I want to consider the strong support that Donald Trump enjoys among Evangelical Christians. And I think that in order to address it productively we’ll need to set aside two common approaches to religion. One is the approach of total deference, which takes people’s religious beliefs and feelings as a given, beyond any question or scrutiny. This approach treats all religious views as equally acceptable and valid, and leaves little room for critique or dialog.
At the same time we’ll need to avoid the opposite error of just bulldozing religion. We should avoid simply judging everything by own own personal or cultural or philosophical standards, with no regard for whether different standards are being professed by those we’re judging.
A more productive approach is to engage with religious viewpoints just as we engage with other political and ideological viewpoints. So that on the one hand religious people get credit for truly believing what they say they believe, and disagreeing with you where they disagree with you. But this does not shield them from having to answer for things like whether different stated beliefs are really compatible with one another or with their asserted sources. Which in the case of Evangelical Christianity brings us to the Bible.
Now it’s a delicate thing to argue with someone about their own scriptures. But it’s at least somewhat less delicate here, given the way that Evangelicals explicitly define themselves by their embrace of the Bible as a message from God, and their belief that it can and should be read and understood by individuals. In practice individuals interpret the Bible in radically different ways, of course. But it seems to me that while the biblical texts are very pliable they are not infinitely pliable. On at least some important matters they really do point in certain directions rather than others.
This all deserves more careful treatment than it’s getting here, and that’s on the way. But I want to anticipate a bit, and present a few important pieces that I think can stand alone.
First, the Bible is tractable. Because once we entertain the believer’s embrace of the Bible as some sort of divine message this imposes a requirement to read that message in some sort of coherent way. And this simple requirement quickly makes the Bible more manageable. It changes from an undifferentiated mass of texts, that can be cited at random to support or oppose almost any point, into an organized progression, with some parts taking interpretive priority over others, and at least some level of overall coherence emerging.
The basic distinctions that emerge are, first, between the texts known as the Old Testament and those known as the New Testament, and second, to elevate the words of Jesus within the New Testament. And crucially these distinctions emerge from the texts themselves rather than being brought in from outside. The Christian trying to read the Bible as a coherent divine message encounters multiple points of contradiction between the Testaments, and explicit New Testament claims to superseding the Old, with the result that Old Testament passages can no longer stand alone as justification.1 The New Testament must be consulted, and must take precedence if there’s conflict. And when consulting the New Testament, the words of Jesus within it are held up as central.2
This point enables the others. In considering how Evangelicals read the Bible we begin with a big mass of texts that can be cited on many sides of many issues—but then we give interpretive priority to a much smaller set of those texts, and that smaller set often speaks in a clearer and more unified voice. We move away from seeing an inscrutable holy book that believers can cite in any way they wish, and instead focus on 27 short letters and narratives that are easy to read, and that on at least some important matters, including matters with political relevance, seem quite easy to understand.
With this in mind I want to examine three points on which I think any coherent reading of the Bible does indeed point in a particular direction, and it’s a direction deeply at odds with supporting Donald Trump.
First is the Bible’s deep concern for vulnerable people like orphans, widows, immigrants, and the poor. Both Testaments are filled with passages as emphatic as these:
Do not mistreat or oppress a foreigner, for you were foreigners in Egypt. Do not take advantage of the widow or the fatherless. If you do and they cry out to me, I will certainly hear their cry.
Do not take advantage of a hired worker who is poor and needy, whether that worker is a fellow Israelite or a foreigner residing in one of your towns.
Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow.
Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God.
Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.
Continue to remember those in prison as if you were together with them in prison, and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves were suffering.
If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person?3
As forceful as such passages are, I grant that they may not dictate a full set of conclusions on social spending or immigration policy. Other considerations inside and outside of the Bible may well come into play. But still I think we can say that for any political view to be coherently biblical it must be marked by deep concern for vulnerable people.
Such concern does not mark Donald Trump. As a general matter he seems remarkably empty of empathy and compassion. As a wealthy developer he routinely cheated struggling workers. And—as absurd as this is—the man actually stole money from kids with cancer.
In office Trump has extended those patterns and shown no concern for vulnerable people. The old and the sick have been left to die of COVID. Poor disaster victims have died of neglect. A staggering 34 million Americans have lost their health insurance.4 Trump closed the door on 12,000 refugees, and has torn thousands of immigrant children away from their families. He is currently fighting to kick 700,000 of the very poorest Americans off of food stamps. And now with temporary eviction bans expiring and no federal action expected, we could see as many as 28 million Americans evicted in the coming months. Trump’s concrete actions and inactions almost always serve the rich and powerful while either ignoring people in need or actively making their suffering worse. Trump quite directly does the opposite of what the Bible commands.
Next consider issues of violence, coercion, and the state. Trump consistently admires the use of force, at home and abroad, by police and troops and (the right sort of) civilians. He adores strength, power, domination, and revenge. But while Trump attributes his “eye for an eye” mentality to the Bible, it’s simply not what results from any coherent reading. It can only be cherry-picked from the books of Moses by rejecting the words of Jesus:
You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.5
And Trump very much aligns himself with what we might call Christian nationalism. This involves seeing the United States as a Christian country, and believing that biblical imperatives should guide our politics.
There’s a problem here for Evangelicals, though. Because this Christian nationalist view is itself deeply unbiblical.
Granted, plenty of nationalist-friendly texts can be picked from the Bible. But without exception they come from the Old Testament rather than the New. This is one of the clearest points on which the New Testament conflicts with the Old, and therefore must supplant it for Evangelicals. In the Old Testament God’s people are a nation. God commands them to wage war, gives them land, and gives them laws. But then there is a decisive break, and in the New Testament God’s people are exiles and strangers scattered among the nations, called to suffer patiently, love their enemies, and turn the other cheek.6 The New Testament has no concept of a Christian nation, or of Christians in any way using force to coerce non-Christians.7 So Christian nationalists can only christen the flag or legislate the Bible by disobeying the Bible.
