Quote:
Retired, I don't find myself disagreeing with you often but I'm not following some of these statements.
1. "Lesser of two evils" still results in evil.
- Not voting still results in evil. However by not voting the opportunity to restrain evil is forfeited.
I wouldn't say "not voting" results in evil. It is simply choosing to address evil through different means, which is centered on being a Christ-like witness to the world. I'm not saying that you can't do that
and vote, but as we see in cases such as this last election, the choices presented are so diametrically opposed to the way of Christ, that I believe the witness of the church to non-believers has been greatly damaged in America by throwing their weight behind either of the candidates.
Quote:
2. "damages the witness of the church"
- Not if we make our case. Example: DT and HC both have made decisions that I disagree with which causes me to have a difficult time trusting either. However when I consider things like abortion, taxes, wars, honesty, same sex marriage, which of those values does God value most. I'm convinced that human life is more important than taxes. Given the option between two imperfect candidates I'm going to vote for the one that is most in line with what I think God values most. In my opinion Jesus would be the only perfect candidate because He is perfect in power yet humble, a Mighty King yet He serves, Holy, righteous, and just yet gracious and merciful. In this election, Jesus is not on the ballot and I have a free choice to try and make a difference.
But this wasn't an election between George W Bush and Jimmy Carter. Neither of the options were remotely in line w/ what God values. He values a humble, contrite heart. He values caring for the widow, the refugee, the unborn, the marginalized, the oppressed. Neither of the candidates were in line with that. Perhaps in past elections, you could make that argument, but not in 2016.
Also, keep in mind, that the survey wasn't simply about holding one's nose and casting a vote. The perception among certain Christian demographics on the issue of immorality in a candidate underwent a stark shift. "Character counts" was no longer applicable, and was replaced with "we're not electing a pastor". I point back to Robert Jeffress and his comments about wanting a president that looks
nothing like Jesus Christ. That's alarming for a Christian to say, especially one who leads a church body.
Quote:
3. The antichrist world view: steal, kill, destroy, lie, cheat, deceive, blind people from placing their faith in Jesus.
- I believe there's one party that wants to silence Christian teaching, praying, etc more than the other.
- I believe there's one party that more in favor than killing the innocent than the other.
- Voting doesn't guarantee that all will be perfect but it gives us a chance to make a difference for the good.
I don't believe either party wants to silence Christian teaching or praying more than the other. Neither party, despite their lip service, will ban abortion. It's become a political football that neither side wants to get rid of. But, I also don't think a law against abortion is the most effective way of addressing it to start with, and it certainly isn't necessary in order for the church to be a force against it. Any minute "good" that may indirectly result from a vote is undercut by the damage to the church's witness, especially w/ regards to the often hateful and angry tone Christians take when it comes to politics.
Quote:
4. If all Christians didn't vote, what view would be guaranteed to flourish?
The early church spread rapidly throughout the most powerful and pagan empire in history, and it happened without casting a vote. The Christian view will flourish if we fight evil with "the blood of the Lamb and the word of our testimony". No vote is necessary.
Now, I do understand that many Christians were not necessarily being a "champion" for Trump, or Hillary. Many viewed it, as you laid out, as simply a case of holding the nose and voting for the "lesser evil". The problem is that whichever side is the "lesser evil" is often dependent on the already existing political beliefs of the individual. And I'm certainly susceptible to that as well, as a pacifist and voluntaryist. Which brings up an issue that I have w/ voting, in that I believe it only reinforces an inherently violent system of which I cannot, in good conscience, participate as I believe my faith demands I reject all violent ways.
But, please, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying one is sinning by voting. I just think it's an act that we instinctively engage in without thinking through the ramifications, especially when given a choice between two candidates who both hold antichrist worldviews. I think most are very well-intentioned in their vote, so I'm trying to not come across as issuing some judgment against them. This is simply how I look at the issue. I think going over to the politics board and seeing those who claim Christ and how they talk of those on the other side of the political aisle only works to confirm my feelings on the toxic nature of partisan politics. It's inherently divisive and views the "other" as the enemy.