Elizabeth Spiers: It’s not Christianity in any real theological sense, and the kind of compassionate Christianity Liz talks about has zero appeal for them. It would strip them of their self righteous determination to punish others for perceived sins and would require sacrifices they don’t want to make

I think this piece wildly misunderstands the reason why white conservative Christians (Evangelicals in particular) need to pretend Trump is Christlike and why they’re so hateful toward women and minorities.

What is the point of this bizarre wishcasting www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...

They believe in a bastardized version of Christianity that’s reverse engineered from their biases. It does not teach compassion but gives them permission to judge people they don’t like and punish them for deviations from conservative norms. It has never been rooted in service to others

The proposition Liz makes, which does strike me as a wishcasting, is that these people totally reform their understanding of Christianity which they have no desire to do and won’t do.

Instead they cherry pick and misinterpret Bible verses that give them permission to harm others. When they talk about freedom, they mean freedom to do harm and control others, not individual freedom to make your own choices. If they didn’t they’d view bodily autonomy, for example, as sacrosanct.

The kind of Christianity they practice is uniquely American, socially regressive, and conflates a jingoistic and shallow Patriotism with a god ordained national destiny

It’s not Christianity in any real theological sense, and the kind of compassionate Christianity Liz talks about has zero appeal for them. It would strip them of their self righteous determination to punish others for perceived sins and would require sacrifices they don’t want to make

In their narrative they need to portray Trump as god ordained because he represents a powerful Christian nationalist state. Some Trumpists know he’s not a Christian but refer to him as a “flawed vessel” for God’s will to be done.

If this strikes you as bending over backwards to justify something shitty, let’s just say they’re well practiced at backbends and have executed the same kind of maneuvers to bash LGBTQ people, justify racist behavior, strip women of healthcare, and punish the poor for their poverty

You can’t separate the bigotry and need to torment others in order as a show of power and supposedly superior moral authority from this kind of American Christianity. Those things are the entire appeal.

a lot of Xians are horrible people Signed, A transracial adoptee raised by white jesus people (minister/missionary household) in white jesuslandia (with a five year stint in their Nigerian mission field)

amen

Yes. That’s how it strikes me (all of it). A form of bastardised Christianity

👏 👏 👏 I’m driving through Arkansas right now and all the Christian symbols I see here (and they are EVERYWHERE) speak to me in the exact way you have outlined in this thread

I still don’t understand how or why Bari W did a multi part podcast series on how JK was “wrongly maligned as a transphobe”, when JK is very clearly anti-trans.

They're both bad people.

God would’ve picked a better vessel and they know that. He acts as a false prophet.

He fits the description of the Anti-Christ all too well by their Left Behind addled standards... and yet they raise him up.

I don't know about this... can you point to a time in history when an explicitly Christian society lived up to these ideals? Otherwise it feels like a No True Scotsman fallacy. From the outside, it looks like internecine religious disagreement 🤷🏻‍♀️

I commend anyone whose personal relationship with Jesus leads them to more kindness, but using Christian as a synonym for good has... a lot of issues, among which historical precedent is one

My Dad was a pastor and I went to Bible College and was even the freshman class chaplain there - these are my references for saying I agree with you completely.

There’s never been an time when it did. That’s not an argument I’m making. I just think the white Evangelicalism movement here is better explained by American power dynamics than anything in the Bible.

Sure, but you could make that argument about any era and social context for Christianity. I'm not saying the American Christian right isn't toxic, just gently pushing back on the instinct to call it "not really Christianity." Like the Crusaders were Christians! and mass murderers and pogromists

To be more specific it’s not the Christianity they *say* they practice. Lotta people with “love thy neighbor” in their bios have happily told me to get raped because they don’t like my politics.

And as an atheist who grew up Evangelical, i think you know I don’t exactly romanticize it

As a longtime follower/reader I give you all the benefit of the doubt, and I see what you’re getting at—but FWIW I had the same reaction as Talia to “bastardized version of Christianity” and “not Christianity in any real theological sense” and I suspect many other progressive Jews would too.

Lotta people view the ultimate act of love as keeping other people out of an eternity of hellfire, via their very specific definitions of sin. I don't think arbiting theology is a useful approach -- it's a dual edged sword for one thing!

I'm not; i don't care about the theology. I'm just pointing out the difference between what they say they believe and what they do and prioritize, and the real reasons they identify with Christianity.

Talia's right. The definition of Christian love to many evangelicals is telling your loved ones "the truth" no matter how harmful it is. To an evangelical, affirming their gay or trans child, for instance, is hatred. Because you're ensuring they go to Hell. And what loving parent would do that?

