.”

After a few days of steady rain and as the waters began to rise into the streets, the voluntary evacuation became mandatory and National Guard trucks were sent in to help remainers move out. The faithful man politely thanked them and, refusing to leave, said, “God will provide.” When the water reached his front stoop, first responders were sent in skiff boats to help him out. He refused again, saying, “God will provide.”

The flood eventually reached up near the man’s second story where he was trapped for several days until the Coast Guard came by to pick him up. He graciously declined saying, “God will provide.”

Finally, the water was high enough to force him onto his roof. An Air Force helicopter was commissioned to rescue him, but he waved them off, attempting to shout over the engine noise, “God will provide!

Shortly after, the floodwaters overcame the man and he drowned. When he arrived at the Gates of Heaven, he was confused and asked Saint Peter, “Why didn’t God save me? I’m a faithful man and I prayed daily.”

Peter scanned the record of the man’s last days and said, “Let’s see, we sent the police, the National Guard, first responders, the Coast Guard, and the Air Force. What the heck were you waiting for?

David French’s answer might be, “I’m sure there were philanderers, fornicators, and insulting tweeters among the lawmen, the first responders, the National Guard, the Coasties, and the Zoomies. I was right not to go with them and no one else should have either.”

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 45 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Arahant Member

    • #1
    • February 18, 2020, at 7:11 AM PST
    • 3 likes
  2. Stina Member

    David French might point to this verse as support for his position:

    But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

    But none of these people consider Trump to be a brother. They think he is not a believer. If it is true that they think he is not a believer, then they miss the next verse:

    What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”

    (1 Corinthians 5:11-13)

    Now, I’m not entirely certain Trump is  not a Christian. I think he has had a relatively recent conversion. The most recent philandering episode we are publicly aware of is Stormy Daniels from when Baron was born (if that was even true). We do not know what has happened to Trump since.

    As to  slanderer, I would be hard pressed for anyone who is critical of Trump’s words to put forth anything he has said about the press or political leaders that is factually untrue.

    He may not be very charitable to the press or oppositional political leaders and bureacracy, but he has been incredibly charitable to the American people – more so than even the pundits have been. And quite honestly, other than arguably for style, I see nothing morally wrong with the fight he is fighting. And style is so very shallow, it isn’t worth the amount of criticism it gets.

    Again, I don’t care if people criticize Trump, but I do care what standard they are holding him to. If you are holding him to a standard that has never applied to any president in the history of this country (ahem, JFK, Johnson, Adams, Jackson, Obama), then you are judging unfairly. If you are holding him to the standard of a moral leader like a priest or a pastor, you are judging him unfairly.

    If your argument is then that we should be better than our past, then start with the culture, not the president. There is no reason to expect better coming out of our culture. It is rotten to its core. Its amazing it produces anything good at all.

    • #2
    • February 18, 2020, at 7:23 AM PST
    • 9 likes
  3. Stad Thatcher

    This elderly Jewish man Herschel would pray every night, “God, please let me win the lottery.” He did this every night for ten years. Finally, one night he asked, “Dear God, why won’t you let me win the lottery?”

    A voice boomed from above, “Work with me Herschel—buy a ticket!”

    • #3
    • February 18, 2020, at 7:41 AM PST
    • 18 likes
  4. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Stad (View Comment):

    This elderly Jewish man Herschel would pray every night, “God, please let me win the lottery.” He did this every night for ten years. Finally, one night he asked, “Dear God, why won’t you let me win the lottery?”

    A voice boomed from above, “Work with me Herschel—buy a ticket!”

    Haha! Love it!

    • #4
    • February 18, 2020, at 7:42 AM PST
    • 5 likes
  5. Stad Thatcher

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    This elderly Jewish man Herschel would pray every night, “God, please let me win the lottery.” He did this every night for ten years. Finally, one night he asked, “Dear God, why won’t you let me win the lottery?”

    A voice boomed from above, “Work with me Herschel—buy a ticket!”

