Debunking Talking Points of "Evangelicals For Harris"

[Shoshanna]

Debunking the So-Called 'Christian' Talking Points of 'Evangelicals For Harris,' Part One

A newly formed group has made several arguments for why Christians should vote for Harris.
Here's why they're wrong.



By C. Douglas Golden

Sep 07, 2024 06:11 PM4
The following is the first part of a four-part series to be released on consecutive Sundays. This series is exclusive to members of The Western Journal.



It happens every four years: The Democratic Party makes a valiant pitch for faith voters, arguing that the liberal vision for the country is more Christian than the conservative one.



This has intensified over the last three cycles since the Republican nominee has been Donald Trump.



There is, of course, no getting around a very obvious fact that both sides acknowledge: Trump, as a human being, has flaws. We all do, as fallen humanity, but his are especially public.



In 2020, we heard talk of how “devout Catholic” Joe Biden carried a rosary around with him and was a diligent churchgoer — something the media and the Democrats contrasted with Trump’s personal life as often as possible, even as the then-president was a professing Christian who had made strides in publicly demonstrating his belief in the Almighty.



Biden will not be atop the ballot this time, which presents problems for the “Democratic values”-voter push.



This time, however, the campaign seems to be coming from, in large part, evangelical Christians who are either liberals, moderates, or simply NeverTrumpers.



The best-known example of this is arguably the establishment media’s most visible evangelical pundit, The New York Times’s David French, a nominal conservative who penned an Aug. 11 piece titled “To Save Conservatism From Itself, I Am Voting for Harris.”



If the piece was widely mocked (satire site The Babylon Bee: “David French Says To Save Masculinity, He Will Now Transition To Female”), it was also widely read, and it contained most of the common arguments Democrats are using to persuade values voters: the candidates are mostly equivalent in terms of the protection of unborn life (which is to say, one is ineffective, the other deliberately ignores it); populist attacks on government elites have led to strife and social inequity; Trump is singlehandedly responsible for the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, as well an uptick in political violence in general; and current Democrat policies — particularly social harmony and support for Ukraine — more broadly align with Christian values.



French is just one voice in the wilderness, though, and certainly not one willing to organize for Kamala.



That’s where Evangelicals for Harris — a group you’ve probably seen and heard a lot more of, particularly on social media — comes in.



For the most part, Evangelicals for Harris focuses on practical issues that it attempts to imbue with the spirit of Christianity.



That said, it does attempt to cast Harris as a more faithful Christian than her opponent through unsubtle comparison on a page dedicated to the candidate’s “faith story,” which the group says “shaped her into the leader she is today.”



For Kamala, her calling is to public service: “I can trace my belief in the importance of public service back to learning the parable of the good Samaritan and other biblical teachings about looking out for our neighbors — and understanding that our neighbors aren’t just those who live in our ZIP code, but include the stranger, too. Over the course of my career, I’ve always tried to be an advocate for the voiceless and vulnerable …”



Harris’ favorite Bible verse — “We walk by faith and not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7) — recognizes that we don’t have all the answers, but also that we do not face life’s challenges alone. Our loving God is with us. “The God I have always believed in is a loving God.” It is this God in whom Kamala puts her trust.



​God is also with her through her church family. From them she draws strength and feels “grounded in a complex world.” Her church provides Kamala “a sense of community and belonging where we can build lasting relationships and be there for one another in times of need.” Her pastor, the Rev. Dr. Amos Brown, says Harris is there for others: “She is an encourager; she encourages all people regardless of their social station in life.”



But are these truly Christian issues? Does a leader’s character and personal failings automatically make them a worse choice for a Christian who bases their vote, in large part, on faith issues? And, most importantly, is the difference between the two candidates on the issue of unborn life irrelevant?



There are three major flaws in the arguments of Evangelicals for Harris, if we are to take them in good faith — and we will, for the purposes of this series.



They correspond, not unsurprisingly, to those three questions.



