Albert Mouhel, the president for a long time for the Southern Baptist theological school, is one of the best well -known evangelists in the United States, and is famous for his writings for faith, and now for the “The Breathest”, which is broadcast every day of the week. Muhaller was a harsh critic of Donald Trump in 2016, describing him as a “sexual predator”, and he lamented his popularity among Christians. (Muhaller says he did not vote that year) to talk In June 2020, Trump was “greatly embarrassed”, but he provided various reasons for a necessary presence to support him in that year’s elections. He admitted that his region had some utilitarian dimension, explaining that Democrats and Republicans have diverged a lot in social issues.
Five years later, Muhller conducted an interview with his colleague Alamiology about “Sin of Satisfaction”. The conversation took place in February, at the same time that Elon Musk Joe Rogan told him that “urban suicide sympathy” was destroying the West. I wanted to hear more about Mohler’s view of sympathy, and whether his views on American policy and the Trump administration have evolved since we last spoke. Our conversation, which was edited for length and clarity, below.
Do you still think that President Trump is embarrassing?
Now when you say these words, you will return to 2016?
2020. I said that to me.
Well, I need a context here. It supported President Trump’s election in 2020.
I know that you did that, but when we talked, I said: “President Trump is a great embarrassment, and it is embarrassed for evangelical Christianity that there are many people who will specifically celebrate the aspects that I see in the Bible more than others and liberated.”
Yes, I mean, I said that in a context. I mean, frankly, many details of Donald Trump’s story are embarrassing for Evangelists. But, at the same time, I supported him unusually in 2020, and I supported him in 2024. By the way, I supported him as a president as soon as he was elected in his first term. I don’t think it is fair to have this statement as an isolated cabin. Donald Trump is not the only politician who embarrassed me that I supported.
So it is a bigger group?
Well, it is a complex context, and I want to be very clear about it. It is very complicated. It is not easy. I just finished teaching a two -hour semester of driving, and one of the things that you referred to, as you know, in ancient Rome and then Victorian England, you had a separation between the general virtue and the special deputy. Now you have a deputy general. This is the game change. We know things about John F. Kennedy that people do not know when he was alive.
In 2020, I thought you were doing a real utilitarian state of Trump.
definitely. There is a benefit from politics, the period. Therefore, as you know, on my podcast tomorrow, I am talking about increasing politics, and I just say politics He is The increase. Perfection can be the enemy of goodness in politics. There are no ideal candidates.
I was proudly used the word “utilitarian”. I once said: “The utilitarian perception of the world is widely celebrated by the secularists … when objective morals are abandoned by right and wrong, which is inevitable like pragmatism and utilitarianism is all that will play his role.” Do you have any concerns about that now?
Yes. I do not disagree with myself. In this quote I read to me, I am talking about what was officially identified as the philosophies of pragmatism and utilitarianism. So when I say that someone is pragmatic, I do not necessarily connect it to John Dewey, as you know, who did not think that morals were real. I am a moral realistic. I am not my pragminess. But in decision -making, sometimes we have two options and we have to weigh these two and make an option. I would like to use the word “pragmatism”, and I am not trying to be a slippery here.
I recently wrote, “President Trump has won the White House, and he achieved a complete acquisition of the Republican Party.
Amen.
Can you say more –
So I think there was a big screening. I will be honest, in principle, I see myself in a straight line, and I am open to anyone who corrects me about it. I can tell you why I think I am a straight line in these issues. I try to achieve it, legally and culturally, and the greatest awareness of the moral endings that I think is right. This is the strategy, and the tactics change the elections according to the elections, because you were presented with a different set of options. I think, if you want to understand why many evangelists are essentially happy that there are many former Republicans, because it is because with regard to great issues a day, they are not all different from Democrats. They were just liberals on the slower schedule.
What do you think of this type of Republican for life who felt disgusting from Trump’s behavior, through the accounts of women who said that he assaulted them, through, as you know, they make fun of the disabled, all these things? What about the people who felt they had enough morally and were unable to swallow it anymore?
I have different responses. No. 1, let’s assume that this was honest and with an attempt to ethical consistency.
Well, I said things like that once, so I will suppose you honestly told them.
True, but let me finish my mind. I am about to waste here. I think some make this argument, with a form of their safety and responsibility. But what I want to ask them, well, where do you draw the line? In other words, who is acceptable? Just be honest and tell me where you paint the line. I think what has become clear is that there were many Republicans who were not really philosophical or ideological, or by emphasizing moral issues completely parallel to the party. As you know, the Republican Party has always had at least three main currents: the interests of large companies, companies, social conservatives and liberals. The liberation and companies – were not great in social issues, which are definitely the main reason behind the presence of many moral conservatives in the Republican Party in the first place. And I think it has become clear that many people were not committed to these issues. It was not smoked in 2016, but it did in 2020 and 2024.
Smoking? You mean as if they revealed themselves or something like that?
See, how many people were against gay marriage and now for that?
In 2024, there was an open primary. Many people on the stage were supporters of life, against gay marriage, and they had more conservative social values by Donald Trump. Why did the Evangelists widely adopt another person in the 2024 preliminary elections?
I supported Ron Desantis. I think Donald Trump represents something that does not see many people. I haven’t seen it for a long time, but I think I see it now. I think there is an intuitive relationship that Donald Trump has made with many people in the United States who believe that the tremendous turmoil of al -Qaeda is necessary in order to save the republic and preserve culture. I think they see this in Donald Trump. I must say that I do not think that a major Republican, in his opening speech, said, “In my administration, there will be only two types of sexes: males and females.” I think Donald Trump did so because Donald Trump is a disruption. There is great hunger by many American conservatives, including conservative Christians, for turmoil.
