I would like to add my voice to the deafening roar of confusion, in hope that:
If in fact, by the time I finish writing this and have firmly decided upon a decision, I hope to promote whatever truth it might contain therein.
1) I might start a discussion
2) and that I might realize the truth of what Jesus would have me do, specifically in matters of democratic elections
What Voting Means
What does one's vote mean? When one votes for a candidate or proposition, what is one effectively doing?
Generally, a vote can be understood as a unit, a measurement, of confidence.
When one votes two things happens. That person is basically saying that:
1) They want A Candidate/Proposition
2) They do not want B/C/D Candidate/Proposition
There is both an affirmation and a denouncing or denial that is included in a vote.
Free Will
Voting in a democratic government is essentially the peaceful pitting of wills. The will behind one vote, is the denial of a will behind a competing will, and in a democratic government--a vote has exponential consequences on how free will is both looked upon and treated.
For example.
If a person votes in favor Libertarian views, in theory that person is voting for the protection of one's right to one's own goods and services. They are also, in theory, voting against those who would want everyone to share in responsibility for each other.
If a person votes in favor of Socialistic views, in theory that person is voting for the idea that the government should facilitate helping each other. They are also, in theory, voting against those believe that they have an exclusive right to their own time, work, possessions.
A vote for a certain view, is a vote against another view. It is a peaceful enforcement of a view upon another person.
Whichever proposition, or candidate wins--they will enforce the views outlaid before those voted, on those who voted (and more).
Government versus God
All types of Government, except for Anarchy-which dictates that no one should rule over another, and Theocracy--where God is sovereign, are by their nature anti-God.
However Anarchy is unachievable because humans are incapable of living independent of society,
and a Theocracy cannot be established by humans.
The United States is a Democratic Republic, which means that its citizens have the power to elect their representatives and to decide how they are governed (among many, many other things).
It rule by the people, instead of God. It is a form of rule that denies the authority of God over humans in favor of human's rule over themselves.
Every time an American votes, they are asking/demanding/saying that the government of the United States should change.
Every vote is a negation, or canceling out of another person's vote representing a different view/belief.
Or it is an approval in conjunction with other same votes.
Because votes are measured in positive integers, and because there are no fractions, a vote for a candidate is seen as an affirmation of the person as a whole, right and wrong, good and evil. A vote for proposition is seen in whole as an affirmation of both the positive and negative repercussions of that vote.
Jesus
Matthew 4:8-10
Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.
"All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me."
Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.'"
Jesus recognized that even He, who was perfect, should be humble and should not rule the world.
Not only was it not His time to rule the world (though if there was any time, it could have been then), Jesus [I will presume] knew that:
1) He did not have the right to silence counter wills, to force people to believe as he did
2) God is sovereign over all, regardless of who is in office, regardless of laws, He reigns and passes over all governments, decisions and votes. A vote for a candidate or proposition, places the voter in the position of a judge (instead of having God as the judge), and being imperfect we make imperfect decisions.
But then, some Christians may assert that they know how God would vote.
American Christians
John 19:15
"Shall I crucify your king?" Pilate asked.
"We have no king but Caesar," the chief priests answered.
To often those who call themselves Christians have said these very words through their actions. They have used Ceaser (government) to further their own gain, or they have mistaken the government's authority as more important than God's reign.
One example of this is when Christian groups, churches, organizations and leaders insist that God's reign is not triumphant unless it is supreme and manifest in government.
These actions stem from the fallacious belief that one may understand God's will enough to know how He would vote.
This belief is solid hubris.
Jesus Himself refused to take government command of a government, how then can American Christian claim to know how the government should be governed. Can humans understand the full range of consequences of a vote?
-Besides the fact that Jesus would not vote solely on principal of not believing in forcing people to live a certain way-
-He would not have voted because He could never endorse the full range of negative attributes and consequences that naturally come with every candidate and proposition.
-He would understand that by voting, He would be judging Human government--which would make the government the judge of God's law.
-He would understand that any wrong or evil that resulted from endorsing a certain candidate/proposition, would be a reflection upon himself, and upon God.
Based upon these four reasons why Jesus would not vote, Christian Americans too, should not vote.
2 comments:
Well, I read most of your blog (skimmed here and there), and I totally agree with you.
Our kingdom and government is not of this world, so to depend on the United States legislature to carry out the will of God is like trusting lab rats to figure out a way to cure AIDS.
