Guilt tripping Evangelicals is a clever manipulation, especially when it’s done by someone who says, “Hey, I’m a Christian too, and you guys are wrong!”
That appeals to our best and worst instincts.
At our best, we want to be responsible disciples who preach the Gospel, serve God, and love our neighbors. Since we never do that perfectly, when someone says, “Here’s where you’re blowing it,” that gets our attention.
We know we’re perceived as hateful by people who assume that if you disapprove of Something, you therefore hate the Someone doing the Something you disapprove of. That can put us on the defense.
So can the fact that some Christians – not most, but some – have spoken with a cruel stupidity about gays, liberals, Muslims, or non-believers in general. We may overreact by feeling guilty for holding the same positions they do, even though we express them in a completely different way. Misguided as that is, it can come from good intentions.
But at our worst we also want to be liked, sometimes at the expense of being faithful. That, too, can make us susceptible to accusations of being un-Christlike in our speech, manner, or vote.
For example, Evangelicals believe Christ is the only way to God and that the Bible is authoritative over all other writings. Accordingly, we’re unwilling to support LGBTQ ideology, Critical Race Theory, Marxism, or antisemitism. We vote (and hopefully live) our consciences, based on our beliefs.
But if an articulate and Christian-identified gentleman tells us those beliefs are making us look bad (or even unloving and mean!) and that what we call sound doctrine is actually a distortion of God’s true commands, and that he – a seminarian, Senator, and grandson of a Baptist pastor – knows a better way, then we just might listen.
A Progressive Star on the Rise
Enter James Del Talarico, a member of the Texas House of Representatives and Democratic nominee for the 2026 US Senate.
A theological Progressive, he’s a member of the likewise progressive Presbyterian Church USA, so his beliefs on gender (“God is non-binary”) homosexuality (“Jesus never taught against it”) and transgender (“Bans on gender-affirming care are hateful”) are hardly a surprise.
Talarico also decries Evangelical support for Trump and/or the Republican party as “Christian Nationalism,” an idolatrous sin leading millions of believers away from the basics of Christianity.
Which are, according to his recent interview on Stephen Colbert’s talk show, pretty simple:
“Jesus tells us how we’re gonna be judged and how we’re gonna be saved: by feeding the hungry, healing the sick, and welcoming the stranger. It’s all about how you treat other people.”
Apparently, we who believe we’re saved by putting our trust in Christ and His finished work have got it wrong. Never mind whether your name’s written in the Lamb’s book of Life; your eternal status has more to do with acts of kindness. (A new form of legalism, perhaps?)
Now, it’s legitimate for any candidate to make his case to a voting bloc, Evangelicals included. There’s no wrong in Mr. Talarico seeking their audience in hope of votes, as many of his Republican colleagues do the same. That’s politics as usual.
But his call to revise Biblical doctrine is not, and there’s the real concern. Talarico’s a reformer of sorts, calling for a rejection of Evangelical “wrong” ideas about Christianity, and an embrace of his “right” ones which are, he assures us, the truly Biblical ones.
His campaign, then, is not just about platforms. It’s about collective Evangelical guilt for our doctrinal errors, and (if we happen to be Republican) for supporting a party whose sins – nationalism, indifference to the poor, un-Biblical priorities – we’ve been found guilty of.
Never mind that many Christians, Evangelicals included, don’t vote Republican. Or that many Christians, Republican included, are unsupportive of Trump. If an Evangelical majority voted for him (which the stats verify) then for Talarico, that’s scandal enough.
All of which will make his theological arguments, covered generously by a favorable media, the topic of national discussion. He proposes we adopt his way of looking at Scripture and recognize our errors and our guilt. Will Evangelicals buy into this?
You Are Charged With The Following
Let’s break down 3 charges Talarico levels against us.
1. Ignoring the two commandments Jesus gave us: to love God, and to love our neighbor. (He credits his Baptist grandfather for teaching him this.)
2. Violating Christ’s command to love our LGBTQ neighbors by rejecting gay or trans-affirming policies.
3. Compromising our faith by supporting the Republican Party and/or Trump and/or the Maga Movement without question, thus making an idol of political power.
As we approach the November primaries, we’ll hear these charges repeated. In the interest of developing a Biblical defense (our “apologia,” if you will) let’s tackle each.
Just Two Commandments?
No. Actually, Jesus did not give the commandments to love God and neighbor, as they’d both already been given in the Law of Moses. Rather, He reiterated them by saying love for God was “the first and great commandment,” and loving one’s neighbor is a commandment “like unto” it. (Matthew 22:38-39) He also gave a new one (making the commandment count 3 not 2) when He commanded us to love not just our neighbors, but one another as well. (John 13:34)
Yet He also gave at least 48 other specific instructions, including the Great Commission to preach the Gospel. Is that no longer critical because He said, “Go ye into all the world” without first saying, “This is My commandment?”
And what about His instructions to judge not, to repent, to render unto Caesar, to await His return, to ask in faith, to take communion regularly, or to not cast pearls before swine? (Among so many others) Are we really going to negate those because He didn’t qualify them as “Commandments?” Are they perhaps just “Suggestions?”
