With election season upon us, many Christians are wondering who to vote for. Usually, one party tends to align with more conservative, Christian principles. This year that candidate appears to be far from the ideal candidate. There are other choices for president, but would voting for any of them make any impact in the election? Before you cast your vote, we should spend some time studying not only each candidate, but especially the Christian perspective on the role of the government. This first part will start there. Part two will discuss how a Christian should use his vote.
American Christians have a unique opportunity in the history of the world to have a major influence in choosing their government. Throughout history, Christians have found themselves under the rule of appointed kings and oppressive rulers. There has been nothing quite like the
When deciding how to vote, we must first consider what we believe the role of government to be. We must also understand what our role as Christians in this country is to be. Nailing down these two points will help us understand how to use the unique opportunity of freedom we are presented with.
Not much is spoken of in the New Testament in regards to setting up a proper government. The Bible is not a political instruction manual. Most of the mentions of government address how Christians are to live under the authority structure they find themselves in. Romans 13, while addressing the importance of submission to the government, does provide us some insight into what the purpose of government.
Verse one states that all people in authority have been instituted by God. Every ruler, including the most wicked in history, was brought into power by the hand of God. Verse two continues to say, then, that if you rebel against the in place authorities, you rebel against what God has ordained. The following verses command us to pay the authorities monetarily and with respect and honor. Paul does not say how a proper government should handle taxes and revenue, just that these are appropriate and subjection to these provides for a peaceable, orderly society. In Luke 3:13, Jesus says that the tax collectors do have a right to collect revenue for the government, but they are not to cheat people out of more than what they owe.
What are some specific duties of the government that we should look to establish? Proverbs 8:15,16 suggest that God appoints rulers to exact justice. The word justice today has started to lose quite a bit of its original meaning. Today justice seems to mean that we feed hungry people, give money to poor people, and take care of the environment. The original meaning of the word (and the dictionary definition) is more akin to keeping order in society by holding people accountable for violating a law. Justice is not to favor one type of person over another. Special interest is to be given to those who are least able to protect themselves, however, sensitivity to the poor does not suggest the government is to show them favor either. “Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly” (Lev. 19:15). At a basic level, the government is to provide order and safety to its citizens by curbing the immoral behavior of its citizens and those outside influences that infringe on the people’s natural, God-given rights. It is important then to determine what our rights are.
Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence that our unalienable, God-given rights are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The founders of this country had a firm understanding of the biblical view of man and government. They knew that the role of the government isn’t to make everyone behave in a certain way or provide for the every need of the people. They felt that the government is to ensure that everyone has the right to live and to make their own choices on how to run their lives. The government is to simply provide safety and security in those freedoms. They knew that a group of sinful men would not be able to control every sinful decision of its people, so it was their responsibility to provide the freedoms and trust that the local governments and churches would work to provide order.
Especially important for us to consider is the amount of power the government has to provide direction for the country. Our founders understood that men were inherently sinful, and given too much power, they would exploit it for their own benefits. When the government was established, they balanced the powers between many different offices and provided checks on the power between the offices. It was set up so that one person would not be able to force his own will on the people contrary to the will of the majority. No matter who becomes president, he alone will not have the power to ruin this country.
Our country is not what is now popularly known as a democracy. A democracy is government directly by the majority. If the majority wanted sin, they could get it. Our country is a democratic republic. The majority choose representatives to lead them within the bounds of the constitution. The constitution even provides a check on the people’s representatives from legislating contrary to the basic rules laid out at the onset. If we want new laws we have to go through the constitutional means laid before us. Much of what our government does today and what we expect from our government is far beyond the bounds of the founders’ original intent for this nation.
What happens if the man that is elected is not the desired candidate? What are we to do as Christians? To keep us sane, we need to remember what our role as Christians is. We must remember that we are pilgrims (strangers, foreigners, aliens, sojourners) in this world. While we live in the
Currently, at our church, we have been encouraging everyone to memorize 2 Corinthians 5:20-21. These verses are a simple reminder of our primary mission in the world: “Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ; certain that God is appealing through us, we plead on Christ’s behalf, ‘Be reconciled to God.’ He made the One who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”
Our role as Christians is to proclaim the gospel to lost, blind people. We are ambassadors of the God of the universe given the task to take the message of His kingdom to this world. Our primary mission is to get the word of God into the culture so people may repent of their sins and turn to the Savior. It is vital to understand that making new laws will not change people’s hearts. A Christian’s view on politics must be grassroots. We proclaim the gospel to individuals which changes hearts which creates new people who will pass good laws. Too many Christians put their hope in the government to do the work given to the church. Making good laws will not make good people. It is our duty to proclaim the gospel whether the leader of our country is Nero, Hilter, Bush, Obama or McCain.
