Sullivan church of Christ – Sullivan, MO
Date: November 5, 2006
“CHRISTIANS AND VOTING”
David B. Smith
[NOTE: Within the past several days, more than a few — Christians and
non-Christians — have asked about and discussed voting in this year’s
election. Many issues are on the ballet. Many are confused about the
whole thing. It is certainly good and healthy to discuss these issues and
be bound and determined to know what the Bible teaches. The following
article is perhaps the best and finest treatment of this subject I have ever
read. The article was written by brother David B. Smith, the local preacher
for the Northside congregation in Calhoun, GA. The article appeared in
their weekly bulletin of Oct. 29, 2006. The Northside congregation is a
sound and faithful congregation of the Lord’s people. This congregation
also oversees the incoming support for brother Dennis Sargent of
Pomeroy, OH. The church at Sullivan is able to help with this work on a
monthly basis. Please read the following article carefully and
conscientiously. The article begins with a brief explanation by the writer.]
[This article is a collection of thoughts run several years ago prior to the last
Presidential election. Most people will remember the controversy leading up to
that election regarding morals and whether this should be a consideration when
casting a vote for a candidate. While the church is not a political entity,
members of the church cannot be unconcerned with the politics of the nation.
Our concern is morality. And the votes we cast DO impact the morality of the
nation. The debate over these very issues is once again surfacing as another
election approaches. Electing members to the Senate and Congress (even
governors) is every bit the serious issue as electing a President. The President
is only a part of the political structure of Washington. So as we enter the voting
booth, may we be reminded of our responsibility to help the morality of the
nation with informed votes. As we do so, may God bless America — DBS.]
In certain circles, it is suggested that involvement in world politics is only
feasible when one sets aside all connection to the principles of the Bible. That
is, some men have taken the idea of the “separation of church and state” to
mean that spiritual convictions should have no bearing on the choices one
makes for leaders in governmental offices. Even more tragic than this prevailing
debate among men in the world is the fact that this very debate is now being
waged among members of the Lord’s body. But those who take “separation of
church and state” to mean that one’s spiritual convictions cannot aid political
decisions — or perhaps, prohibit him/her from political office — fail to
understand the intent of the First Amendment entirely (since this generally is
the point of appeal). The Church and the State are only “separated” as distinct
entities, and one entity cannot attempt to perform the actions of the other. For
example, it is not the duty of the church (as the church) to punish law-breakers
with civil penalties. On the other hand, it is not the duty of the civil government
to appoint elders or decide how the Lord’s money will be used toward the mission
of the church. As one man well states, speaking from Bible-principle, “while
there is a functional separation between Church and State found in the Bible,
there is certainly no absolute separation. Both institutions have a common
authority; they are both under God and accountable to His revealed word. The
head of the Church is not the State. The head of the State is not the Church.
Both institutions have Jesus Christ as their head.”1 And since Jesus is the
common factor to both entities (Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22-23; Rom. 13:1-8), the
connection between the two is moral/spiritual. That means, the required
interest of Christians in politics and the affairs of civil government is spiritual in
nature.
The connection is undeniable to Paul’s charge to Timothy, “I exhort therefore, that,
first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all
men; for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable
life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God
our Savior” (I Tim. 2:1-3). Is it to be believed that only the highest responsibility
(prayer) is enjoined upon God's saints toward politics and governmental affairs,
but nothing less than prayer? Who could possibly conclude this? Does not this
same statement from Paul require that Christians do whatever is possible —
within the realm of possibility (Acts 5:29) - to affect the outcome that is pleasing
to God, that desired "godly," "moral" atmosphere? Yes it does. And if a Christian
is able to affect that outcome by casting a vote, does he not therefore have an
obligation to cast his vote for those men who will bring the world more in tune
with the divine will? Yes he does. Think of it this way. God requires
governmental/political leaders to promote godliness and conform to His will (I
Tim. 2:1-3; Dan. 5:18ff.; Deut. 17:18-20). And there is a sense in which American
citizens form a part of the leadership of the country, by virtue of the design of
democracy. There is therefore a responsibility placed upon every man and woman
to fulfill — to whatever degree — his/her own part in "righteous/moral"
leadership. This includes the casting of a vote. One must cast his vote for those
leaders who best promote the ideal environment. There is no debate over
whether this is the case from a Biblical standpoint.
What about the economy or foreign policy? Are these not the factors which
determine a vote? No. The fact is: neither of these two will work in the long run
without a primary concern for morality. Listen to the divine plan for a successful
nation, "righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people" (Prov. 14:
34). History itself is replete with the reflections of uninspired men who
understood this same principle. For example, General Douglas MacArthur
concluded: "history fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to
moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been
either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive
deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster." The prayer for Gaius shows
the only order approved by God, "beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest
prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth" (3 John 2). Matters of the
soul come first. And when the soul is healthy, everything else will find its way
into the proper place of priority. But consider this from the practical perspective,
of putting God and morality first. Who is more likely to be a better steward of
money, the man who fears God or the double-tongued man who endorses even
the sickest of agendas for a vote? Who is more likely to handle foreign policy
correctly, the man who believes that God is in control of his office or the man
who spits in God's face by endorsing the murder of babies? Better yet, who is
God more likely to help? Remember, God has demonstrated on more than one
occasion that entire nations can be brought to ruin because of the wickedness of
a ruler (or band of rulers).
Honestly, this writer is more than a little discouraged at the approach some
members of the church are taking to the voting issue. Since when is the size of a
wallet more important than saving the lives of the unborn children? Which is
more important, a retirement benefit or having the respect of God through the
implementation of righteous principles? People who vote money over morality
simply do not trust God! Jesus said, "but seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his
righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you" (Matt. 6:33). This writer
is firmly convinced through the Scriptures that any man who knowingly casts his
vote for a leader that endorses abortion is just as worthy of death as the "doctor"
who performs the procedure: "who knowing the judgment of God, that they which
commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in
them that do them" (Rom. 1:32).
A Christian cannot set aside his service to the Lord temporarily in order to avoid
the spiritual consequence of a political vote. If he puts the sword of the Spirit
down, the devil gains the advantage. As R. J. Rushdoony once stated, "the world,
moreover, cannot be surrendered to Satan. It is God's world and must be brought
under God's law, politically, economically, and in every way possible...the time
has come for a full-scale offensive...to bring every area of thought into captivity
to Christ."2 If members of the church refuse to vote on the basis of what is truly
in the best interest of the country, what will the end be except complete ruin?
The time to act is now. Once America crosses the Rubicon of moral decline,
there is no more hope left. Now is the time to do something, with intelligent,
God-pleasing votes.
References:
1. Gary DeMar, God And Government: A Biblical and Historical Study, Vol. I
(Atlanta, GA: American Vision, Inc., 1989), p. 172.
2. Rousas J. Rushdoony, The Biblical Philosophy of History (Phillipsburg, N.J.:
Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1979), p. 16.