The general election of 2004 is just a few weeks away and the media of full of debates, polls and politics. How should a person decide who to vote for? Some people will vote for who they thought “won” the debates. Others will vote for who they think appears more presidential. Yet others will vote for the challenger because they want to see change. Still others will vote for the incumbent because they do not want to see change. I think that the Bible gives a better way on how to decide who to vote for.
If we look at how God says a leader should be chosen, it will show us the characteristics to look for in a leader, whether a President, a Senator or some other official. The classic example is found in 1 Samuel 16, where God chooses a leader for Israel through the prophet Samuel. The instructions that God gave to Samuel are found in verse 7, “Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The LORD does not look at the things man looks at. Man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.” Bottom line, pick a leader based on heart characteristics, like character and values, rather than external factors.
Let’s move right to 2004 and ask how we are to determine the character, the heart characteristics of a candidate. The character of a man will determine his future effectiveness as a leader, not his good intentions or promises. Character is best judged by past experiences. 1 Timothy 3:10 says that “They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.” I have taken courses on best practices for job interviews and they agree. The best predictor of future performance is past performance. Don’t ask the applicants about what they plan to do, ask them about what they have done in the past. And so, we should judge presidential candidates the same way. Their past record gives the best indication of what they will do in the future, it shows the direction of their hearts. Therefore, choose the candidate whose plans are simply an extension of their past experience. If the candidate makes promises, but does not root them in his past performance or voting record, he has no credibility.
Leadership is to be based on principle and values, not on simply doing what the poll of the day indicates. A leader leads, he molds public opinion, rather than simply following public opinion.
The Bible indicates that God has designed three major institutions in society: government, the church and the family. The best candidate will understand the balance between these three institutions and see how each has a role to play in society.
A candidate’s stand on the issues and past record must be analyzed with respect to biblical values and teaching. A claim to be a Christian or to have a relationship with God should not be deemed credible if the record does not indicate the candidate has a biblical worldview. The stand of national level candidates on many issues can be found on many news websites, as well as others like, www.ivotevalues.org.
Not all issues are of equal importance to those who desire to vote based on biblical values. As important as issues like the economy, taxes, health care or terroism are, the way to assess the best candidate to deal with them is to look at a small set of non-negotiable issues. These issues have crystal clear answers in the Bible and most candidates have clear positions on them. If a candidate’s stand on these issues is correct, the rest of their positions will tend to reflect a biblical worldview. If the candidate’s view on these issues is incorrect, the rest of their positions will tend to reflect a non-biblical worldview.
Here are the non-negotiable issues, agreed on by every believer who knows and lives by the Bible:
- Protection of human life is a responsibility of government. The Bible teaches that life begins at conception and so abortion must be opposed in every way possible. The choice to kill one’s own child is barbaric. Life continues until God takes it and so euthanasia, the active termination of life must be opposed in every way possible.
- Issues in bioethics are not difficult to understand if one is guided by biblical principles. Embryonic stem cell research results in the mutilation and death of unborn children and must be opposed. Adult and other stem cell sources pose no ethical problems. Human cloning is an attempt to play God by manipulating the creation of life and must be opposed.
- Marriage is held with high esteem in the Bible and provides the basic unit of society. From the beginning, marriage has been between one man and one woman. Society and government must encourage marriage and oppose anything destructive to it. Same-sex marriage must be opposed, in particular for the damage that it would do to future generations of children as well as society.
In the past, it may have been difficult to tell where candidates stood on these issues, but no more, especially at the national level. The major parties have taken stands on many of these issues and discussed them in their party platforms. Most candidates support their parties’ platforms on these issues, but there are exceptions, particularly at the state and local levels. Find out the candidates’ stances on these issues. Vote for the candidates who best support these non-negotiable values.
It doesn’t matter if your family has traditionally voted for one party for years, the times have changed, believers must do the right thing today. Don’t vote for the candidate that you think will put the most money in your pocket, vote for the candidate that follows godly values. When you do the right thing as a believer by voting according to biblical values, not your pocketbook, it will lead to blessing on your family and the nation. It is sad that in a day when the choice of president is a black and white issue for believers, the country is almost evenly divided. Either half of the country is completely ignorant of what is at stake or they are willingly choosing the wrong rather than the right. Regardless of the outcome of the elections, you and your family will be blessed if you vote your values as believers.
NLT Proverbs 14:34 Godliness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.