So how does this influence our vote? An amazing privilege has been given to us to actually have a voice in who leads this country. What first century Christian wouldn’t have loved to have been given the right to choose to get Nero out of
14 comments:
How about addressing why a Christian should vote before assuming it to be true?
Do you feel it is wrong for a Christian to vote? I'm curious; tell me about it.
We have freedom in this country to participate in choosing our leaders. As far as I understand, there is no biblical prohibition to voting, so I will let my voice be heard (with my single vote) and get back to the business of gospel proclamation.
I don't believe it's wrong to vote, but I also don't believe in doing something for the sake of doing it especially when it comes to political engagement. There is no biblical prohibition against voting and there also is no recommendation either. Christians that want to vote need to recognize how the action connects to their identity in Christ. If I'm called to follow Christ and happen to live in a democracy then my participation in the electoral system deserves better justification then "I vote because it's the ritual I engage in every four years according to the custom of my national identity." Christians that want to vote need to seriously consider first for what reasons Christ would vote had he lived in a democracy. My challenge is that you present those reasons before assuming it is the right of Christians to vote.
I don't think I presented the attitude that "I vote because it's the ritual I engage in every four years according to the custom of my national identity."
I thought I presented the contrary; that we have the privilege (not right; true rights are God-given, not from the government) to choose our leaders and that we should not put our hope in the government. We must recognize that we are citizens of God's kingdom; that our vote reflects that and despite who leads this government, we will serve Christ first.
I am not seeing where I presented that it is a God-given right we have to vote and we'd better use it in this country or we are in sin.
I am posting this because most of the Christians I know plan on voting (even for a candidate who represents little of what Christians stand for), and they seem to put far too much stock into who becomes the next president. It is great that we have this opportunity to participate in choosing our leadership, but the point is to not forget about our primary mission in this world: the Gospel.
I spoke of rights because you mentioned the "God-given rights" the founders had in mind when they formed the country. I assume that since democracy has been tied to the founding of our country that it follows that it is an expression of those "God-given" rights.
Why do you think voting is a privilege? To talk of privilege suggests that you have something that others don't and wish they had/should have/should be envious they don't have (take your pick). Is it a privilege to be an American as opposed to being Chinese, Pakistani, Romanian, Somalian, etc.?
Why is it a privilege to vote if we "should not put our hope in the government?" It's like saying I feel privileged to waste a bunch of time reading news, studying candidates positions, thinking through my own positions, comparing and contrasting my and the candidates positions and waiting in line to push a button (or whatever you do) but I have no hope and should not hope that it will matter. Should Sisyphus say "I feel privileged to push this rock up a hill despite the fact I know I cannot get it to the top, it will roll back over me and I will be privileged to do it all over again?"
You say:
"We must recognize that we are citizens of God's kingdom; that our vote reflects that and despite who leads this government, we will serve Christ first."
This makes no sense to me. First, you're still assuming that American Christians should vote (for whatever reason yet to be established). Second, you speak of the Body of Christ and how our vote reflects the body of Christ. This must mean that from the Bible you can pull out both the rationale for voting, the biblical prescription for what government looks like and works like, and the areas in Christ's life in which these ideas are manifested. I don't at all believe that you had in mind to be cocky when you wrote this (you are a nice guy Adam), but that's a lot to claim.
How can the support of secular governance ever reflect our Heavenly citizenship? I don't see that connection. When I ask myself "what would Jesus do?" I can't fathom an answer in this context. Most will admit that voting is a choice between the lesser of two evils, yet I don't see in Christ's life where He ever chooses between two evils. So, when you say, "the Christians I know plan on voting (even for a candidate who represents little of what Christians stand for), and they seem to put far too much stock into who becomes the next president," how much stock should we put into who becomes the next president? I'd like to see a justification that any stock should be put into this. Yet, you're writing these entries and are planning on voting because you must put some stock into it otherwise there would be no reason to suggest that one candidate is more Christian than another and thus worthier to be voted president.
You finish by acknowledging, "the point is to not forget about our primary mission in this world: the Gospel." I agree with this wholeheartedly, but what does the practice of voting have to do with that mission? More importantly, I would add that we should not forget that we are called to model Jesus. How does modeling Jesus connect with voting?
