Have Evangelicals Destroyed Christian Morality in the US?

[Skwim]

I don't see evangelicalism doing much of anything except making noise. It's their métier. According to the graphic here, it comprises only about a quarter of all faiths and like all the categories except for one, is declining in membership percentage, although rather insignificantly.

So many people these days find that they disagree with what passes for core Christian values now -- anti-choice, anti-LGBT rights, anti-evolution, anti-climate change, pro prosperity gospel, and even willing to condone such evils as racism, sexism, sexual molestation, wealth inequality, and so forth if it is politically expedient to do so.

Personally, I don't believe anti-choice, anti-LGBT rights, anti-evolution, anti-climate change, are representative of core Christian values. I know the Lutheran church, the United Church of Christ, and the Episcopal church are now marrying homosexuals, and the United Methodist Church is seriously considering doing the same. Plus, a host of denominations now affirm LGBT rights. The Presbyterian Church, Unitarian Universalists, United Church of Christ, and both Conservative and Reform Judaism support abortion rights with few or no limits. (The Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church and Methodist Church all support abortion rights, but with some limits.) As for evolution, the United Church of Christ, United Methodist Church, Presbyterian Church, Judaism, Catholicism all accept evolution; moreover, 50% of the American population accepts it. So if anything, the core Christian values regarding these issues has shifted considerably.

So, I don't see evangelicals destroying Christian morality at all. Christian morality, specifically where it concerns LGBT and abortion rights is making a huge 180, and, IMO, for the better.

.


.​

 

[sealchan]

Colorado Springs, where I live, is the home of over 300 Christian non-profit "ministries", including Focus on the Family. Focus on the Family is a large Evangelical organization founded by James Dobson that, among other things, seeks to influence politics in the US on all levels. It is especially notorious for its attacks on the rights of LGBT folks, but its activism doesn't stop there. It pushes a broad social and political agenda.

Some long time ago, I came across a chilling quote of Dobson's in the local newspaper. It was from around the time when he founded Focus on the Family. I can no longer recall the exact words he used but I believe this is an accurate paraphrase:

"People have got it wrong. They think Christian morals are about old ladies being nice, sweet, treating everyone fairly. But that's only the velvet glove of Christianity. We are going to show people the iron fist. We are going to change how people view Christianity. We are going to make sinners fear us."​

Now, I don't suppose everyone who is younger than about 40 these days is fully aware of how Christianity and Christian morals were most often thought of by most people back before James Dobson and other Evangelical leaders changed the public perception of the religion. However, I've heard more than one person my own age or older speak with regret about the "old days".

You see, back in the old days, the most popular view was that Christians -- if and when they lived up to their ideals -- had exemplary morals. In fact, it was not uncommon to think and speak of "true Christians" as the most moral people in any given community -- even the most moral people possible.

To call someone a "True Christian" in most communities was to say in effect that they treated everyone, regardless of their background (such as race, social and economic class, religion, etc) with fairness, dignity, and respect. It was to say that they were a gentle person who rigorously avoided unnecessarily hurting anyone, who readily forgave any slights against themselves, who ever sought to see the best in others (even people considered grievous sinners), and who strove to be the most humane person they themselves could be.

And that was just the start of it. In the popular imagination, a true Christian was the peak, the acme of human moral excellence. The phrase, true Christian, even at times was applied to people who were not Christians, as in, "He's Jewish, but he's more of a True Christian than most Christians".

Of course, there were people who didn't hold such a positive view of Christian morals, but they seemed to me a relatively small minority at the time. The main criticism you heard of Christians was that they didn't always live up to their ideals, not that their ideals were bad or evil.

I think it's very different today. The custom of praising someone for being a true Christian is almost unheard of now. So many people these days find that they disagree with what passes for core Christian values now -- anti-choice, anti-LGBT rights, anti-evolution, anti-climate change, pro prosperity gospel, and even willing to condone such evils as racism, sexism, sexual molestation, wealth inequality, and so forth if it is politically expedient to do so. Political power at all cost. That's what Christianity -- in moral terms -- has come to mean for so many people today.

I think Evangelicals -- the folks who by all accounts led this change -- were deeply unwise to do so. I suspect that the coming years will see interest in their brand of Christianity wane with most morally healthy people while it yet increases with the morally insane.

But what do you think?

For further reading: The Death of Christianity in the US. An angry, but I think fairly accurate condemnation of today's Evangelical values.