Well Said, Pastor Dan. I read your blog and that hits it RIGHT ON THE HEAD. You can wiegh your decisions on whom to vote for in light of biblical principles and come up with the obvious choice with very little indecision. VERY WELL DONE. And Scripturally sound as well… If i am ever in your area, I would consider it a priveledge to sit in on your teaching. You sound like a man i would like to learn from.
Blessing and safe journeys in all your comings and goings.
GotItDownPat
It’s pretty horrible how you limit biblical values to three areas, that clearly favor Bush. Why do you care more about life coming into this world than life already here? Isn’t caring for the poor of any importance to you? It’s clearly in the bible. President Bush cares nothing for the poor and medically uninsured. It may be playing God in terms of embryonic stem-cell research, but it surely is playing Satan sending the children of this country’s poor off to die for a war started on false pretenses. Why would God care more for the unborn than for those already suffering? And in terms of gay marriage, ask yourself this: why would God create homosexuals? Homosexuality is not a choice, even if it is condemned by the bible. Bush may live by the bible, but he leads by it only in areas that gain him votes. It’s people like you that have made Missouri so ignorant and backwards.
My article deals with deciding who to vote for at all levels of government, not just the presidency. Each person must decide how these criteria apply to each candidate. You question why I limit biblical values to three areas. As I state in the article, there are many issues to assess candidates on, but the three I have articulated are ones the Bible is clear on and attaches great importance to.
You mention that caring for the poor is a biblical value and you are right. Why isn’t caring for the poor in my top three non-negotiable issues? First of all, caring for the poor is a responsibility of each of the three institutions created by God, family, church and government. I believe that the responsibility for the poor as taught in the Bible is first of all with the family, second with the church and last with the government. Therefore, it is open to debate how much the government should do for the poor. It is certainly not the case that the candidate who promises to spend more tax money on the poor should be voted for. Tax money spent by the government may have been taken from the family and the church, robbing them of the means to carry out their responsibility. So, you see, caring for the poor is not a clearcut issue on which candidates can be chosen.
Secondly, the Bible teaches that certain moral issues are of more importance than others. One of the ways that this can be determined is by the penalties assessed under Old Testament law. For the most part, these gradiations in penalties have been carried over into the law of our country. For example, murder carries a greater penalty than theft and therefore is of greater importance. The implication is that the murder of an unborn child is of greater importance than the failure to care for the poor.
You mention the issue of war. The Bible does not condemn war. God used the nation of Israel to carry out his judgment on evil nations through war. Some wars are morally justified, others are not. Whether the war in Iraq was morally justified is open to debate. It is not a clear cut issue.
So, the first two issues I present have to do with the taking or creating of human life and are of the utmost importance. The last issue has to do with the foundation of the societal institution of family and is of equal importance. God did not create homosexuals, any more than he created murderers, liars of any other kind of sinner. The Bible is clear on God’s abhorence of all sin, including homosexuality. Here is where much of the rhetoric of today is hopelessly confused. The tendency to be attracted to the opposite sex may not be a deliberate conscious choice, I don’t believe the Bible speaks to this directly. The Bible would refer to that tendency as a temptation. It would be the same as the temptation of a heterosexual man to satisfy his desires with sex outside of marriage. Both are wrong. What the Bible condemns in both cases is the giving in to the temptation, either having homosexual sex or heterosexual sex outside of marriage. Although both are wrong, the Bible clearly considers homosexual sex a greater perversion. A celibate homosexual, that is someone who has homosexual tendencies but does not act on them or encourage others to act on them, can be a committed Christian.
I am sorry that you think what the Bible teaches is ignorant and backwards. It is God’s wisdom for individuals, families, churches and governments.
Well, I am glad that I logged on to your site before attending services tomorrow, 10/24. I was very excited about receiving the flier in the mail about a Community Church that was “inclusive” regardless of religion or faith. However, after reading comments on election issues, I have decided that this is not a place that I intend to worship the Lord. My faith is deep, but I live an alternative life-style, not by my choice, but because this is who God made me. Your Church does not seem to relish “inclusiveness” as much as you may project in your advertisements. Sorry that you are as narrow minded as the Catholic Church and only include those that walk the line of the perfect parishioner. God loves all people and I will be with you in Heaven.
