Should Christians vote?

[Bootstrap]

But if you follow this reasoning to it's logical conclusion, we have what I heard someone call a "Constantinian" solution, which would be the Christians running the affairs of government as well as the church. Utopia, right?? I think we would all agree that the church running the state was one of the biggest disasters ever.

But I think it's possible to consciously vote as a member of "the remnant", knowing that no political party is really all that aligned with the Kingdom of God. In fact, I would say that's the only way a Christian should vote. Or offer opinions.

And I think some non-voters can sometimes use biblical metaphor and apocalyptic imagery to describe fairly normal politicians. Some of them have been doing this for decades, generally only for politicians of "the other side". In that case, I see little virtue to not voting.

[Ken]

My history is a little vague. But was 75% of the Roman Empire Christian in the pre-Constantine era? Or was Christianity a relatively minor sect in the grand scheme of things?

For that matter, it's not my impression that the early church as represented by the Pope in Rome and the other regional power centers in Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem were a-political. To the contrary. They were exceedingly involved in politics. Perhaps not small local congregations. But the church hierarchy certainly was. Politics were, of course, different then. It was less about voting and more about divine rights of monarchs and so forth.

What's more, what did it mean to be political in Pre-Constantinian Rome? It certainly had very little to do with voting.

Agreed - but that's where the answer to Ken's question lies, at least in part. Certainly the demographics and power dynamics were different, but how did the church, for its first 300 years relate to the power structures of the state? And what was the result? How did things change post-Constantine when the power of the state was incorporated?

It was an honest question and thought experiment on my part. Not some sort of gotcha. But you also have to suppose some sort of world where the majority of the population is more seriously and honestly Christian, not our current word where so many are just members of the Christian "tribe".

I suppose there are really 3 different models.

1. A post-Constantine middle ages theocratic model where the Church and State are one. This started to erode with the Reformation and continued to erode with the establishment of secular democracies across most of the western world in the 19th and 20th centuries.


2. A modern secular model with separation of church and state but in which Christians actively participate. This model has had a good 250 year run since at least 1776, but seems increasingly on shaky ground at times.

3. A two kingdoms model with a secular state in which Christians do not participate. Which seems like it was largely developed in response to #1 rather than #2. Menno Simons and his contemporaries were looking at the state as the Holy Roman Empire of the late middle ages, not the state as a post 1787 constitutional democracy which was still centuries away.

[Bootstrap]

Thought experiment: Aren't there times that there really is a significant moral difference between two candidates?

Suppose the 2024 election is between Abraham Lincoln and Adolph Hitler. Shouldn't Christians be able to identify important moral differences between these two men? I don't think there's a lot of doubt that the Centurion was a better man than Herod in the New Testament. Neither one will bring the Kingdom of God, but one is much more likely to do things that God wants than the other.

Our choices are rarely that clear. More often, it's a matter of degree and opinion. But I don't think it's true to say "they're all the same" or to assume that the truth is always half-way down the middle.

How would it be different to live as a Kingdom Christian during the Civil War? Or in Nazi Germany?

[Bootstrap]

I suppose there are really 3 different models.

1. A post-Constantine middle ages theocratic model where the Church and State are one. This started to erode with the Reformation and continued to erode with the establishment of secular democracies across most of the western world in the 19th and 20th centuries.

2. A modern secular model with separation of church and state but in which Christians actively participate. This model has had a good 250 year run since at least 1776, but seems increasingly on shaky ground at times.

The danger here is that people start to conflate Christianity with being an average member of American society. Which can happen with or without voting.

I participate in my neighborhood, I have picnics with secular neighbors, I go to events in secular parks from time to time. I see voting the same way, being part of the place where I am living. But I think it's important to do all of these things at a certain distance. I don't really see voting as different in kind from these other things.

Joining a party or campaigning for a candidate would cross my personal line. We all need to set appropriate boundaries. For any temptation we face.

3. A two kingdoms model with a secular state in which Christians do not participate. Which seems like it was largely developed in response to #1 rather than #2.

In theory, this should work. But if a Christian immerses himself in politically partisan news sources for 4 years, then chooses not to vote, is that Christian really any more separate than anyone else? If you give your mind over to that kind of thinking on a routine basis, not voting seems kind of hollow to me.

[Ken]

Thought experiment: Aren't there times that there really is a significant moral difference between two candidates?

Suppose the 2024 election is between Abraham Lincoln and Adolph Hitler. Shouldn't Christians be able to identify important moral differences between these two men? I don't think there's a lot of doubt that the Centurion was a better man than Herod in the New Testament. Neither one will bring the Kingdom of God, but one is much more likely to do things that God wants than the other.