I don't understand what point you are trying to make. It seems you are trying to find some philosophy in my statement that makes voting unbiblical. I am saying, "You have freedom to choose your ruler as you go about proclaiming the gospel. Be careful with your choice." It would be foolish to say, "No thanks, I'll take whatever the pagans want to give me." I am not writing this to tell people that they must vote. It is simply to remind those who wish to participate that they will be accountable to Christ for everything, even their vote.
I don't believe in voting for the lesser of two evils. In the current election there is a man who supports nearly every biblical principle I support for a man to lead our government. He is not likely to win, but I will vote for him because I will be accountable to God for what I did with my freedom. I will let God be sovereign to work through men to raise up the rulers of the world (either oppressive rulers or God-fearing leaders) as I am faithful to biblical principles.
We can't live in isolation. We live in America and at this moment are fairly free to choose to live as we please. What does going to a secular job have to do with modeling Jesus? What does driving a car have to do with modeling Jesus? What does using the internet have to do with modeling Jesus? These are privileges we have in this country that we can show our allegiance to Christ as we live under the authority of a secular nation. If I have the freedom to say that I would like a God-fearing president, I would sure like to exercise that freedom. It seems to me that you are saying we shouldn't participate in anything that isn't totally biblical and that fatalistically we should give up and let God take care of things without us.
I'm not trying to find any kind of unbiblical philosophy. What I'm trying to find is a biblical reason to vote.
You said:
"I am saying, "You have freedom to choose your ruler as you go about proclaiming the gospel. Be careful with your choice.""
From what we see from Jesus's life in the New Testament given as a model for ours can you say that you think Jesus would say these same words you have if He had a democracy to be a part of?
You said:
"It would be foolish to say, "No thanks, I'll take whatever the pagans want to give me.""
Why is it foolish? That's how Jesus, the disciples and the early Christians lived. Jesus said, "Blessed are the persecuted." If the pagans choose to persecute us we are blessed. If they don't we are in the position we currently are in the US, so what is foolish about not choosing? If we will all be held accountable for our choices then you must think it will be to your benefit when that accountability comes that you make the choice to vote who you vote for. How do you reason that? You're making a choice that you think will be more favorable in the eyes of God than not voting or voting for someone else. What scriptural reasons do you have for that understanding of how your choice reflects whatever accountability you have to God?
Neither candidate is Jesus Christ so you must be voting for the lesser of two evils. You think that the candidate is the most Christian of the choices, but you can't know ahead of time that his policies will reflect your original conviction. A lot of Christians that voted for Bush four and eight years ago thought the same way then that you do now and that is part of the reason the republicans are likely to lose this round (that's a factual observation, not an endorsement).
Every day we come closer to the Apocalypse. It may come tomorrow, a decade or even a century from now, but we're certainly not moving farther from it. One day it will be the Anti-Christ in charge and whether he was voted into whatever office he holds or not he is ordained by God to be there to bring about the end.
You said:
"I will let God be sovereign to work through men to raise up the rulers of the world (either oppressive rulers or God-fearing leaders) as I am faithful to biblical principles."
What biblical principles are you being faithful to in your act of voting?
I'm not suggesting we should live in isolation. Jesus was in the world and very engaged in the lives of people, but He and the other New Testament writers did not concern themselves with the political squabbles of their time and regions. We use current modes of transportation to get where we need to go just like the disciples used what was available to them. We use current forms of communication for the same purposes the early church did. We have jobs because it's biblical to not be so lazy as to not try to support oneself. These correlations do not go so far as to include political engagement, like it is currently imagined, in the Bible. My challenge remains that we should have a Biblical reason for voting or we should not do it.
Arguing from Jesus silence on voting does not help us figure out if we should vote. They did not live in a democratic type society so they didn't have the option. He told them to submit to what they had before them. The government at the time was a dictatorship and sub-rulers were appointed based on corrupt quid pro quo relationships. While there may be much corruption in our system, we still have the option to vote for someone who fears God and will act that out in his political job (are Christians allowed to have secular jobs, just not those in politics?).
I just think it would be foolish if you were given the options between oppression, mocking, or a government that will leave you alone, you choose to say nothing.
I understand that all people are born evil, so technically all votes would be for the lesser of two evils. However, Christians have been redeemed and are given new hearts that desire to serve Him. I would definitely prefer to live under a government led by him so I will vote for him. If God does or does not orchestrate for that man to be our leader, I will move on a face either more freedom to share the gospel, or persecution as I share the gospel.