I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “inclusive.” If you mean that God accepts everyone into a relationship with Himself regardless of lifestyle or belief, that is certainly not what the Bible or we teach. While we love and accept everyone at Full Life, neither we nor God approve of every lifestyle. Certain lifestyles are harmful to yourself and other people. Tendencies and temptations do not exclude you from a relationship with God, chosen lifestyles do.
NIV 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
God is in the lifechange business. If you are engaged in one of the lifestyles mentioned above, you will not be in heaven. However, none of those lifestyles is genetic, contrary to misinformed contemporary opinion, and so the good news is that God can change you. I pray that you will pursue a relationship with God and allow Him to change you to become like Jesus.
I appreciate your comments to persons who are in disagreement.
I am not in disagreement with your non-negotiable areas of concern. As a matter of fact I agree with each one but I want to know what you think about the Florida and Missouri elections and how Republicans orchestrated the disenfranchisement of thousands of people and the possibility that it may happen again in other states. I also way to know your thoughts on whether the President and Vice President are profiting from the war via Halliburton and oil deals.
If people, regardless of political affiliation, do things that are illegal, the law enforcement institutions will deal with them. You seem to take as fact things which have not been proven or even prosecuted. Remember, a person is considered innocent until proven guilty in this country. Don’t base your vote on unsubstantiated allegations, speculation or mudslinging, vote on what is known about the candidates and their stands on the non-negotiable issues.
I would agree with your statement that the choices of the past is sometimes a good ideal about the true person you are voting for. It is common knowledge that bush has been an adulterer in his early marriage as well as a drunk and drug user. I do not claim that kerry is any better. However, one is baiting the Christians more so than the other. If you truly want to be informed on the choices….I would recommend a site entitled: cuttingedge.org.
This site helps one reason as to why neither candidate as publicly disassociated himself from freemasonery and the illuminati…(skull and bones society)
The site is written by pastors who have researched for many years about this secret society and their findings……
One last plea….is to truly know all the facts before casting your vote.
cpg
The one problem that I find with the above article is that all of the decisions should be made in the eyes of god.
Well, it’s true, not everyone believes in God. Whether they be an aethiest, agnostic, heathen, homosexual, or whatever, their rights have a place in our society regardless of a christian moral hierarchy. Just like yours are.
I understand your right to be a christian and I understand the right for it to be protected. I DO NOT understand why there are those who cannot comprehend the same. It’s simple logic.
You speak of gay marriage ruining society, well christiandom has done it’s fair share and we live on. Spend a day with a gay couple or gay family. You will see that there is nothing to fear and that healthy lives are had.
I’m not really sure what cpg is saying. The conspiracy theories outlined on the webpage you mention are ridiculous and don’t deserve further comment. However, your comments are representative of a small number of Christians who are looking for the perfect candidate. Finding a single flaw in belief or action in a candidate, as compared to their own beliefs, disqualifies the candidate from being worthy of their vote. This type of person will then either not vote at all, or throw their vote away on some unknown 3rd party candidate. This is not what a believer should do.
Obviously every candidate has their shortcomings. Our responsibility as believers is to vote for the candidate that best follows biblical values on the non-negotiable issues and whose election is realistically possible. In deciding who to vote for, we are not looking for perfection or agreement with every nuance in one’s theology. Simply vote for the best candidate, as defined above, and God will take care of the rest.
Randy, democracy got it’s start in 1776 based on a Christian foundation and continues to spread across the world. The elections in Afghanistan several weeks ago were momentous, as the first democratic process in the Muslim world, the last major holdout on the planet. It was Christianity that gave every person the right to vote and to express their viewpoint, whether they believe in God or not. It is in a free society, that the truth has the best chance of winning arguments in the public square and being embraced by a nation.
Having said that, freedom has limitations, freedom has responsibilities, that’s why we have laws. Laws basically prohibit things that are harmful to society and are based on moral codes, of which the Bible is the most representative and widely used in the world. The Bible encourages things that help people live in harmony and prohibits actions and lifestyles that hurt people.
Apparently your hot button is homosexual marriage. Briefly, marriage between one man and one woman is the building block of any society. Anything that causes damage to marriage is wrong and harmful. Homosexual marriage first of all violates the biblical prohibition against any homosexual activity and secondly legitimizes it in society thereby undermining marriage as ordained by God. I will reserve a full expansion of this topic concerning the danger of homosexual marriage for a complete article in the future. It is a very misunderstood topic and I believe many people genuinely don’t understand the destructive force homosexual marriage would unleash.
