The second main part of your argument, as I understood it, was your defense of the validity of what I call the “Nobody’s Perfect Defense.” I had argued that the defense failed in Trump’s case, and you maintained that it was valid. This you did by arguing that Trump was comparable to several flawed but great men. Here’s where I take issue with you, however. There are orders-of-magnitude differences between Trump and any of the great men you mention. The problem with Trump is not that he is imperfectly good but rather that he is almost perfectly bad.

First, there are some facts about Trump we need to face. Trump spent his life as a shady businessman, owner of casinos and strip clubs, and as a playboy. At present it would not be accurate to say he is imperfectly reformed. The fact is that we have no evidence whatsoever to believe he is reformed at all. His pace no doubt has decreased with age, but we see no signs of reform or repentance.

That leads directly to a second fact we need to face about Trump. Trump’s Christianity is not doubtful, equivocal, or uncertain in the least. It is nonexistent. Full stop. Trump has said he has not asked God for forgiveness. People who have not asked God for forgiveness are not Christians. Period. Some people, eager to say Trump is a Christian after all, seized on a statement he made in a later interview with journalist Cal Thomas. When Thomas noted Trump’s previous claim of never having asked God’s forgiveness, Trump replied, “I will be asking for forgiveness, but hopefully I won’t have to be asking for much forgiveness.” That’s not how it works. When Thomas asked who Jesus is, Trump responded with no hint of Christ’s divinity, sacrificial death, or resurrection. I repeat, then, Trump is not a Christian, not a “baby Christian” or any other kind. Read the interview yourself.

I don’t hold that a man has to be a Christian to be a good president. Some of our best presidents were probably not Christians. Lincoln? Probably not. Washington? A good Episcopalian. Reagan? Possibly. Jackson? Not while he was president, but he probably converted after leaving office. Coolidge? A good Congregationalist. Cleveland? Probably not. So of America’s six best presidents (in my reckoning), probably not more than two or three were Christians while in office. So what qualities did they have and what qualities are necessary in a president? Aside from intelligence and a talent for politics, these men all had self-discipline, integrity, and honesty. Lincoln, Washington, Jackson, and Coolidge were especially notable for their honesty, and all of them had that quality to a considerable degree. Washington also stood out for his self-discipline, and all of them had a fair degree of that too, at least in their mature years.

The problem with Trump is that he has practically none of these qualities. He actually seems to have almost no self-discipline at all and no integrity. He is possibly the most dishonest man ever to hold the office of president, and that really is saying something. This is where Len’s comment, to which you took exception, comes in: “If he’s breathing, he’s lying.” I’d say this is intended as hyperbole and not to be taken literally. For a man who talks and tweets as much as Trump does, it would be hard to avoid accidentally making a truthful statement from time to time. I’m sure it must pain him when that happens.

It’s because Trump is so obviously devoid of self-discipline, integrity, and honesty that his supporters have to try to depict him as a Christian. By invoking the concept of a new birth, Trump’s supporters hope to cancel out his entire track record in the minds of American voters.

In this connection it has been interesting to observe how the date of Trump’s alleged conversion, to which he himself does not testify at all, has gradually moved onward in time. Shortly after Trump won the nomination, James Dobson said Paula White had “personally led him [Trump] to Christ,” presumably not very long before that, since Dobson also said Trump was “a baby Christian.” Later a rumor said Trump had actually become a Christian just before the third debate with Hillary, October 19, 2016, and a couple of weeks ago an earnest Trump supporter told me it was not until a group of pastors came to the Oval Office, laid hands on Trump, and prayed over him that Trump became “a changed man” and thus apparently a Christian. That presidential photo op took place July 10, 2017. Of course, Trump has not testified to conversion at any of these times.

The date of Trump’s alleged conversion keeps moving forward in time because Trump keeps doing and saying outrageous things completely incompatible with the behavior one would expect to see in the newest babe in Christ. So his followers have to adopt later and later dates for his “conversion.”

There’s one more thing I’d like to clear up before I address your specific comparisons. You took very vigorous exception to a post I shared, which stated in part, “Saying you don’t care what Trump did BEFORE he became President is like saying, ‘I know you’ve always been a child molester, but go ahead and babysit my kids. I’m only interested in what you do AFTER I hire you.’” You said this was ridiculous because Trump is not a child-molester. Well, I’ll grant we have no solid evidence to believe Trump is a child-molester. Although there have been allegations of his having visited a certain island where very bad things were said to go on, I’ll be happy to hold such rumors as definitely false until evidence turns up, if it ever does.

