obviously this entails litigating what constitutes a true christian. realistically there are many people who identify as both. also realistically, american christianity has long involved weird corruptions and reinterpretations of principles set out in jewish and christian texts. the question of who is a “true christian” is fraught and the subject of many conflicts over millennia at this point
so i guess im not really sure how useful this formulation is. what is more useful is to point to specifics. like: synoptic gospels indicate jesus consistently advocated for sharing resources. like: all gospels identify jesus with lower classes and position wealth as a corruption. the corruption of these specifics long precedes maga