The three major flaws in the pro-Harris argument made by Evangelicals For Harris will be covered in the next three installments of this series. Look for part two on Sept. 15, at The Western Journal.



link

[Shoshanna]

Debunking the So-Called 'Christian' Talking Points of 'Evangelicals For Harris,' Part Two

Here's where the "Evangelicals For Harris" argument goes wrong when it comes to upholding biblical principles.



By C. Douglas Golden



Sep 14, 2024 09:40 PM

The following is the second of a four-part series to be released on consecutive Sundays. This series is exclusive to members of The Western Journal.



Part one, which you can read here, stated that there are three major flaws in the pro-Harris arguments made by Evangelicals For Harris. Here is the first of those flaws.



1. Evangelicals For Harris erroneously conflates the government with the family and community — not just as a matter of a social unit, but also as it pertains to biblical edicts.



In the Bible, God makes it clear that we are to love and provide for one another. Charity, compassion, unity, love, support — these are all values we are enjoined, as Christians, to practice.



But we’re enjoined to practice them as individuals, or as members of a family or faith community. Where Evangelicals For Harris goes awry is in taking this not just one step, but one giant leap forward — or, in another light, one giant leap away from the faith.



For instance: If the organization has been able to get away with casting the candidate as a plausible alternative for advancing Christian policy prerogatives, it’s because so little of Harris’ campaign has actually revolved around concrete policy proposals.



She has sought to distance herself from the Biden administration and its works as much as she can — unless, of course, it casts her in a positive light. As for substance, she has promised to give to the neediest among us, assumedly by taking it from the wealthiest, who will not miss it.



In this endeavor, however, it’s worth noting that her sole major substantive proposal to separate the “wealthy” from the money that would pay for this — corporate taxation and new taxes on unrealized capital gains — would not only deal a blow to the economy that would be felt across the board but would also hit small business owners the hardest, experts say.



While this is an economic and not spiritual matter, that’s the problem — when it comes to the biblical case Evangelicals For Harris makes for their candidate, it is the rule rather than the exception.



Not only that, those behind it seem to ignore the fact that, as a historical matter, vague political rhetoric that seems to align with Christian values translates far more poorly into actual virtue when the policies necessary to effectuate it are put into place.



And that’s the root of the problem with Evangelicals For Harris: Rarely does the organization touch upon black-and-white matters of Christian faith, but rather policy initiatives that are theoretically defensible by a single Bible verse or theme, but which produce results that don’t necessarily align with that intention.



There are too many examples to count on Evangelicals For Harris’ social media feed, but one perfectly encapsulates the problem: their use of 1 Timothy 5 to attack a proposal in Project 2025 to eliminate the Office of Head Start, the federally administered childcare program.



Project 2025 would eliminate HeadStart, devastating working communities who rely on it for affordable childcare—especially in rural America. We can’t leave our neighbors out to dry. #HarrisWalz #LaborDay #HeadStart #ChildCare #WorkingParents



— Evangelicals For Harris (@evangels4harris) August 31, 2024



Let’s ignore that this is a misread of 1 Timothy 5:8, which is clear about the role of the family and not society to care for its members, a distinction the organization almost universally blurs.



(“But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever,” the verse said in the English Standard Version.)



If this is the case, as the Project 2025 paper noted, that makes the Office of Head Start “worse than an unbeliever.”



“Head Start, originally established and funded to support low-income families, is fraught with scandal and abuse,” the report noted.



“With a budget of more than $11 billion, the program should function to protect and educate minors. Sadly, it has done exactly the opposite. In fact, ‘approximately 1 in 4 grant recipients had incidents in which children were abused, left unsupervised, or released to an unauthorized person between October 2015 and May 2020.’ Research has demonstrated that federal Head Start centers, which provide preschool care to children from low-income families, have little or no long-term academic value for children. Given its unaddressed crisis of rampant abuse and lack of positive outcomes, this program should be eliminated along with the entire [Office of Head Start].”



