I’m not writing this to defend Donald Trump or to minimize the despicable nature of his comments captured on video in 2005. Not a chance.

Nor am I writing this to convince NeverTrumpers to vote for him.

My own wife, Nancy, has told me repeatedly that she could not vote for him, despite the possibility of Hillary getting elected. (Of course, she will not vote for Hillary either.)

Instead, I’m writing this to ask those who once supported Trump, like my highly esteemed, Christian brother Wayne Grudem, a fellow-professor and theologian, why the video tape changed things.

Prof. Grudem wrote, “There is no morally good presidential candidate in this election. I previously called Donald Trump a ‘good candidate with flaws’ and a ‘flawed candidate’ but I now regret that I did not more strongly condemn his moral character. I cannot commend Trump’s moral character, and I strongly urge him to withdraw from the election.”

Certainly, I commend Prof. Grudem for his integrity and for acknowledging what he now feels was an erroneous endorsement of Trump. In fact, just a few days ago, I wrote a piece questioning whether I will endorse another candidate in the future, having previously endorsed Sen. Cruz.

But my issue is simply this: Why the surprise now? Did anyone really think the tape misrepresented who he was in 2005 and who he likely continued to be.? Did any of us think that he didn’t sexualize women, that he didn’t lean into his star power, that he didn’t boast about his many (alleged) sexual trysts? Why the outrage and shock now?

Even if Trump changed in certain ways since 2005 — perhaps he has been more faithful to Melania and more involved with their kids — the character he displayed throughout the election process indicated some very deep, moral flaws, making him the least likely poster boy for the evangelical right.

During the primaries, I issued numerous words of warning and concern about Donald Trump, in writing, on radio, and on video, also making clear that these warnings were in the context of the primaries, when we had other, more viable candidates for president. (Obviously, this was simply my opinion.)

Once it came to Trump vs. Hillary, my posture has been that I cannot vote for Hillary but that Trump could earn my vote, and that remains my position until today.

I would like to be able to vote for him, and I do hope that he will heed the godly advice that is being given to him and learn to humble himself before God and people. But his failings and flaws are such that I still have concerns about helping to elect him as president, despite the dire possibility of a Hillary presidency.

But these are just my personal opinions, and I do not write this to persuade or to influence. My purpose in writing is to ask those who once backed Trump but do so no longer: Why the surprise at his past conduct? Weren’t his weaknesses and flaws shouting aloud to the nation over the last year via tweet and spoken word?

I never for a moment bought into the “Saint Donald” rhetoric, questioning other Christian leaders who embraced him as such. (I don’t mean to deny that he has helped people privately and has a compassionate, caring side. I simply mean that to present him as a wonderfully Christian man is to be self-deceived.)

And I understand the convictions of the NeverTrumpers, although I have never identified with this group. (I once used the hashtag in a tweet but decided not to do so again.)

My issue is with the political leaders and Christian leaders who endorsed Donald Trump and who worked to help elect him but are now distancing themselves from him in shock and dismay. Who did you think you were dealing with?

I know he can be gracious and humble in person, and there are surely many positive qualities about him.

But if you’re going to endorse him, do so with your eyes wide open, or don’t endorse him at all.

The man who once boasted about his adulterous encounters with famous women and who opened a casino with a massive strip club inside but felt he didn’t need to ask God for forgiveness is the man you endorsed for president.

Had he renounced with shame his past life, that would be one thing.

Had he not insulted and degraded his political opponents (and other perceived opponents) in the most vile and cruel ways, crushing them at any cost so that he could advance politically, that would be one thing as well.

But he did not renounce his past or change his public ways, because of which, the only issue with the 2005 tape should not have been the tape itself but rather how he responded to it today.

I have colleagues who believe that God is raising up Trump the way He raised up Cyrus, pointing out that Cyrus was used by the Lord although he was a pagan king who did not know the God of Israel (see Isaiah 45:1-6, and note carefully the phrase “although you do not know Me” in v. 5-6).