    Haha! Love it!

    It works best when you use a Jewish accent for Herschel and a New York accent for God:

    “Woik with me Hoishel” . . .

    • #5
    • February 18, 2020, at 7:51 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  6. Aaron Miller Member
    Aaron Miller Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Stina (View Comment):
    As to  slanderer, I would be hard pressed for anyone who is critical of Trump’s words to put forth anything he has said about the press or political leaders that is factually untrue.

    Did he ever apologize for publicly misleading people about Ted Cruz’s father during the first campaign? Stuff like that and his history as a wheeler-dealer is why I am not sure about his character, even if he has proven a good President. 

    I always liked that flood parable. I would agree with the application except that a President is not just a servant but a leader and our chief ambassador to the world. George Washington proposed sublime titles as alternatives to “President” because that understanding was present from the beginning, long before the federal government became so powerful and centralized. It matters how a national leader behaves, though his legal actions take priority. 

    Trump has done a good job and will probably be the best candidate this year. But I wish there was more middle ground between hating him and idolizing him. 

     

    • #6
    • February 18, 2020, at 8:41 AM PST
    • 7 likes
  7. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    Did he ever apologize for publicly misleading people about Ted Cruz’s father during the first campaign? Stuff like that and his history as a wheeler-dealer is why I am not sure about his character, even if he has proven a good President. 

    I think you can be fairly sure about his character. It’s flawed. And very few of his supporters don’t know it. Who are these idolaters so often mentioned?

    I think the absurdity of his comments about Ted Cruz’s father should make them obviously unserious. I find his comments about Carly Fiorina’s and Ted Cruz’s wife’s looks much more troubling. He should apologize and make amends for that. I’m not making excuses for it, but explaining that his fierce competitiveness can get ugly. It’s also what drives him to fight the Left. He’s a mixed bag.

     

    • #7
    • February 18, 2020, at 8:50 AM PST
    • 8 likes
  8. Arahant Member

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    He’s a mixed bag.

    Definitely. But he has been doing fairly well for our side.

    • #8
    • February 18, 2020, at 8:54 AM PST
    • 7 likes
  9. Jim Beck Member

    Morning WC,

    Love these posts, yes here it come, however, my problem is that is discussing my disappointment with French and Jonah, I think I become what I dislike in them. I feel they are judgemental and trying to act as prophets, as you say joyless scolds. My reaction to them seems often as joyless. Preaching to myself, we as Christians should be the least surprised by criticism for how we live, we should be the least surprised that factions faith would develop which would champion one person or path versus another, so since we have been warned and since we have a Shepherd, we should not worry about the criticism or betrayals anymore than we should worry about what we are to wear or eat. If I get angry and impatient with French or his defenders, this is not good, and this anger just increases the space between folks who are believers. I think French is politically wrong, but this is not a sin, and nothing that happens in politics is outside God’s knowledge and control, and I think French exhibits a type of religious pride, but to publically make an issue of that is not providing loving counsel to a fellow Christian. Loving counsel is loving, it is personal, and it is purposefully kept out of the public arena so as to keep corrupting agendas from undercutting the counsel. So the part of your posts that convicted me was your advice that we not be joyless scolds. Often I want to say to those with whom I disagree, “you fool, you empty-headed idiot”. Not only does this not persuade anyone, it shows that I am no better and enjoy speaking contemptuously of those with whom I disagree. Again thanks WC, you have given me a lot to think about.

    • #9
    • February 18, 2020, at 8:58 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  10. Arahant Member

    Jim Beck (View Comment):
    Often I want to say to those with whom I disagree, “you fool, you empty-headed idiot”.

    And this is why we Southerners say, “God bless his heart!” It’s a paradigm shift from one of anger to one of hoping for G-d to work his best miracles.

