One-Fourth of White Evangelicals Embrace the QAnon Conspiracy Theory: Poll

[Mark_Smith]

Nor Does Owning A Gun Make You A Better Man

Can’t argue with you there. And I don’t care what you think of me. I’m just pointing out that being a gun-owner is not antithetical to Christianity. A gun is a tool, nothing more. It’s not a symbol of manhood, or any other kind of status symbol. In fact, my wife often shoots better than I do. If that’s not a hit to self-esteem, I don’t know what is! (Kidding, in case you didn’t get it.)

However, NOT owning a gun doesn’t give one some kind of moral superiority to look down on those of us who do as clueless rubes…

As to churches where EVERY men’s meeting is about BBQ and/or guns, well, I sympathize with you there. My pastor hunts and owns guns as well, but guns and hunting are never mentioned from the pulpit either (maybe there has been a mention in an example), nor do men’s meetings at my church have anything to do with guns or BBQ. That’s not to say some of the men don’t do those things, but they are not church sponsored.

My point was that owing guns, and taking democrats at their word when they call themselves socialists and proclaim Marxist ideas hardly makes one not a Christian or something for churches to fear.

[dgszweda]

Remember that the 26% relate to Christians who hold all 3 of the tenants. Many more hold to just one or more. In addition, many individuals in church hold to offshoots of the QAnon beliefs, that while they do not define someone as QAnon, are rooted in QAnon.

That’s as ridiculous as saying that Catholics are actually the same as evangelical Christians because they believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and also hold some of our other beliefs. Or claiming that our beliefs are rooted in Catholicism rather than in the Bible that they also claim to use. It’s the differences, NOT the similarities that are important. If you’re worried about every believer that holds one or more false beliefs, or beliefs similar to people you despise, you won’t have a single person in church or one you can fellowship with.

And while I know a lot of people (believers and unbelievers alike) who think that the widespread flouting of election laws and irregularities a year ago are fishy enough to wonder if the election was really on the up-and-up, I know hardly any Christians who are full-blown “the election was stolen” types. Questioning irregularities does not make one a conspiracy theorist or dangerous to the U.S.

As I see it, the idea that evangelical Christians are one of the greatest dangers to the American republic is almost as loony and fringe as believing in Q-Anon.

[dcbii]

As I see it, the idea that evangelical Christians are one of the greatest dangers to the American republic is almost as loony and fringe as believing in Q-Anon.

I didn’t say they were the greatest danger, just one of the greatest danger. Almost all of the conspiracy theories and myths going around out there, the largest single cohesive block is almost always the white evangelical.

The fact that 60% - 75% of white evangelicals (depending on which survey you read) feels that Biden was elected illegitmately, all by itself makes them one of the greatest dangers. They are the single largest block of individuals who believe that,despite not a single shred of evidence supporting that. Add on top of that, that there is a sizeable chunk who also believe that armed conflict might be necessary, just shows you that you are out of touch with what is taking place in the country. I am not sure why quoting distinct statistics makes it a looney or fringe idea.

61% of white evangelical Christians feel that the election was stolen

75% of White evangelical Christian Republicans believe that Biden was illegitmately elected

If such a large majority of a single defined voting block believes that the leader of their country was illegitimately put into public office by unseen forces and not through the democratic process, that in and of itself is the very definition of a danger to a stable democratic republic.

[dgszweda]

If such a large majority of a single defined voting block believes that the leader of their country was illegitimately put into public office by unseen forces and not through the democratic process, that in and of itself is the very definition of a danger to a stable democratic republic.

Even given that the statistics you reference are accurate (even after reading the methodology, I’m never sure how the “Christian” status of those being polled is determined), belief that something happened wrongly doesn’t directly translate even to taking action let alone being a danger. I’d be curious to know even what percentage of the “white evangelical Christians” in that poll would do more than just talk, and further, how many of those committed to action would be willing to take up arms (beyond just saying they would).

