How Ought Christians Think About Their Right to Vote?

The year 2024 marks the 60th presidential election in the United States. Christians and non-Christians
alike shall be asked to vote for either Kamala Harris (D), or for former president, Donald Trump (R).

Have you made up your mind as to which candidate you will choose? Have others inquired of you, “Who will you vote for?” Or, “will you choose a third party other than Democratic and Republican?” And not a few of us may have raised the question: “Is it okay not to vote at all?” 

The Oxford Dictionary defines the verb “to vote” as “to give formal indication of a choice for a candidate or a course of action.” In the United States, citizens enjoy the right, privilege, and responsibility to vote. It is a right that is denied many in other countries. It is a privilege as our form of government confers this right to vote on all citizens for all candidates and bills at all levels: the federal, state, and local. And it is a responsibility as all freedoms are freedoms subject to our ultimate duties to God and neighbor (Mark 12:29ff).

Of course, when we consider voting, we must not forget that there is more to an election ballot than voting for the president every four years. In the United States we vote for senators, congressman, and many lesser civic authorities as well as, at times, specific bills or propositions. 

How, then, ought Christians to think about their right to vote? Let’s explore this one issue at a time. 

Are Christians obligated to vote? 

Every Christian, every follower of Christ, understands that the Lord Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, has been given all authority in heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18). So, our entire life must be governed in accord with the risen Christ, who told his disciples to teach all other followers of Christ to obey all that he has commanded (Matt. 28:19). So, we need to ask: Does Scripture command or require Christians to vote? The answer is no. Scripture does not command or obligate us to vote either by expressed precept or by good and necessary inference deduced from Scripture (WCF 1.6). That is to say, to exercise one’s right to vote is a wisdom issue. 

Yet, whether we choose to vote or not, and whatever choices we make in casting a vote, we must do so in accord with three biblical criteria. 

First, it must be an action done in faith. Romans 14:23 tells us that “everything not done in faith is sin.” Christians are expected to exercise faith, that is, to rely humbly on God so that you do not act out of fear, pride, or other sinful motives. In this light, a question we can ask ourselves is: Am I casting this vote in faith? Or, out of sinful fear or pride? Scripture does not command or obligate us to vote either by expressed precept or by good and necessary inference deduced from Scripture (WCF 1.6). 

Second, it must be an act in accord with God’s word. Matthew 4:4 tells us, “man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.” To the best of our ability, we must choose good and hate evil. Vote for upholding God’s moral law, and vote in ways to restrain evil. A question to ask here is: Am I assured that by casting this vote God’s moral law shall be upheld? 

Third, it must be unto God’s glory. First Corinthians 10:31 says, “Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.” The Christian seeks, above all, God’s glory, the exaltation of his name, kingdom, purposes, and law. Thus, we must ask ourselves: In casting my vote, do I recognize, hope for, and wait until that day when Christ, who sits on the throne, and is sovereign over all, shall return and “the kingdom of this world will become the kingdom of our Lord and Christ” (Rev. 11:15)? 

 The Lesser of Two Evils 

“Lesser of two evils” is a rhetorical statement. Herman Bavinck, in his book titled Reformed Ethics, rejects the “lesser of two evils” idea. He says we should never do anything that is evil. Instead, he counsels: “… we may never choose the lesser of two evils, for our conscience can never obligate us to do what it judges to be evil.” So in one way, if you deem a candidate “evil,” you cannot in true faith choose such a candidate. 

However, in common usage the phrase “the lesser of two evils” often serves simply as a synonym for “the lesser of two not particularly desirable options.” Most Christians I believe have this second definition in mind. As Reformed Christians, we know that all men and governments this side of glory are tainted with evil to varying degrees. There is no perfect or ideal government, candidate, or bill. With that in mind, we are always choosing the “lesser” of two evils. And if chosen in faith, in accord with God’s word and to his glory, we may vote for the lesser candidate or bill. 

Of course, the “lesser of two evils” assumes that one has only two options, in voting for this or that bill or this or that candidate, and there is no third alternative. As we discussed earlier, there is the option not to vote. If one cannot in good faith vote for either candidate, not voting would be the godly thing to do, lest you violate your conscience (Rom. 19:23). But another option, a third option, would be to vote for a third party that does not violate your conscience. In light of the dominance of the two major parties, such a vote is considered by some as a “throw-away vote.” 

