By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Albert Mohler, a prominent evangelical leader, initially criticized Donald Trump, calling him an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity. However, Mohler supported Trump in the 2020 and 2024 elections, citing a pragmatic, utilitarian approach to achieving desired political outcomes, acknowledging the lack of perfect candidates. He contends that this support stemmed from a belief that significant cultural and legislative disruption was needed to preserve conservative values, and that Trump uniquely represented this disruptive force. Mohler further argues that the 2020 and 2024 elections exposed a lack of commitment to core social issues among many Republicans, leading to a “great sifting” within the party.
Read the original article here
Donald Trump’s influence on American Christianity is a complex issue, and it’s tempting to pin the blame for a decline in empathy solely on him. However, a closer examination reveals that the erosion of compassion within certain segments of the Christian community predates his presidency significantly. It’s more accurate to say he exploited pre-existing conditions rather than creating them.
The assertion that Trump’s rhetoric directly teaches Christians to abandon empathy is a simplification of a much larger, more deeply rooted problem. While his divisive language and actions undoubtedly exacerbate existing tensions and polarizations, the lack of empathy within some Christian circles existed long before he entered the political arena. The AIDS crisis, for example, saw a disturbing lack of compassion and support for those afflicted, highlighting a pre-existing tendency towards exclusionary behaviors.
This lack of empathy isn’t solely a political phenomenon; it’s intertwined with broader social and theological trends. The rise of prosperity gospel theology, for instance, prioritizes material wealth as a sign of God’s favor, potentially diminishing concern for the less fortunate and fostering a sense of self-righteousness. This focus on personal gain rather than selfless service could arguably undermine the core principles of Christian charity.
Trump’s appeal to a specific segment of the Christian population isn’t about teaching them something new, but rather about validating existing beliefs and prejudices. His rhetoric often reinforces existing biases, providing a platform for those who already feel disenfranchised or threatened. This validation might inadvertently encourage a disregard for those deemed “outsiders” or “enemies.”
It’s also important to acknowledge that not all Christians support Trump, and to assume otherwise is a harmful generalization. Many Christians actively advocate for social justice and demonstrate empathy towards marginalized groups. Attributing a lack of empathy to an entire religious group is inaccurate and ignores the diversity of beliefs and practices within that community.
Furthermore, the notion of a singular, unified “Christian” perspective is itself flawed. Interpretations of Christian teachings vary widely, leading to diverse approaches to social and political issues. Some emphasize love, forgiveness, and compassion, while others focus on moral absolutes and adherence to specific doctrines.
While Trump’s presidency has undoubtedly heightened political polarization and societal divisions, the lack of empathy within certain Christian circles is a complex issue rooted in long-standing theological and social trends. He didn’t invent this lack of compassion; he merely capitalized on it, providing a convenient vessel for pre-existing anxieties and resentments. Attributing the problem solely to him oversimplifies a multifaceted issue with roots extending far beyond his influence.
The idea of “Christians” as a monolithic bloc with uniform beliefs and behaviors is inaccurate and unproductive. The diversity within Christianity encompasses a spectrum of views on empathy, compassion, and social justice. Attributing the abandonment of empathy solely to Trump ignores the historical context and the complex interplay of religious, political, and socio-economic factors contributing to this issue.
The tendency to view those holding differing perspectives as enemies rather than fellow human beings is a concern transcending religious affiliation. It’s crucial to foster dialogue and understanding to bridge these divides, focusing on shared values and common goals rather than exacerbating existing tensions. Addressing the issue of declining empathy requires a broader, more nuanced approach than simply blaming a single political figure.
The potential for religious beliefs to be manipulated for political gain is a long-standing concern. Throughout history, religious doctrines have been interpreted and employed to justify various actions, some benevolent and others deeply problematic. Understanding this historical context is crucial to analyzing the current situation and preventing future occurrences of faith being used to legitimize harmful actions.
In conclusion, while Donald Trump’s rhetoric and actions may have emboldened those already lacking empathy, the problem itself is far older and more complex than his presidency. Attributing the abandonment of empathy solely to him simplifies a multifaceted issue and ignores the broader historical and socio-theological factors at play. A more nuanced approach, acknowledging the diversity within Christianity and engaging in constructive dialogue, is essential for addressing this significant concern.