A belief that things were wrongly decided may for many or even most of them result in only lobbying and changes to election laws and procedures, or even running for office themselves. If laws were changed to make it harder to cheat or more corrupt politicians replaced, I’d consider that a good outcome rather than a dangerous one.

It’s quite interesting to me how when activists entered and took over the Wisconsin capitol about a decade ago how that was considered reasonable action, since what the actual legislators were doing was the supposed “real” danger. Of course, it’s becoming more and more clear to me that the amount of “danger” one supposedly poses is not based on anything more than which side one is on, and which beliefs are held, rather than the ability to actually do something dangerous.

If one doesn’t just blindly believe that every government agency is benign, and everything happens in the way that it should (in complete contrast to what Christians know about human nature), and that there is no need for any kind of oversight or change, such a belief is now considered a danger. Belief that things are currently done wrong, and that changes are necessary is a defining feature to a republic such as ours. It’s a feature, not a bug. If “wrongthink” is now what is considered dangerous, that actually describes despotism, not a republic.

[dcbii]

and that there is no need for any kind of oversight or change, such a belief is now considered a danger.

The concern is not that any kind of oversight is needed. The concern is that a narrative is being created in which there is not one single shred of evidence that supports this narrative and that narrative is being used to storm the capital, create laws for perceived wrongs that don’t exist….. the facts are that the oversight across so many layers of democracy ensured a fair and equitable election that was free from fraud. The danger is that people want to overthrow laws, and Congress for falsehoods. The fact that these people based on absolutely nothing, erected gallows on the front lawn of the capital and was seeking law makers and the VP to hang should scare anyone. Whether they could have pulled it off is another story. Whether everyone wants to use force or not, is another story. But the narrative to justify the force is being supported by a large group of people.

…that people want to overthrow laws…for falsehoods.” Kinda like years of impeachment proceedings for the hoax of Russian collusion?

I agree that what happened on January 6 was wrong. But I have a difficult time getting too worked up over it when I see, over and over again, that the same behavior, committed for purposes of advancing Leftist goals, is applauded by the very people who are only capable of being incensed when something similar is committed by those on the right. I’m waiting to hear the people who support Black Lives Matter state that what was done for their cause was wrong, or that saying “All lives matter” is a noble statement.

If you are truly concerned about dangers to our Republic whenever anyone storms a capitol (ie. Wisconsin), or riots, burns, loots, and assaults in public places, you may gain a listening ear. Until then, it’s just so much partisan bickering. “You did this!” (“Yes, but you did this.”) Ho hum.

[G. N. Barkman]

If you are truly concerned about dangers to our Republic whenever anyone storms a capitol (ie. Wisconsin), or riots, burns, loots, and assaults in public places, you may gain a listening ear. Until then, it’s just so much partisan bickering. “You did this!” (“Yes, but you did this.”) Ho hum.

My ultimate, root of the concern is that Christians should know better. We should be pushing for

• obedience to government not an uprising
• pray for our government don’t riot
• project the truth - especially the gospel and don’t be known for pushing falsehoods

There are problems on both sides of the fence. I am less concerned with Trump being a bad person or Biden being a bad person, and more concerned with the fact that Christians are increasingly moving to a group known for faleshoods and lies. I have no affinity to this country. Given enough time it will fall. It is the problems in the church that I am more concerned with. At the end of the day I loose no sleep over Black Lives Matter or CRT. I loose sleep over what I see is the destruction of the gospel message by the church. Yes, not every church is doing this. So we haven’t fallen off the cliff. And yes, Christ will preserve the church. I am concerned with the growth of the problem and the potential of what it leads to unchecked. And this isn’t fringe groups. John MacArthur peddles misinformation around COVID, James White peddles even worse misinformation around COVID, government….. just to name two that have recently been posted on this site.