The commandments to love God and our neighbor are general and yes, vital ones. But the Old and New Testament are chock full of instructions showing us how to fulfill those two great commandments.
So God commands us to love Him, our neighbor, and one another. But He didn’t issue those commands then leave us guessing how to live them. To suggest otherwise is to negate the authority of Christ’s many other words, not to mention the wealth of instruction throughout both Testaments.
Not Loving Our Gay Neighbors?
We’re to love our neighbors, no argument there. How can we call ourselves Christians if we don’t?
Yet love is more than friendly affection. It rejoices in truth, Paul said (I Corinthians 13:6) so condoning what’s untrue is never loving.
Love certainly does show sacrificial kindness to anyone, be they in the right or the wrong. (Luke 10:25-37) So our posture towards gays and lesbians, as towards all people, should be marked by respect, kindness, and practical help when needed.
Likewise, Christians aren’t given authority to tell non-believers outside the Church how they should live (I Corinthians 5:12-13) but we are told to be at peace with them (Romans 12:18) speaking to them with grace (Colossians 4:6) and interacting wisely with them. (Colossians 4:5)
But we can’t affirm what God decries. The Father Himself declared homosexuality abominable (Leviticus 18:22) and the Son reiterated God’s design for the marital union as being, among other things, heterosexual. (Matthew 19:4)
So we can’t be expected to support the redefinition of marriage, or the imposition of pro-gay ideology on our kids in public schools, or restrictions on what we may or may not say, even in our own churches.
We should be at peace with homosexual or transgender friends and loved ones. But we draw the line when told we have to believe what they believe. Love for man never compels us to unfaithfulness to truth and conscience.
The MAGA Dilemma
“When the Church gets too cozy with political power,” Talarico said, “it loses its prophetic voice.”
Amen, and very well put. But is a Republican vote a concession to power?
Full disclosure: I voted for Trump, without regret. I felt there were two viable options in 2024, and I’m convinced he was the better of them. I reserve the right to criticize him when I feel he’s wrong, and to commend him when I feel he’s right.
Which leads to Talarico’s charge that Evangelicals lost their way by supporting Trump (a move which evidently earns us the MAGA label, whatever that means.)
First, as noted earlier, all Evangelicals did not vote for him, and some openly deplore him.
Second, voting for a man and blind support for him are hardly the same. Like most Americans, I have never voted for someone I completely agreed with, because there’s no such person. Nor do I condone, minimize, or excuse the wrongdoing of anyone I voted for. (Or the party I belong to.)
I’ll grant that some follow a leader so blindly that he can do no wrong in their eyes. But it’s at least presumptuous, and at worst arrogant, to assume that applies to all who voted Republican, or that a vote proves total allegiance.
If we believe the Kingdom of God is advanced by our choice of President, or that good policies are more important than saved souls, or that God’s sovereignty is lost when the wrong person occupies the White house, then I’d say “Christian Nationalist” is a fitting term.
But if we believe our nation is made better (never perfect) by the right leadership; that Patriotism is not the same as Nationalism; that we never have to choose between caring for the poor or resisting immorality and lawlessness; that we are Christians before we are Democrats or Republicans; and that “being about our Father’s business” of preaching the Gospel and making disciples takes precedent over politics – well, then, I’d say we’re innocent of the charges Talarico makes against Evangelicals.
When You’re Popular, Be Careful
“Woe unto you,” Jesus warned, “when all men speak well of you.” (Luke 6:26)
He took that sentiment even further when He told His disciples, “If the world hates you, know that it hated Me first.” (John 15:18)
Of course, we can be hated for acting like mouthy jerks, so let’s not assume pushback is always undeserved. We can always improve our ways of communicating, not to mention our attitude.
But we’re dead wrong if we buy into the idea that disapproval from the world means we’re doing it wrong, or that a secular “Amen” is proof we’re getting it right.
Talarico is Exhibit A, because he’s getting that “Amen” from a world eager to hear a Gospel without edges. Count on it; he’ll be a strong media presence over the next few months, not only because his positions align with the worlds, but because he’s awfully good at what he does. For that, let’s hand it to the man. He’s likeable, well-spoken, and boyishly appealing.
He’s also dead wrong, preaching a false Gospel and calling Evangelicals to turn away from Scriptural markers that, more than ever, we should observe.
Yet some will hear his call and find it reasonable, compassionate, valid. In a time when many Believers go to church for inspiration but not instruction, the Biblically uninstructed will be susceptible to Talarico’s attractive bait. They’ll find it “cool” to join his cause, sadly believing that rejecting the traditional and embracing the cool must always be a good thing.
They’ll take his bait, and they’ll encourage others to bite into it as well.
But discerning believers, no matter how hungry, will never join them.
(To read more about the Believer’s voice in modern controversies, check out my book “Christians in a Cancel Culture” in the first comment below.)
Comments
comments for this post are closed