But that is a conclusion drawn from a merely pragmatic view of voting. As we saw earlier, Christians are bound to act upon biblical principles: faith, God’s word, and God’s glory. Yes, there are wisdom issues to our votes. And there is an “incalculable calculus” in voting— so many competing issues to weigh and decide which is best. Yet, if we act in principle by voting for a third party that we deem honors God’s moral law better than the major parties, then there is no throwing away your vote. God will judge us, and our voting, not on the basis of “success” but on whether or not we acted in faith. 

What about so-called one-issue voting? 

In light of the myriad competing issues and choices, is it wise for a Christian to vote for a candidate or a party’s slate based upon a single issue, such as respect for human life or God’s design for sexuality and marriage? Such issues are rooted in God’s moral law and expressed in the Ten Commandments. 

Consequently, some Christians argue that in light of the deeply foundational nature of human life, one should never vote for any candidate who advocates or defends LGBTQ issues: same-sex marriage, transgender legislation, e.g., Equality Acts, Respect of Marriage Act. 

In view of this “single-issue” voting, it is important for us to remember that when one votes or does not vote, they do so for more than one reason. Even so-called single-issue voters likely have more than one reason. Typically, the single issue can be of two kinds: (1) a very broad reason, or (2) a very narrow or particular issue. A broad issue might be that I vote only for this or that party because they will best promote God’s moral law. So, when voting, I check all the boxes for this or that party: be they Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian, etc. Vote for upholding God’s moral law, and vote in ways to restrain evil. 

On the other hand, some single-issue votes are for a particular matter that appears to the voter to have such moral weight or is of such fundamental or foundational substance affecting the nation as to allow a voter to definitively say “yes” or “no” to this or that bill or candidate. One might find this “single reason” voting compelling. For example, Psalm 11:3 asks: “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?” What are the foundations? Well, they would be God’s moral laws. If a government, or people—much less a candidate or bill—is not in accord with God’s moral law, then it is by definition striking at the foundations. 

I stress “people” because in many ways, in a country ruled by a democratic government, in the end the government expresses the attitudes and desires of its people. 

If its people desire idolatry and want to transgress God’s moral law, then they suffer for it. Or better, then God judges them. A clear example of this is found in Ezekiel 20:25. There the Lord reminds Israel that due to their love for idolatry, he gave them unjust laws: “Moreover, I gave them statutes that were not good and rules by which they could not have life…” 

Very similar to this idea is what Paul says in Romans 1—that the way God presently expresses his wrath is giving people over to their sin and their sinful desires such as immorality, homosexuality, and depraved minds (Rom. 1:24, 26, 28). 

All this to say, when we vote, even for a so-called “single issue,” we vote for multiple reasons, which are not equally weighted or valued. If, then, I vote for bills or candidates that support a single issue, let’s say pro-life, or the sanctity of marriage, or freedom of exercise of religion, then that single issue is not simply a single reason but a foundational one. Granted, others may disagree. 

So again, the critical question we need to ask ourselves is: Is this or that reason wise, good, just, and does it promote God’s moral law? 

Regarding Civic Duties 

We’ve talked about what obligates Christians in terms of our civic duty to vote. We have seen that voting is a right, a privilege, and a responsibility. We have also seen that we are not commanded to vote. We may choose not to exercise this right to vote. 

But let us never forget that while voting is not a divine command, our Lord does command two things with respect to our civic duties: (1) pray for our leaders (1 Tim. 2:1–2); and (2) submit to them (1 Pet. 2:13). 

First, let’s be mindful of the context in which 1 Timothy and 1 Peter are written. Both letters were likely written during the time of the Roman emperor Nero (54–68). According to ancient historians, Nero was considered corrupt in character and notorious for his cruelty and debauchery. Nevertheless, the apostles Paul and Peter instruct us to be submissive to the emperor, kings, or rulers. There is no perfect or ideal government, candidate, or bill. 

The first priority for us as citizens and civilians in any country is to pray (1 Tim. 2:1–2). Says Paul: “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way.” 

Paul’s goal is that God would grant us a basic stability of life in terms of political, economic, and social order. Jeremiah encouraged the Jewish exiles in Babylon similarly, saying, “But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare” (Jer. 29:7). 

 Let us do the same. Whether we vote or not, let it never be said we failed to pray for our civic leaders, legislators, justices, and government. 

 The second priority is to submit. First Peter 2:13 says, “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men, kings, governors, who are sent by him (God) to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.” Of course, our submission to human authorities, even in the church, is always a penultimate submission, as our ultimate authority is obedience to God. We must obey God rather than man if a human authority demands we violate God’s law (Acts 5:29). 