Furthermore, a look at the group’s website details a laundry list of how they deliver or propose to deliver for evangelical voters, which scarcely touches upon faith: curbing inflation, increasing wages, proposing an end to “price-gouging,” nominating diverse candidates to fill federal courts, eliminating student debt, enacting gun control, and supporting Ukraine.



You may believe these are wonderful things — and certainly, campaigns make them sound as good as possible. But these are policy prerogatives, not biblical commands, and they so seldom turn out how they’re pitched. Don’t tell that to Evangelicals For Harris or the ticket they support, however:



Our 3rd ad, “The Fruits of the Spirit.”



The Bible says, we shall know Christ’s true followers by their fruits.



Kamala Harris and Tim Walz have made their priority clear—that in America we choose to love our neighbors. #evangelicalsforharris #faithinaction #DNCConvention2024 pic.twitter.com/RSgtIttl4S



— Evangelicals For Harris (@evangels4harris) August 22, 2024



The idea that government intervention forcing this kind of “love [for] our neighbors” on us represents “the fruits of the spirit” as defined in the Bible is bordering on heresy — and, at the very least, is faulty theology of the highest order.



The next two major flaws in the pro-Harris argument made by Evangelicals For Harris will be covered in the next two installments of this series. Look for part three on Sept. 22 at The Western Journal.



link

[Shoshanna]

Debunking the So-Called 'Christian' Talking Points of 'Evangelicals For Harris,' Part Three

Even though you won't hear a recounting of Harris' very human faults in the media, you also won't read a laundry list of them here.



By C. Douglas Golden

Sep 21, 2024 05:10 PM

The following is the third of a four-part series to be released on consecutive Sundays. This series is exclusive to members of The Western Journal.



Part one, which you can read here, stated that “Evangelicals For Harris’s” pro-Harris arguments contain three major flaws. Part two detailed the first of those flaws. Here is the second.



2. No human or government is perfect — and a Christian who wishes to vote for their values is voting for policy, not personalities.



If you’re a conservative, you’ve probably heard the joke a dozen times, at least: “Donald Trump is such a staunch believer in family values, he’s had three of them!”



You don’t need a recounting of Donald Trump’s very human faults here; if you do not know them, you aren’t reading this, because you’ve never seen a computer in your life.



They’re trumpeted from on high by every media establishment outlet — including some which are outright falsehoods.



(There’s also the matter of the bevy of specious charges brought against the former president, but that’s for another day and another fact check entirely.)



But, the fact is, Donald Trump is a sinner — like all of us, including his opponent. Perhaps a more powerful sinner than us. Perhaps a more manifest one than we are. But running against a perfect or divinely deserving human being? Hardly.



Even though you won’t hear a recounting of Kamala Harris’ very human faults in the establishment media, you also won’t read a laundry list of them here. Except for one, at least ascribed to her by “Evangelicals For Harris”: pride in her piety.



In case you haven’t alighted on the book of Luke lately, let me re-relate the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector:



He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.



I’m not certain whether Vice President Harris abides by this lesson, but Mr. French and the people behind the “Evangelicals For Harris” website clearly don’t.



Furthermore, on faith issues where the government does play a role — abortion, religious liberty, the sanctity of marriage, pornography in our public school libraries, indoctrination in the classroom, freedom of speech, parental rights, allowing the horrific practice of “gender transitioning” to be performed on minors — Kamala Harris and Donald Trump stand on two different sides.



I shouldn’t need to tell you which one stands on which.



And then, even if you believe that Trump is profoundly flawed — this writer emphatically does not, but is merely positing a hypothetical — God has used profoundly flawed men, men far more flawed than Trump is, to accomplish wondrous things.



From Jacob obtaining his birthright through deception to the sins of leaders like King David and King Nebuchadnezzar, the world has never been led by men like John Calvin and Billy Graham.



That doesn’t mean that Christians in public life should disregard personalities — but they definitely shouldn’t overlook policies at the expense of them.



This brings us to the most critical point … which will be covered next Sunday in the final installment of this series.



link