1) what @swordsjew.bsky.social is saying. 2) @www.bugbeardispatch.com has written about violent Christian love and how it is rationalized, as an act of rel practice. 3) the implication of bad or wrong Christianity umdrrmines any/all discussion of what they are doing and impacts.

Yep. For some varieties of Christianity, to be a good Christian is to be a bad person religiondispatches.org/christian-na...

Christian Nationalism is Authentically Christian — And According to a New Poll Most White Evangelicals are Supportersreligiondispatches.org When I attended K-12 evangelical Christian schools in the 1980s and 1990s, we didn’t call ourselves Christian nationalists; we just called ourselves Christians. As the pious Christians we were (compel...

I mean, for most of the history of Christianity the Bible and services were explicitly in a dead language most parishoners wouldn't have been able to speak. By design, Christianity has always had very little to do with the Bible.

Yeah, which is an important point. I think there are at least some reasons still to see Trumpism as somewhat distinct, and not just because he's that much MORE of an asshole than Bush or Reagan. It's personal in a different way, and lacks the (faux) pietism of prior movements.

It's also tied up in much more New Age-y weirdness than anything like an orthodoxy, and much more flexible around what had at least been, for a long time, religious taboos.

When you mix church and state, you don't rub the best parts of the church off on the state, you rub the worst parts of the state off on the church.

All religions can be used to justify whatever the priors of the religious are, to be sure, but things like prosperity gospel are a particularly stark demonstration of an absolute perversion of the clear meaning of the religious texts that seems especially American.

I think that the American version of Calvinist Christianity adds an extra layer of hypocrisy armor to religious ethics. People have already gone thru the sorting hat, the behavior of the elect is by definition excusable because they are destined to be saved, the non-elect are clearly damned.

Looking at the Supreme Court, it is pretty easy to see that Catholics are far from immune from motivated interpretations of doctrine, and the Jesuits actually have a goal oriented logical argumentation framework that serves as training for goal oriented constitutional interpretation.

It seems that maybe a more nuanced way to phrase this is that it is a practice of Christianity that is primarily grounded in political dominance rather than theological orthodoxy. Because they certainly are Christian, but also seem to actively disavow basic Christian beliefs.

Just finishing Tim Alberta’s book on evangelicals and their march towards extremism and power. Eye-opening. He grew up in an evangelical church, father was a pastor and is completely dismayed at what it’s become. I recommend it if you’re interested and haven’t already read it.

Oddly I have found those who moan the loudest about applying the No True Scotsman argument to Christianity are pagans! (Said quietly: a lot of pagans are basically Xtians who added a goddess into the roster.)

I think the notion of a “Christian society” is a fallacy. Christianity in its roots was about personal choices, not the imposition of moral or lifestyle standards on others or on society. Kindness, selflessness, generosity, humility—it was all about introspection and the creation of a better self…

…and this, to be blunt, is why we suck at it and why its politicization as a cudgel for beating others into conformity is so inevitable. And why that cudgel is so predictably wielded by those squealing “patriotism!” and decrying our society’s fall from a grace it never had.

Dan, I don’t think this holds up. In Acts, we learn when a head of household converted, that meant the family and servants did too. The center of early Christian life was the Assembly, a social body. Christ came to fulfill Scripture & the moral law was full of social obligations.

I’m referring to a full-blown society, not just social constructs. This would include both communities and institutions. It’s the institutionalization aspect that makes the notion of a “Christian society” an oxymoron.

so like... the vatican controlling countries... the holy roman empire... that doesnt count? what about vatican city? does this apply only to christianity or

That’s what I mean, actually. The core of Christianity was about changing oneself internally. Every attempt that’s ever been made to institutionalize it has resulted in some of the most abusive, evil, outright corrupt societies in history. Apologies if I’ve been confusing.

It's not that Christianity isn't societable, it's that the society it works for is not a worldly one, and not one of this life. Christian Nationalists are obsessed with worldly power of the here and now in a way that is deeply un-Christian.

It isn’t “societable” in any way that is meaningful to any discussion of human societal constructs, so I’m not sure why you think that observation about some heavenly kingdom is relevant here.

Because Christian Nationalists are obsessed with worldly power of the here and now in a way that is deeply un-Christian? Seems pretty relevant to me.

The entire context here is human society in this universe. Discussions of what eternal life might look like are way outside the point here. You seem to think it was important to defend Christianity as a societable framework.

Post