We most honor Christ when we obey his commands to pray for and submit to our governing authorities. 

So, whom will you vote for this November? Well, let us hope that, come November’s presidential election, it may be said of us: “We prayed for our leaders and our country. We shall submit to them. But we shall always obey our God." 

 Dr. Alfred Poirier (DMin, Westminster Theological Seminary) is professor of pastoral theology at Westminster Theological Seminary. He has held several additional teaching positions and has 38 years of pastoral ministry experience. His academic interests lie in the areas of pastoral counseling and expository preaching. He is the author of The Peacemaking Pastor (Baker, 2006), and Words that Cut: Learning to Take Criticism in Light of the Gospel (Peacemaker Ministries).

 

It's Not Always Nice To Be Nice

One of the many ways we must “fight the good fight” (1Tim. 6:12) in our time is the recovery of robust
Biblical speech to combat the many errors, compromises, and assaults upon faithful Christian belief both inside and outside the Church. 

This is true of every generation of the Church. But one of the errors of our time is – ironically enough – the idea that Christians should not fight for what they believe is right, or fight against what they believe to be wrong, with appropriately strong words.

More often than not, when a Christian begins to fight for/against such things today, they are – ironically enough – fought against by other Christians for manifesting a “combative spirit” or some other such charge. Needless to say, such Christians usually come armed with an arsenal of verses about peace, meekness, gentleness, and so on. What is a poor Christian combatant to do? 

We know what we’re expected to do, of course: lay down our arms (that is, our Bible verses) and bow meekly before the benevolent Gentleness Coalition who are politely stationed outside with a rather robust barricade, warning that our terribly combative posture could be a serious safety hazard to the effective witness of the Gospel and the unity of the Church.

Indeed these days the charge of “combative tone” is the closest you might get to seeing church discipline actually enforced within the average mainstream evangelical church or network.

Gentleness over Combativeness?

One such set of counter-verses to Christian combatants occurs in Ephesians 4, where Paul speaks of the need for believers to walk “with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (Eph. 4:2-3). 

To many, it seems straightforward enough. Stop disagreeing so strongly, forget your differences, be peaceable, and show the world your unity. To sharply disagree or say things which offend other Christians is thus seen as “divisive,” “breaking the bond of peace,” or “failing to bear with one another in love.”

Perpetual combativeness certainly can be a sign of immaturity, of course. Parents rarely need to call out their children for insufficient combativeness when they disagree with a parental command, lose a board game, or miss out on dessert. Indeed, if a sibling “borrows” a favourite toy, many children seem more than willing to go to war for their pound of sibling flesh if they believe some great injustice has been done!

Christians are not called to be childish, impetuous, or malicious. There really is such a thing as an unhealthy desire for “quarrelling” and an approach to opponents which is unfair, hot-headed, and ungentlemanly (see 2Tim. 2:24-25). But we must discern the need of the hour, and the way some Biblical verses are frequently used to support subtly unbiblical things. Failing to oppose such things over time always causes greater damage and disunity in the long run.

Aren’t We Always Meant to “Build Up”?

The Church in the west has been passive for far too long. We have forgotten what it means to fight for our convictions. We live at a time when the wolves are at the door and many of the supposed gatekeepers have not only welcomed them in with open arms but have strongly chastised those who tried to stop them. They pat the wolves, stone the prophets, and wonder why their sheep keep disappearing. 

In our era of perpetual evangelical winsomeness, the greatest evangelical “sin” was to seem unwelcoming or disagreeable. To speak against compromise in the Church too strongly tends to incur the charge of immaturity, as though the one alerting the Church to doctrinal and social evils is like the child attacking their sibling for taking their favourite toy or winning the game. “Let it go”, “Learn to get along”, “Love doesn’t insist”, “Be nice”! 

Those who bring challenge to the established mindset must often speak in strong words to be truly heard. We need not make something seem worse than it really is; we simply need to say it is as bad as it is when it is as bad as it is. The desire to sugar-coat the truth in “nicer” tone often misrepresents the severity and urgency of the issue. It’s not always nice to be nice.

Those who really wish to challenge their fellow Christians – or indeed to challenge those in the world with Christian convictions – will be accused of falling foul of Paul’s teaching on gentleness and unity, of seeking to tear down rather than build up.

