Thanks for sharing. In the past few weeks, I've seen Tim Keller referred to as a "leftist", and now John Piper as a "virtue signaler". Strange times we live in.

This is spot on:

Quote:

---

It is naive to think that a man can be effectively pro-life and manifest consistently the character traits that lead to death temporal and eternal.

---

Quote:

---

I will not develop some calculus to determine which path of destruction I will support. That is not my duty. My calling is to lead people to see Jesus Christ, trust his forgiveness for sins, treasure him above everything in this world, live in a way that shows his all-satisfying value, and help them make it to heaven with love and holiness. That calling is contradicted by supporting either pathway to cultural corruption and eternal ruin.

You may believe that there are kinds of support for such pathways that do not involve such a contradiction such an undermining of authentic Christian witness. You must act on what you see. I can't see it. That is why I said my way need not be yours.

---

NoahAg said:

---

I get what he's saying but the practical implication leaves us with the only option being to write in "Jesus" for every local, state, and federal election.

---

Nah, there's the option of not voting at all. It sounds like that's the route he's taking, or at the very least isn't casting a vote for POTUS.

Since I actually embraced Christ, I have not voted a single time.

And Piper isn't saying anything really different than what the Wayne Grudem's of the world were saying in the 90's. Character counts. Many have seemed to forget that. And Piper is right about the effects of the sins of arrogance, boastfulness, vulgarity, etc have in how they infect others. We see it in the political discourse of the day.

I agree, and that's why I'm glad he didn't make the article an endorsement of Biden, but it is already being pitched as that.

My point is (and I recognize this is straying off topic from Piper a bit) is that yes, character counts, both candidates have bad character, so if you're going to vote for one of them you look to the policy. If character is so important to you that you're not going to vote for either one, that is fine - I get that. I think your position is a reasonable one.

I meant to reply to PacifistAg but I guess I replied to myself.

Quote:

---

I believe we need to return to seeking a Judgment of Charity and find the good in our civil leaders and the good in the institution of government God has established for our benefit.

---

I think it would be more effective if we sought a return to being a prophetic witness to a Kingdom not of this world, where we love our enemies, return evil with good, and beat our swords into plowshares. I think this will present a lost world with a clear alternative between their "two evils" and One righteous. For me, I find it more effective to do so by not participating in their "two evils" approach and getting their stench on us, which only fuels accusations of hypocrisy that undermine our witness. I mean, imagine if Christians on the left and the right said "no, we refuse to vote for either of these". Those that crave power would then, in their effort to attain power, present more palatable options. But right now, they throw out whatever person they want because they know we're programmed to choose between them.

Again, though, just as Piper said, this is just my personal belief.

chuckd said:

---

Why view someone as evil just because they are running for a civil office? They have no more of a stench than you do. It's easy to speak of people like that just because they are in the public eye and you don't know them personally, but it is not helping your witness. Most Americans view politicians that way - they're just on the other side of the aisle. It's not uniquely Christian.

---

You even referred to "two evils" in your initial post. I was using a common term "lesser of two evils", not to call either of these men evil (although their fruit is not fruit of the Spirit), but to point out that these are two bad options. It's a common term to describe elections.

And I don't view them as "evil" simply because they're running for office.

Yes, it is a common term that we have accepted, even as Christians. Why? We can equally judge who is the greater of two good options. "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal." That is what political discourse has become today. If I view one or both persons as evil or bad, then this whole thread will sound like a "lifeless instrument."

They'd call BB Warfield a liberal in these times. Ridiculous. Keller is no lib.

chuckd said:

---

Why view someone as evil just because they are running for a civil office? They have no more of a stench than you do. It's easy to speak of people like that just because they are in the public eye and you don't know them personally, but it is not helping your witness. Most Americans view politicians that way - they're just on the other side of the aisle. It's not uniquely Christian.

---

It seems that in order for one to ascend to a higher level of political power, that person must sell their soul in exchange for that power. Its a pretty cynical view, but I have a pretty low opinion of many of our leaders.

chuckd said:

---

Yes, it is a common term that we have accepted, even as Christians. Why? We can equally judge who is the greater of two good options. "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal." That is what political discourse has become today. If I view one or both persons as evil or bad, then this whole thread will sound like a "lifeless instrument."

---

I think you're being far too literal with regards to that term. I believe it was Charles Spurgeon who even said "of two evils, choose neither". It's an expression.

And voters aren't presented with two good options. I think most would love if they were. And I agree that political discourse has become completely unloving, which was part of Piper's point. Many have taken cues from their preferred candidates. It's become toxic, so even Piper is saying that he won't choose between these two options. I don't agree with Piper on much, but I do trust he's prayerfully approached this and this is where the Spirit led him. I'm the same, albeit for slightly different reasons.

Quote:

---

And I agree that political discourse has become completely unloving, which was part of Piper's point.

