Should Christians vote for the lesser of two evils?

The topic of whether or not Christians should vote recently came up in the comment thread of this post that originally asked the question of whether or not Christians should vote for a Mormon (i.e. Mitt Romney). However, the predominant question that emerged from the comment thread was: Should a Christian vote for the lesser of two evils?

Now, if a truly blood-bought, born-again, child of God was running for political office, the debate would be moot. But let’s face it, we will probably never be given that option (at least not on the presidential ticket). Any genuine Christian with presidential aspirations would be facing an insurmountable obstacle of opposition because the world would hate him because it hated Christ first (and no pupil or Christian presidential candidate is above His master).

The unfortunate truth is, gaining the approval of the voting populace would require compromising one’s faith and morals in order to be accepted and in order to procure the votes needed to win. The Christian candidate would have no choice but to assimilate to the world in order to garner the approval of the world. (To see how successful that pragmatic approach is just look at the result of years of pastors pandering to the world while their sheep are dying of starvation. There’s a reason why God warned us not to mix light with darkness.)

Time and time again in America Christians are relegated to having to choose between the lesser of the two evils and it doesn’t appear that the upcoming presidential election will be any different.

So, with all that said, my current position is that true Christians should not have to vote if they first have to sit down and estimate which candidate is the lesser of two evils. 

Although I cannot (and will not) dictate to others whether they should vote or not, my conscience tells me that voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

Now, I know that there are many who will respectfully disagree with my position, and even suggest that it’s our duty as Americans and our obligation as Christians to vote for someone . . . anyone! So, for the furtherance of this discussion, I present the following four questions for your consideration:

1). What happens when both candidates are pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-Christian, big government socialists?

The way things are going, we’re not too far from that scenario now (and some might even argue that that’s what we already have every election cycle; just one candidate hides it better than the other).

If/when this scenario occurs do we flip a coin, or is voter abstinence permissible then? If you say the latter, then you must concede that those Christians who refuse to vote now because neither of the candidates are genuinely a Christian or a conservative (even though one may claim to be for election purposes) are actually doing the right thing.

And once the tide of Americans’ opinions breach that 51% mark of being pro-homosexual, pro-abortion, pro-cradle-to-grave government dependence, then you can expect to see less (if any) viable presidential candidates running on a conservative platform because politicians will always cater to the majority in order to win votes. (A rather ominous conundrum democracy inevitably births which is why democracies are always temporary.)

2). What exactly are you hoping to accomplish by voting for the lesser of two evils?

Do you vote for the lesser of two evils in the hopes to either have a little morality pumped back into society or at least to slow the rapid descent of moral decline? Those are commendable ambitions, but can you really rely on worldly means (e.g. presidential candidate, political process, government, etc.) to accomplish such lofty and noble spiritual goals? And to what end? What is the logical conclusion of that expectation? Do you hope to see a moralistic utopia where no one steals, lies, or spits on the sidewalk, but where most people still go to Hell because they are self-righteous and believe that they’re morally good enough to earn God’s approval? This may not be your intended outcome, but you know that it is the inevitable result when any worldly government attempts to legislate morality sans Christ.

To put that much stock in (and ultimately, that much responsibility on) a government or on the shoulders of a president is to forget how depraved the human heart really is. If your theory was possible, then to fix the ills of the world God could have made Noah president instead of covering it with water.

In the past 30 years we’ve had pro-life presidents in office on several occasions, but abortions are still legal and still going strong. In the past 30 years we’ve had conservative presidents in office on several occasions, yet we’re not too far off from homosexual marriage being legal. And for the past 30 years every president we’ve had has been a professing Christian (even our current one) yet, the government is still growing bigger and the runaway train of moral depravity continues to barrel down the greased tracks unabated.

By voting for the lesser of the two evils are you expecting to see a few less homosexual unions? A few less abortions? A few less of this moral ill or that moral ill?

Do you really think that an unregenerate man or woman elected to a worldly political office is going to stem the tide of sin’s downward spiral in this nation? When you compare the current state of our once great country with the road to wrath in Romans, you may come to the conclusion, as John MacArthur has, that this nation has already been abandoned by God.

3). What is our example from those in the New Testament Church concerning our involvement in politics?

Are we supposed to be more concerned with spiritual matters or earthly matters?

As a Roman citizen, can you honestly envision the Apostle Paul “voting” for the lesser of two evils; which Caesar he thought would be more moral than another? (Yes, I know, Rome wasn’t a democracy, but you get my point.)

It is becoming increasingly apparent (to me at least) that Christians in America are too caught up, are too distracted, and are too preoccupied with worldly political matters, and all of this is at the expense of the sharing of the gospel.

Perhaps we need to get more serious about the souls that are perishing all around us. Christ didn’t command us to elect politicians, but He did command us to make disciples. And how much more difficult that task becomes when–before a word is ever spoken–we alienate others by the political bumper stickers that placard our cars and the campaign signs that litter our yards.

The gospel we live and die for should be the stumbling block to our family, friends, and neighbors, not our political leanings and affiliations. Unfortunately too many of us are known more by our politics than by our Christianity.

How many opportunities have been lost over arguing politics with someone when that person needed to hear about Christ? I have been so guilty of this, and I painfully regret those many lost opportunities that can never be recovered.

4). Is getting an immoral, socialist, anti-Christian president a bad thing?

As American Christians we’ve become accustomed to our prosperous and secure lifestyle, a lifestyle foreign to Christians throughout church history (and equally foreign to those Christians today who don’t live in the West) but so commonly taken for granted by us.

Do you vote for the candidate that will best help you to achieve the American dream or preserve your current prosperous economic status? If so, I have to ask a serious question of you: Has the American dream been a help or a hindrance to your faith?

We would do good to remember this lesson from history:

Beware that you do not forget the LORD your God by not keeping His commandments and His ordinances and His statutes which I am commanding you today; otherwise, when you have eaten and are satisfied, and have built good houses and lived in them, and when your herds and your flocks multiply, and your silver and gold multiply, and all that you have multiplies, then your heart will become proud and you will forget the LORD your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.   – Deuteronomy 8:11-14

If our true passion is to see souls come into the Kingdom, then we should be less concerned with achieving the American dream, increasing our financial prosperity, and righting the moral ills in the world, and instead we should be more focused on devoting our lives fully to preaching Christ and Him crucified.

If making disciples is one of our primary purposes for existence, then why are we so preoccupied with building a happy, safe, comfortable, economically prosperous life, and exerting so much time and effort in electing men and women to political positions that will assist us in maintaining our desired lifestyles?

You may argue: “But if a really evil president gets elected and outlaws Christianity, then what?” Well, if he were to outlaw what has come to be known as “Christianity” in America (better known as Churchianity or Moralistic Therapeutic Deism), then how is that a bad thing?

But what if true Christians begin getting persecuted?” you ask.

When we look at the explosive growth of the underground churches in countries like China, Vietnam, Iraq, Cuba, etc. and then compare that to the current state of the visible mile-wide, inch-deep, man-centered, program-driven church in America, then I have to suggest that maybe, just maybe, a president that is bad for the country might actually be good for the church. (And I won’t even delve into the fact that God gives nations the leaders they deserve; that’s another whole issue.)

The inconvenient truth is that the church suffers when its people get comfortable, but it flourishes under pressure, trials, and persecution. The more intense the persecution is, the better the health of the church is. And if the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church, then the luxury and security of the churchgoer is certainly the death of it.

__________________________________________

See also:

The Fall of the United States of Rome

Has the Religious Right lost its voice in American politics?

Independence Day and the state of the church in America.

63 thoughts on “Should Christians vote for the lesser of two evils?