I'm currently studying the Gospel of Matthew in detail and have formulated a hypothesis that I will be testing. It creates something of a hierarchy regarding the teachings of Jesus and it goes something like this:

1. Jesus teaches us that it is our psychology which we must address, not the actions of others; addressing our psychology will take care of our actions

2. The three temptations Jesus experienced are the three greatest sins:

• Giving into the fear of unmet needs or desires
• Giving into the fear of death
• Giving into the thirst for power

3. The Beatitudes or principles of psychological attitude a Christian is to practice and cultivate (paraphrased)

• Avoid materialism
• Be open to loss and grief
• Be strong within yourself but do not seek to express power over others
• Be focused on righteousness (hunger and thirst for it, not for needs and desires)
• Be merciful (compassionate)
• Be sincere, honest and direct (pure of heart) and not try act on a hidden motive or a hidden desire to manipulate
• Seek peace and do not try to win a battle or disagreement, dialog and listen
• Do these things in Jesus' name and if criticized, know that you are blessed

If this hierarchy is at all true, then a lot of people who call themselves Christian are in some serious trouble.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

View attachment 20203

But, Jesus, everyone at the wedding you catered got completely trashed.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Have Evangelicals Destroyed Christian Morality in the US?

The status of Christianity in America and perhaps elsewhere has been significantly damaged by American conservative politics of the last few decades. Perhaps that has been the most significant factor powering the decline of those self-identifying as Christians while the "nones" continue to grow. Millennials and Generation Z seem to find Christianity increasingly unappealing.

 

[Mister Emu]

Of course, there were people who didn't hold such a positive view of Christian morals, but they seemed to me a relatively small minority at the time. The main criticism you heard of Christians was that they didn't always live up to their ideals, not that their ideals were bad or evil.

I think it's very different today

I would suggest that is as much to do with a segment of society's changing view of Christian morality as with any change in Christianity itself. You used to be able to believe that what goes on in a bedroom isn't really your business but you don't think society should give its imprimatur to a homosexual relationship without being called a horrible nazi monster bigot. Now that is an evil, regressive, stuck in the bronze age moral understanding.

Political power at all cost

This I agree with, politics corrupts. Political leaders realize that you can't run purity tests if you want to be successful, so you back the "best" guy for your position with little regard to what they are personally. Within a democratic system, the individual has to make a choice between actively voting for someone immoral and not standing up to someone whose positions include absolute moral trash. It is a difficult choice, and feels sullying no matter the decision.

I suspect that the coming years will see interest in their brand of Christianity wane with most morally healthy people while it yet increases with the morally insane.

But what do you think?

"Progressive" churches are dying at a far faster rate than more hardline traditional ones. The truth is that religion fills a basic need for most people, and the milquetoast, watered-down, modern churches, the lukewarm, don't satisfy that need by and large. Thus, it will be filled elsewhere.

For further reading: The Death of Christianity in the US. An angry, but I think fairly accurate condemnation of today's Evangelical values.

Liberation theology hypocrite of the highest order. He's not angry that evangelicals sold their soul for politics, he's angry they sold it for the wrong politics.

 

[metis]

The status of Christianity in America and perhaps elsewhere has been significantly damaged by American conservative politics of the last few decades.

As well as their anti-science position, such as claiming that the evolution of life is some kind of scientific hoax, or the stance of many of them denying climate change. But they love their guns, thus picturing Jesus carrying an AR-15 and being a card-carrying member of the NRA.

 

[Akivah]

"People have got it wrong. They think Christian morals are about old ladies being nice, sweet, treating everyone fairly. But that's only the velvet glove of Christianity. We are going to show people the iron fist. We are going to change how people view Christianity. We are going to make sinners fear us."

You see, back in the old days, the most popular view was that Christians -- if and when they lived up to their ideals -- had exemplary morals.

Of course, there were people who didn't hold such a positive view of Christian morals, but they seemed to me a relatively small minority at the time. The main criticism you heard of Christians was that they didn't always live up to their ideals, not that their ideals were bad or evil.

But what do you think?

I think the view of thinking that Christians are tolerant people is only a very recent one, since after WWII and the Holocaust. Throughout Jewish history, we suffered centuries of persecution from so-called good christians. What I find annoying is when I relate some of our history to someone making claims about the alleged superior morals of christians, they will always respond with the line "Those weren't REAL christians". To which I reply, "they were all too real to us".