    • #10
    • February 18, 2020, at 9:06 AM PST
    • 8 likes
  11. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Jim Beck (View Comment):

    Morning WC,

    Love these posts, yes here it come, however, my problem is that is discussing my disappointment with French and Jonah, I think I become what I dislike in them. I feel they are judgemental and trying to act as prophets, as you say joyless scolds. My reaction to them seems often as joyless. Preaching to myself, we as Christians should be the least surprised by criticism for how we live, we should be the least surprised that factions faith would develop which would champion one person or path versus another, so since we have been warned and since we have a Shepherd, we should not worry about the criticism or betrayals anymore than we should worry about what we are to wear or eat. If I get angry and impatient with French or his defenders, this is not good, and this anger just increases the space between folks who are believers. I think French is politically wrong, but this is not a sin, and nothing that happens in politics is outside God’s knowledge and control, and I think French exhibits a type of religious pride, but to publically make an issue of that is not providing loving counsel to a fellow Christian. Loving counsel is loving, it is personal, and it is purposefully kept out of the public arena so as to keep corrupting agendas from undercutting the counsel. … Often I want to say to those with whom I disagree, “you fool, you empty-headed idiot”. Not only does this not persuade anyone, it shows that I am no better and enjoy speaking contemptuously of those with whom I disagree. Again thanks WC, you have given me a lot to think about.

    I hear you, Jim. It’s always a risk to scrutinize the speck in someone else’s eye. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), I don’t have the means to privately counsel David French, and he does have the means of an expansive public platform. So, this is where we are. (And my previous post wasn’t about David French; it was about encouraging and loving the pilgrim Donald Trump. David French became a point of discussion through others’ comments.)

    I’m not particularly concerned about David French’s salvation. I think he’ll be just fine. Donald Trump, on the other hand, needs work and prayers and mercy. But, French’s counsel and advice to others to keep their hands clean in a down and dirty messy world could, inadvertently, be complicit with evil. He means well, so he may lack moral culpability (God decides, not me), but the ends achieved by him protecting his moral purity may enable evil to ascend to power and cause much more suffering than is necessary. I don’t know this for a fact, but he doesn’t know that reelecting Donald Trump will cause the damage he predicts either. The last three years weigh heavily in my favor. 

     

    • #11
    • February 18, 2020, at 9:19 AM PST
    • 9 likes
  12. Arahant Member

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    The last three years weigh heavily in my favor.

    Indeed.

    • #12
    • February 18, 2020, at 9:31 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  13. Aaron Miller Member
    Aaron Miller Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    I think the absurdity of his comments about Ted Cruz’s father should make them obviously unserious.

    I could make an “unserious” accusation on public airwaves about your father being an assassin’s co-conspirator and you could shrug that off as an excusable excess of competitive spirit? Whether Trump believed the accusation or not, that demonstrated an extreme selfishness; an ends-justify-means mentality in order to win. 

    Trump’s behavior has been better since the campaign. In charity, I like to think that is a response to so many prayers for him. But I’m wary of “it’s just business” opportunism. 

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    I find his comments about Carly Fiorina’s and Ted Cruz’s wife’s looks much more troubling. He should apologize and make amends for that. I’m not making excuses for it, but explaining that his fierce competitiveness can get ugly. It’s also what drives him to fight the Left. He’s a mixed bag.

    I appreciate that.

    The common idolatry I have seen is the utter reluctance to admit any of his faults. Everything is a strength. Every Tweet is “4-dimensional chess” and never a reckless impulse. Though Trump will employ the bully pulpit for immigration control, he gets a pass for putting no public pressure on Republicans in his 2 years to repeal Obamacare and otherwise failing to take the initiative on that crucial dilemma.

    Aside from the nomination of judges, most of what he has accomplished can be quickly undone by the next Democrat in office. Economic life isn’t really much different for Americans than it was during the last upswing. He has been better than previous Republican Presidents, but that’s not saying much. 

    I just wish more of his supporters would treat him like a normal politician and hold his feet to the fire with cautious optimism. So few Republicans fight that of course Trump is passionately praised for calling out Democrat nonsense. Still, he’s a lifelong negotiator who openly admits to playing people. 