  1. Pilgrim — Excellent post! The Constitution does not mandate (as in a law) its citizens to vote. The Constitution designates “Voting” as a “right”; therefore to ‘not vote’ is not disobedience to civil authority (Romans 13:1).

  2. I agree, and even more so thanks to being quite convinced that the results of all high-level elections are 100% predetermined by Satan’s most devoted and powerful human servants. The fix is absolutely in, regardless of who opposes the hand-picked “winner,” and regardless of how many people vote for whom; it’s all a sham and a farce. Even so. Come quickly Lord Jesus, maranatha!

  3. abidingthroughgrace says:

    Pilgrim,
    I’ll save you the boredom of cutting and pasting my previous comments (to the other post) here. :) The premise you suggest is correct. In the the case of evil and less evil…I’ll vote for some random 7th party guy that holds to my values or I’ll stay home. Mr. Evil vs. Mr. Not Very Good…I’ll probably vote for Mr. Not Very Good, but it will greatly depend on what he stands for.

    Interestingly, I had this conversation with my good friend last night who is staying with us for a couple days and he stated emphatically, NO WAY would I vote fore a Mormon. Eventually we got to a place where I agreed I would not vote for a Muslim. This flipped a switch for me and i started to understand the point being made by you and others. Mormons will be anti-Jesus Christ similar to how a Muslim would be.

    I want to commend you for these two sentences…they are truly convicting and on the money:

    “The gospel we live and die for should be the stumbling block to our family, friends, and neighbors, not our political leanings and affiliations. Unfortunately too many of us are known more by our politics than by our Christianity.”

    “How many opportunities have been lost over arguing politics with someone when that person needed to hear about Christ? I have been so guilty of this, and I painfully regret those many lost opportunities that can never be recovered.”

    -abidingthroughgrace

  4. Revival and Reformation says:

    This is precisely why we as a family do not vote. Which would be better, Saddam Hussein or Adolf Hitler? Christians always justify their decision to vote for someone by saying, “Oh but they’re a Christian,” or “They talked about the Bible”, or “So and so had them speak at their church…”

    Brother…

  5. Kay says:

    You make some really good points and certainly some food for thought. I had never completely thought this through, and I can understand your position. I have seen that Jesus, Paul, Peter and the other apostles did not waste any time with political activism, but were consumed with spreading the Gospel. With that said, I recall your rhetorical question of whether or not we should vote for the lesser evil in order to prevent a few more abortions. To that, my conscience would say, yes, each life is precious. I can only wonder how many thousands of lives were saved under Bush’s administration due to his outlawing of partial birth abortions. Remember Hitler’s regime and his slaughter of the Jews. Would a Christian feel obligated to vote against a man like Hitler (if there were a chance to vote against him), knowing that so many lives would be at stake? Bonhoeffer believed that it was his obligation to oppose what Hitler was doing, and there were some Christians who saved lives by hiding Jews from the Nazis. These are the thoughts I am grappling with, and I too believe that no one should go against what their conscience will allow.

  6. Bob J says:

    Kay….Bush may have signed the bill and prevented some abortions but he also is responsible for 10′s of thousands of lives lost because of his wars. (the lesser of two evils?)

  7. The practice of not only accepting but promoting the lesser of two evils is perhaps most apparent every 4 years, but at the core is the fundamental issue of compromise “for the greater good”, which if manifested at the voting booth, very often manifests in other areas as well. And we need to be diligent to consider when compromises may have an impact not only on our own faithfulness to Christ, but on someone else’s eternity.

    Is Catholicism or Mormonism to be supported in heathen countries because “at least they bring Biblical concepts” or “the name of Christ” to heathen people? Is any “gospel”, even a faulty one, better than no Gospel at all? Should an author or preacher be supported/endorsed because we like SOME of what he says, because SOME of what he teaches is Biblical, even though some other things he teaches is unbiblical or anti-biblical? Should Christians become like the world (in using profane language, in immodest dress, or in enjoying worldly/fleshly behavior), in order to “reach the world for Christ”? Should the Christian join with the enemies of Christ, even praying with them (thus yoking themselves), to counter evil in the world? History has shown (even in my own short lifetime) that many Christians have, under the “lesser of two evils” or compromise “for the greater good” value system, promoted that which was ultimately contrary to God’s truth and righteousness.

    Jesus made it quite clear on numerous occasions that He does not accept compromise. Nor does He accept mixture of truth and error. Nor does He accept lukewarmness.

  8. Jonny says:

    My question is to the original poster…
    If you do vote for the lesser of two evils, what are you losing? Do you feel that you are violating Christ in doing so? Do you feel that it immoral to vote for “the lesser of two evils”…

    What does the Scripture say about this issue?

    I agree with most of your points, and this is a very difficult issue to deal with for a lot of people because of watching this country go in a bad direction.

    Can you elaborate on what you feel like will happen to those who do vote for the lesser of two evils? Are they selling out their souls?

  9. Leo says:

    Great article, very much thought provoking, even though I do not agree with everything stated. I did found an interesting article worth sharing written by Jason Stellman titled “No Nation Under God” here’s a small excerpt:

    “What should be our response to learning that, come presidential campaign season, both the Democrats and Republicans will be playing tug-of-war with Jesus?

    I would like to offer a handful of observations that I hope will help clarify our thinking on some of these issues, as well as provide some fodder for further discussion and study of these matters.

    First, no matter their political persuasion, all Christians should feel very uncomfortable with the idea that the solution to the conservative politicization of the Christian faith is cheering on liberals when they try to do it. It is extremely anachronistic for anyone, whether on the left or the right, to try to claim divine sanction for free-market capitalism or biblical justification for universal healthcare. The Bible is not a political manual or blueprint for earthly utopia.

    Second (and speaking of utopias), we must remember that the biblical doctrine of the liberty of conscience means that one man’s utopian dream is may very well be another man’s nightmarish dystopia. This is why those who long for their ministers to “take a prophetic stance against the culture” need to be careful what they wish for—they may find themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to listen to a 12-week sermon series on the evils of multinational corporations and their role in the killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians during our so-called liberation of Iraq. You see, the thing about prophets is that their hearers have no veto power, nor do they have any say about which sins the prophet chooses to rebuke (and chances are, since “judgment begins in the house of God,” they will pick sins to rebuke that Christian tend to find tolerable [instead of the obvious ones]).

    Third, America does not have any role in God’s redemptive plan for planet earth. The kingdom of Christ is manifested in this age in the visible church, not in any nation-state, regardless of how noble its history or how lofty its ideals. Many Reformational people have learned this lesson only partially—they have trashed their Left Behind novels and admitted that they were wrong about Israel, but they still haven’t figured out that they’re wrong about America, too.

    Fourth, Obama is not a socialist. Even if our president’s wildest dreams were fulfilled, he would still be miles and miles to the right of much of the rest of the industrialized West. Say what you want about President Obama, but he is a smart man. It would be politically suicidal for him to make any actually progressive moves such as ending our for-profit healthcare system, or re-tailoring U.S. foreign policy in a truly systemic way. Sure, progressive moves such as these may be popular, but the unfortunate fact is that the desire of the people is only one of a host of other concerns. Thus when we take a couple steps back and analyze our two-party system, it becomes apparent that the only thing that distinguishes Republicans from Democrats is not the overall vision for our domestic and foreign policy (they both agree on this), but the miniscule details of that overall plan about which they disagree. To-may-to, to-mah-to.