Our choices are rarely that clear. More often, it's a matter of degree and opinion. But I don't think it's true to say "they're all the same" or to assume that the truth is always half-way down the middle.

How would it be different to live as a Kingdom Christian during the Civil War? Or in Nazi Germany?

Personally I think voting/not voting is kind of a red herring or side issue.

The more relevant question in my mind, is what responsibility to Christians have to stand up for justice and against injustice. If Christians do have a responsibility to seek justice for their fellow man (rather than living a separate life like the Amish), then it is simply a question of methods and tools. For me, voting is just one of many different tools, and not even the most significant one. So I think focusing on voting rather than engagement kind of misses the point.

In your Hitler example, I would like to think that I would engage in all peaceful means to resist and stand up for justice but would not participate in violent overthrow of the government. I would probably not take futile symbolic martyr type stands because I also have an obligation to self and family. And I would hope that I wouldn't just retreat from the public sphere and just hope/pray that things turn out OK. It's a fairly difficult needle to thread. But the voting/not voting seems sort of like a side issue to the main one of engagement or non-engagement.

[JimFoxvog]

Well, on the surface the Democrats claim to be for the little guy, so with an uncritical acceptance of their words, one might feel they are acting in a Christian manner to elect Biden, but the facts show otherwise. Or perhaps this person has a deep desire to be a martyr for the Christian faith, which could definitely become a reality under a Biden presidency as they give the USA over to CCP control. But I would suggest instead of dragging all of us into the martyr situation, he can move to a number of places in the world and become an instant martyr for his faith.

When someone writes something erroneous, I usually just express a differing opinion. But this flat-out nonsense is fear-mongering and can arouse hatred. I think this needs repentance.

No one is going to give the US over to Chinese control.

[Sudsy]

6 months off this forum and thought I might check in to see what is going on. I have a couple knees that need replacement so looks like I will have more indoor time to chat.

Thanks DanZ for the video which I watched entirely. Love hearing certain Anabaptist beliefs expressed.

In reply to the thread title question, my view is vote if you believe it is doing some good as 'he that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin'. Besides this text here are a few others that come to mind lately -

1 Timothy 2:1-2 - I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.

1 Peter 2:17 - Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor.

Romans 13:1 - Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

It seems to me that prayer, respect and thanksgiving for leaders (as seemingly impossible it may be for their ways) are ways we suffer as believers in denying what our flesh/carnal ways desire to do. How do we 'love your enemies' and 'speak evil of no one' ? I fail many times in this but see this approach as being the 'upside down' way of living out the Kingdom of God.

I believe and have experienced that when I allow the Holy Spirit to control and enable how I should live, then the fruit of the Spirit will reflect Jesus and be that light this world needs. That 'old time religion that makes me love everybody'. In myself, there is no chance of this ever happening. I need that on-going, daily filling of the Holy Spirit giving Him control.

What disappointed me in the video was no mention of the guidance of the Holy Spirit or I missed it expressed somewhere. Whether to vote or not to vote, we have a guide and why not allow for Him to work in each of our lives in His way and in His timing.

If this is a wrong way of understanding this, I'm open to correction. Although this is what I believe scripture says I wish I could say I am denying my flesh and I too often join in to how the unsaved world thinks. My mind needs much more transforming to Kingdom ways.

[ken_sylvania]

Here's what a Church of the Brethren friend and spiritual director posted on Facebook yesterday:

I don't put a lot of faith in voting, but I care about those on the margins and am glad to say NO to this wicked man, his enablers, the lies, the chaos, the brutality, and the failure to take COVID seriously. I often feel conflicted when I vote, but today, this was an easy choice!

Maybe those of you who vote sometimes could enlighten me, but I would not have realized that there is a "No" option on the ballot for electing politicians.
Did Mr. Gish perhaps mean to say that he had voted for a righteous man?

[Swiss Bro]

If I only had the choice between Trump and Biden I am not sure if I would vote.

In Switzerland we have two small explicitly evangelical parties (one a bit more liberal, the other very conservative). If I vote for them I feel they will at least try to implement a „Christian agenda“.

What‘s more, we also get to vote on actual topics like, should there be mariage for all, should we buy new fighter jets, shall immigration be capped. And on communal level even small time stuff like should we build a new hockey stadium etc. I have no problem voting on such subject.

I would be interested what those of you who abstain in the US would do in my situation, vote or still abstain?

[JimFoxvog]

Maybe those of you who vote sometimes could enlighten me, but I would not have realized that there is a "No" option on the ballot for electing politicians.
Did Mr. Gish perhaps mean to say that he had voted for a righteous man?

There is a write-in option. One can write "No" or "Jesus" or whatever you like. I don't think it gets counted in some states unless it's for a write-in candidate that has registered in some way.