 

[ChristineM]

Colorado Springs, where I live, is the home of over 300 Christian non-profit "ministries", including Focus on the Family. Focus on the Family is a large Evangelical organization founded by James Dobson that, among other things, seeks to influence politics in the US on all levels. It is especially notorious for its attacks on the rights of LGBT folks, but its activism doesn't stop there. It pushes a broad social and political agenda.

Some long time ago, I came across a chilling quote of Dobson's in the local newspaper. It was from around the time when he founded Focus on the Family. I can no longer recall the exact words he used but I believe this is an accurate paraphrase:

"People have got it wrong. They think Christian morals are about old ladies being nice, sweet, treating everyone fairly. But that's only the velvet glove of Christianity. We are going to show people the iron fist. We are going to change how people view Christianity. We are going to make sinners fear us."​

Now, I don't suppose everyone who is younger than about 40 these days is fully aware of how Christianity and Christian morals were most often thought of by most people back before James Dobson and other Evangelical leaders changed the public perception of the religion. However, I've heard more than one person my own age or older speak with regret about the "old days".

You see, back in the old days, the most popular view was that Christians -- if and when they lived up to their ideals -- had exemplary morals. In fact, it was not uncommon to think and speak of "true Christians" as the most moral people in any given community -- even the most moral people possible.

To call someone a "True Christian" in most communities was to say in effect that they treated everyone, regardless of their background (such as race, social and economic class, religion, etc) with fairness, dignity, and respect. It was to say that they were a gentle person who rigorously avoided unnecessarily hurting anyone, who readily forgave any slights against themselves, who ever sought to see the best in others (even people considered grievous sinners), and who strove to be the most humane person they themselves could be.

And that was just the start of it. In the popular imagination, a true Christian was the peak, the acme of human moral excellence. The phrase, true Christian, even at times was applied to people who were not Christians, as in, "He's Jewish, but he's more of a True Christian than most Christians".

Of course, there were people who didn't hold such a positive view of Christian morals, but they seemed to me a relatively small minority at the time. The main criticism you heard of Christians was that they didn't always live up to their ideals, not that their ideals were bad or evil.

I think it's very different today. The custom of praising someone for being a true Christian is almost unheard of now. So many people these days find that they disagree with what passes for core Christian values now -- anti-choice, anti-LGBT rights, anti-evolution, anti-climate change, pro prosperity gospel, and even willing to condone such evils as racism, sexism, sexual molestation, wealth inequality, and so forth if it is politically expedient to do so. Political power at all cost. That's what Christianity -- in moral terms -- has come to mean for so many people today.

I think Evangelicals -- the folks who by all accounts led this change -- were deeply unwise to do so. I suspect that the coming years will see interest in their brand of Christianity wane with most morally healthy people while it yet increases with the morally insane.

But what do you think?

For further reading: The Death of Christianity in the US. An angry, but I think fairly accurate condemnation of today's Evangelical values.

You wouldn't happen to know if he's made himself very wealthy from his righteous campaigning?

 

[Vouthon]

An interesting poll of Catholics and how they voted was reported in "America" magazine (Jesuit) back last summer, and here's what they found with the Catholic vote (rounded down because I can't remember what the last digit was): 40% voted for Trump; 60% of "white" Catholics voted for Trump; but only 20% of Catholics who went to mass weekly or more voted for Trump (mass is said everyday in most RCC).

There is a similar trend among Catholics over here in France and Britain with regards to far-right nationalist, Eurosceptic parties i.e.

62 per cent of French Catholics voted for Macron | CatholicHerald.co.uk


62 per cent of French Catholics voted for Macron

More than three in five French Catholics voted for Emmanuel Macron in Sunday’s presidential election, a poll has said.

An IFOP poll for Pèlerin/La Croix found 62 per cent of Catholics voted for the independent candidate, with 71 per cent of regular Mass-goers choosing him over right-wing populist Marine Le Pen.

Macron fared slightly worse among “occasionally practising Catholics”, however, with only 54 per cent backing him compared to 46 per cent voting Le Pen.
​

Analysis | Catholics like the European Union more than Protestants do. This is why.

NL& SW-L -Did religion play a part in the Brexit vote?