What I think we have lost a clear picture in is that the success of the church does not rely on pushing back on the over reach of government. Do I like over reach? No. Do I think they are over reaching in some cases? Yes. But the church was founded at a time of extreme government over reach and it had no problem growing at a tremendous pace. The church needs to be focused on the gospel and being a beacon of truth. Not peddling a bunch of misinformation in order to push back on the government in order to establish more morality within the government. Not saying we shouldn’t influence the government in the right way and participate in government, but it isn’t our focus and we surely don’t need to propogate lies to accomplish it.

dgszweda, I understand, to a degree, your concern for the unhealthy state of Christianity. Surely all true Christians share this legitimate concern. But I have trouble with your approach because it is so clearly tied to a political agenda. When someone with leftist leaning politics is willing to dismiss serious assaults by those with a leftist political agenda because they are not the church, but is gravely concerned by infractions committed by the Right, because “the church” should know better, something’s not quite right. How convenient. No need to be concerned about the infractions committed by my side, because they aren’t expected to know any better, but I’m very concerned about the antics of the other side because they should know better. Hmmm. Does this sound like the “mote/beam” problem addressed by Christ?

This perspective becomes more problematic when it appears that Evangelicals are faulted for infractions committed by right-wing extremists which are neither endorsed nor applauded by the Evangelicals that I know, nor apparently by any of those represented by SI readers. It seems that you want “us” to take responsibility for things we did not do, and of which we do not approve, while removing yourself from responsibility for similar (or worse) infractions committed by “your” crowd. Your playing field is not level, and as such, will persuade few to share your concerns. I think you might be misled by believing opinions of those who love to unfairly vilify anything related to Christianity.

We can debate the prevalence of the problem, but I do know that there is a small, and often vocal, minority in the circles where I travel that seems to be quite willing to spread the most amazing nonsense (to put it politely) on issues related to the election and COVID, and there are a couple of huge problems with it. First of all, I’m watching as one mother more or less directs her children to leave good opportunities because of total nonsense “evidence” against COVID vaccines.

That’s bad enough, but even more significant is the reality that in many cases, what’s being done by the adherents is to push people into horrendously bad logic. It’s training us to misrepresent not only facts here on earth, but also…..Scripture. Scary stuff!

[G. N. Barkman]

But I have trouble with your approach because it is so clearly tied to a political agenda.

The problem is that many feel that if you are not attacking the left than you have a political agenda. I truly do not. We could sit here and attack the left all day long, but SharperIron is probably not the best venue for that. My concern is more for the Church. That is it. Yes, the left is painting Christians in a certain light, but we are not helping the problem. And that is what I am ultimately after. While it may run parallel to what you are seeing from the left, that doesn’t mean it is tied to the political agenda of the left.

The church has a serious problem, in my opinion and I also don’t think it is a small problem. We can’t spout misinformation from one side of our mouth and at the same time expect the world to believe that we speaking the truth when it comes to the Gospel.

Let us agree that Christianity has a problem. (Actually, a lot of problems.) What do you believe is the solution? Most SI readers do not believe, nor support, the misinformation of which you speak. Do you believe that pointing out these errors to those who do not share them will solve anything? Do you believe that SI readers are in a position to correct the errors that concern you, especially since they are scarcely present within our circles? Do you think that those who have embraced lies will reverse course because you, or I, tell them they should?

It seems to me that the solution must go much deeper than this. What we need is a genuine revival among professing Christians to return to Bible centered Christianity. The problem is that most Christians do not know their Bibles. The truth is that most churches are not Bible centered in their ministry focus. The reality is that most professing Christians prefer to have it so, yes, demand to have it so. They avoid Bible centered churches in favor of entertainment style churches. In their spiritual weakness and Biblical ignorance, they fall prey to many errors, including political ones. So what’s the solution? Correcting their political errors? Not likely. What we need are a few million pulpits proclaiming Biblical truth. But before that can happen, God must send revival to our churches, preachers, and congregations. A large percentage of professing Christians have not been regenerated. Pigs don’t like sheep food. God must create sheep. Other than that, there is no solution. What you are describing is apostate Christianity, which is no better than, and actually worse than the world because it is the world, but thinks otherwise. Telling apostate Christians to shape up and act like Christians is a fools errand. Telling apostate Christians they must be born again or they will go to hell is what is needed, but that will not make you popular. It will drive “Christians” away unless God’s Spirit works to convict and convert them. But that’s the only message that can produce a genuine solution to your concerns.