Again, Paul appears to emphasise this later on in the same chapter of Ephesians:

“Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear…Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamour and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another.” (Eph. 4:29-32).

Such verses gladden the hearts of the perpetually winsome, who might see “corrupting talk” as anything seeking to challenge or deconstruct an opponent’s ideas or credibility with too sharp an edge or to "inappropriate" a tone. “Surely,” they say, “there can be no argument for Christians to argue when it doesn’t always immediately ‘build up’ their opponent? Listen to Paul, see – be gentle! Don’t say anything that won’t make them feel affirmed! If someone’s in error, don’t make too big a thing of it; be tender-hearted; be kind; be nice!” 

I’m not saying there are no times where some exhortations like this should be heeded. But beyond everyday “fellowship” issues within church communities, this therapeutic approach should not be applied en masse to cover all of our strategic theological and public engagement. 

When Cowards Abuse Unity

Using Paul’s exhortations for tender-hearted unity against the righteous Christian combatant (or perhaps, the “protestant”…) can often be (ab)used in such a way that it puts them in a situation where they cannot possibly disagree without seeming to prove the point of those who are (somewhat ironically) “protesting” against them.

Too often this tactic is used as a subtle strategy today to make the cowards seem like the heroes, as though they “chose” unity above their insatiable desire to confront evil or error. Most of the time, such people just did exactly what felt most comfortable to them, and were glad they had some verses to back them up. They often don’t care about the net effect of their cowardice because the effects are less immediately obvious than those of the zealous over-confronter. The effects of cowardice may be subtle, but they are usually ten times more destructive over the long haul. Entire denominations fall into apostasy not because of confronters but because of cowards, and the nice guys who kept letting them get away with it. 

If we truly care about love and unity, we must not only oppose the bullies and fools, but also oppose the cowards, who may be abusing the concept of unity in order to suit their own desires. When confronting such people, they probably won’t like you for it, at least not at first. But over time, loving confrontation on significant issues is more likely to lead to deeper unity among God’s people in the long run. 

by Clear Truth Media

What Happens When the Election is Over? How Should Christians Live?

What should our posture be as the people of God when the November 5, 2024 election is all over? 

How do we reflect the love of Christ to our neighbors and our friends? Here are five important postures:

1. Gratitude

This sounds counter-intuitive. Can we find something praiseworthy in a divisive, partisan season? Even if we will be grateful when we can stop getting hit with text messages, mailers, and TV ads, we can find room for gratitude that, unlike most people in human history, we even have a politics to complain about.

Consider that right now, nobody in totalitarian regimes like North Korea, Russia, or China is complaining about partisanship. In fact, if you were to ask the average citizen in those countries if they’d trade places with us, they’d gladly accept that offer. America is far from perfect, with lots of glaring problems and issues—hence a political campaign—and yet we are still the freest, most prosperous nation in human history.

We have the opportunity to choose the people who hold public office and the policies they enact. We may wish our point of view had more influence or got more votes, but at least we have some measure of influence. Today, billions of people long for that kind of freedom. So, we should thank God for the privilege of living in America, regardless of who wins the election. 1 Thessalonians 5:18 urges us to “in everything, give thanks.”

2. Prayer

In 1 Timothy 2:1-4, Paul urges Timothy to pray for “or everyone, for kings and all those who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good, and it pleases God our Savior, who wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” November 5th will put a different president in the White House. He or she deserves our prayer. We’ll also see several new Senators, House members, mayors, state legislators, judges, governors, and local school board members. Christians must make it a regular practice to ask God to direct those in office to govern fairly, righteously, and as a “God’s servant for good” (Romans 13:4).

It's important to pray for leaders, whether or not you agree with them or voted for them. Paul urged Timothy to pray for a ruthless Roman emperor whom neither of them would have supported if given a choice, a man who arrested, jailed, and executed Christians. On our worst day in America, we’re not anywhere close to living under this kind of tyranny. I am sobered by how often I complain about politicians compared to how often I pray for them. We should make this a regular habit, both personally and in our congregations.

3. Engagement

Our work in “seeking the welfare of our city” (Jeremiah 29) and living as “salt and light” (Matthew 5:13-16) doesn’t end when the last ballot is counted. There is much work for us to do in between elections, both locally in working with our state and local governments to help serve our neighbors and in speaking out on important issues. The scared, unwed mothers in our communities will still need the help of our pregnancy resource centers, even when the election is over. Our school boards still need the wise involvement of faithful Christians, and our schools still need help educating children. The hungry, the hopeless, and the homeless still need the tangible service our SBC churches so generously provide in communities across the country.

