I think that, sadly, the Albert Mohlers and Franklin Grahams of the world are far more accurate representatives of American Evangelical Christianity, at this time, than people like BRTD or Jimmy Carter.
But that probably will change when the former group starts dying off.
And, obviously, it's not just Evangelicalism that's dominated by lunatics. Islam has plenty of toxic elements, but that's why we should be paying attention to the reformers within that faith and dismiss the Wahhabi/authoritarian/regressive sects.
https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/islam-facts-or-dreams/
Understand that the reason I am a Christian is that I believe that Jesus Christ is who he says He is. Accordingly, I view Mohammed as a false prophet. As such, I view the Quranic view of Allah to be a false description of the character of God (if one believes that there is only one God, and the Allah of the Quran is the same as Jehovah God of the Bible). The God of the Bible loves sinners, sent His Son to die in their place that they may be reconciled to Him and be with Him Forever. This is black letter Scripture; not abstract, not vague. The Protestant Reformation was an act which reformed the Church from where it DEVIATED from Scripture and ADDED TO Scripture extra-Biblical concepts that actually contradicted the faith.
In addition, the New Testament is the New Covenant God has with His People. When asked which of the 10 Commandments was the most important, Christ, Himself, stated "You shall love the Lord with all your heart and all your mind and all your soul and all your strength. This is the First Great Commandment. And the Second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself." He told His Disciples: "A New Commandment I give you: Love one another, as I have loved you." He said of his followers: "By the, (the World) will know them; that they will have love, one for the other." I could go on and on. If modern American Evangelical Christianity needs a "reformation", it would be a reformation that would bring it into conformity to Scripture in ways where it has deviated.
I do not profess to know the Quran as well as I know the Bible. But to the extent that Islam needs a "reformation", it would be a movement to bring Islam AWAY from the Quranic Scriptures; in effect, rewriting the Islamic Scriptures themselves, or adding to them in a way that would cancel out the words of Mohammed, himself. While a Second Evangelical Reformation would be to make Christianity MORE Scriptural, an Islamic Reformation would be a move to make Islam LESS Scriptural. The doctrines that would reform Islam in the ways that Scott (or Andrew McCarthy, for that matter) would wish to see are doctrines that would contradict the Quran as it is now.
With Christians, it is individuals that need to be reformed, to conform them more closely to Scripture. The Crazies of Christianity out there (Westboro Baptist Church, Branch Davidians, Abortion Bombers, and most perpetrators of "sectarian violence") all are OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH SCRIPTURE. (I'm sure my list is incomplete.) All of them. Jesus was never about a political movement, and He was not about a war to overthrow His enemies. (That fact disappointed the Pharisees of His day.) Biblical Christianity isn't about that today, either; it's about presenting the Gospel to the whole world, giving the whole world a chance for Salvation, before Jesus Christ returns.
I think Mr. McCarthy makes a strong argument that the crazies of Islam are IN COMPLIANCE with Islam. This, to me, is a critical difference between Islam and Christianity. As Mr. McCarthy points out, the "moderate, peaceful Muslims" are the ones who are out of compliance with the Quran; it is the Jihadists who are in compliance. I'm certainly willing to listen to reasonable arguments to the contrary. But I view this is as pretty significant because both Christianity and Islam are "religions of the book". It says something when the desirable outcome for this lifetime (truly loving and tolerant people) can be achieved by following one book (the Bible) more closely, but requires ignoring significant portions of another book (the Quran) to achieve the same thing.
I realize that many Evangelical Christians fall short of the standards Christ has set for them. I'm sure I have at times, and I'm willing to bring myself into conformity with Scripture. I'm not always thrilled with the politics of Evangelical leaders, and even everyday Evangelical Christians, for that matter. But most all of them I know ask God to help them be more kind and loving, and I see their kind and loving acts on a regular basis. I see ordinary Christians every day step up to help others in need they don't know about. (A Christian brother of mine who owns a roofing company put a new roof on a man's house; the church took up an offering for the materials and he and his son did all the work, because the man's roof was likely to cave in; this happened ONLY because this roofer was a Christian and God laid this on his heart. This is just one example.) Their Good Works aren't for Salvation; that was paid for at Calvary. Their Good Works are to glorify God; hence, the anonymity of their deeds.
There are some folks here that are so politicized that they would reject their college loans being paid off if an Evangelical Christian was writing the check. I believe that number is relatively few. I would suggest that many folks here are so blinded by their prejudices toward Evangelicals that they really have no idea of what Scripture asks of a Christian. "Love one another as I have loved you." I forgive RFKFan68 for unfairly maligning White Evangelicals as a group. I forgive others for their double standard. I don't wish them ill. I do think that bringing the double standard out into the open is something that has been overdue here.
"Love one another as I have loved you." Can you apply that standard to Betsy DeVos (let alone Donald Trump)?
Poll