I have no problem with this concept at all. As the old saying goes, let God be God (in other words, let Him do what He chooses to do in His way and for His purposes). So be it. As I’ve written before, I personally hope it’s true.

But for those who are having cold feet about Trump now, I ask again: Wasn’t it clear from day one that this was the man you were endorsing?

For all of us, then, from here on in, the lesson is simple and clear: Whatever we do, let’s do it with our eyes wide open and with our trust in God alone. (For more from the author of “Why All the Fuss Over the Trump Sex-Comments Tape?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

For many months now, critics of Donald Trump have asked his Christian supporters, “So, you heard about the latest scandal with your candidate? He’s a vulgar, immoral man. How can you possibly vote for him?” His supporters have responded: “Well, look at King David in the Bible. He committed adultery and murder, and God still used him. He was even called a man after God’s own heart! So, if God could use a man like David, he can certainly use Donald Trump.”

To be candid, comparing Trump to David is like comparing apples to Leer Jets — in other words, the two are so different that they’re not even in the same category — but that doesn’t mean that Trump could not learn a lot from David, especially at a time like this, when the Trump campaign is still reeling from the latest scandal, the video tape of Trump with Billy Bush.

But before I explain what David could teach Trump, let me emphasize how inapt the comparison is between them.

First, David was a man after God’s own heart, meaning, a man who loved the character of God and the ways of God and the Word of God, a man who sought to please God, a man who longed deeply for God. None of this, even faintly, can be said of Donald Trump — at least, to this point in his life.

Just consider these words of David, written in the Psalms and see if you can imagine Donald Trump speaking them sincerely, let alone writing them: “The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple; the precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes; the fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the LORD are true, and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, even much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb. Moreover, by them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward” (Ps. 19:7-11).

Or how about these words? “Vindicate me, O LORD, for I have walked in my integrity, and I have trusted in the LORD without wavering. Prove me, O LORD, and try me; test my heart and my mind. For your steadfast love is before my eyes, and I walk in your faithfulness. I do not sit with men of falsehood, nor do I consort with hypocrites. I hate the assembly of evildoers, and I will not sit with the wicked. I wash my hands in innocence and go around your altar, O LORD, proclaiming thanksgiving aloud, and telling all your wondrous deeds” (Ps. 26:1-7).

Shall I quote hundreds of other verses like this, verses which Trump has likely not even read his entire life?

I join many others in praying that Donald Trump would become a man after God’s own heart, but to compare him to David is to miss the point badly.

Second, David’s sin with Bathsheba, committing adultery with this married woman and then having her husband, Uriah, killed, was an absolutely horrific act, one for which he paid dearly. In fact, you could argue that his life was never the same after his sin. But it was the exception to the rule of his life, which is why Scripture said that “. . . David did what was right in the eyes of the LORD and did not turn aside from anything that he commanded him all the days of his life, except in the matter of Uriah the Hittite” (1 Kings 15:5).

In the case of Trump, ungodly behavior has been the pattern of his life, the rule rather than the exception, something for which he was known and of which he was proud. Again, the comparison breaks down dramatically.

Third, when David was confronted with his sin, he pointed no fingers, offered no justification and did not seek to minimize his guilt. Instead, he confessed his sin in the most humble, broken and contrite terms, pleading for undeserved mercy.

And this is where King David could teach Donald Trump a valuable lesson.

When the video comments were released over the weekend, Trump immediately tweeted out an extremely tepid “apology,” minimizing his guilt, attacking Bill Clinton and apologizing “if anyone was offended.”

This was extremely disappointing, since what matters now is not what he said and did more than a decade ago — is anyone really surprised by that? — but rather how he responds today. That is ultimately how he be will judged and how his supporters will evaluate his character.

A few hours after his tweeted “apology,” he issued a more substantial apology on video, repudiating his 11-year-old comments but still pointing a finger at former president Bill Clinton.