What’s more, our engagement in public policy is just beginning. The new officeholders will be making consequential decisions. Regardless of who inhabits the White House, who controls Congress, who sits in governors’ mansions, city councils, and other offices—we should support them when they make good decisions and oppose them when they make poor decisions. And we should do it while obeying 1 Peter 3:15-17, which instructs us to both “have an answer for every person” while doing it with “gentleness and kindness.”

4. Hope

It is good and right for Christians to be concerned about important issues that face our communities, our cities, and our country. Speaking truth in the public square is not a distraction from our Christian mission. We do this because we genuinely care about policies that impact our families and the lives of our neighbors.

Still, we should engage the world with hope. Jesus, before he went to the cross, reminded his disciples, “In this world you will have tribulation, but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world” (John 16:33). The opposition we face for our convictions, the difficulty in seeing good laws passed, and the frustrations we feel in a broken world should not surprise us. Jesus promised this. Yet we can be comforted with his words. Christ has overcome the world. Do we really believe this? Would anyone accessing our social media timelines get this vibe from what we post? Would our friends and family members observe that Christian hope is something that guides our lives?

Political fortunes rise and fall. Sometimes we’ll see great victories and sometimes we’ll experience great defeats. But we shouldn’t be dispirited. God is sovereign. We may have been sweating this election, but the Lord of all the earth was not in Heaven white-knuckling the election. He is on the throne. He knows what time it is. He’s gathering history to himself. And he’s made us for this moment.

5. Faithfulness

There are many things about this election season we can control, but so many more that we cannot. We can’t control how our neighbors vote, nor can we control what those in power will do with the power they are granted.

What we can do is be faithful to the things Christians are called to do in every moment and every season: walking with God through prayer, Bible reading, gathering with our brothers and sisters every Sunday at church, and making disciples of all nations. The Great Commission isn’t conditioned based on who wins the election. And here’s the good news: unlike political campaigns, which have no guarantee of success, Christ has promised that he will build his church (Matthew 16:18). The move of the Spirit of God among the people of God applying the Word of God to bring the lost to Jesus is not dependent on who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And as important as political engagement is, it’s not ultimate. We’ll make better American citizens when we recognize we are first citizens of another kingdom. So let’s be faithful in walking in step with the Spirit, working to build up the body of Christ, and loving our neighbors.

By Daniel Darling, the director of the Land Center for Cultural Engagement at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is a regular columnist for World and a contributor to USA Today. He is the author of several books, including The Characters of Christmas, The Dignity Revolution, and A Way With Words. Daniel and his wife, Angela, have four children. You can follow him on Twitter and find his work on his website.

Judging By Results

If you are a follower of Jesus, then it should be abundantly evident in a life that is different because of Jesus. If your life is not different, then there are questions about the legitimacy of your claim to follow Christ. It doesn’t mean you are perfect and sinless, but it does mean you should be more like Jesus than like who you used to be. The failure of people who claim to follow Jesus to actually be something like him, actually invites the criticisms that we hear far often today. Christians are accused of hypocrisy, something young people say is why they leave church. The following is how C.S. puts it:

I think this is the right moment to consider a question which is often asked: If Christianity is true why  are not all Christians obviously nicer than all non-Christians?

What lies behind that question is partly something very reasonable and partly something that is not reasonable at all. The reasonable part is this. If conversion to Christianity makes no improvement in a man’s outward actions—if he continues to be just as snobbish or spiteful or envious or ambitious as he was before—then I think we must suspect that his ‘conversion’ was largely imaginary; and after one’s original conversion, every time one thinks one has made an advance, that is the test to apply. Fine feelings, new insights, greater interest in ‘religion’ mean nothing unless they make our actual behaviour better; just as in an illness ‘feeling better’ is not much good if the thermometer shows that your temperature is still going up. In that sense the outer world is quite right to judge Christianity by its results. Christ told us to judge by results. A tree is known by its fruit; or, as we say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. When we Christians behave badly, or fail to behave well, we are making Christianity unbelievable to the outside world. The war-time posters told us that Careless Talk costs Lives. It is equally true that Careless Lives cost Talk. Our careless lives set the outer world talking; and we give them grounds for talking in a way that throws doubt on the truth of Christianity itself.

Quotes from Mere Christianity, Part 83
C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (1952; Harper Collins: 2001) 207-208.