    Lastly and most importantly, American Christians need to remember something that we so easily forget, and that is that our true homeland is an eternal, heavenly one whose allure cannot be compromised by the goings-on of the culture war. It is remarkable that, for all the passionate Christian devotees of right-wingers like Glenn Beck or lefties like Jim Wallis, there are very few evangelicals in this country who can articulate the doctrine of justification in a coherent and biblical way. In other words, we Christians seem to have sacrificed the one thing that makes us unique—the gospel—on the altar of some baptized political ideology for which the divine Son of God isn’t even necessary.

    So even if America does cease to be particularly special or unique in the world, we can rest assured that the church will always be so, for it is her errand that cannot be mimicked, and her message that cannot (and must not) be co-opted by the powers that be, whether on the right or the left.”

  10. I don’t really think Scripture addresses this issue. We have a say in who governs this nation, and as citizens of it (2ndly, since we are citizens of heaven first), we should do what we can to see that this country does not end up like Nazi Germany, or Castro’s Cuba or even Haiti. It isn’t a matter of materialism, rather it is a matter of these governments causing great human suffering. Wherever socialism takes over, persecution of Christians has followed. So why vote for those who will do their best to prevent the spread of the gospel when you can have those in office who will at least ignore your efforts. Some say persecution will cleanse the church, and there is a lot to say for that, but why vote for someone’s whose goal is to cause more human suffering.

    The Democratic party has a platform which is socialistic, and what we are seeing in the current economic conditions, for example, are purposeful ruination of our economic standards so as to force socialism on the nation. So I will never vote for a Democrat, and I can’t see how any Christian can vote for any member of a party who will do everything possible to destroy this nation morally and fiscally. Are there Republicans who are just as evil in their intent? I don’t think so, because of the party platform, but there are plenty of Republicans – most of them – who aren’t much better.

    Nevertheless, if I think there is any chance of a Democrat getting into office, I will vote to aid in preventing that. And I don’t see that as a conflict with biblical teachings.

  11. GeorgeTHansel says:

    You should vote with your heart. I personally believe that religion and politics should be separate for them both to work properly. Obama isn’t even close to being a socialist. He is a corporate stooge like the rest, who will sell out the middle class to the rich. You see, what politicians say and what they do are very different things.

    Your brand of politician will claim “Jesus this” and “Moses that” in order to make you vote for him. You should not listen to them. All of those right-wing politicians who say all of the right religious things are just pulling your leg, and once you vote for them, they’ll work hard to sell out the poor and middle class to the rich. You are being swindled into voting against your best interests. You all need to start thinking for yourselves.

    The left wing does the same thing. They claim they care about the American worker to get the liberals to vote for them, and once they get into office they get right to work for their rich masters. You cannot rely on the mainstream media (including Fox News) to present you with an unbiased, truthful version of reality. You really shouldn’t vote unless you independently research the politicians — without taking the mainstream media’s word for it.

  12. daveburton says:

    ALL elections are choices between the lesser of evils, because no one is righteous. That’s why we have “no king but King Jesus.”

    But you have a stewardship responsibility to make that choice, of the lesser of evils. It is a sin to fail to do so: to stay home, or, equivalently, to lodge a “protest vote” for some unknown 3rd Party candidate. In a democracy, it is we, the people, who have the burden of governing, and if you don’t think God wants those who govern to do so well then you probably have never opened the OT.

    [Aside to Bob J: Saddam Hussein, during the ~23.5 years he was in power, from mid-1979 to early 2003, was directly responsible for about 2 million violent deaths, mostly of Iranians and his fellow Iraqis. He was filling Iraq with mass graves of innocents. He committed genocide against Marsh Arabs & Kurds, and ecocide against the Marsh Arabs' marshes in his efforts to eradicate them. The U.S., the U.K., and 37 other allied countries largely ended that slaughter when they liberated Iraq in 2003. Do not accuse America of killing 10s of thousands of people with "Bush's wars." It is not true.]

    God is merciful, he knows we are sinners, and loves us anyhow. He does not demand that we be perfect men, only that we do our best to do justice, to love mercy, and especially to seek Him.

    But that means we have responsibilities. God commands us to “speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves,” and “rescue those being led away to death.” Jesus said, “as you have failed to do it for the least of them, you have failed to do it for Me.”

    Well, Christian Americans have a lot to be ashamed of, because if those Evangelical Christians who stayed home in ’08 had come out and voted for “the lesser evil” then McCain would be President.

    If McCain had won, we’d probably finally have a pro-life, strict constructionist majority on the Supreme Court, which would stop the current Court’s habit of lying about the Constitution to promote a leftist, secular agenda.

    If McCain had won, we’d not have the federal gov’t taking over healthcare, putting us on the road to having the sorts of problems that Canadians have. (E.g., see http://www.timelymedical.ca, and google for “baby Joseph.”)

    If McCain had won, the federal gov’t would still have budget woes, but it wouldn’t be spending $1.75 for every $1.00 in tax revenue, while wasting vast sums on pseudo-green initiatives like cash-for-clunkers and Solyndra.

    If McCain had won, our brave men and women in uniform would not be subjected to homosexual social experimentation.

    If McCain had won, we wouldn’t have been embarrassed by having an unchurched President with an heretical spiritual adviser like Jeremiah Wright, who loudly calls for God to damn America. We’d have a Christian President (an Episcopalian who attends a Baptist church), who regularly petitions God to forgive and bless America in spite of our sins.

    But McCain didn’t win, and more than a million American babies are still dying every year, sacrificed to an idol we happen to call “choice” rather than Moloch (as if that makes it any better), and we’re further than ever from stopping the slaughter, thanks to Evangelical Christians who stayed home on election day.

  13. J. says:

    We need to rely on God, not man. Spend more time praying for our country and less time debating politics that merely serve as a distraction.

    The cards have already been laid out. It’s in your Bible clear as day for those who are blessed with the eyes to read it. What’s going to happen is going to happen. No one but Jesus is going to come swoop in and save the day. But even that will not be pretty because things must occur before that happens.

    It seems to be that time would be better spent praying that more people will see the light and become saved, praying for protection and discernment, praying for mercy and that people will repent, and going out and making disciples whenever you can. That seems a lot more productive then sitting around arguing over worldly matters and then patting yourself on the back for “doing your duty” by checking a name in box.

  14. I realize this is kind of an old thread, but some of you might find an article I’m posting tomorrow interesting. In it, I argue that voting for the lesser of two evils is the right thing to do.
    When I wrote it, I hadn’t read the post here. There is much here I’d like to respond to some time.
    For now, I’ll just say that there are several false choices assumed or depicted in the article here… that is, the situation is incorrectly depicted as “either-or” where it can be “both-and.” For example, the fact that word is need of the redemption only Christ can provide does not mean we should not try to make it better here and there for a while if we can. Secondly, we do not have to chose between letting the world get worse and making people more self righteous. An immoral sinner is not better than a moral one. Though self righteousness is blinding, so is just about any other sin you can name. The idea that we make people more saveable by seeing society become more wicked is not taught anywhere in Scripture is contrary to much of the OT.
    Anyway, for more of a different point of view, check out http://sharperiron.org/article/why-vote-for-lesser-of-two-evils on 12/13/11.

    Edit to previous: “the fact that word is need” …. sorry. Should read “fact that the world is in need”

  15. Adam says:

    To Aaron: “The idea that we make people more saveable by seeing society become more wicked is not taught anywhere in Scripture is contrary to much of the OT.”

    maybe you should reread the bible and consider the context. Go to Judges and you find that every time the Israelites became more wicked, judgement came and they repented. In their wickedness they suffered and were forced to rethink their situation. If you look at the New Testament, it was in the suffering of the disciples that they brought many to faith. This is also true in the early church. Here is a suggestion. It is better in the long run to stand for your principles, thus allowing the more evil candidate to win as it may send a shock to the population as he tries to implement his standards. This is better than the slow blinding deterioration that may never be noticed and may bring others to repentance faster as the consequences become more obvious.