But the post did not mean to say that Trump was a child-molester. It makes the point that Trump is to the office of president as a child-molester is to the job of babysitter — blatantly disqualified by a track-record demonstrating a lack of the character necessary for the position. In Trump’s case this low character is demonstrated not by child-molestation, which I still grant he is not known to have done, but rather by constant lying, corrupt business practices, and rampantly immoral behavior. And there certainly is evidence for all of those.

OK, now I’ll turn to the specific comparisons you made. Here’s what you wrote:

“God almost exclusively works through pitiful instruments: Moses the murderer; Samson who preferred Philistine flesh; Jephthah who murdered his own daughter; King David who, though later repentant, committed his most egregious crimes during his administration; President Lincoln, whose Christian profession was at least as, if not more, ambiguous than President Trump’s; President Reagan, who divorced his first wife and whose second wife dabbled in the occult; etc., etc., etc. It seems to me that President Trump is another in a long line of pitiful deliverers, and I’m certain he’ll not be the last.”

And here’s why I disagree:

Moses committed manslaughter, not murder, and perhaps with some justification, though not, apparently, according to God’s will. It was not until 40 years later that God began to use Moses.

Samson lacked self-control almost as badly as Trump does, and he came to a bad end.

Jephthah led Israel six years during one of the nastier periods of its history, when “every man did what was right in his own eyes.” His only recorded activity after the unfortunate business with his daughter was to lead Israelites in a civil war against other Israelites.

All David’s great accomplishments were before his sin with Bathsheba.

Lincoln, as I mentioned before, was probably not a Christian, but he was a man of great integrity and honesty — quite a contrast with Trump.

Ronald Reagan was divorced by his first wife, much against his wishes, according to what I’ve read. He did remarry, but as far as we know he remained faithful to his second wife for the rest of his life. He had been married to her for 28 years by the time he was elected to the presidency.

Of the five men you named, Samson and Jephthah, though they accomplished some things and got a mention in Hebrews 11, were not great leaders and had their usefulness very much curtailed as a result of their lack of self-control. King David, and presidents Lincoln and Reagan stand in dramatic contrast to Trump. The first three were men with self-control, integrity, and honesty, although they had flaws. Trump is devoid of these traits. Of the first three, only King David committed an offense comparable to Trump’s depth of evil. Admittedly Trump is not known to have killed anyone yet, but his constant, relentless dishonesty is equally heinous in its own way. And David’s one-time offense, though repented of, sharply curtailed his future usefulness. In short, putting Trump alongside the likes of David, Lincoln, and Reagan is like saying that a student who scored 19 percent on an exam did substantially as well as three of his classmates who each scored 91 percent. This is precisely where the “Nobody’s Perfect” defense fails. It’s true nobody is perfect, not even great leaders like David, Lincoln, and Reagan, but Trump is nobody like David, Lincoln, or Reagan.

As to whether God will use Trump, that is God’s concern. He will use whom He pleases. But we ought not to back an evil man just because we surmise that God might perhaps choose to use him.

In conclusion, you quoted Victor Davis Hanson in one of his recent paeans to Trump in National Review. The quotation included this passage:

“Trump’s critics insist that his comeuppance is on the horizon. They assure us that character is destiny.”

Hanson says this almost as if he thought it were not true. If so, how did that happen? How has this pattern held throughout human history and now suddenly ceased? When did God repeal His law of sowing and reaping? No, it’s not repealed. If there’s a God in heaven, and if the Bible is His word, then every man will reap what he sows — Trump and every one of the rest of us.

Let me exhort you then to oppose Donald Trump with all your might. Even if he does a good thing now and then (probably for the purpose of trying to manipulate people like us), he’s still a bad man. The good things he does, though welcome in themselves, are tainted by his touch. The sooner Christians disenthrall themselves from Trump, see him for what he is, and take the lead in banishing him from American public life, the sooner we can get started on the long road to winning back the testimony and reputation that have been lost by evangelicals’ embrace of a vile and unrepentant man.