Court Evangelical: An “Axis of Evil” is Destroying the Trump Presidency

As many of you know, President George W. Bush used the phrase “axis of evil” in his 2002 State of the Union Address to describe foreign governments sponsoring terrorism and seeking to build nuclear arsenals.  Bush applied the phrase to North Korea, Iran, and Iraq.

Jeffress uses “axis of evil” to describe the Democrats and Republicans of the “establishment” who are trying to destroy Donald Trump.  “We cannot allow that to happen,” he says.

Is this a call to a holy war of some type?  Is Jeffress pitting the forces of God against the forces of anti-Trump evil?  Is Jeffress comparing the opponents of Donald Trump to what Bush describes here?:

Seconds before Jeffress came on the air, in the same segment, Lou Dobbs was talking about Pope Francis’s criticism of the Trump administration.  This was the context in which Jeffress used the phrase “axis of evil.”  Is Francis part of this axis of evil? If so, this would not be the first time Jeffress has spewed forth anti-Catholic rhetoric.  Whatever the case, this Dallas court evangelical believes that Trump is God’s anointed one and anyone who opposes God’s anointed one is evil.

And you wonder why I have suggested that the course of American Christianity is changing?

One thought on “Court Evangelical: An “Axis of Evil” is Destroying the Trump Presidency

  1. You hit the nail on the head when you contend that Jeffress “believes that Trump is God’s anointed one and anyone who opposes God’s anointed one is evil.” I have heard this argument advanced from some evangelical friends and acquaintances in defense of their unwavering support of every Trump word and action.

    I have seen the “touch not the Lord’s anointed” argument (as originating in the Bible with David’s refusal to lift a hand against King Saul despite Saul’s disqualifying disobedience) used too many times by authoritarian pastors and church leaders to buttress their own leadership, and it is used too often in church situations to justify abuses of power and to stifle pushback. It is basically Scriptural-sounding shorthand for telling the “rank and file” to keep in line and be quiet and don’t rock the boat, don’t question anything.

    The obvious issue with the application of this concept to politically-elected leadership is, who gets to decide which elected leaders are God’s anointed? Clearly the people advancing this argument don’t believe that all elected leaders are God’s anointed, or they would not have so rigorously opposed our previous president for eight years and questioned his legitimacy. So who gets to decide which leaders are the ones who God put into place, versus which leaders are the ones who people put into place against God’s wishes? And so the definition of “God’s anointed” simply becomes, “the ones I agree with.”


Comments are closed.