  16. Clay says:

    Where is the scripture to justify your position? This is what I found.
    8 And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”?—as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.
    I think to vote for someone that supports homosexuality, abortion, (insert sin here) is to do evil. I will chose to abstain until someone who stands up for the Bible is a candidate.

  17. “find that every time the Israelites became more wicked, judgement came and they repented”

    The reasoning here is circular. They would have nothing to repent of if they had not become more wicked in their conduct. Doesn’t make sense to argue that Israel sinng –> earned God’s wrath–> repented, therefore the sin was a good thing because it lead to repentance.

    “Where is the scripture to justify your position? This is what I found.
    8 And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”?”

    In my essay I explain why voting for the best man is not evil. Therefore, it is not “doing evil that good may come.”
    So, Scripture to “justify” … there are so many, but his will suffice.
    Ga 6:10 NKJV 10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith.

  18. Lainie says:

    Obama was elected because he promised to bring our troops home and end the war. Now we have more wars and our troops certainly did not come home, more were deployed.

    Psalms 120:6 My soul hath long dwelt with him that hateth peace. 7 I [am for] peace: but when I speak, they [are] for war.

    Candidates that promote peace are rare, but they do exist. They aren’t the most popular, but this isn’t the horse races folks. Do the right thing.

  19. RS says:

    I see a lot of grasping and misrepresentation of the Scriptures in the comments in attempts to support one’s own chosen reasoning on the matter. Of all that was said here, I find the original post by Pilgrim to be the most sound from a biblical standpoint. And I urge the reader to consider the issue based upon what we see clearly taught by God and illustrated for the New Testament Christian, rather than from so much pragmatic, Dominionist, Social gospel based reasoning expressed in so many of the comments.

  20. Actually, Obama was elected for a wide variety of reasons. For many it was purely emotive. “Hope and change” resonated with them. But yes, for many it was about extracting ourselves from Iraq and Afghanistan.
    But just as a point of fact, Obama has brought most of the troops home and fully intends to have the rest home in 2013.
    In my opinion, this is a huge mistake. “Him that hateth peace” is not the same as “him who brings the troops home or doesn’t send them out.” Hating peace might mean “not being willing to fight for it.” It has never come for free when aggressors were on the move, but has had to be defended or taken back afterwards.
    (Certainly loving peace is not the same thing as “abandoning the defenseless to oppressors.”)

    Even in Scripture, the final peace comes by means of war when Jesus Christ conquers (Rev.19).
    ____________________________________________________________________________

    Typo: “Him that hateth peace” is not the same as “him who brings the troops home or doesn’t send them out.” … What I meant was “Him that does not hate peace” is not the same as…. Said it backwards.
    My point: how much you value peace does not directly correlate to whether you send troops or refuse to send troops. Troops are often the only path to peace.

  21. “I see a lot of grasping and misrepresentation of the Scriptures in the comments in attempts to support one’s own chosen reasoning on the matter.”
    I’m not sure which comments are in view here, but if you’d like to point out where any grasping or misrepresenting occurs in my posts, I’d be happy to defend them.

    “Of all that was said here, I find the original post by Pilgrim to be the most sound from a biblical standpoint. And I urge the reader to consider the issue based upon what we see clearly taught by God and illustrated for the New Testament Christian, rather than from so much pragmatic, Dominionist, Social gospel based reasoning expressed in so many of the comments.”
    Again, I don’t know which comments are intended here, but I’m passionately opposed to both dominionism and the social gospel. As for pragmatism, people tend to trot that one out when they want to dismiss a view they don’t like… but I’ve never yet found anyone who was willing to say that actual results of our choices have no bearing on the ethics of those choices. Results matter. They are not *all* that matters or even what matters *most,* but they matter. (So, as it happens, I’m passionately opposed to pragmatism as well, properly defined)

  22. RS says:

    @Aaron: My comment was not a personal attack upon you, or your posts. So you need not be so defensive. Rather, it was an observation that more than a few comments on this thread appeal to the antithesis of this post based upon the typical trilateral concepts: Pragmatic reasoning (in this context, based upon what “works” to achieve our goals, the mentality that if we could only vote in enough of the “right people”, we could turn this country around to be “more moral”, etc.), Social Gospel (in this context, supporting “the lesser evil” as at least a stand or a resistance against “the greater evil”, and therefore one’s “Christian duty” to better society, especially for the poor and needy), and Dominionist theory (in this context, making this a more “Christian nation” through legislation of Christian ideals). And I hope there will be grace here, understanding that I have for brevity sake boiled these concepts down to their essence as they apply to this topic, rather than elaborating on their wider applications.

    All of these concepts are intertwined and may superficially make sense to many. But what do the Scriptures command Christians to do? How do we see Jesus, the Apostles, and the early church believers who were filled with the Holy Spirit, “changing culture”? Do we see them snuggling up to governing authorities as a means of foisting Kingdom concepts upon heathen cultures to make them more “moral”? The burden of proof is not incumbent upon those who merely show what we already see in God’s word, but upon those who present concepts we do not see taught or illustrated therein. I believe Pilgrim hit the nail on the head: the problem is a spiritual one, and it cannot be fixed politically. It would be redundant to elaborate on what Pilgrim already explained in his opening post so well. Therefore I completely agree with his thesis and stand with him.

  23. fleebabylon says:

    Many evangelicals vote republican because they want a moral society where they can be at ease in zion, pursue the american dream, and anything else that keeps them from having to pick up their cross and follow Jesus. They also so confuse the kingdom of God with the U S of A that their identity and allegiance is to both Christ and Ceaser, effectively serving neither.

    Pilgrim said “If our true passion is to see souls come into the Kingdom, then we should be less concerned with achieving the American dream, increasing our financial prosperity, and righting the moral ills in the world, and instead we should be more focused on devoting our lives fully to preaching Christ and Him crucified.”

    God help his elect to live this way brother. While His name is blasphemed among the nations because by the kingdom of churchianity (conservative and liberal), might our lives be lived out as witnesses for His eternal kingdom.

    In Christ -Jim

  24. For: “a moral society” (*more* moral, at any rate)
    Against: being at ease in zion
    For: American dream (properly defined)
    Against: failing to take up the cross and follow
    Against: confusing kingdom of God with USA
    Against: failing to render to God what is God’s
    Against: failing to render to Caesar what is Caesar’s

    “Pilgrim said ‘If our true passion is to see souls come into the Kingdom, then we should be less concerned with achieving the American dream, increasing our financial prosperity, and righting the moral ills in the world, and instead we should be more focused on devoting our lives fully to preaching Christ and Him crucified.’”
    False disjunction. Increased passion for souls does not require decreased passion for “righting the moral ills in the world,” nor does caring about right and wrong require less devotion to preaching Christ.
    Does anybody really preach Christ 7×24? Does anyone believe that a good Christian should have no time to, say, do gardening as a hobby? If we can pursue gardening and also be fully devoted to preaching Christ, I think we can pursue good policy (for the sake of our neighbors and children as well as God’s glory) and still be fully devoted to Christ. Conflict between these goals only exists when they are not rightly understood.