    • #13
    • February 18, 2020, at 9:39 AM PST
    • 2 likes
  14. D.A. Venters Member

    Can’t speak for him, of course, but I suspect where French would disagree with this analogy is the existence of the flood – i.e. the idea that Christianity or the Church or Evangelicalism, or whatever, needs a savior, let alone a savior in the person of a US President.

    To the extent the world needs a savior, I suspect French would say he has already come. Christians aren’t waiting on their rooftops for rescue, they’re driving the boats from house to house. Modern politics just aren’t that important in the grand scheme of Creation. Maybe Trump is an anchor on one of the boats, maybe he’s a sail. But either way, he’s just on one little boat, and Christians ought not put all their hope in him. There are other things to do.

    • #14
    • February 18, 2020, at 10:07 AM PST
    • 5 likes
  15. Jager Coolidge
    Jager Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    Can’t speak for him, of course, but I suspect where French would disagree with this analogy is the existence of the flood – i.e. the idea that Christianity or the Church or Evangelicalism, or whatever, needs a savior, let alone a savior in the person of a US President.

    To the extent the world needs a savior, I suspect French would say he has already come. Christians aren’t waiting on their rooftops for rescue, they’re driving the boats from house to house. Modern politics just aren’t that important in the grand scheme of Creation. Maybe Trump is an anchor on one of the boats, maybe he’s a sail. But either way, he’s just on one little boat, and Christians ought not put all their hope in him. There are other things to do.

    I think that is were the disconnect lies. I am not looking for Trump to be a small church pastor, much less a Savior. I do not put all my hope in him. I don’t think that Christian Conservatives see Trump or any President in this light. 

    Someone is going to be elected President in a bit. Christians can choose the Jerk who attended the Pro-life march, generally seems to like them and at least leaves them alone. Or they can choose a person who is hostile to their beliefs and pro-abortion. No matter what patter French likes to make about elections not being “binary”, history has shown us that the results are binary, one of these two choices will win. The Jerk or the person hostile to Christians deeply held beliefs. 

    It is not looking for a Savior to support the person who will do the most good or at least the least harm. We are electing a political leader not a Pope. He is not expected to lead our faith, but to work generally in the direction of our goals. 

    • #15
    • February 18, 2020, at 10:28 AM PST
    • 8 likes
  16. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Jager (View Comment):

    I think that is were the disconnect lies. I am not looking for Trump to be a small church pastor, much less a Savior. I do not put all my hope in him. I don’t think that Christian Conservatives see Trump or any President in this light. 

    Someone is going to be elected President in a bit. Christians can choose the Jerk who attended the Pro-life march, generally seems to like them and at least leaves them alone. Or they can choose a person who is hostile to their beliefs and pro-abortion. No matter what patter French likes to make about elections not being “binary”, history has shown us that the results are binary, one of these two choices will win. The Jerk or the person hostile to Christians deeply held beliefs. 

    It is not looking for a Savior to support the person who will do the most good or at least the least harm. We are electing a political leader not a Pope. He is not expected to lead our faith, but to work generally in the direction of our goals. 

    Agreed. And it’s kind of insulting to keep accusing your fellow Christians of divinizing Donald Trump.

    The rescuers in the joke aren’t leading our man of faith to heaven. They’re just trying to help him through a tough situation. God uses all kinds of flawed people to get us safely home, but only He opens the door.

    I think the analogy is pretty solid.

    • #16
    • February 18, 2020, at 11:01 AM PST
    • 3 likes
  17. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Jager (View Comment):
    It is not looking for a Savior to support the person who will do the most good or at least the least harm. We are electing a political leader not a Pope. He is not expected to lead our faith, but to work generally in the direction of our goals. 

    And yet, the “leaders” of the Evangelical Christians seem rather inclined to support and praise Trump in all respects and actions. Casually dismissing his many many faults. They don’t seek to correct him or admonish him when he steps from the path of righteousness, rather they dig deep for excuses and rhetorical tricks to keep talking out of both sides of their mouth. Funny that, almost as if they were cynical Pharisees. 