JG: Yes. If you look at the 2014 European Parliamentary Election Study, in the run-up to the Brexit vote, it’s clear that in the United Kingdom, Catholics were supportive of the E.U., as were minority religions — Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists — whereas Evangelical Protestants were the most critical of the E.U. And a lot of the surveys that were done just before and after the Brexit vote, even though they weren’t very good at identifying different religious groups, found pretty consistently that the more Protestant you were, the more critical you were of the E.U. That may have made the difference: If those Protestants had voted the way the average citizen of the United Kingdom had, Brexit wouldn’t have passed.​

Which is to say, according to the statistical data, the more church-attendant or devout the Catholic, the more likely they are to support pro-EU centrists and liberals as opposed to the far-right, who fare better among Catholics who don't go to church.

In other words, the homilies at mass really must be getting through to some folk.

This is the opposite of what a lot of people think (e.g. that the religiously observant are naturally more right-wing, immigrant-hating, anti-social welfare, nationalistic etc.).

The biggest problem on both sides of the Atlantic is clearly with white, non-church attending "cultural Catholics" who view their religion in terms of heritage rather than belief.

But the interesting thing is that (at least in Britain) if your devoutly Evangelical the opposite applies: your way more likely than the average person to hate the EU. Would I be right in assuming its probably the same with American Evangelicals vis-a-vis Trump?

 

[Twilight Hue]

You wouldn't happen to know if he's made himself very wealthy from his righteous campaigning?

I'm certain that made him a pretty substantial income.

Some older sites says his net worth was around half a million. That's pretty modest and hard to believe for a media driven Christian evangelist. It's hard to find his present net worth actually. Search engines turn up pretty dry. Looks like he's keeping it secret.

 

[74x12]

The irony of your first meme is that if you actually read on in the Bible. The people Jesus fed one time decided they would make Jesus their king by force so He could always feed them that way. So, yes apparently feeding them did make them kind of dependent. Jesus actually ends up having to escape by walking across the lake. The people search for him and find Him, but Jesus knows they only want the materiel blessings. Jesus preaches to them about spiritual things and they all leave.

 

[Politesse]

No, but only because I never acknowledged their moral authority in the first place. There was always something deeply off there, even if it is being unmasked in new ways of late.

I was a (very much closeted) teenager when Matthew Shepard was killed. And I remember quite clearly the response of the teachers at the evangelical-run private school I was attending at that time. In particular, one who solemenly told us that we should be "thankful" for the message of God, given so that Americans would be forced to acknowledge that the "wages of sin is death." Evangelicals have never shied away from cruelty or spite, nor even terrorism, not even against children. Jesus has very clear and good advice at such times:

“No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thorn bushes, or grapes from briers. A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of."​

I would rather turn in my Christian badge altogether than accept that conservative evangelicalism is the moral core of our shared faith. They have virtues of their own, but morality is not among those virtues.

 

[Deidre]

Many/most Christians have no idea who Jesus was, yet they believe they are ''true Christians.'' Jesus wasn't about hate. He did preach some hard truths, he wasn't an ''anything goes as long as you're happy'' kind of person. But, he wasn't about hate.

Dobson is weird AF, and regardless of his religious affiliation, I think he just is creepy. His views on women, alone are enough to make anyone run.

Dobson and Pat Robertson...weird aaaaafffff!! lol

Why do so many weird a** men like these two end up ''representing'' Christianity? A faith that started with a middle eastern Jew, yet these two hate people from the middle east, if you hear them talk. Backward, racist sexist weirdos end up running these mega-churches. WEIRD!!!

 

[Sunstone]

You wouldn't happen to know if he's made himself very wealthy from his righteous campaigning?

Dobson? He lives in a large house in one of the wealthiest gated communities near Colorado Springs. I suppose he has a bit of money to own such a house, but I have no idea how much money. I would not be surprised, however, if Dobson isn't very wealthy. I think he's more interested in power and influence than he is in personal wealth.

 

[osgart]

The Bible is meant for to war with the non believer. Believe or perish. The roots of evangelical intention. It's a blind morality. Blind to what honest people do and think. The evangelicals never waiver from the war. They are militant. Very sincere in one aspect, saving souls to their side.

It's a war of principles, fought ideologically. They always do what they have always done.

Sure there are false evangelicals, but they are outright corrupt.

The true evangelicals have not waivered from their commitment. They honestly believe in what they are doing. And they are very moral in the Christian sense.