  25. Linda says:

    “Pilgrim said ‘If our true passion is to see souls come into the Kingdom, then we should be less concerned with achieving the American dream, increasing our financial prosperity, and righting the moral ills in the world, and instead we should be more focused on devoting our lives fully to preaching Christ and Him crucified.’”–

    I hardy AMEN Pilgrim. I totally agree with you.

    as one brother said so well–”When it comes to voting in America as Christians when there are 2 evils. The Constitution does not mandate (as in a law) its citizens to vote. The Constitution designates “Voting” as a “right”; therefore to ‘not vote’ is not disobedience to civil authority (Romans 13:1). I agree, and even more so thanks to being quite convinced that the results of all high-level elections are 100% predetermined by Satan’s most devoted and powerful human servants. The fix is absolutely in, regardless of who opposes the hand-picked “winner,” and regardless of how many people vote for whom; it’s all a sham and a farce. Even so. Come quickly Lord Jesus, maranatha! I have seen that Jesus, Paul, Peter and the other apostles did not waste any time with political activism, but were consumed with spreading the Gospel. Where is the scripture to justify your position? This is what I found.
    8 And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”?—as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.
    I think to vote for someone that supports homosexuality, abortion, (insert sin here) is to do evil. I will chose to abstain until someone who stands up for the Bible is a candidate.”

    Trying to keep this nation moral is not the same as and not equivalent to the GOSPEL AT ALL.

    Hitler did that-he was for morality. He did all the right things. he got rid of homosexuality, pornography, he cleaned up the streets and got rid of prostutition–he was for POSITIVE Christianity-he worked of all the right things and they were behind him 100%. We’re not supposed to concern ourselves with a corrupt government.

    Jesus did not concern himself with the Government. He concerned himself with those who were corrupting the house of God-the Temple.

  26. I agree with Aaron. This country is not like the Roman empire – Paul didn’t have any right to vote. In this country each citizen is supposed to have a wee bit of a say-so as to who their leaders will be. Being a Christian does not interfere with, nor contradict that right and responsibility. If Christians stick their heads in the sand, then they deserve what they get, and I think often all God does it let us have what we deserve in the way of leaders because of our apathy.

    The problem here is a lot of false comparisons with the governmental system Jesus and the apostles were under. It is not unbiblical to participate in the political process.

    And Linda, it isn’t “political activism” to vote.

  27. “Trying to keep this nation moral is not the same as and not equivalent to the GOSPEL AT ALL”
    Absolutely true. I don’t know who is saying they are the same or equivalent. Certainly not me. However, it doesn’t follow that being concerned about the gospel means not being concerned about right and wrong. Read the minor prophets. God is deeply concerned about what nations do. (If time is short, just survey the first couple chapters of Amos).

    Of course we had to bring Hitler up. :D
    Here’s the old Hitler fallacy:
    - Hitler did A
    - Therefore we should not do A
    The unstated second premise is: Everything Hitler did was bad.
    OK, let’s see how well that reasoning holds up:
    Hitler wore socks…. Hitler shaved….Hitler sang hymns….Hitler bathed….Need I go on? Hitler is not relevant to this topic.

    “Jesus did not concern himself with the government.”
    Jesus also did not concern Himself with marrying and raising a family or working a “real job.” The argument from absence in Jesus’ life is a pretty weak one.

    But maybe it would help to refocus on what we’re talking about here: should a Christian try to elect the best leader possible? Should Christians care at all what goes on around them? I have not seen any biblical evidence that the answer to either of these questions is “no.”

  28. fleebabylon says:

    “If Christians stick their heads in the sand, then they deserve what they get, and I think often all God does it let us have what we deserve in the way of leaders because of our apathy.”

    This is a most disturbing statement. I can assure you those who are out preaching the Gospel, carrying their cross, living as pilgrims on this earth, already in eternity, are not sticking their heads in the sand. Oh no, what if Ceaser takes away our precious 501c status. How will we ever convince the unconverted churchians to part with their money if we cant offer them a tax break. Gods judgment on churchians in America is primarily through the leaders of her christendom, not her ceaser. The worse judgment yet is through the Pat Robertsons and “christian right”.
    _________________________________________________________________

    Anytime we miss the Gospel religous flesh will try to compensate for it to justify us. Like an sda who is unconverted – the best they can pretend to do is keep the sabbath. Likewise an american evangelical that is unconverted the best they can try to do is fight for “moral objectives”. This is the story of the christian right in america but it is not the story of the new testament Church.

    I vote NO on the gospel of american morality, however many evangelicals, catholics, and mormons may partner together to vote YES. -Jim

  29. Fleebablyon,
    Another illogical statement. No one is suggesting participating in Pat Robertson-type of activism, and I’m not suggesting any activism at all — I certainly have never participated in any activism. Yet I vote. And NOT voting is sticking your head in the sand and claiming it is biblical to do so. We aren’t talking about tax breaks (they could take them all away for all I care). We are talking about being proper citizens of the country God has allowed us to be a part of. You want to live in the best country in the world and yet let everyone else do the work of keeping it that way? I suppose you think being in the military is also wrong (be careful – Jesus never condemned the centurions for being in the military)? Too many Christians let others died protecting their country from the likes of Hitler or Stalin while they sit back and enjoy the freedoms they have. It’s the same thing with a simple task of voting for the best available person to lead the country – “the lesser of two evils.” If you don’t vote, then you have no one to blame but yourself when you wake up with no rights, in a famine-stricken country steeped in rank immorality and you can do nothing as you watch your wife and family raped and murdered by anarchists. And you will find nothing in Scripture to support your position without twisting context to suit your bias.

  30. Anytime you vote, you are voting for someone with a sin nature, vulnerable to many temptations, lacking sufficient wisdom for the job, lacking sufficient strength to always do right even if he has the wisdom to always do right. Any vote is for the lesser of two evils.

    When you have a candidate who is specifically and openly endorsing perversion, I believe you have a moral responsibility, when you are given a chance, to say, “Not in my name.” Whether you do that by voting for another potentially-electable candidate, by voting for a protest candidate, or by writing in someone else’s name is a much more difficult question. But if you have a chance to say “no” to perversion and/or the killing of innocents, I believe you’ve got a responsibility to say “no.”

    Someone said, “The fix is in.” Romans 13 tells us who is in control of that. The fix is in on a lot of things. The god of this world has the fix in to destroy the lost souls of those around us, and for the most part they are willing participants in that fix, but we’re still commanded to give the Gospel, and there is One who can override any fix that the enemy has. If we should vote, we should vote, whether the fix is in or not. If we shouldn’t, we shouldn’t.

  31. “This is the story of the christian right in america but it is not the story of the new testament Church. I vote NO on the gospel of american morality, however many evangelicals, catholics, and mormons may partner together to vote YES. -Jim”
    Jim continues to strawman. There is no “gospel of American morality” involved in the position I, and many others advocate. Apparently this reasoning is too difficult to follow:
    a. God cares what nations do. It is better for nations to do right than to do wrong.
    b. God cares what individuals do, even unbelievers. It is better for people to do right than to do wrong.
    c. Public policy/leadership greatly influences whether nations/individuals do right.
    d. Public policy will be made whether we are involved or not. Good public policy is better than bad public policy.
    Conclusion: Christians should use the influence they have as citizens to encourage good public policy.

    And the above is just one argument. Several others are equally strong. For example, Scripture commands us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Good leadership & law makes life better for our neighbors, therefore we should encourage good leadership/law over bad leadership/law.
    Pr 28:15–16 ESV 15 Like a roaring lion or a charging bear is a wicked ruler over a poor people. 16 A ruler who lacks understanding is a cruel oppressor, but he who hates unjust gain will prolong his days.
    These verses are in the Bible because, apparently, it matters whether a ruler is “wicked” or “cruel” or “hates unjust gain.”

    Then you have the family argument.
    a. Parents are supposed to provide for their households (Prov.31.15, 1 Tim. 5:8).
    b. Good policy and leaders make for a safer and healthier environment for our kids.
    c. Therefore, we should seek good policy and leaders.