---

That couldn't have been his point. I don't see anything in the article where he says something loving about Trump or Biden. It's the opposite where all he does is point out their flaws.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

chuckd said:

---

Why view someone as evil just because they are running for a civil office? They have no more of a stench than you do. It's easy to speak of people like that just because they are in the public eye and you don't know them personally, but it is not helping your witness. Most Americans view politicians that way - they're just on the other side of the aisle. It's not uniquely Christian.

---

It seems that in order for one to ascend to a higher level of political power, that person must sell their soul in exchange for that power. Its a pretty cynical view, but I have a pretty low opinion of many of our leaders.

---

This is what Lord Acton was referring to. Power corrupts, and these races are between individuals seeking power. But not just the individuals running, but in our system also their supporters. So we see wherewinning becomes paramount above all, and principles become corrupted if it's needed to win. That becomes a major problem when those principles are our very faith.

That is a pretty negative view on things but Piper is always like that.

chuckd said:

---

Quote:

---

And I agree that political discourse has become completely unloving, which was part of Piper's point.

---

That couldn't have been his point. I don't see anything in the article where he says something loving about Trump or Biden. It's the opposite where all he does is point out their flaws.

---

He's talking about the effects that the arrogance, vulgarity, etc coming from leaders have on the political discourse. That is evident all around us. So he chooses to not make a choice between the corrosive effects of arrogance, vulgarity, etc and the corrosive policies of the other side.

Frok said:

---

That is a pretty negative view on things but Piper is always like that.

---

Agree. He did say it was his civic duty to vote and decried anarchy and tyranny so I am with him there.

AGC said:

---

I was amused and disheartened by the article because he didn't mention how kamala climbed the ladder or where joe found his wife. When you factor that in there's really little difference in the candidates outside of Pence. He really set the table to talk about how all the candidates are the same without using names (but media coverage makes it seem obvious who he's talking about) and then he seemingly punted.

---

Amen. And this is what I do not get. People are judging Trump more harshly for the exact same behaviors other pols are doing but because of Trump's "personality".

Piper does hit on that with his discussion of Trump's arrogance, self love, etc.

Quote:

---

And voters aren't presented with two good options.

---

You can't say one good thing about Donald Trump or Joe Biden?

dermdoc said:

---

AGC said:

---

I was amused and disheartened by the article because he didn't mention how kamala climbed the ladder or where joe found his wife. When you factor that in there's really little difference in the candidates outside of Pence. He really set the table to talk about how all the candidates are the same without using names (but media coverage makes it seem obvious who he's talking about) and then he seemingly punted.

---

Amen. And this is what I do not get. People are judging Trump more harshly for the exact same behaviors other pols are doing but because of Trump's "personality".

Piper does hit on that with his discussion of Trump's arrogance, self love, etc.

---

this is where i struggled when reading the article. i'm letting my biases be known as a guy who did vote for trump this go round. i did not in 2016 for most part in due to Piper's opinion here that i shared at the time.

What i don't like about the comparison is that this time, his opponent has played around with infidelity, and has been a harsh, arrogant person as well. Joe Biden has called his voters fat, stupid, liars, and threatened to fight them... heck, he even threatened to fight Trump, etc. While i was no fan of Clinton in 2016, it was obvious that she had a better and more composed demeanor than Trump could ever hope for or that Biden currently has. Like her or not, she carried herself better.

Piper literally has no leg to stand on calling Biden the less offensive, rude, arrogant person. Or more pure. If he was just pointing out character flaws vs. a pro-abortion stance in 2016, i'd get it. This is looking at today and his actual opponent, not just their one stance most Christians obviously don't agree with.

Now there's no tacit endorsement, which I appreciate. That being said, it's better than the drivel Thabiti has endorsed over on Gospel Coalition. Not saying I completely disagree with all his takes, but I found his staff member's endorsement of Clinton last go round just as disgusting as Fallwell Jr.'s

AGC said:

---

I was amused and disheartened by the article because he didn't mention how kamala climbed the ladder or where joe found his wife. When you factor that in there's really little difference in the candidates outside of Pence. He really set the table to talk about how all the candidates are the same without using names (but media coverage makes it seem obvious who he's talking about) and then he seemingly punted.

---

I do not think politicians should be expected to be religious leaders or spiritual and moral leaders. I don't care if a politician has an off-putting personality, or is a philanderer, gay, straight, Christian, Mormon, Muslim, or worships the FSM. In part, this post is a defense of voting for Trump despite his personal . . . . shortcomings (or whatever you want to call it).

More so than in years past, it seems that all people care about is winning and power. Its probably not fair to blame politicians, its more likely that they are a symptom of the ugly nature of their constituents. We cheer on 'our' side when they break the rules, execute a power grab, and when they condemn the other side for doing the exact same thing.

The biggest threat to this country is not [insert leftist policy] or [insert conservative policy]. And its not who the president has slept with or the vulgarity he puts on display. Its our own hypocrisy and hunger for power. This is how democracy dies.

