>>>>>

King James Bible Proverbs 28:13
"He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy."

It's the 'forsaking them' that I don't see. The Hollywood Access tape is followed by more than 15 women, a porn star, and a Playboy Bunny indicating that Trump has followed the comments on the tape rather than forsaking earlier transgressions. If evangelicals "have the mind of Christ", I still see hypocrisy in their telling others how to interpret scripture that is so clear ("murder of infants" ) and defending Trump's fornication and adultery.

Yes you are immediately forgiven and there are consequences. But are you sure that you know what you’re talking about referencing Psalm 16:10? Try it in context...

Psalm 16:7-11 (NASB)
7 I will bless the LORD who has counseled me; Indeed, my mind instructs me in the night.
8 I have set the LORD continually before me; Because He is at my right hand, I will not be shaken.
9 Therefore my heart is glad and my glory rejoices; My flesh also will dwell securely.
10 For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay.
11 You will make known to me the path of life; In Your presence is fullness of joy; In Your right hand there are pleasures forever.

David was assured that the Lord would preserve his life in the face of death. He rejoiced because God enabled his body to rest securely even when confronted with death. The reason he could rest is that God would not abandon him to the grave, nor... let His holy one see decay. This verse refers to David, who describes himself as God's "holy one," that is, one of God's saints (cf. v. 3). He took comfort in the fact that God would not, at that time, allow his body to die and decay in the grave. In fact God had caused him to know the path of life so he anticipated experiencing further joy in God's presence (v. 11).

Verses 8-11 were cited by Peter on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:25-28) and Psalm 16:10b was quoted by Paul at Antioch (Acts 13:35-37) in reference to Christ's resurrection. So the words of David are also typological; they transcended his own experience and became historically true in Christ. Preservation from the decaying grave is the idea behind both David's and Jesus' experiences, but with David it came through a deliverance from death, whereas with Jesus it came through a resurrection from death.

Death posed no threat to David because he enjoyed great blessing and fellowship with the Lord. God would not permit death and the grave to interrupt that marvelous fellowship. So in a fuller sense this is true of believers today, who having the full revelation about the doctrine of resurrection, can say that even when they die, God will not let death destroy that full fellowship they enjoy with the Lord (2 Cor. 5:8; Phil. 1:23). This expression of faith is possible because Christ conquered death (Luke 24:6) and rose to become the firstfruits of all who sleep (1 Cor. 15:20).

>>>>
Yes.
No question that 16:10 is Messianic and could be interpreted as you suggested. But then you have to explain:
1) What was Christ doing in hell?
2) What is David doing in hell if he was forgiven immediately or even in his lifetime?
3) The question remains: Can one take a life? Quickly "repent"? and then be completely and immediately absolved? If the answer is yes, then that is what other Christians (presumably not evangelicals according to your presumably evangelical interpretation )call the "cheap grace" of doing anything against Deity's commandments and being absolved right away by mere confession. Sort of an inexpensive version of the medieval practice of buying indulgences. Where does the fairness to the murdered person lie? Too bad Uriah, you were just a pawn in the king's adultery? Tough luck, Marine.
4) David admits he is going to hell v10, where he then makes a comparison of his relief from hell through resurrection and the Lord's resurrection.
Can we not take David's words literally? It is a common mistake, even cop out, to interpret some verses literally, and when they don't fit one's interpretative scheme, to ascribe them to metaphor. Real grace is not cheap, because it is based in the Savior's infinite atonement--a price that no human could pay; His atonement is cheapened by your interpretation of David, admittedly favored by the Lord, to be given absolution from payment of such grievous sins as adultery and murder by a quick, "Gee, I'm really sorry, and I promise to not do it again." If this were the rule of heaven, what prevents a life of shame and sin to be forgiven on a deathbed with an, "I'm awfully sorry?" It defies the fairness of a God who loves His children equally, and therefore treats them equally according to their deeds even as He is willing to forgive the sins but does not allow the law to be compromised. Strange belief to find favoritism to be ok in a perfect Parent who loves all His children equally.
5) If your interpretation is valid, then what is the problem with abortion? Why the big deal? In your scheme, it is just another murder that can be
easily forgiven, just like David's.

>>>>>
If you knew the current status of how human mental machinery makes decisions, you would know that feelings are a prime factor in determining how humans decide. You, not I, ride an incorrect scientific principle into an ocean of absolutism about psychology and religion. No shipwreck here, brother. Thanks for whatever level of concern you have for me, but do not worry, I know what my issues are--I have the chart, I know the waters, and I know that I will reach my destination. Hope to find you there.

>>>
After chiding me for saying that actions are important, it is interesting that you quote Matt 7:21-23, "but he who DOES the will of my Father in heaven." Do you really think Trump's record is supported by evangelicals because he is such a good example of doing the Father's will--which includes obeying the Father's commandments---like no adultery? or as you like to quote," by their fruits ye shall know them." The Lord really disliked hypocrisy as He again and again condemned the Pharisees for theirs. So we are back to the hypocrisy of evangelicals condemning non-evangelicals for their sins but unwilling to condemn Trump for his. As they themselves admit, they would rather have presidential and legal (court) power even if it costs them the price of having to wear the scarlet letter of 'H' for their hypocrisy.
Thanks again for your concern about my soul. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved..." Mark 16:16. I believe and I have been baptized. So according to those criteria, I am saved. No need to worry on my account.

As oldMarine says: God bless the United States. Beauase it has the mission to be Reagan's city on the hill.
As oldMarine says: God bless Donald Trump. Because he leads the US and he certainly needs all the celestial help he can get.
As this Marine says: God bless the Constitution because He gifted it to us.

Semper Fi and Basta!

Hollis Phelps', Professor of Interdisciplinary studies at Mercer University in Macon, GA wrote an article titled "Maybe It's Time to Admit that the 'Grotesque Caricature' of White Evangelicals is the Reality" where he examines the pathology. He writes the following:

"There’s no doubt that evangelicalism seems to have an image problem, especially since its overwhelming alliance with Trump. In the minds of many outside the fold, evangelicalism no longer represents a specific religious position centered on sin and the need for individual salvation but rather a self-serving, power-hungry political movement that will side with the devil himself for the sake of political pragmatism.
“When people say what does it mean to be an evangelical, people don’t say evangelism or the gospel,” Birdsall told the Washington Post. But this image problem isn’t new. Although polling shows that overall feelings toward evangelicals as a religious group have remained relatively stable since 2014, the perception of evangelicals as “agents of intolerance,” to quote John McCain back in 2008, well predates the Trump era. And besides, we shouldn’t chalk it all up to image. The fact remains that over 80% of self-identified white evangelical voters cast their lot with Trump. Moreover, despite a host of missteps and scandals, overall evangelical support for Trump as president hasn’t declined but grown.
Phelps posits the pretext that the White Evangelical uses to support Donald Trump and turns it on its head.
Given the consistency with which white evangelicals as a whole have lent their support to Trump—and right-wing candidates and policies more generally—it’s far past time to own up to the fact that the image is, in many respects, the reality."

"Well-intentioned evangelical leaders may not like to hear that, but it remains the case that an overwhelming majority of evangelicals continue to support Trump and his policies. Sure, they may have issues with his moral center, or lack thereof, but they’re willing to overlook all this for the sake of political expediency, for promises of “religious freedom,” and the hope of a judiciary stacked with conservative judges. This is because, at the end of the day, evangelicalism isn’t really about personal values but, rather, social and political conversion and control."