    I think I’ve got a few more arguments, but as of yet, nobody has explained why we should not care what our nation does when God clearly does care what nations do. That alone is reason enough to seek good policy and good leaders.

  32. Linda says:

    So what do you say to God one day when you stand before him that you voted for the lesser of the 2 evils and the lesser is supporting abortion and homosexuality? Would God condone us supporting ANYONE for the sake of “this country” which is NOT our home who supports blatant evil? I don’t think so.

    My conscience is CLEAR. I will NOT vote for anyone who supports abortion or homosexuality even if they are the lesser of the 2 evils. I will NOT lend credence to someone whom God is AGAINST. If you want to vote because you say it’s our freedom and we should make a difference, then tell me what difference is it going to make? Supporting people whom GOD is against does NOT make a difference for the GOSPEL. If we lose our Freedom here in the USA, well that’s not TRUE FREEDOM for the Christian anyways. There are MANY who would fight for freedom and have fought for freedom in this Country which we have enjoyed—yet it is not true freedom when Jesus sets a person free from our sins. I’d rather not have freedom in this country and people know TRUE freedom in Jesus than to keep holding onto this WORLDLY freedom. This world its system and this country are not our homes. We are PILGRIMS we are ALIENS and according to the word of God we are not to love this world or anything in this world for if anyone loves this world the love of the father is not in him”.-1 John 2:15.

    Isa 40:15 Surely the nations are like a drop in a bucket; they are regarded as dust on the scales; he weighs the islands as though they were fine dust.”

    John MacArthur said, “Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.” -Jn. 18:36. Jesus did not attack this world’s system and concern himself with its evils. Mind you Rome was corrupt and seeping with evil. So why did Jesus not do anything about the government? Strangely today Christians use much of their energy “for a good cause” but is this where the real battle is?”—”It is not our job to transform society, nor to attempt to “Christianize” its institutions, nor to pressure the ungodly to live like saints, but instead to call out of the world those who will respond to the GOSPEL, that they might live wholly for God.”-

    “The CHURCH is seeping with corruption and who do we go after? The Government and let our churches go down the tubes. What is wrong with that picture? People are filtrating the CHURCH at what expense? At the expense of people-people going to hell” end quotes~~

    Our focus is in the wrong place if we’re going to chide our brothers and sisters about Voting and our priorities are all out of order when we focus on the freedom here in the USA and are remiss when it comes to our Churches….

    WE are to be as truthful and honest “,,,blameless and holy in the presence of our God and Father,,,”–1 Thes.3:13 as Christians because God’s honor and his name are my delight. God delights in men who are truthful”-Pr.12:22. I love the LORD and long to please HIM even if we loose all in this world…

  33. fleebabylon says:

    “Too many Christians let others died protecting their country from the likes of Hitler or Stalin while they sit back and enjoy the freedoms they have.”

    All I am advocating is Christ and His kingdom… you seem to be advocating any means (including killing those you are called to love and lay your life down for) to protect your american dream in ceasers kingdom. You rightly stated that believers shouldn’t kill for ceaser. Selah

    “If you don’t vote, then you have no one to blame but yourself when you wake up with no rights, in a famine-stricken country steeped in rank immorality and you can do nothing as you watch your wife and family raped and murdered by anarchists.”

    I have already settled the matter to forsake everything and follow Christ, you would be wise to do the same if you call yourself a Christian. Not a bird drops to the ground that my Father does not know about. Are you trying to save your life in this world? Be sure you will lose it friend.

    “And you will find nothing in Scripture to support your position without twisting context to suit your bias.”

    My bias.. forsaking the American dream to follow Jesus and loving my enemies. I cant see how that would be twisted to you.

  34. “If Christians stick their heads in the sand, then they deserve what they get, and I think often all God does it let us have what we deserve in the way of leaders because of our apathy.” — how untrue is this.
    The leadership we presently have is not a result of Christians ‘sticking their heads in the sand’, it is a result of the LACK of biblical preaching/ teaching across America. The current state of this nation is as it is because the pulpits are filled with syrupy messages that play on the emotions and satisfy the ear, while sin, repentance and judgment go unspoken. God will not punish His own by giving us ungodly leaders because we do not vote, He will however turn a nation over headlong into sin because truth is suppressed. That would certainly include ungodly leadership.

  35. Disclosure: I’ve known Aaron on-line for at least 6-7 years and have a
    lot of appreciation and respect for him. I’m also willing to disagree
    with him :). In this case, I happen to mostly agree. “So what do you say to God one day when you stand before him that
    you voted for the lesser of the 2 evils and the lesser is supporting
    abortion and homosexuality?” Linda, with respect, where did Aaron say he would vote for someone
    supporting abortion and homosexuality? He’s argued, if I understand
    him, that it would be good to vote to limit those and / or other evils
    even if a candidate is deeply flawed in very important ways. ***
    God used Jehu (an evil man) to restrain evil, and called it a good thing
    (II Kings 10:30). He sent a prophet to anoint Jehu. Should the prophet
    have refused? Obviously not. The prophet anointed an evil man and
    false worshipper who was less evil than the incumbent. Can anyone
    say it is always wrong to vote for an evil man and false worshipper who is less evil than the alternative? If I can’t find a substantive moral difference between the candidates, I
    will vote for neither. And if a good candidate has little chance, I may
    give him my vote, even if it risks electing the worst of the main
    candidates — there is value in a statement for righteousness even if
    it won’t “win.” I’ll not always give my support to a party that tends to
    nominate evil men barely to the right side of the more evil alternative. They should do better if they always want my vote.. But I cannot really find Scripture that forbids voting for the lesser of
    two evils, and examples such as Jehu suggest this is appropriate
    when substantive moral differences exist.

    —————————

    One further thought that I broke out for a separate comment, because it’s a different focus.

    Christians are often mistaken in viewing fiscal matters as not a moral issue.

    Tax / spending policy is a moral issue. We are stewards of God’s money, and if we can reduce the amount of it which the government takes from us and wastes or spends on immoral purposes, that is a moral issue. So also government debt which will be a hardship on our children and our neighbours’ children is a moral issue.

    We are to be generous with God’s money, but if we could prevent a drug addict from stealing it to buy drugs, we would. If we can prevent the government from taking it by force and using it to encourage drug abuse, promiscuity, laziness, etc, we should. It is not right for Christians to treat fiscal policy as somehow beneath spiritual consideration.

  36. “The current state of this nation is as it is because the pulpits are filled with syrupy messages that play on the emotions and satisfy the ear, while sin, repentance and judgment go unspoken. God will not punish His own by giving us ungodly leaders because we do not vote, He will however turn a nation over headlong into sin because truth is suppressed. That would certainly include ungodly leadership.”
    A lot to agree with here. But this is a little bit like saying “boats don’t sink because they have holes in them; they sink because captains run them aground.” There is more than one way to get into a mess… and we can end up with bad policy and foolish or despotic leaders in lots of ways.

    My own view is that in the US we have consistently gotten better leaders than we deserve. Even Obama is better than we deserve. But the question of what we deserve is separate from what we ought to do when given a choice between two leaders, one of whom is worse than the other.

    By the way, it’s interesting to me how doggedly some insist on characterizing a vote as one for “the lesser of evils” when it’s just as accurate to say “the better of the two.” Isn’t it pretty obvious that if one is “less evil” he is “better”?

    What if both candidates favor abortion, gay marriage or something not on the table presently like euthanasia, human cloning or slavery of all left handed people? I’d still vote if one of the two has a better foreign policy or a better grasp of our founding principles or a history of more competent decision making when handling crises. He would still be better than the other guy.

