« Had Al Mohler gone to Southeastern seminary and not to Southern seminary, what would have become of Southern? | Main | Al Mohler on Heresy: Let’s show humility…sometimes »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Alex Guggenheim

They are obsessed with so-called principle of conscience which is nothing but a cloak for moral narcissism and self-righteous posturing.

With his deficits Donald Trump still has made it clear he will preside from the right and some in the middle not much different than many Republicans that both men have supported in the past.

With Trump's continued articulation regarding his intent to appoint constitutional judges and maintain freedoms for Christians and all Americans and generally form an Administration representative of most conservative values, you cannot convince me this is any longer about ideology or political positions.

I can only conclude this is a war of egos and these men simply cannot acquiesce to a more dominant man.

What is most reprehensible is that these men imagine they have the luxury of thinking about their own selves instead of this nation. They imagine they're righteous posturing, which may enable Hillary to be elected by refusing to vote for Donald Trump and then permit a far-left Supreme Court to come into existence which will stay that way for at least 30 or 40 years effectively destroying any future for traditional America is a superior virtue of which they can be proud.

Actually it takes a great deal more principle to support your party and to realize when you don't get your way your party still needs your support because you still have an opportunity and obligation to influence and have a say in many areas.

These men, instead, will help cut the nose off of the GOP to spite its face and when it bleeds in public, having been defaced, they will think to themselves they have done some noble act. God, truly help us.


There have been a whole lot of people who've claimed to be conservative but were actually just Demlite. They want to grow the government more slowly than the Dems but still grow it. It's about "compassionate conservatism" There are fundamental differences regarding what the actual role/purpose of government is between genuine conservatives and the fake conservatives. Donald Trump is exposing those fault lines.

Scott Shaver

Can sum up a rationale in voting for Trump with 2 simple points:

1. Hillary Clinton

2. Russell Moore

Chicago Parking Lot

Russell Moore once worked for a democrat. Now he has Gabe Lyons and Andy Stanley speaking at ERLC conference. That's enough right there. I forgot he plays footsie with Jonathan Merritt.


Mark Driscoll. They had no problem that vulgarian "pastor". They had no problem partnering with him and bringing his influence into the SBC for young men.

So their position on Trump makes no sense, whatsoever.

Vulgar, arrogant, greedy cheating Reformed pastors are ok?

They are Hypocrites.

Which leads me to believe it is all about establishment power. They know a third party elects Hillary.

Scott Shaver

You are correct Lydia. Duplicity rather than "evangelicals" are the problem.

Scott Shaver

...."IS" the problem.


Morning Lydia,

Your claim that they are hypocrites "might" not have merit.
Just because they "may" have made a mistake with Driscol doesn't necessarily disqualify them from making their point about Trump.

As you know, you have lied in the past. You also know that I have lied in the past. That doesn't mean you are not qualified to make a comment or advise others not to lie. That doesn't make you a hypocrite when you do.

Because they "may" be wrong on whatever position they took with regard to Driscol certainly doesn't make them a hypocrite for their position on Trump.

I think Mohler is a fairly strong conservative. Do you really think he desires a Clinton presidency?

Scott Shaver

Based on 30 years of documented history, Lydia's assessment of "hypocrisy" flies like a lear jet, Eric.

As to Mohler, your willingness to turn a blind eye to that history makes you a sycophant, also unworthy of credibility as to judgement and reality on the ground.

I believer Mohler will continue to do whatever keeps him in a cat-bird seat and broadcasting over the radio/internet/tv


Come on.
You really think Mohler will "sell his soul" (my word not yours) to stay in his "cat-bird seat?

I don't think I said anything to suggest I'm turning a blind eye to history. I also don't think I said anything to suggest I'm a sycophant. I'm not a follower of Mohler or Moore. I may be if i listened to them, just don't listen to them. What I've heard of Mohler leads me to make the statement i did. In that i don't follow him, perhaps he is not as conservative as i assume. In any event, a sycophant...really?

Why do you have to be so combative?

Look back thru the past years and you are mostly combative when replying to me. You will note that i don't reply in kind. There is a reason why, perhaps worth examining.

Scott Shaver


Believe and have watched over the years as Mohler has already "sold his soul".

"Combative"...just because I disagree in principle with folks like you at almost every point?

Yes...mostly combative and until you grow up, or evolve, the sarcasm is likely to continue.....by the way, have a nice day :)

Robert Vaughn

I don't give one hoot who Mohler and Moore are voting for -- or Jeffress or Falwell for that matter! I do not plan to vote for either Trump or Clinton and am comfortable with that choice. I feel like those who tell me that I am helping elect Clinton are using pressure something similar to what Mohler and Moore are doing (albeit from a different angle). I "prophesy" that my not voting for Trump will not help elect Clinton and that all the electoral votes from my state will still go to Trump.