    If the “Christians” actually had a true purely practical deal with Trump why feel any need to defend his immorality? Why get so upset with the Christians who do criticize his immorality? What is it to them that David French keeps attacking Trump as an immoral reprobate? Maybe French’s attacks will force Trump to change (which would be good) or more likely have no impact on him. Either way it is no skin of their noses. 

    Of course all of this talk of practicality begs the question why it only arises now? None of the “righteous” lot of Evangelicals defending Trump now seemed all this secularly minded under past administrations. IS the idea then that if you don’t give them their preferred policy outcomes they attack you moral and christian character and if you do they don’t? What then does that character mean if it is so fungible? Sin is only a problem if it is unprofitable, ergo anything that is profitable is not a sin, eh? 

    Me thinks you all do protest too much. 

     

    • #17
    • February 18, 2020, at 11:26 AM PST
    • 3 likes
  18. Jason Obermeyer Member

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    Modern politics just aren’t that important in the grand scheme of Creation. 

    But that’s just it. I don’t have any special insight into his mind, but some of David French’s writing leads me to believe that he values Christianity more as a source of civic virtue for the country rather than an end in itself; the goal being to produce good, virtuous citizens first and foremost. I mean, if you want to take an uncompromising position based on religious principles in politics that is fine, but it all has to come in. The central message of Christianity isn’t “be good,” its that you are terrible apart from faith in Christ’s free gift of grace (and a Trinitarian Christ at that). From an orthodox (small “o”) Christian perspective, a President Mitt Romney – if he had won – would have been the most evil president since William Howard Taft (the last obvious Unitarian in office that I’m aware of). But I voted for him, because I’m not electing a national role model or anything like that. It’s a relative choice that – as you note – isn’t “that important in the grand scheme of Creation.”

    What seems to unite Never Trump is a desire to make politics noble or pretend that it already is. But you have to ignore a lot of things to pretend that its so, and you have to ignore a lot what is in the New Testament to believe that any political system (or even a bare majority of it) will be “good.” 

    On a related note, we are now starting to get some commentary on the theme of “The Conservative Case for Bernie Sanders.” Jonathan V. Last recently said that while Sanders’ politics are bad, at least he has beliefs in contrast to the corrupt Trump. I understand true believers having mutual respect for one another even if their beliefs are antithetical, but whenever I get to deep in that sort of thinking I remind myself of something stupid said by John Goodman’s character in The Big Lebowski:

    Nihilists! [CoC] me. I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least its an ethos.

    Few lines demonstrate better the absurdity of respecting true belief in an evil philosophy compared with someone who has no values at all. About a year ago, I wrote that the problem with corruption is that it destroys the credibility of a system and leads people to look toward other, more problematic governing philosophies. The problem here is that a vote for almost any Democrat is vote to bring the alternatives closer to reality; it is an affirmative choice for the thing to be avoided. We are really moving toward “destroying the village to save it territory.”

    • #18
    • February 18, 2020, at 12:07 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  19. D.A. Venters Member

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Jager (View Comment):

    I think that is were the disconnect lies. I am not looking for Trump to be a small church pastor, much less a Savior. I do not put all my hope in him. I don’t think that Christian Conservatives see Trump or any President in this light.

    Someone is going to be elected President in a bit. Christians can choose the Jerk who attended the Pro-life march, generally seems to like them and at least leaves them alone. Or they can choose a person who is hostile to their beliefs and pro-abortion. No matter what patter French likes to make about elections not being “binary”, history has shown us that the results are binary, one of these two choices will win. The Jerk or the person hostile to Christians deeply held beliefs.

    It is not looking for a Savior to support the person who will do the most good or at least the least harm. We are electing a political leader not a Pope. He is not expected to lead our faith, but to work generally in the direction of our goals.