    In America (pretty much everywhere else for that matter) a vote for someone has never meant “I am in favor of every single thing this person believes and does” or even, necessarily “I am in favor of most of what this person believes in and does.” It only means “I believe this one is better than the other.”

  37. Aaron,
    you say “What if both candidates favor abortion, gay marriage or something not on the table presently like euthanasia, human cloning or slavery of all left handed people? I’d still vote if one of the two has a better foreign policy or a better grasp of our founding principles or a history of more competent decision making when handling crises. He would still be better than the other guy.” That is your choice, my response is that I would vote for neither, is it going to send the nation into turmoil if I do not vote? No, we have no biblical mandate to vote for sinful men; we do have a biblical mandate to proclaim truth, pursue holiness, and work out our salvation with fear and trembling. I trust in the sovereignty of the God of the universe and understand He will do as He pleases; He will put into the positions of leadership those He ordains for His purposes and to fulfill His will. He can, and does put ungodly men in positions of authority as part of His judgment against a nation, or to bring that nation to repentance.

    If Christians vote or do not vote will not change the status of America, nor can we blame those who choose not to vote if America gets a leader who is just as godless as he can be; the choices for President is between two sinners who are unregenerate. I could never, with a clear conscience, vote for a man who upholds abortion and/or homosexuality just because he has a good foreign policy plan. This world is not my home, so why would I make this an issue and feel as though I have to vote for one or the other? There is a bigger need for America than picking the ‘best candidate’ for president, this nation is wicked, sinful, vile and rejects the God of the Bible. America is filled with idolatry, immorality, materialism, arrogance, selfishness and every other sin imaginable, to be concerned over who should be president is a distant second to the first and foremost issue facing this country…the need of God’s truth proclaimed from sea to shining sea.
    The only thing that will change sinful men and women is the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ {Romans 1:16}. Putting a godless man into the office of leadership over this country is not the issue, there have always been godless men, for the most part, in the office of leadership over this country.

  38. Fleebablyon,
    No, there is not even an intimation that I advocate “any means…to protect [my] american dream…” What I am pointing out that it is our responsibility as Christians and as citizens secondly of this nation, to take part in deciding who our leaders should be.

    Voting is not activism, nor does it take away a single thing from preaching the Gospel and proclaiming the kingdom of God.

    Forsaking everything for Christ does not mean one cannot vote; the two are not mutually exclusive.

    Everyone here wants to preach the gospel, but the USA is one of few places left where it can be done openly and effectively without government interference. Without working to protect that right, you will end up imprisoned with no one to preach to, if not altogether executed.

    It is a cowardly position which says, “let someone else protect my rights – I follow Christ only.” It is also an unbiblical position, because even Paul used his rights as a Roman citizen to protect himself.

    As has been pointed out several times already, there is no perfect candidate, and there will always be the better of two evils for which to put into office so as to protect your right to preach the gospel.

  39. Linda says:

    Jon Gleason I was not addressing Aaron or anyone specifically. I was merely presenting the argument to the forum.

    “Better a little with righteousness than much gain through injustice”-Pr.16:8
    “Better a little with the fear of the Lord than great wealth with turmoil”-Pr.15:16

  40. Linda says:

    Oh, It’s no offense whatsoever. I am so glad that you have sucha close relationship with Aaron. May the Lord richly bless you Jon. Ty

  41. Well, I don’t know that we’re THAT close, Linda :). We’ve certainly differed “robustly” a few times. I only mentioned it because people are funny sometimes. I could just hear someone a few months later finding out and saying, “Oh, that’s why you agreed with him, you go way back.” So I just thought I’d mention it up front. Probably just added more confusion, since we’re not joined at the hip or anything. :)

    ***
    If a vote is a blanket endorsement, we should never vote for “the lesser of two evils.” If we view government as an instrument to bring in true spiritual righteousness, we would have to vote only for righteous people.

    A vote is not a blanket endorsement. Government will never bring in true righteousness, but only imperfectly restrains evil, even if run by godly Christians. It can never do its task perfectly. Thus, I believe it is legitimate to vote for a choice which brings greater restraint of evil, even if it will not perfectly restrain all evil.

    What is the nature of a vote, and what is the role of government? Ultimately, how we answer those questions should drive our voting decisions.

  42. Linda says:

    @ Jon Gleason,,

    I can understand what you are saying and I even agree with you. When have we EVER had a Government that was not evil? God has established Government and knowing that God is in complete control is a huge relief to me since He is Sovereign.

    I can even agree with this—Even bad government is better than no government. CS Lewis said he was in favor of democracy because everybody was “equally evil, and sinful and we need to watch one another.”

    I’m like this Jon,,,I’m motivated by pleasing my heavenly Father and bringing honor and glory to his name. That means that since I KNOW how evil both sides are, what they stand for or against when it comes to voting, why would I want to vote for any of them and bring disgrace to the Name of the LORD my God knowing HE does not condone nor support such evil? Knowing that both sides support what God is against, shouldn’t I remain faithful to my LORD? HIS Character and his reputation is everything to me and to vote for the lesser of 2 evils is to do dishonor to the LORD. What is in God’s name? Is not his name to be honored more than anything in our lives? Why would I want to bring opprobrium upon the name of the LORD?..

    and no he doesn’t need anyone to defend him. But I need to know his love and holiness in my life and so do honor HIM above all in my life that HE is HOLY. It’s not worth voting for wickedness since its become so obviously evil either way- “betwixt and between”. It compromises my integrity for what?? Freedom in this country is more important than the Name of the LORD? so we would rather continue to support our tenuous view of GOD and continue to elevate our lives on earth to make it as comfortable and as pleasurable as possible even if it means compromising the Name of the LORD? I’d rather lose our freedom in this country and be beaten and imprisoned than to compromise and so dishonor our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ. What does GOD’s name mean?

    the Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom
    those who delight in the Lord take refuge in His strength and Might
    when God shakes this world, you will KNOW He is the LORD
    God Almighty will proclaim His Name is Wonderful and Great
    only those who have taken Refuge in God will be hidden in the cleft of the Rock
    He is My Mighty Fortress and Strong tower, my Ever-present help in times of need. He is my Sustainer, Provider and my Solid ROCK. His name is the LORD my Righteousness
    My Hope is in His unfailing love and His tender mercies
    Thankfulness and gratefulness guide me on His untraceable paths,
    “The name of the Lord is a strong tower; the righteous run to it and are safe”-Pr.18:10.

    After ALL God has done for me do I really find the necessity to vote for someone who obviously so dishonors the LORD???

    What I think about God matters to me. His name is Jealous and he is a jealous GOD for us whom he has redeemed and it DOES mean everything to me what I think about HIM….

    anyways that’s where I stand and that’s why I will not vote at this point in life.

  43. Linda, it sounds to me like you effectively view a vote as an endorsement, even if you don’t use that exact word. If that is the case, you are correct, you shouldn’t do it.

    There is no necessity to vote. It is a privilege which God has sovereignly granted to us. The king’s heart is in His hand, and He turned the hearts of the leaders of Western nations to cede some of their power to the citizenry. In many ways the system is horribly flawed, but this is the system God has given us, just as Imperial Rome was the system He gave the apostles. I believe if He has given us that opportunity, we should use it to influence government. Sometimes, that influence will be greatest by withholding our vote, but we should recognise that the powers that be are ordained by God. Democratic republics are not an accident of history — there are no accidents of history.

    God sent a prophet to anoint an idolater (Jehu) and an idolater and murderer (Hazael of Syria). A vote is less of an endorsement than an anointing, and God commanded the anointing of men no less wicked than our choices today.