I would encourage Mr. Trump to get on his knees, all alone, to take out his favorite Bible, and to read Psalm 51 out loud. (Remember: This is the man who said publicly that he didn’t feel the need to ask forgiveness.) Let him read these words of repentance written by David after he was confronted by the prophet Nathan about his adultery and murder.

David pointed the finger at himself alone, stating, “Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight” (Ps. 51:4), and he didn’t minimize his sin: “For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me” (Ps. 51:3).

He also recognized how utterly polluting his sin was, pleading with God to cleanse him: “Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin! . . . Hide your face from my sins, and blot out all my iniquities. Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me” (Ps. 51:2, 9-10).

Americans are a forgiving people, also tending to side with the victim, and given the media’s frenzied attacks on Trump now, he could easily be perceived as the victim rather than as the womanizing victimizer of the past — but only if he humbles himself deeply.

So here’s what he must do (maybe even in the debate tonight?). With heartfelt contrition, he must restate how utterly ashamed he is of his past transgressions, which he does not minimize or deny, he must say that he has asked God to forgive him, asked his family to forgive him and asked his supporters to forgive him.

Then he must reaffirm that although that is the man he once was — and he is ashamed of it — that is not the man he now is, as his family and friends can attest. And because he has done wrong in the past, he is the ideal person to do what is right in the future, having learned from his errors. He can be the poster boy of reformed behavior!

And he must do this without comparing his sins to the even worse sins of Bill Clinton and without, for the moment, talking about the campaign.

There will still be several weeks to promote his campaign agenda and, when he is criticized, to expose the media’s hypocrisy, covering for Bill Clinton (and Hillary Clinton) while crucifying him. But now, let him act in the spirit of Psalm 51. Whether he wins the election or not, he will be a better man for it, and the nation will be the better for it as well.

And David would surely tell him, “Whatever you do, don’t let pride dictate your actions. In this case, it could be the difference between the White House and a failed campaign, if not between life and death.” (For more from the author of “What King David Could Teach Donald Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Should Christians get behind Donald Trump?

As I’ve demonstrated here, on every criterion of politics, it seems to me that electing Donald Trump is less dangerous to the preaching of the gospel, the safety of Christian institutions from colleges down to the family, and the lives of unborn children. We don’t have to believe the claim that he’s even a “baby Christian” to recognize that this is true. Winston Churchill wasn’t any kind of Christian, but he defended our institutions and our freedoms, and that was all we needed. It is all the church ever needs. Given our own failure to evangelize the culture, it may be more than we deserve.

But aren’t Christians all about asking God for exactly that — more than we deserve? If it sounds like I’m saying that the election of Donald Trump might be a moment of unmerited grace for the United States of America. … Yes, given the only live alternative, that is exactly what I mean.

I think that some Christian resistance to backing this candidate comes down to simple distaste — some of it justified. This is a man with multiple divorces, a flashy and hedonistic lifestyle, a penchant for juvenile insults — the list could go on and on. It can wear down the soul just to think about it, and that’s for a simple reason: It’s gossip. The sins of other people aren’t meant to be fodder for our spiritual reflection, though the devil tells us otherwise. The flaws that matter in a political leader are those that connect to his likely performance in office, compared to the real-world alternatives. When we say we prefer the hard-drinking, foul-mouthed, racist agnostic Winston Churchill, we mean compared to Adolf Hitler. It’s nonsense to line up every leader next to Jesus or even our ideal politician. I promise you, they will all fall far short.

Besides, there’s a long history of Christians humbly setting aside their craving for a fully admirable leader, in recognition of a stark reality: In a fallen world, we are subject to violence. Those we are called to protect, from our own children to those in the wombs of desperate strangers, demand that we find a way to defend them. If we look at the sword which God has left in our path, and sniff that it isn’t shiny enough or might be caked with mud, and leave the innocents to suffer — make no mistake, we will answer for it.