Just because the Antichrist could come tomorrow doesn't mean I should live a defeated life and accept that we are trending toward destruction. Through many secular means we can work to save lives and help the oppressed so we have the opportunity to warn them of the judgment to come.
The principles that I look for in a candidate are protection of life and the ability to choose how to pursue happiness; a person that understands that laws can't change how people behave, just prevents them from infringing on other people's lives.
By the way, I think Bush was a terrible president in that regard. He used Christians to get into office and did not protect these liberties, but exploited them.
Thanks for the discussion. I don't know that we are coming toward any agreement. You make me think though.
I am glad you are enjoying this discussion. I am as well. It's been awhile since I've had the opportunity to articulate my views on this subject.
The Bible talks about a lot of very important topics in detail that give Christians a good idea of what to do and not do. I think that the biblical silence on government participation on the part of Christians speaks volumes. You are correct that they did not live in a democratic society, but the timelessness of the Word means in my mind that Christian participation in government should still be addressed in the Bible if there was a reason for Christians to participate. There are all kinds of governments in the world and Christians are all over the world. God knew we would throughout history struggle with our governments, be unaffected by our governments and identify and participate in our governments whatever the structure of that government may be. Yet, it is not addressed. Drunkenness, the use of wealth, gender roles, church leadership and many other important topics are addressed but not Christian participation in government. Also, to point out, though admittedly it does not bolster my argument much if at all, Paul as a Roman citizen had the right to vote for senators to the Roman Senate, but there is no mention of him ever doing so.
I would argue that Christ had a political choice he could have made that would bolster an argument for participation in democracy, but also since He did not make it it should reveal something to us about His thoughts on that participation. That choice was revolt. Jesus had a revolutionary amongst His disciples (Simon the Zealot). I see no reason to think that if Christ thought it was a valuable endeavor for the Body to do anything by the power of the government He could have encouraged the disciples to align more closely with the Zealots. After all this would feed into the image of the Messiah the Jews were expecting.
I interpret Jesus' silence on the matter and indeed His maintaining the path He chose to say that He wants to use the Body to show the world how powerful the foolishness of God is. The world is structured by governments because it makes since and yet for all our human ideals and good intentions governments can't form a society that is rid of problems. The Body of Christ and the Kingdom of God are juxtaposed to human government to show an alternative way where there is real freedom and deliverance despite the inability of the worldly wise to recognize it.
I left the Antichrist bit incomplete and did not elaborate on it as I meant to within the post. Sorry about that. I pointed it out meaning that there are no guarantees in voting. There was no guarantee before with Bush and there is no guarantee for any candidate. Christians caught up in the ritual of voting could very well vote into the public sphere the Antichrist. The Bible has nothing to say about what kind of person he will be or what kind of politics he'll espouse, so it would seem to me that he's just as likely to be conservative as he is liberal. It seems likely to me that he could be "Christian" just as easily as he could be Jewish, Muslim or Athiest. If there is accountability for our voting habits then what would that say about the Christian who voted for the Antichrist?
I acknowledge as well that through secular means we can accomplish God's will, but I wonder if this is the best means available? There are many people in the world who are anti-American. How can we witness to them if they see that the Gospel we are trying to proclaim is tainted by the very things the hate us for? If we use secular means to spread the Gospel then that Gospel becomes identified, whether we like it or not, with the actions and reputation of that secular organization. It seems to me that the early church did the most amazing job ever at spreading the Gospel and they did so under persecution and without secular help. The tools to spread the gospel are already within the Body of Christ. There is no need for recourse to secular institutions. Indeed, by the fact that certain secular institutions are despised in the world, I argue that the identification with those institutions in the long run is more a hindrance than a help.
To bring this back to the topic, if we vote for a leader the world will connect us to the actions and reputation of that leader. I don't see how being identified with any leader other than Jesus Christ will help or not hinder the proclamation of the Gospel.
I read through both your comments in great detail and would like to make a few points.
First I would like to say that Christians absolutely have a responsibility to vote whenever possible in democratic political elections. Why? Big A said it perfectly when he wrote that we CANNOT live in isolation in America. Blake you mentioned that Jesus did not trouble himself with the political squabbles of His time. That was not His purpose for coming to Earth. Jesus came to save us from our sins and along the way, He taught us how to live our lives and He shook up the old Jewish religious system. For Jesus, I think, influencing government was secondary to influencing humanity.