dgszweda, I understand, to a degree, your concern for the unhealthy state of Christianity. Surely all true Christians share this legitimate concern. But I have trouble with your approach because it is so clearly tied to a political agenda. When someone with leftist leaning politics is willing to dismiss serious assaults by those with a leftist political agenda because they are not the church, but is gravely concerned by infractions committed by the Right, because “the church” should know better, something’s not quite right. How convenient. No need to be concerned about the infractions committed by my side, because they aren’t expected to know any better, but I’m very concerned about the antics of the other side because they should know better. Hmmm. Does this sound like the “mote/beam” problem addressed by Christ?

Does anyone even know how many of the Capital rioters even claim to be Evangelical Christians? The religion that I keep hearing about is the shaman of Q Anon, not Christianity.

I must not be a Q guy because when I heard the first question:

“There is a storm coming soon that will sweep away the elites in power and restore the rightful leaders.”

I thought, yes, the midterm elections of 2022 are coming. But I think most people have had those sort of ideas throughout the years whenever their party of choice has been out of power.

[JD Miller]

dgszweda, I understand, to a degree, your concern for the unhealthy state of Christianity. Surely all true Christians share this legitimate concern. But I have trouble with your approach because it is so clearly tied to a political agenda. When someone with leftist leaning politics is willing to dismiss serious assaults by those with a leftist political agenda because they are not the church, but is gravely concerned by infractions committed by the Right, because “the church” should know better, something’s not quite right. How convenient. No need to be concerned about the infractions committed by my side, because they aren’t expected to know any better, but I’m very concerned about the antics of the other side because they should know better. Hmmm. Does this sound like the “mote/beam” problem addressed by Christ?

Does anyone even know how many of the Capital rioters even claim to be Evangelical Christians? The religion that I keep hearing about is the shaman of Q Anon, not Christianity.

No surveys. But the number of religous signs and flags was quite large. Here you can see some:

https://religionunplugged.com/news/2021/1/6/some-history-behind-the-chr…

[G. N. Barkman]

Let us agree that Christianity has a problem. (Actually, a lot of problems.) What do you believe is the solution? Most SI readers do not believe, nor support, the misinformation of which you speak.

Not so sure if it is most SI readers or not. We have had some lively debates around misinformation here.

Not sure if there is a good solution, but it starts in the pulpit. We need Christian leaders who espouse truth and call out lies and misinformation. For example, I am not saying that Dr. John MacArthur should not speak out about government over reach. But what he does need to stop doing is using baseless claims, lies and misinformation to support his claims. The issue is what our leaders, and what we are seeing throughout the Republican party, are using or calling “truth”. A great example is Dr. James White’s response to Piper. Piper laid out a biblical case for following vaccination mandates. I do not believe that Piper has the corner on truth, nor should we blindly accept what Piper lays out. So when I heard Dr. White was going to offer a rebuttal, someone who is well regarded as a Reformed apologist and theologian, I was excited to see the biblical case for resisting the mandates. Instead we got an article that did not mention a single verse or Bible passage and instead peddled debunked misinformation.

This is where the crux is at the moment. Religous people have historically had a concern about government overreach and we are drawing a line in the sand on these items, but for the most part we aren’t using well constructed and biblically based arguments around this. We are using misinformation. It very much reminds me of the amount of misinformation used to combat evolution that many Christians and churches used. It was very, very poor information. It was hard to sit in a church service and listen to some crazy ideas being thrown from the pulpit around evolution, and then try to take the message that was preached after that seriously. And I am an ardent YEC.