Do Not Put God to the Test

The early Church is a good guide for this. For centuries, Christians had suffered hideously — being hunted like animals by the Roman secret police, then rounded up and killed in gruesome ways in the Colosseum as public entertainment. Many thousands were skinned alive, hanged, burned, or torn apart by animals, to the cheers and jeers of the crowd. Many more renounced their faith to save their lives, then eked out stolen decades haunted by guilt — to face an uncertain fate on the day of judgment. We might like to pretend that we would act like heroes or martyrs, but most people don’t. It’s our job to avoid and help others avoid occasions of sin, such as this one. Jesus himself warned us not to put the Lord our God to the test.

As Philip Jenkins documented in his powerful, tragic The Lost History of Christianity, by the year 1000 the majority of Christians on earth lived in the Middle East and Asia. Yet within 200 years those churches had virtually disappeared, ground down by persecution. All that’s left of most of them are a few scattered ruins in deserts, and scraps of bibles found in the lavatories of mosques.

It can happen here. Hillary Clinton and the worldview she represents have promised to make it happen here. What else can you make of her speech to the United Nations, where she said that for women to enjoy their fundamental rights, guaranteed by the government, Christian beliefs on abortion would have to change?

Is that any different from Diocletian decreeing that we must worship the emperor? Obama’s number two lawyer already told the Supreme Court that churches which don’t perform same-sex marriages will have to face crippling taxes. We can’t say we haven’t been warned.

Constantine

When the pagan warlord Constantine came to power in 312, he rallied support from Christians by revoking their persecution. For the first time in hundreds of years, the church could operate in the open. Constantine himself remained religiously ambiguous, only accepting baptism on his deathbed — once he’d already committed the many sins he thought he would need to, to keep his throne. He saw one of his sons, Crispus, as a political rival and had him cruelly executed. He did not move to create an ideal Christian society; slavery remained perfectly legal. So did the exposure of unwanted infants. Constantine let passersby who rescued such infants claim them and sell them as slaves. The poor were taxed cruelly, and the sons of army veterans were forcibly conscripted as soldiers themselves.

Perfectionist Christians, who demanded the kingdom of heaven on earth, or felt a profound distaste for this ruthless autocrat, might have held themselves aloof and refused to work with Constantine — as one sect, the Donatists did. They scorned the prayers of “imperfect” Christians, and removed themselves to live in “pure” communities. But the vast majority of Christians, including the hundreds of bishops who had remained faithful under persecution, looked instead to Constantine with gratitude as a gift from a loving God. The early Christian poet Lactantius wrote this hymn of praise:

We should now give thanks to the Lord, Who has gathered together the flock that was devastated by ravening wolves, Who has exterminated the wild beasts which drove it from the pasture. Where is now the swarming multitude of our enemies, where the hangmen of Diocletian and Maximian? God has swept them from the earth; let us therefore celebrate His triumph with joy; let us observe the victory of the Lord with songs of praise, and honor Him with prayer day and night. …

Constantine’s Council Gave Us the Creed

The bishops were more than grateful. They were downright cooperative, allowing Constantine to summon a church council to resolve controversies over the divinity of Christ. He paid for the bishops’ travel and gave the keynote speech at the council’s opening — then used the force of law to enact its decisions. It was this council, held in Nicaea, that gave us the formula still recited by well over a billion Christians: the Nicene Creed.

Since the church is the means of salvation, its first duty, after faithfulness, is self-preservation. I cannot think of a less loving or less Christian thing to do than to willfully raise the risk of a persecution that might lead souls to hell. If we do that out of distaste, to keep our hands “clean,” or to keep up the federal funding for our favorite government program, we are failing as Christians. I for one don’t wish to hear on the Last Day these words: “I was persecuted, since you did not protect me.” (For more from the author of “If We Reject Trump, We May Be Inviting Persecution” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.