Unlike Mohler and Moore, though, I understand why the Christians in my church and among my friends are voting for Trump and I have no criticism of their choice or their Christianity on that account. Beyond just saying what I am doing, I have no interest in convincing them to do otherwise. I don't mind receiving the same respect.

peter lumpkins

No pressure from this sector, Robert. Vote as you wish. While I often reveal my personal reasoning as to why I'm voting Trump, I do so in the context of continually being told I'm caving into "American politics" and siding up "against" Jesus.

Thus, my reasoning as to why Trump is a better choice than Clinton should be viewed contextually as more a defensive apologia contra Moore & co. who insist people are "selling their soul" than as "pressure" to vote with me as I vote.

Inform the people on the issues, inspire the people to vote according to their understanding of the issues, and trust God for the outcome of the election is what should be the goal of every leader in the SBC and every pastor in every church so far as I am concerned...

Scott Shaver

Ditto here, Robert, as far as political/preference/choice/abstention from process.

Will argue my rationale for not continuing status quo with me own personal choice but, like Pete, have not gotten a memo from Jesus that I'm "siding against Him" in an American presidential election.

Do have notes from Him by proxy in both Old and New Testaments, however, about taking God's name in vain and earthly thrones.


Can anybody imagine if Richard Land used such rhetoric how certain factions would have melted down. If you don't agree with Moore you're against Jesus.


"Your claim that they are hypocrites "might" not have merit.
Just because they "may" have made a mistake with Driscol doesn't necessarily disqualify them from making their point about Trump."

Huh? They "may" have made a "mistake" on Driscoll? I am floored at how long it took them to respond, "Mark who"? Let's just pretend we never partnered with Driscoll or promoted his vulgarity. So...what do you do with the Mahaney "mistake". Innocent children are involved with that one protecting molesters. It is perfectly ok to expect a tad bit of common sense and integrity from folks including pastors. Driscoll was a draw for them.

"As you know, you have lied in the past. You also know that I have lied in the past. That doesn't mean you are not qualified to make a comment or advise others not to lie. That doesn't make you a hypocrite when you do."

This is so typical. Everyone is guilty so no one is guilty. This is how shepherding cults approach child molestations, too. The victim is a sinner, too, you know. Nice try, Eric. You officially think like a shepherding cult follower. Sin leveling. Sin desensitizing. You are official now.

"Because they "may" be wrong on whatever position they took with regard to Driscol certainly doesn't make them a hypocrite for their position on Trump."

So, no problem with a vulgar, arrogant, rich "pastor" who they billed as Gospel focused for the young over ripe boys. I get it. Lower standards for reformed pastors. That is not new. Many of us have seen it for a long time now in that movement. You have made it clear by your comment there are lower standards for those who make a guru living off Jesus.

I think Mohler is a fairly strong conservative. Do you really think he desires a Clinton presidency?


'I think Mohler is a fairly strong conservative. Do you really think he desires a Clinton presidency?"

I think Mohler is about power. And that means whatever it takes which in this case is the establishment staying in power. Hillary is establishment. They won't promote her. But they would rather have her than Trump.


I'm no fan of Mr. Driscoll and don't think he is qualified to be an elder....based on biblical qualifications.
I used the word "may" because I don't know how Mohler promoted Driscoll.

Im not familiar with many of those terms of which you leveled against me...I'll need to look them up.

Please slow down with your accusations and let me or any other clarify a point before you make assumptions.

The idea that I would promote an idea that because everyone is guilty of sin then no one is guilty is absurd along with the idea that I don't have a problem or will give a pass to a vulgar pastor.


Eric, you just don't recognize it. You pulled the typical Shepherding cult tactic.


I don't know what a shepherding cult is, so you are correct that i don't recognize it.

Scott Shaver

Russell Moore tweets: "It would be a tragedy to get the right president, the right congress, and the wrong Christ."

What in Sam Hill is this supposed to mean? I didn't know Christ was running or on the voting ballot in the upcoming presidential election.

Somebody please reveal to me the profundity here.



Unless there is a surprise that occurs with Clinton's FBI investigation and Sanders represents Dems or Trump being Trumped by the Pubs..

It will be either Trump or Clinton that becomes the next President.

Take your pick,, no yeah buts or fantasize a third party candidate winning.

If you choose a third candidate you will infact put a smile on Hillary Clinton's face.

I know, go ahead and vote for Ross Perot who took 19% of the vote in 1992,, who did he yank the most votes from?

Scott Shaver

"#Never Trump" aka "Elijah" aka "nastiness" aka "Clueless" has absolutely nothing to say with regard to FBI Directors assessment of "irresponsibility" on the part of one Hillary Clinton, aka Sec of State US, aka Democratic Presidential Nominee US.

One would think that Elijah wouldn't have such blind spots.