    But the Scripture does not give direct instructions on this, and “let every man be persuaded in his own mind.” If you cannot vote for someone in good conscience, you should not do so. We should all trust the Lord to teach us differently if we are in error.

  44. Ed says:

    Excellent article. I could not agree more with your perspective. I find it thoroughly biblical and wonderfully refreshing! Press on with your truth-sharing.

  45. Thank you Pilgrim. This was a very timely find on an article like this. For many years I did not vote because I did not care. Then as I cared I did not vote because I did not understand enough and got over whelmed. Then I began to care and some what understand at least what I did not want to see continued in this nation. But who I would stand and vote for is not on the ballot in my state. And even if he were, the time to learn about each person one most vote for is to short before election day to do a true and honestly searched and educated vote. I even registered for the first time in most of my adult life. I even uplifted the man I would support though I can not. But in my heart I felt unconvinced unprepared uneducated. I have been vocal and have been reprimanded by family and friends for whom I would support. But in years passed, I have been reprimanded by those same for not voting. It is to be their way or I am wrong. I am much delighted to find this article to help me in my decisions. I don’t feel it is wrong or right per se to vote but wrong to just wing it and vote for the lesser of two or three. Then in this respect I feel my solemn duty to this country and any leader (even though he be our enemy) is to pray as we are commanded for our Leaders. This is a scripture command that no Christian can twist. And pray I will. And when I have Christian friend family or acquaintance tell me my prayers are falling on deaf ears, then I find my sole duty to this country is to pray and stay out of the voting that I feel so apprehensive to do. Thank you for this article and may God richly bless your faithfulness. May you hear “Well done good and faithful servant”
    Searching, ever searching for the Truth and nothing but.
    Normajean

  46. April Frazier says:

    Voting may be a right and not a mandate, however, A christian who makes the choice to not vote is essentially throwing their vote away. That is the way that the electoral college works. You live in this country and who the leader is effects you. So, not voting means there is an increase that the worse of two evils will be elected. I pray God lays it on each of your hearts to vote. Don’t throw away your right to change this country. Maybe it is just a little moral boost but a small step forward is a whole lot better than a giant step back.

  47. Reformation Rider says:

    Everyone has the “right” to vote….Is it disobedience to God to not choose to use that right to vote? Show me chapter and verse please…Pharoah was put into power to give glory to God bottom line!Whomever, our President will be he is there to give glory to the one true God. If I choose not to use my right to vote and we move toward a Socialist gov’t it is to the furtherance of the Gospel not because I didn’t cast my vote…As of right now I do not have a clear consience to vote for either of the Candidates……

  48. Lessee – as my pastor recently put it when asked about this, voting for the lesser of two evils is … voting for evil. A man needs to be able to leave the voting booth with a clear conscience.

  49. Maybe there are evils we are supposed to vote against. Part of my post today:

    ‘Our trust is not in politicians or princes. But what we say matters, as Proverbs 24:24-25 says. One way we speak is our vote, and Christians should speak (verbally and vote-ally) against candidates who openly endorse wickedness, even if we can’t trust their opponents to govern righteously. God will bless us for opposing wickedness even if we are betrayed by a candidate who breaks his promises, but He will not bless us if we remain silent. Sometimes, even if we don’t want to vote “Yes” for one candidate, we have to vote “No” against his opponent.’

    http://mindrenewers.com/2012/10/24/a-proverb-for-today-proverbs-2411-12-proverbs-2424-25/

  50. Voting for any politician is voting for the lesser of two evils, because every politician ends up being run by some agenda. You either vote for a politician who will defend America and moral values which will allow Christians freedom or you will vote for a politician who will continue to erode or defense system, denigrate moral values to nonexistence, and remove freedoms to practice our faith. That is the system we have. Realistically, you have only a choice between a demokrat or a Republican party member, because no other party will ever make it. If you believe otherwise, you are either naive or in denial.

  51. Glenn, now you are condemning men with guilt by association. I agree that the two main political parties are really one oligarchy and that’s not a good thing. Most Republicans have no regard for the constitution – examine Paul Ryan’s positions, for example. The GOP is built on a legacy of mercantilism (we call it crony capitalism) and power grubbing nationalists.

    I do not agree that it’s naive or denying reality to vote for a candidate one agrees with who has “no chance” of winning. Because the goal is to leave the voting booth with a clean conscience. If I vote for Tom Hoefling for president, that is not a wasted vote nor does it make me a moron. But it may very well allow me to avoid the cognitive dissonance voting for Romney would cause.

    Also, the most important races are the local ones. This is where we can have the most impact and this is where candidate for higher office start out.

  52. It is not “cognitive dissonance” to vote for Romney as a way to vote against Obama. My conscience will be clear if Obama wins because I actually voted (will vote) for someone who has a chance at removing him from office. If your conscience can remain clear by voting for someone just to keep from voting for the only two parties who have a chance – just because of “principle” – and watch Obama be in there for another four years, then good for you. Your comment about the Republican party sounds almost as if it came from the Demokratic party.

  53. Manfred, suppose the electoral college is tied without your state — your state decides the election. You and your wife are given the privilege of voting after all the other results are in. The results come in, and Obama is winning your state by one vote. You can vote third party or not vote at all, and let your state and nation, for the first time ever, endorse a candidate who is running on a pledge to approve homosexual perversion and the killing of babies. Or you can decide that your state and nation will not endorse such a man, even if it means you have to vote for a man you don’t trust, who obviously isn’t saved, and whose values in many ways are unbiblical. But he doesn’t endorse homosexual perversion or the killing of babies.

    Will you stand aside and let your state and nation endorse the man who approves these evil things? Is that being salt and light? Is that how we love our neighbours, to allow actions we could stop which will inevitably bring the judgment of God?

    We have no assurance that Romney will be any good, that he will even be any better than Obama in any way. But Obama’s words and actions are calling for evil people to endorse him and godly people to actively reject him. Protest votes have their place, but when a candidate endorses evil on the level that Obama has, I think we have to vote to replace him. You have to vote your conscience, but make sure your conscience is Biblically-informed.

    Don’t tell me that last-vote scenario isn’t real. It very well might be.real for anyone living in a swing state — except that you won’t know that your vote is the difference-maker until after the election. But it could be the difference maker. And even in non-swing states, it is important that Christians do all they can to say, “This evil is not acceptable and must be rejected.”

    If you want to vote against Obama, there are third-party options, but if you need to vote to defeat him, unfortunately, there is only one option. For the good of a nation and our neighbours, I am persuaded this is a time when he needs to be defeated, the more soundly the better.

  54. Jon, Create any hypothetical you wish; such will not affect me. I’m done voting for McCain candidates. Unless the GOP – or another party with a chance – grows up and nominates someone who will honor his oath of office, I will not give them my vote. I voted today and wrote in a name. My conscience is clear – on this matter.

  55. Manfred, we all stand before the Lord. You can’t do what you believe to be wrong.

    For my part, I’ve voted, too. I believed that this election was not one to send a message to the GOP, but to send a message that the evil which is now openly espoused must be defeated. For me, this election was not one to vote against both main candidates, but to say that this evil is too great to be tolerated.

  56. Scott in Texas says:

    Not voting (thereby depriving yourself of an influence over the out come) is the only wasted vote. Voting which involves compromise of values and principles is a loss of integrity. Voting based upon ones values and principles is the ONLY vote that is with integrity. I choose not to lose my integrity by voting for the lesser of evils, but instead to vote for a third party candidate who only is unelectable because too many good Christians do not hold to their principles but are deluded into thinking the lesser of two evils is an acceptable choice.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s