    Agreed. And it’s kind of insulting to keep accusing your fellow Christians of divinizing Donald Trump.

    The rescuers in the joke aren’t leading our man of faith to heaven. They’re just trying to help him through a tough situation. God uses all kinds of flawed people to get us safely home, but only He opens the door.

    I think the analogy is pretty solid.

    I don’t mean to accuse you of “divinizing” Trump, but the analogy does seem to, at the very least, present him as some kind of divine instrument, as do the frequent references to King David, or other flawed biblical characters, in defense of the president that I have seen here (not necessarily by you, I understand).

    I’m just not convinced that our present day political battles rise to that level of concern, such that warning signs of the man’s character can be safely ignored in the service of some supposed higher agenda. Even more important, I’m not convinced that if God is concerned about our present day political battles, that Trump’s agenda meets with His complete approval. Some of it maybe – abortion – ok probably…Turning away poor immigrants at the border? – uh,oh – I’m pulling at my collar a little on that one.

    • #19
    • February 18, 2020, at 12:11 PM PST
    • 1 like
  20. Stina Member

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    Did he ever apologize for publicly misleading people about Ted Cruz’s father during the first campaign? Stuff like that and his history as a wheeler-dealer is why I am not sure about his character, even if he has proven a good President. 

    I don’t know if he did. Cruz acts like he did. If he did, it was not a public apology.

    Trump probably puts too much stock into the National Enquirer, but they have broken stories before.

    Apologies are to mend rifts. Public apologies don’t do that anymore. They have been weaponized to destroy people who publicly apologize. I hope he did apologize to Cruz. I’m ok with it not being done publicly.

    • #20
    • February 18, 2020, at 12:19 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  21. Stina Member

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    I don’t mean to accuse you of “divinizing” Trump, but the analogy does seem to, at the very least, present him as some kind of divine instrument, as do the frequent references to King David, or other flawed biblical characters, in defense of the president that I have seen here (not necessarily by you, I understand).

    David was human too.

    Why is it that you people can’t think God cares about anyone but the Jews?

    He doesn’t care about us to take an interest in us? Why the hell should I pray about a friend getting a job, then?

    And why, pray tell, do poor immigrants get higher dibs than the woman living in her car whose child was taken from her by CPS because she can’t find a job that pays more than 16k a year?

    Why should God care about any of our tawdry, weak, and pathetic lives? Why should he care about the immigrant? Why should he care about you or me or my kids?

    • #21
    • February 18, 2020, at 12:25 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  22. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    abortion – ok probably

    Why the hesitation? There are many reasons I could never vote for today’s Democrats, but this is number one. David French seems to believe God looks unfavorably on us for electing a flawed man like Donald Trump. I believe God will let us perish as a country for the nearly one million abortions we perform every year. It’s not even a close call.

    Again, you seem to be taking French’s position that the anti-progressive candidate’s agenda must meet with God’s complete approval before you can support the candidate. “God will provide.” Meanwhile God is acting and moving in the world. I choose to be grateful for what he’s doing through Donald Trump.

    • #22
    • February 18, 2020, at 12:25 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  23. Jason Obermeyer Member

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    Of course all of this talk of practicality begs the question why it only arises now? None of the “righteous” lot of Evangelicals defending Trump now seemed all this secularly minded under past administrations. IS the idea then that if you don’t give them their preferred policy outcomes they attack you moral and christian character and if you do they don’t? What then does that character mean if it is so fungible? Sin is only a problem if it is unprofitable, ergo anything that is profitable is not a sin, eh?

    This is problem. In retrospect, the Church would have been better off not advancing the idea that we need moral political leadership. It can support politicians that will let the Church be the Church without really getting too tangled up in the process. Most of the examples of moral political leadership in the past are based on myths in any event. As Lord Acton said, “great men are almost always bad men.” The Church needs to consider whether the whole “Moral Majority” thing spiritually worked out for it in the long run.

