An Atheist in WH?

Is This the First True Atheist to Occupy White House?

February 7 2020

The Evangelical may prefer to dismiss the following.  It may be too challenging to typical American doctrine; touching too close to the demand of I Peter 3.15.

Pro-maga folk, with whom I have only passing acquaintance, could have mixed emotions.  They seem to yearn for a leader who breaks them free of the uncomfortable restraints of traditional decorum for the sake of some ill-defined ego-centered philosophy; and might be comfortable with an atheist yielding unlimited power.

To both of these groups, read on -- it really is just a question.



In 1952 both political Parties wanted as candidate for POTUS the most popular war hero in America, General Dwight Eisenhower.  His problem was that he had never been “baptized” into any Protestant denomination.  He joined his wife’s Presbyterian church.  Right or wrong, prior to 2016 no one could hope to be elected to any office in the land if they did not at least exhibit “belief” in God.  Then we somehow got trump.

Yesterday a perfunctory appearance was made by the chief executive at the National Prayer Breakfast, where he was clearly out of his element.  Possibly betraying ignorance of it being Biblical teaching for two millennia, he began by disagreeing with the previous speaker about loving our enemies. 

What followed was, at best, lacking in what was traditionally regarded as civil discourse.  If, as was noted, this was behavior “unbecoming” a gentleman, it might also be described as unbecoming a drunken gentleman.  But, it would be unfamiliar to refer to trump as a gentleman; and, if drunk at all it would have been intoxication from the unimaginable political power invested the previous day by the majority Party of the United States Senate.



An intelligent young self-professed “progressive” asks:  Is this the first true atheist to occupy the White House? 

This is, unfortunately, a perfectly reasonable and logical question to be asked by someone reared in the current generation; a generation which old men must navigate.  Our young progressive puts forth several anecdotal observations any “non-believer” might see as justification for their question:

·        He is demonstrably unfamiliar with church services, hymns, or their traditions and liturgies; and doesn’t seem to know the Bible – once referring to “two” Corinthians

·        He is first to have no church service in White House [Although there is a high-profile TV evangelist as self-proclaimed “spiritual advisor” who, in this old man observation, may not be best representation of Christian belief to put in forefront]

·        Nothing in his publicly known life reflects any Christian ethic, yet he consistently publicly panders to Christians as “his” people

·        People who have known and worked with and for him have variously described him as: “profane” “bully” “habitual liar” “deceitful” “shameless” ‘amoral” “braggart”

·        When asked specifically if he prayed for forgiveness, he said he thought he would if he ever did anything wrong

To this list must be added yesterday’s bewilderment that a wife would love her husband so much she even cried because he was near death.  An observation he’d made other times.

Having spent a lifetime in the Church it should be said many of these observations can be seen in faithful, church-going parishioners.  So, would the reader please come forward who has evidence otherwise, but is this the first true atheist to occupy White House?  To which must be added the vital question for future generations:  Should it still matter?