Should Christians vote?

[barnhart]

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.

I'm not ready to agree to the formulation that choosing to abstain from systems of force and violence is non participation in society. In the long run it may be that abstention coupled with active social engagement may prove far more powerful in moving the collective conscience of the nation.

[mike]

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.

I respectfully disagree. My opinion is that Christians who participate in the coercive systems of violence of the governments of this world are far more affected by politics than vice versa, making them no longer a "remnant" but simply part and parcel of Caesar's system. They lose their voice, in a sense, to speak the teachings of Jesus and the good news of the kingdom of Jesus, in my opinion.

[mike]

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?

I would still abstain. Voting for either party still involves participation in civil government, a system that while appointed by God operates outside the principles of the kingdom of Jesus.

[Fidelio]

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.

Can always get one of these:

[Fidelio]

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?

I would still abstain. Voting for either party still involves participation in civil government, a system that while appointed by God operates outside the principles of the kingdom of Jesus.

For many of us, our places of employment also operate outside the principles of the Kingdom of Jesus, which may explain why most (if not all) Amish are self-employed.

And how many of us send their kids to the government schools, which clearly operate outside the principles of the Kingdom of Jesus?

Or buy an automobile or groceries etc. from a company that operates outside the principles of the Kingdom of Jesus.

[Fidelio]

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?

Bad enough the 2020 is between Trump (Abraham Lincoln) and Kamala Harris (not saying she is Hitler, but she is no prize and she will be president if Biden gets elected because as Trump says, Biden is shot). To me, the choice in this election is clear: Law and Order under our constitution, or Antifa type chaos. George Soros has been funding Antifa, BLM, and many radical leftist candidates for offices from local to national. It is a takeover attempt and they have loaded the deck to the point where we nearly lost America in 2016.

[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?

Bad enough the 2020 is between Trump (Abraham Lincoln) and Kamala Harris (not saying she is Hitler, but she is no prize and she will be president if Biden gets elected because as Trump says, Biden is shot). To me, the choice in this election is clear: Law and Order under our constitution, or Antifa type chaos. George Soros has been funding Antifa, BLM, and many radical leftist candidates for offices from local to national. It is a takeover attempt and they have loaded the deck to the point where we nearly lost America in 2016.

You do make a good point. Vis-à-vis the subject of this thread, you probably shouldn't be voting if you have Trump and Abraham Lincoln confused

‘You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything….Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.’ –Donald Trump

When McCain died, in August 2018, Trump told his senior staff, according to three sources with direct knowledge of this event, “We’re not going to support that loser’s funeral,” and he became furious, according to witnesses, when he saw flags lowered to half-staff. “What the f--- are we doing that for? Guy was a f---ing loser,” the president told aides.

“Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump referred to the more than 1,800 Marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed. …

-------------------------------------------

We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle-field and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature. --Abraham Lincoln.

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. - Abraham Lincoln

I can see how you might have them confused.

[JimFoxvog]

Can always get one of these:

I'm hoping to get one and put it in a more prominent position than my Black Lives Matter sign.

[Ernie]

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?

At one point I would have been open to voting on "issues" such as "marriage for all?" until someone pointed out to me that someone will need to enforce this law if it is made. If I vote "no" on such an issue, I am admitting that force should be used on anyone who transgresses.

Fighter jets? That is a "sword" that is used by civil governments and I don't think I should help that kingdom decide which sword should be purchased.

Immigration capped? That one I think I could vote "no" against, and be in harmony with the scriptures. If I voted yes, I would again be admitting that force needs to be used against those who transgress.

Hockey stadiums? I think the Bible gives direction on how money should be used so I think I could vote on this one as well.

So I guess on the last two it depends on which way a person votes as to whether or not he should vote on them.

[RZehr]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/hell-non-vot ... 53676.html

All told, 21% of nonvoting respondents fit into this category.

These nonvoters told Insider that they were not voting because:

"I believe that God's kingdom is the only solution to the problems we all face."

"Because of my religious beliefs."

"Voting adds your name to be selected for jury duty. I, like most people, don't like jury duty."

Included in this category are religions such as Jehovah's Witnesses and Christadelphians, which do not permit practicing followers to participate in elections.

Someone been polling Mennonet’ers?