Backing Trump Is A Moral Dilemma


(About 12 minutes)

 
 
I should preface the rest of my remarks on this topic with the admission that I’m not a Christian. When I fill out my forms I say I’m Jewish. Which is how I was raised. But my actual religion does not conform to any religion known to any other man. I have no doctrine. I have no rituals. I just listen to the Spirit. Holy or otherwise? It has never led me wrong so far. If there is a name for it it would be mystic. Except I’m not into mysticism. All I can say is that I don’t need faith. And that is because I have experience. When the Head Office talks (in that small quiet voice that fills the universe), I listen. I have found it very unwise to do otherwise.

The Christian Science Monitor is looking into how real Christians can vote for a man as obviously unChristian (despite his avowals) as Trump.

Albert Mohler, the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, is urging Christians to prayerfully consider how to approach this “unusual challenge,” The Gospel Herald reported.

During a podcast briefing on March 2, Mohler said the likely contest pitting Clinton against Trump “is going to raise a host of new worldview issues with incredible urgency for confessing Christians.”

He said “at the very least this is going to require of conservative Christians in America a fundamental rethinking of what we believe about the purpose of government and the character of political leadership.”

Mohler said Christians must consider which of the two candidates exhibit “biblical fidelity and gospel faithfulness.”

Well I have always wondered about that myself. If Biblical fidelity is so important why are some Bible laws considered important and others not? Why don’t Christians put adulterers to death as commanded in Leviticus? Why can’t I have a number of wives and a host of concubines? King David did. Just who decides which laws should be adhered to and which other one’s should be discarded?

If Jesus celebrated Passover, why don’t all Christians?

The Jews are quite clever about all this. When there is a law they feel is no longer useful they write the enabling laws in such a way as to abrogate the Torah (for Christians The Old Testament).

Here is an example (not exact – it has been a long time since I studied it in the Talmud) of how it is done.

Of course we must put adulterers to death it is commanded in the Torah. But it is such a harsh penalty for the offense that we must be absolutely sure that the event took place. So unless there are 50 eye witnesses and a confession, that penalty can’t be carried out. And just a confession will not do. Sometimes people confess to things they did not do. That is why the witnesses are required. And why so many eye witnesses? Because witnesses are not always reliable. To kill for adultery we must be absolutely sure.

So that is how the Jews eliminate inconvenient laws. And it is done by the concordance of living Judicial Rabbis. What we under English law refer to as Common Law. Judge and case made law. We still have some of that in American law. Which is why when you are tried for criminal violations you would prefer to avoid if possible “hanging Judges”. And of course hanging Judges have their own problems. If they are excessive enough they are in danger of disappearing. At least that is how it was done in the old days. These days they get over ruled.

The Atlantic Magazine after a posting that discusses the various Christian religious dimensions of a Trump candidacy, comes to this conclusion.

…Trump’s candidacy will prove clarifying. The Republican Party has relied on “values voters” for decades without, in their view, faithfully representing their interests. As Falwell put it in his introduction of Trump: “For decades, conservatives and evangelicals have chosen the political candidates who have told us what we wanted to hear on social, religious, and political issues, only to be betrayed by these same candidates after they were elected.” In Trump, these voters see someone who shares their true priorities.

My take is consonant with that view but also has a more libertarian tinge. There are things beyond government’s power to accomplish. Outlawing abortion for instance will do no such thing. It will merely create a Black Market. And the people who use that market will be mostly unreachable. Who will confess to a crime? Very few. It is better to drop the pretense of prohibition and instead change hearts and minds. Such a stance is painful (edicts and enforcers are more satisfying). It is slow. But what we know is that it is working. We are getting a more moral people instead of a people who pay lip service to morality (we have laws) and then do otherwise.

And we know from the history of the last 100 years that government has not made us a more moral people. It did not make Alcohol Prohibition (a favorite of some Christian sects) work. Making us a more moral people has been accomplished the old fashioned Christian way. By changing hearts and minds.

We have relearned through hard experience that Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, — it is force! And like fire, it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master. And we all have living examples of that. When was the last time when you were being followed in your car by the police that you did not do your very best to avoid notice? Not too fast. Not too slow. And no sudden or furtive movements. All to avoid the taxes on our time and our wallets that encounters with the roving revenooers often bring.


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

11 responses to “Backing Trump Is A Moral Dilemma”

  1. Bram Avatar
    Bram

    This might actually matter if Trump wasn’t running against somebody as obviously un-Christian as Clinton.

  2. Simon Avatar

    Bram,

    With the advent of Christianity as a State religion, Christians have mostly given up “hearts and minds” in favor of passing laws.

    Yes. In the current situation – Clinton vs Trump – should be obvious. But unfortunately for some of our religious minded folk it is not.

  3. aporitic Avatar
    aporitic

    If this fall’s election were for the next pope, it would matter to me that Trump isn’t “Christian enough” for the job.

    But, since this is a secular office, I’m content to “render unto Caesar” and vote for the candidate who is going to do the best job of running a secular government.

    Between Trump and Clinton, that’s not even a contest. One may wonder if he’s qualified, but – to any sane observer – she has obviously DISqualified herself.

  4. great unknown Avatar
    great unknown

    Come on; not everybody recognizes hyperbole in this case.

    Two eyewitnesses, confession not required and in fact irrelevant. This is true of every crime subject to physical – not necessarily capital – punishment.

    On the other hand, the questioning of the witnesses was quite stringent. It was done with each witness in isolation, by the court and not by any attorneys.

    If someone actually told you differently, I would be glad to send you the accurate sources.

  5. captain*arizona Avatar
    captain*arizona

    trump is a populist. ayn randist free trader movement conservatives have destroyed the economic well being of their social conservative base.

  6. Man Mountain Molehill Avatar
    Man Mountain Molehill

    Christers –

    Your choice will be between Trump and Hillary. No matter how much you disdain Trump, Hillary will be infinitely worse. Unless you’re hoping she’s really the anti-Christ and will usher in the Millenium.

    Trump isn’t Christian enough for you? Tough. Be Christian in your own life, to think that Christian values should be imposed by government is both a corruption of Christianity and of the founding principles of the U.S.

  7. Man Mountain Molehill Avatar
    Man Mountain Molehill

    How will you know when Trump is Christian enough?

    Does he hand out free Trump Snakes at his next campaign rally? Speak in tongues? Walk around the National Cathedral on his knees while flagellating himself? Heal the sick? Turn water into Trump Wine? walk on water? Walk on wine? What?

  8. Simon Avatar

    great unknown,

    I was explaining how the death penalty requirement was abrogated. It has been a long time but it was explained to me roughly that way in a Talmud class by a Rabbi of the Chicago Sanhedrin. He held the class every Saturday in his home.

    And yes. Throwing in “confession” was gratuitous.

    For more civil matters like divorce you are correct.

  9. Simon Avatar

    MMM says:

    Trump isn’t Christian enough for you? Tough. Be Christian in your own life, to think that Christian values should be imposed by government is both a corruption of Christianity and of the founding principles of the U.S.

    I make that very point in my latest post:

    http://classicalvalues.com/2016/05/the-revenge-of-the-oppressed/

  10. Man Mountain Molehill Avatar
    Man Mountain Molehill

    Simon –

    Seems like, in the course of 5776 years Jews have learned to be pragmatic about their taboos and strictures. Wish I could say the same about some other religions around here *coughislamcough*

  11. Man Mountain Molehill Avatar
    Man Mountain Molehill

    A Trump presidency is vastly more likely to leave Christians alone than a Hillary one.