Arguing over Jesus’ politics

Re “Alternative Christianity,” Opinion, Aug. 11

My thanks for Phil Zuckerman’s questioning of the modern evangelical movement and calling it “alternative Christianity.” Having four major members of the Trump administration, including the vice president, openly belonging to and promoting that sect is disturbing.

The founding fathers wisely framed our Constitution to ensure our fragile experiment in democracy would only have a chance of survival were it to remain secular. It protects us from a theocracy. Not only does the infusion of ‘Alternative Christianity’ into our secular democratic decisionmaking process at the highest levels violate our Constitution, this cult also continually borders on heresy regarding the true Christian message. There is no room in our government for evangelical ayatollahs.

I speak as a highly informed, cradle-to-grave, practicing Roman Catholic. I swear on the Bible. Dave Cronkey

El Cajon

Zuckerman doesn’t understand conservatives or Jesus.

Jesus was not anti-money; he warned only of the love of money, which would make a person desire to serve wealth instead of God.

Zuckerman is correct about Christians being required to support the most vulnerable people. However, a study by Arthur Brooks at Syracuse University found that liberals gave far less to charity than conservatives, even taking into account religious giving. The reason for that is that they understand Jesus to be speaking to individuals and not the government about helping the poor.

The Apostle Paul wrote, “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.” Those who cannot work are the ones who should be helped. Government programs have encouraged people to rely on them rather than discover the satisfaction of honest work. So please don’t accuse conservatives of creating “suffering and misery in His name.”

I agree that we fall short when it comes to displaying mercy and forgiveness, but again Jesus was talking about individuals and not the government. Connie Veldkamp

San Clemente