I say influencing government was secondary because it WAS, in my opinion, on Jesus' agenda. Yet how could one affect the government in a day when authoritarian rule was the norm? What political squabbles were there when one ruler told you what to do and think? I don't think God has anything against authoritarian rule; God just hates sin and evil. They say absolute power corrupts absolutely. Is there an easy way to influence the sins of an entire nation under authoritarian rule? Not if the ruler is corrupt. Is there such a way in a democracy? Absolutely. If Christians do not let their voices be heard, or if we do not participate wholeheartedly in American politics then what responsibility do our secular leaders have to respect the wishes of God, Christians and the bible?
Think about it this way: if you knew that somebody was about to be killed and you had the power to stop it but did nothing, aren't you in the wrong? James 4:17 says, "Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins". I don't want to open up another can of worms, but I consider abortion to be morally abominable and a sin before God. If there is anything in my power that I can do to put a stop to it, I feel that I must do it or be a sinner myself. The good that I ought to do then, is vote for a candidate that has the same beliefs as (I believe) God has when it comes to abortion. If I do not vote, then I have not done all that I can do to stop abortions. By this line of reasoning, not only do we have moral obligation to vote, we need to know who are voting for as well.
Of course, voting is not the only way to create this change, but it sure is the simplest. Of course, abortion is not the only reason Christians should vote; God has just weighed it heavily on my heart. I think that there are a number of policies set by the government that contradict biblical teachings and Christians should take advantage of the fact that we can vote to make changes in the way our government rules. Christian citizens under authoritarian rule do not have the ability to make such a huge impact on their governments as Americans do. We have got to take advantage of this. We really can spread God's love through our vote.
Now the argument has been that all candidates are the lesser of two evils. I think I agree with that, but at the same time there are candidates that will seek God's guidance and those that wont. Clearly, if we want morality and Christian doctrine to guide this country, then should we not vote for the candidate that demonstrates God's love and philosophy the most? Should we not know enough about a candidate to know if they will seek God or not? Luke 6:44: "Each tree is recognized by its own fruit." With candidates being put through the ringer like they are today, I feel like I know which presidential candidate is more likely to seek God's will. Obviously we cannot know for sure, but we must try.
This country is blessed beyond our wildest dreams and I believe that that is because we were founded by Believers in God. If this is true, then it follows that God will bless a nation that follows Him. Should we not vote for a president that will follow the Will of God? Should we not seek God's blessing by putting a president into office that will seek God everyday? I believe that we should. I believe that we must.
Thanks mystery person for sharing your thoughts.
Blake, I think I understand your concern for having any involvement in politics. I respect your concern for keeping the gospel pure and adding no stumbling blocks to the already offensive message of the gospel.
I still don't see, though, a prohibition against voting. While I will continue to vote, it will be done with even greater awareness that I will be judged for my vote and with more concern for what my vote does for the gospel.
Thanks for the discussion.
First, I have not said, suggested or ever want to imply that I think Christians should live in isolation. In fact, I stated at the beginning of my second post, "I don't believe it's wrong to vote." What I want is for us to figure out more creatively and more biblically how to engage the world in all its realms including politics.
Jesus clearly did not live in isolation and my whole issue from the beginning has been to try and figure out how to better model Jesus in this realm of our American lives. Anonymous said that it was not Jesus' purpose to get involved in political squabbles. This says to me that for some paradoxical reason it's ok for Jesus to live in isolation from His political context, but it isn't ok for those of us who are supposed to be "little Christs." Apparently it was also ok for the disciples to live in political isolation but it isn't ok for us now that democracy has changed everything about how we look to the early Christians and Jesus Christ for political models.
Anonymous asked:
"What political squabbles were there when one ruler told you what to do and think?"
There were many people that believed differently than Caesar they just didn't have the freedom to voice that opinion. It became custom in the Roman Senate at the time that you show your opposition to whatever laws of Caesar's they were voting on by not showing up that day to vote. The senators wouldn't dare to actually vote against Caesar's wishes.
I have suggested one political option that neither Anonymous or Big A has addressed: going the route of the Zealots. Jesus could have given the disciples a model for political engagement with the Zealots. Here's how it could have happened. Jesus knew He came to save the world from our sins so He does His ministry and prepares Himself for the Cross. But subtly throughout His ministry or maybe just towards the end He suggests to the disciples that once He has done His work on the cross they should go out and spread the Gospel. However, He also lets them know that the peoples of the world do not glorify Him in their practices and thus gives the disciples permission to engage with the government or with revolutionaries to force or at least coerce governments to consider if not wholly change their practices so that various laws like one opposing abortion should be common place throughout the world. If this had happened in scripture then Jesus would have clearly managed to both die for our sins and encourage a model of political engagement for His followers.