Lastly we need to take a longer look at Trump himself. As a general matter there’s room to argue about whether Christian voters should try judging the moral and spiritual lives of politicians. But in the context of Evangelical support for Trump we’re talking about a movement that’s long prided itself on doing just that, and about a politician who loudly calls himself a Christian and panders to Christians.8 So let’s consider just a few aspects of Trump’s life, which will be enough to paint a vivid picture.
First, Trump lies with astounding ease and frequency. However much slack we give him for spin or sarcasm or exaggeration, he’s still lied thousands upon thousands of times since taking office. And this doesn’t sit very well with biblical imperatives about honesty.9
In addition to such prolific lying there’s Trump’s arrogance, anger, and cruelty. He seems about as far as a person can be from biblical ideals like these:
Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.
But now you must also rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips. Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices.
My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry.
Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless.10
This fits into the bigger picture of Trump’s monumental pride. This pride manifests in his constant bragging, his bottomless self-obsession, his unwavering certainty that he’s right, his refusal to ever apologize, and his refusals to listen or read. And such pride is scathingly condemned throughout the Bible.11
Apart from pride, Trump’s greatest passions seem to be greed and lust, neither of which come off well in the Bible.12 And by this point I think we can spot the pattern. Whatever virtues Evangelicals might see in Trump, biblical virtues are generally absent.
With the Bible seeming to indict so much of Donald Trump, both as a person and as a president, what is it that nonetheless inspires such support among Evangelicals?
It’s a complicated question, but I think a big part of the answer is simply the tension between our normal human selfishness and tribalism, on the one hand, and loftier biblical ideals on the other. Evangelicals have high biblical standards but also base human impulses. And in the throes of those impulses they can forget their ideals and act merely as another self-interested identity group, and can try to impose by force aspects of a religion that opposes such force.13
Another part of the answer is that some of the same psychological forces that draw people toward religion can also draw them toward authoritarian or reactionary politics. For example people who are attracted to the idea of an Almighty Father who rules and judges all things can for some of the same reasons be attracted to strongmen and authoritarians. And people drawn to the order and certainty offered by religion can for some of the same reasons want to see more order and certainty imposed on society. And this can happen even when the political leader or movement in question clashes hard with points of biblical clarity.
Realities like these have been leveraged for decades to corral Evangelicals into the Republican Party, and to get them thinking and voting based not on any holistic understandings of their faith or their party, but rather on isolated issues, tribal loyalty, and empty symbolism. The result is a Republican Party that panders to the religious but serves the rich.
So if you’re a Christian reading this and you’ve been supporting Donald Trump I urge you to do some reflecting, and maybe some reading. Look beyond how Trump cheers for your team, and consider how his character and his policies actually match up with your beliefs and your scriptures. There’s always room to debate individual points. But if you try to honestly examine the big picture then I think the answer will become clear.
1) For example at the center of the Old Testament is the law that God gives to the nation of Israel. Moses receives the law, kings obey or forget the law, poets sings praises of the law, and prophets call Israel back to the law. But then in the New Testament Jesus reinterprets the law, Jesus fulfills the law, and Paul preaches freedom from the law. See Matthew 5:17, Matthew 5:21-47, Romans 6:14-15, Galatians 5:18.
2) See Matthew 24:35, Mark 8:38, Mark 13:31, Luke 9:26, Luke 21:33, 1 Timothy 6:3-4, 2 John 9.
3) The passages above are Exodus 22:21-23, Deuteronomy 24:14, Deuteronomy 27:19, Proverbs 14:31, Matthew 25:41-45, Luke 12:33, Hebrews 13:3, 1 John 3:17. See also Deuteronomy 10:18-19, Psalm 82:2-4, Proverbs 29:7, Isaiah 58:3-10, Jeremiah 5:26-29, Zechariah 7:8-10, Malachi 3:5, Acts 20:33-35, James 1:27, James 5:1-5.
4) Synthesizing the data from this and this.
5) Matthew 5:38-44. And note that even the Mosaic “eye for an eye” was about legal punishment rather than personal vindictiveness. See Exodus 21:23-25, Leviticus 24:17-20, Deuteronomy 19:21.
6) See Matthew 5:10-12, Matthew 5:38-44, Matthew 7:13-14, Luke 6:27-30, John 17:14-20, Romans 12:12-21, 2 Timothy 3:12, 1 Peter 1:1-2, 1 Peter 2:11-12, 1 Peter 2:19-21.
7) See John 18:33-36, 1 Corinthians 5:9-13, James 4:4.
8) See 1 Corinthians 5:9-13.
9) See Exodus 20:16, Leviticus 19:11, Psalm 101:7, Proverbs 6:16-19, Proverbs 12:22, 1 Peter 3:10, Revelation 21:8.
10) Ephesians 4:29-32, Colossians 3:8-9, James 1:19, James 1:26.
11) See Psalm 10:2-4, Proverbs 8:13, Proverbs 15:25-33, Proverbs 16:5, Proverbs 16:18-21, Proverbs 27:1-2, Jeremiah 9:23-24, Romans 12:3, Romans 12:16, 1 Corinthians 4:7, Philippians 2:3-4, James 4:6-10. And note that Trump’s refusal to apologize extends all the way to refusing to ask God for forgiveness, which should raise its own issues for Evangelicals.
12) See Exodus 20:14, Matthew 5:27-32, Matthew 6:24-34, Mark 7:21-23, 1 Timothy 6:6-10, Hebrews 13:5.
13) “Beating with a book everyone the book told you to love,” as it’s been described.