The problem I have with Trump is not his arrogance and self love and vulgarity. For me, where Trump becomes indefensible is that he is so openly and unapologetically corrosive and poisonous to the civility and mutual respect that is needed in a democracy.

And maybe I feel this way because I do not align with him on the right on a lot of issues. But, when I read Piper's article and other articles by conservative people, it makes me feel less crazy. Piper may hate liberal policies and abortion. And he may approve of many of Trump's actions. But he seems to feel that there is something about him that is truly poisoning to our souls and to this country.

Who Biden slept with and when would be a distraction from the entire purpose of the article.

Frok said:

---

I think there is a strong temptation to be "above it" in regards to politics. Not voting gives you a sense of moral high ground.

I will not pretend to be morally righteous. I'm voting.

---

Maybe I'm just inferring something you aren't actually implying, but it sounds like you're saying that people who aren't voting are essentially "virtue signaling". There are very valid and principled reasons to not vote. I don't think it's about "pretending to be morally righteous". If voting would require one to violate their conscience or convictions, they shouldn't do it. For me, it's not about some "moral high ground", but about my principles. Specifically about the state and how I'm called to interact with the state as a follower of Christ. Or even more specifically, my views on the inherently violent nature of the state and how it is incompatible with where my faith has taken me.

Quote:

---

More so than in years past, it seems that all people care about is winning and power. Its probably not fair to blame politicians, its more likely that they are a symptom of the ugly nature of their constituents. We cheer on 'our' side when they break the rules, execute a power grab, and when they condemn the other side for doing the exact same thing.

The biggest threat to this country is not [insert leftist policy] or [insert conservative policy]. And its not who the president has slept with or the vulgarity he puts on display. Its our own hypocrisy and hunger for power. This is how democracy dies.

---

This ^^^

Quote:

---

Piper may hate liberal policies and abortion. And he may approve of many of Trump's actions. But he seems to feel that there is something about him that is truly poisoning to our souls and to this country.

---

Also this ^^^. This is what Piper is saying. He clearly abhors the policies of one side, but to him it's not just about policy. He feels that the other side is, as you said, "poisoning to our souls and to this country". We see this throughout the bible as well.

I suspect there will be some rebuttal against that post - Biden and Clinton and others have said hateful things about the right and about conservatives as well. I just don't think you can compare them in this regard to a man who spends 12 hours a day on Twitter insulting others and being hateful.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

I suspect there will be some rebuttal against that post - Biden and Clinton and others have said hateful things about the right and about conservatives as well. I just don't think you can compare them in this regard to a man who spends 12 hours a day on Twitter insulting others and being hateful.

---

Definitely. Neither side is immune to disgusting and hateful behavior, nor is either side immune from bad policy. One is worse w/ regards to policy. One is worse with regards to hateful, arrogant behavior. But both are guilty of both aspects.

PacifistAg said:

---

chuckd said:

---

Quote:

---

And I agree that political discourse has become completely unloving, which was part of Piper's point.

---

That couldn't have been his point. I don't see anything in the article where he says something loving about Trump or Biden. It's the opposite where all he does is point out their flaws.

---

He's talking about the effects that the arrogance, vulgarity, etc coming from leaders have on the political discourse. That is evident all around us. So he chooses to not make a choice between the corrosive effects of arrogance, vulgarity, etc and the corrosive policies of the other side.

---

Do you think the arrogance, vulgarity, etc. comes from leaders? I say it comes from the citizens. It is easy to pick apart a politician's character and judge them, or the countless, very difficult decisions they have to make throughout their term. It is hard to publicly esteem them, or give them the benefit of the doubt when executing their office. Look at this thread.

chuckd said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

chuckd said:

---

Quote:

---

And I agree that political discourse has become completely unloving, which was part of Piper's point.

---

That couldn't have been his point. I don't see anything in the article where he says something loving about Trump or Biden. It's the opposite where all he does is point out their flaws.

---

He's talking about the effects that the arrogance, vulgarity, etc coming from leaders have on the political discourse. That is evident all around us. So he chooses to not make a choice between the corrosive effects of arrogance, vulgarity, etc and the corrosive policies of the other side.

---

Do you think the arrogance, vulgarity, etc. comes from leaders? I say it comes from the citizens. It is easy to pick apart a politician's character and judge them, or the countless, very difficult decisions they have to make throughout their term. It is hard to publicly esteem them, or give them the benefit of the doubt when executing their office. Look at this thread.

---

The arrogance, vulgarity, etc has definitely increased in recent years. I think the citizens are emulating their leaders. I think they feed into each other. Trump, for example, has always been arrogant and vulgar. His followers, though, have not always been, and given that the spike seems to coincide with him becoming their leader, I think he certainly bears much of the responsibility for that. People make their choice to emulate a vulgar person who is devoid of character, so in that sense it's on them. But people tend to look like those that they follow.

Follow Jesus, and you'll start looking more and more like Jesus. Follow the vulgar and arrogant, you'll start looking more and more like that.