This did not happen. What did happen (what we have historical record of) was that the early Christians were very anti-abortion, anti serving in the military, and anti being involved in or witnessing violence all together. The early Christians made it a practice amongst themselves not to have abortions and did not try to export these values to their neighbors through the government.
Anonymous asked:
"If Christians do not let their voices be heard, or if we do not participate wholeheartedly in American politics then what responsibility do our secular leaders have to respect the wishes of God, Christians and the bible?"
Can't the same line of reasoning be applied to any common sinner? I believe the passage pastors usually answer this question with is:
Romans 1:18-20 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people who suppress the truth by their unrighteousness, because what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes — his eternal power and divine nature — have been clearly seen, because they are understood through what has been made. So people are without excuse.
Anonymous said:
"Think about it this way: if you knew that somebody was about to be killed and you had the power to stop it but did nothing, aren't you in the wrong? James 4:17 says, "Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins"."
Right here is where an appeal to the ways of the Zealots would help, but that appeal is not given. Did the early Christians sin because they did not do everything in their power to overthrow Rome to institute a government that would protect the unborn?
Anonymous said:
"We really can spread God's love through our vote."
Christianity is in decline throughout the Western world. For the first time ever the Southern Baptist Convention (the largest protestant denomination in the US) has began to decline in membership. While I'll readily acknowledge that there are certainly a multitude of reasons for the decline of Christianity it seems that one of those reasons must be unBiblical, irresponsible engagement with the governments of the world. The world doesn't want us involved in their governments appealing to a God other than themselves legislating on behalf of, what they perceive to be, some omnipresent boogieman out to get them in their debauchery. The media has aligned Christians with certain political positions and no longer with the Gospel. Many Christians find it easier to canvas for a political candidate than preach Jesus. Our readiness to align with secular institutions and practices have gotten us into a world of trouble.
I point this out to say that we can't spread God's love through our vote; we never could. The early church spread God's love their way without compromising their moral stances and expanded the Kingdom faster and farther than we have managed and ever will manage by using a vote.
Since no one is too interested in explaining why revolution couldn't have been a political model Jesus embraced I'll give what I believe to be the only biblical reason a person may vote.
Alan Hirsch is a very popular contemporary missiologist. In his writings he reminds the church that it defines itself by its mission. In other words most churches today decide how to do missions from how they do church. Hirsch says the opposite needs to happen: how we do missions should inform us how we do church. We need to always be in a missionary mindset.
From this discussion it seems that we've made clear that there is no example of political engagement to be found. So to be like Christ means we ought to be disengaged in the world's political processes (though NOT isolated). However, we must also remember that Christ had around Him in the disciples many who had already taken sides whether it be with the the Romans, Jews or Zealots. Despite their political differences the disciples were united in Christ and the missional calling He placed on their lives. Thus in this group of the earliest Christians we have the reason for any political engagement: as missionaries.
You can't get much farther politically than Simon the Zealot would have been from Matthew the tax collector or the centurion who showed amazing faith. Yet, they all could have gone back to the groups they were a part of before as missionaries. They still identify with the political beliefs of those groups but now they have the light of Christ to offer.
To state it bluntly, you shouldn't vote because you believe in the candidates positions. You should vote because God has given you a mission field of people who believe a particular way and voting along with that way gives you an experience that you share with them that allows more opportunity to share the Gospel. You can choose sides, but you choose that side as a missionary not as any kind of personal political idea or anything to put faith in.
Personally, I find myself in places where there is too much diversity of opinion that I can relate wholly to one idea or another. Like Paul I try to be "all things to all people" (1 Cor. 9:22). It is by God's design that there are Christians of all political stripes, but we must remember that despite our political leanings we are missionaries for Christ amongst those people.
Too many Christians are going to the polls with the intent to do whatever their weak perception of God's will for our country is. This creates a victor-loser mentality within the Body and the Body can not be divided. If you go to the voting booth today, cast your ballot as a missionary. Cast your ballot to give you something in common with the republicans, democrats or whatever other party you find yourself surrounded by at work or in your neighborhood. Missional voting is the only biblical reason I can see for any kind direct secular political participation.
Post a Comment