Scott Shaver

Will be interesting to see this morning 7/8/16 to see if guys like Russ Moore and Alan Cross are still in cop-bashing mode after the disgusting scenario of events last night in Dallas.

Go ahead you good baptist "Christian" boys, keep stirring the pot and hope you guys never happen to need a police officer.



Excellent post.

I don't know what day the Baptist 21 luncheon was, but Moore was put under some pressure at the 9 Marks at 9:00 meeting on the Monday night before the annual meeting.

Moore and Dever were discussing a range of topics, and politics came up.

Jonathan Leeman, with whom I do not agree in all things, was playing the role of the examiner, and asked Moore about his statements, and said, "It sounds like you're telling people how to vote." Moore backed up, and said he was really just responding to those people who said that Trump's morality did not matter.

I had the same reaction as you.

Who is saying that? I haven't heard anyone applaud Mr. Trump for his moral failures, nor have I heard them say, "It doesn't matter" - or anything close.

These people are so mad about Trump getting the nomination that they will slit their own throats and advise others to do the same.

They have questioned the faith of Trump supporters, questioned their intelligence, questioned whether they really are "evangelicals", and they have pondered whether Trump supporters really want to see authoritarianism in the U.S. ala Adolph Hitler.

And you know the argument goes off the rails when Hitler is dragged into the room.

I like Robert Vaughn's expressions above. By all means, if you like neither candidate, vote for neither.

But these guys, and guys like George Will, are showing more antipathy toward Trump than even Hillary. There is no even-handedness here. Will has even gone so far as to say the most important goal in this election is to stop Trump. I fully expect to see him make an appearance at the Dem convention.

It beats anything I have ever seen.

I have choked on guys like Dole, McCain, and others on the state and local levels over the years.

You make the best choice you have from what you are given.

And that's all you get.

Pouting about it is not virtuous. And encouraging others to do likewise reveals something strange, in my opinion.


I just figured out how to smoke them out.

Have someone ask Trump and Hillary what they think about the ministerial housing allowance deduction.

I bet if Trump says he's for maintaining it, and Hillary says she is for removing it, we might see a different tune.

Scott Shaver

Dittos on the housing allowance angle.

Such an announcement would turn Dave Miller and Will Thornton into Trump supporters overnight....LOL.

Scott Shaver

87-12 against the #NeverTrump movement by vote of the RNC rules committee in Cleveland. Total visceral rejection and for good reason.

Looks like Moore/Miller et al will have to now look for a legitimate party in the upcoming election.

How about #NeverTrumpsForHillary?

Scott Shaver

LOL. I started out with Ted Cruz as my dark-horse for 2016. Wouldn't cast a vote for him now if he were running for Montgomery County dog-catcher.

Funny how when it all shakes down, its not Trump, but the also-rans who are lacking in integrity and whose words cannot be trusted.

Looks like Crews and Russell Moore are two peas in a shriveled pod. Absolutely disgusting.


I was watching Cruz speak last night and thought he was doing well, but stepped away from the TV and missed what happened. I saw it referred to later, but could not grasp the full import, particularly because Gingrich tried to pull Cruz back from off the cliff. (Gingrich's speech was really good!)

I did notice that none of the Trumps were clapping during the applause lines in the Cruz speech. Now I know the reason. Trump had seen it 2 hours earlier, and knew what Cruz was going to say at the end.

I am all for being convictional. But that is not the only value. We should hold our convictions with integrity and with love.

Ted Cruz raised his hand in an earlier debate and promised to support the eventual nominee of his party. He has failed to honor that pledge. I don't think that is convictional.

Cruz has said that Trump's attacks on Cruz' wife and father caused him to not be able to support Trump. Fair enough. I get that. Then say that, and don't accept an offer from Trump for a primetime speaking spot at the Convention.

If a person is unalterably opposed the party nominee, when the invitation to speak is given, it takes maturity and class to realize there is no way that you can take advantage of the opportunity without becoming a controversy.

Cruz obviously did not recognize that. And in agreeing to speak, and doing what he did, he did the greatest damage to his career that he could have done.

I voted to Cruz in the primary. But after watching this, I would not look on him favorably in the future. If I have other options, he would be further down the list.

I have heard people say that Cruz is hated in Washington. I used to think that was because he was a principled politician. I believe that last night gave us a glimpse into another reason he is not liked in Washington. He is not a gracious person. He comes off like a Pharisee in the Gospels - very convictional, even to the point of hurting others, and he is not very loving.

It was an unforced error. Very sad. But very revealing.

Scott Shaver

If Cruz can't remember the any spiritual value of "sticks and stones"...especially in a U.S. political election...He has not the intestinal fortitude, spiritual maturity, or temperament to be CIC of US.

Sad he had to demonstrate that openly.

The comments to this entry are closed.