They take a grass roots approach.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Colorado Springs, where I live, is the home of over 300 Christian non-profit "ministries", including Focus on the Family. Focus on the Family is a large Evangelical organization founded by James Dobson that, among other things, seeks to influence politics in the US on all levels. It is especially notorious for its attacks on the rights of LGBT folks, but its activism doesn't stop there. It pushes a broad social and political agenda.

Some long time ago, I came across a chilling quote of Dobson's in the local newspaper. It was from around the time when he founded Focus on the Family. I can no longer recall the exact words he used but I believe this is an accurate paraphrase:

"People have got it wrong. They think Christian morals are about old ladies being nice, sweet, treating everyone fairly. But that's only the velvet glove of Christianity. We are going to show people the iron fist. We are going to change how people view Christianity. We are going to make sinners fear us."​

Now, I don't suppose everyone who is younger than about 40 these days is fully aware of how Christianity and Christian morals were most often thought of by most people back before James Dobson and other Evangelical leaders changed the public perception of the religion. However, I've heard more than one person my own age or older speak with regret about the "old days".

You see, back in the old days, the most popular view was that Christians -- if and when they lived up to their ideals -- had exemplary morals. In fact, it was not uncommon to think and speak of "true Christians" as the most moral people in any given community -- even the most moral people possible.

To call someone a "True Christian" in most communities was to say in effect that they treated everyone, regardless of their background (such as race, social and economic class, religion, etc) with fairness, dignity, and respect. It was to say that they were a gentle person who rigorously avoided unnecessarily hurting anyone, who readily forgave any slights against themselves, who ever sought to see the best in others (even people considered grievous sinners), and who strove to be the most humane person they themselves could be.

And that was just the start of it. In the popular imagination, a true Christian was the peak, the acme of human moral excellence. The phrase, true Christian, even at times was applied to people who were not Christians, as in, "He's Jewish, but he's more of a True Christian than most Christians".

Of course, there were people who didn't hold such a positive view of Christian morals, but they seemed to me a relatively small minority at the time. The main criticism you heard of Christians was that they didn't always live up to their ideals, not that their ideals were bad or evil.

I think it's very different today. The custom of praising someone for being a true Christian is almost unheard of now. So many people these days find that they disagree with what passes for core Christian values now -- anti-choice, anti-LGBT rights, anti-evolution, anti-climate change, pro prosperity gospel, and even willing to condone such evils as racism, sexism, sexual molestation, wealth inequality, and so forth if it is politically expedient to do so. Political power at all cost. That's what Christianity -- in moral terms -- has come to mean for so many people today.

I think Evangelicals -- the folks who by all accounts led this change -- were deeply unwise to do so. I suspect that the coming years will see interest in their brand of Christianity wane with most morally healthy people while it yet increases with the morally insane.

But what do you think?

For further reading: The Death of Christianity in the US. An angry, but I think fairly accurate condemnation of today's Evangelical values.

Destroyed Christian morality? No.

Given the credibility their own particular version of vicious, judgmentally sanctimonious Christianity several devastating blows to the head and groin? I'd say so.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

The Bible is meant for to war with the non believer. Believe or perish. The roots of evangelical intention. It's a blind morality. Blind to what honest people do and think. The evangelicals never waiver from the war. They are militant. Very sincere in one aspect, saving souls to their side.

It's a war of principles, fought ideologically. They always do what they have always done.

Sure there are false evangelicals, but they are outright corrupt.

The true evangelicals have not waivered from their commitment. They honestly believe in what they are doing. And they are very moral in the Christian sense.

They take a grass roots approach.

Define "moral in the Christian sense", please? Because as a Christian, I find most self proclaimed evangelicals morally abhorrent.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Personally I think Christianity was destroyed the moment Rome adopted it. Evangelists haven't helped the image of this spiritual war-machine, nor has America's fetish with over-religious presence.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Evangelicals have destroyed Christian morality the same way Disney has destroyed Star Wars and Marvel. With constant pandering to every group possible and forcing politics where it is not suited. It is deplorable at the end of the day and a sad reflection on American life when people who consistently show no morals try to implement the morals they lack into public life.

 

[osgart]

Define "moral in the Christian sense", please? Because as a Christian, I find most self proclaimed evangelicals morally abhorrent.

Those be the false one's.

But guys like David Jeremiaha, are very sincere Christians. I consider him evangelical.