May I suggest one thing though: pray, and vote for the person who is going to hear from God the most.
For example, who knows, but three days after becoming president Obama could have a God-encounter and seek to establish Biblical truths into the United States. I'm voting for McCain, but honestly, whoever wins we should pray that they encounter God.
Saul was off to kill more Christians before he had a God-encounter, his name changing to Paul and he being one of the greatest spreaders of God's love during his time.
So, pray for who to vote for. That's my stance. And especially for the propositions, I feel those are more important.
Kris Kris Kris... you're just asking for a response from me. As much as I hate to give one sometimes, I suppose that I'll go ahead and put one down for you.
First of all, it should be noted that you are basing your ideas off of a lot of unproven definitions, for example that one votes because they support who a person is or what they claim to do. That may be true for most people, but for people who are following after God it is important to hear him more clearly than the candidates themselves.
The second problem lies in the view of government as being a strictly anti-God thing. Yes, I know that this is a popular belief both in the church and by many political scientists, but that does not at all have to be the case. We live in a fallen world, and as such everyone makes mistakes. The fact that all nations is primarily made up of people who do not actually listen to God (regardless of their religious affiliation) can give governments this spin, but just because this is the case does not mean that God will not be honored despite the actions of the government. I would say that while governments can clearly be harmful, they are not inherently wrong.
Your section on Jesus is interesting, because you quote Matthew where Jesus is being tempted in the wilderness. Clearly the problem here isn’t with the authority of Christ, because ultimately he is the king who will reign over the earth. The reason why you find this story in the synoptic gospels is because it is drawing a metaphor of Jesus as the second Exodus, but instead of failing the temptations as Israel did, he succeeded through each one. That is that he was in the wilderness 40 days like Israel was in the wilderness for 40 years, he was tempted to turn rocks to bread where Israel failed with this grumblings about food, he was tested with the angels as Israel was, and he was tempted to worship a false god just like Israel fell into idolatry. Each time he was tempted as Israel was, and each time he stays righteous unlike Israel and quotes the corresponding portion of Deuteronomy.
The next part of your argument has to be dealt with in parts, so I will first start with your statement that Jesus refused to take command of government. While this is true, it was not because God does not want to get involved with politics, rather it is because that was not what Jesus came to do. Unlike what the Pharisees and Essenes expected Christ to be, he came as a serving accepting teacher and sacrifice and not as a political ruler. Clearly God doesn’t have a problem dealing with government, after all he established a law and civil code for Israel as well as arranging a kingly dynasty. To say therefore that because Jesus did not act politically proves God’s lack of desire to act through government is simply false. You are taking the redemptive essence of God and trying to apply those actions to the entirety of God himself, and that is dangerous.
The next set of statements that you make is perhaps even more dangerous as it would seem to completely deny the existence of direct divine revelation through the Holy Spirit. If this is truly what you believe than you and I have many long and difficult talks ahead of us, for that is a grave error to make. Clearly both by looking at scripture and through examples in our own lives today we see that God does speak to us clearly and that his words as certainly clear enough for him to guide us through how to handle government. To make a blanket statement and say that Christians should not vote and use the argument that God cannot reveal his will to his people clearly limits the power of God and cuts of true Christianity at its knees. To say such a statement promotes a very deist standpoint, but clearly we serve a God who is both transcendent and immanent and desires that we both seek after and follow his will.
Furthermore, if we accept my previous statement that we can in fact know the will of God and act accordingly, then it is God who is responsible for the acts of Government and not us. After all, if we earnestly seek after the will of God and do it, then we have denied ourselves and accepted his authority over our lives and over our electoral vote.
In the end, I would safely say that while clearly there is not and never will be a government on this earth that serves God by its essence and seeks to do his will, in the end God has the authority to enact his will. If that happens to include guiding people to vote a certain way so that by the candidates elected he is ultimately glorified than so be it. Can we really deny the will of God, his sovereignty or the power of the Holy Spirit to speak to us and act through us? Of course not. There is not reason why Christians should not vote, but we should do so with our eyes and ears and hearts focused towards God and not towards men.
Let his will be done.
Ps. If this isn’t good enough for you I definitely can go on… just figured that you have a long reading list :P.
Email my regular account with a response since I don’t check blogspot.
Post a Comment