     

     

    • #23
    • February 18, 2020, at 12:33 PM PST
    • 1 like
  24. Aaron Miller Member
    Aaron Miller Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Stina (View Comment):
    Apologies are to mend rifts. Public apologies don’t do that anymore. They have been weaponized to destroy people who publicly apologize. I hope he did apologize to Cruz. I’m ok with it not being done publicly.

    As you say, Cruz works with him amicably enough today. And yes, he was due the main apology.

    But when one publicly slanders someone, one has a duty to publicly correct the record. Trump misled many people. A public correction would probably not be politically advantageous. It would, however, be just. Letting lies stand for protection of power is not an act of prudence. 

    And because he never apologized, voters like me are left in doubt of who Trump really is. In any case, I know enough to prefer him to Democrats.

    • #24
    • February 18, 2020, at 12:53 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  25. Stad Thatcher

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    If the “Christians” actually had a true purely practical deal with Trump why feel any need to defend his immorality?

    They don’t. They accept the fact he’s a sinner and pray for him, which is a heckuva lot different from your assertion.

    Their support is based on Trump’s actions, which are doing incredible good in spite his being a sinner. Or do you think his actions growing the ecocony, putting conservative judges on the bench, and putting programs in place to reduce unemployment across the board is not a good thing?

    • #25
    • February 18, 2020, at 1:54 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  26. Stina Member

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Of course all of this talk of practicality begs the question why it only arises now? None of the “righteous” lot of Evangelicals defending Trump now seemed all this secularly minded under past administrations. IS the idea then that if you don’t give them their preferred policy outcomes they attack you moral and christian character and if you do they don’t? What then does that character mean if it is so fungible? Sin is only a problem if it is unprofitable, ergo anything that is profitable is not a sin, eh? 

    My mom and I went to the Glen Beck rally in the tea party days. I was new to all of this stuff and it was a first for me. My mom and I were kind of disappointed in the rally, but we had a conversation about how frustrated we were that it seemed that slight mistakes made by potentially good leaders had them raked over the coals and discarded like refuse.

    So in 2010, we were having that discussion about how it was harming Rs to demand morally perfect politicians. I would not be surprised if more had that realization.

    • #26
    • February 18, 2020, at 2:18 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  27. Spin Coolidge
    Spin Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    I have a suggestion for you: stop reading David French.

    • #27
    • February 18, 2020, at 3:32 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  28. Painter Jean Member

    You and Drew from Wisconsin are beginning to make me think that I won’t vote for Trump after all. I can take him, but his supporters….

     

    • #28
    • February 18, 2020, at 4:56 PM PST
    • 1 like
  29. Spin Coolidge
    Spin Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You and Drew from Wisconsin are beginning to make me think that I won’t vote for Trump after all. I can take him, but his supporters….

     

    Let us say for the sake of argument that Mr D and WC (that’s also the name of an all Dutch rap group out of La Crosse) are just complete a-jerks. I’ve been on the receiving end of their salvos before. So I have some sympathy for what you are saying. Some. But so what? They aren’t really all that important, are they? If it is Donny vs the Socialist (the name of a grudge band out of Amarillo)? You would not vote for Trump just because you don’t like the rappers?

     

    • #29
    • February 18, 2020, at 5:06 PM PST
    • 1 like
  30. Painter Jean Member

    Spin (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    You and Drew from Wisconsin are beginning to make me think that I won’t vote for Trump after all. I can take him, but his supporters….

     

    Let us say for the sake of argument that Mr D and WC (that’s also the name of an all Dutch rap group out of La Crosse) are just complete a-jerks. I’ve been on the receiving end of their salvos before. So I have some sympathy for what you are saying. Some. But so what? They aren’t really all that important, are they? If it is Donny vs the Socialist (the name of a grudge band out of Amarillo)? You would not vote for Trump just because you don’t like the rappers?

     

    Yes, because it’s an indication of what Trump inspires. I find it very un-American.

    • #30
    • February 18, 2020, at 5:14 PM PST
    • Like