Finally, I need to reaffirm, putting on my scientific Ph.D. hat, that homosexual activity is not genetically determined and change is possible for any homosexual. There are thousands of documented cases of homosexuals becoming heterosexual. Not easy, but with God’s help, it is possible.
Pastor Dan, I must respect your views of how the teachings of the Bible should be used to choose political candidates, but I cannot agree with them entirely. I feel that you have left out a great deal when limiting the scope of the Bible to just three issues. Does the Bible not teach a message of non-violence? Why then should we choose a candidate that would go to war without just cause? Does the Bible not teach that we should work to help the most impoverished and helpless in our society? Why then should we choose a candidate that favors corporations over the health, welfare, and education of our families? Maybe now you can see why the choice is not as “Black and White” as you think it is.
Furthermore, as a student of Biology at Washington Univeristy in St. Louis I wonder if you understand what stem cell research is, after reading your Blog. First of all, you are right that adult stem cell research is a preferable alternative to embryonic stem cell research. However, it is greatly limited in what it can achieve. It cannot, for example, be used to help anyone with injuries to or diseases of the nervous system. This means that adult stem cells cannot be used to help people with parkinsons disease, multiple sclerosis, paralysis, or alzheimers. Embryonic stem cells offer a great deal of hope to those afflicted with these ailments as embryonic cells have not yet differentiated into any cell type.
The only issue in stem cell research that is being debated today is whether or not embryos that are already marked for destruction ought to be put to better use. The embryos that would be used were created and frozen in fertility clinics and are now going to be thrown away. Either way these embryos will be destroyed. Wouldn’t you rather they be used to help people?
Like you, I believe that abortion is wrong. At first I questioned Sen. Kerry’s decision to vote against partial-birth abortion. But then I realized that the only reason he did was because there was no clause in the bill that provided for the life of the mother. If the mother dies, then the child inside her cannot live. Why should there not be a provision that would allow doctors to save at least one of the two lives?
I strongly value my right to practice Christianity in this country, just as I value the fact that people of other faiths and beliefs have the equal right to practice what they believe. Our forefathers valued this right too. That is why they fled their countries to come to America. That is why I believe in the separation of church and state just as much as I believe in God. I value that my government cannot tell my church that they must allow two gay men to marry in my church. But I also value that two gay men have the right to believe whatever they want, under our great Constitution. Their rights to their beliefs are just as protected as my own. Thus, their rights to marry in a CIVIL, not religious, ceremony ought to be protected. For some reason the distinction between CIVIL and religious ceremonies seems to have been blurred in recent debates.
You’re right, I do want to use the values of the Bible to make my decision. I want to pick a candidate that will help the poor and needy. I want a candidate that will value my right and my grandmother’s right to healthcare. I want to pick a candidate that values life. I want a candidate who will value the lives of my brothers overseas fighthing and living in Iraq. I want a candidate that will act on these values of the Bible.
Wash U student, thanks for your comments which I will address in limited fashion here. There are many topics addressed in the Bible, but all are not of equal importance. The ultimate crime in the Bible and in modern society is murder, the taking of an innocent life. All other issues are secondary to that. Not too complicated a concept, but for some odd reason, a lot of people just can’t seem to get it. The choice is black and white for those able to think logically and biblically. No, the Bible does not teach non-violence in every situation. It teaches non-violence on the individual level, but clearly endorses war and capital punishment as a proper function of the state to protect itself.
I have a Ph.D. in the sciences from one of the top universities in the country and have done additional years of postdoctoral work. I am well aware of the distinctions with stem cell research, which your comments indicate you are not. Adult stem cells have already helped patients with Parkinson’s, sickle-cell anemia, heart damage, brain injuries, spinal cord injuries and the clinical uses are expanding weekly. Recent research indicates that adult stem cells can be induced to differentiate ( Research Paper). There are also many possibilities for the use and differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells isolated from human umbilical cord blood. All the talk in the media about the uses of embryonic stem cells is pure conjecture, none of it has been proven.
A theology of life teaches that embryos should not even be created and frozen in fertility clinics, let alone harvested for medical treatments. If we begin to use them for research, they will continue to be created one way or another, rest assured.
The clause the pro-abortion lobby wanted included in the partial-birth abortion bill was for the health of the mother. When this clause is inserted into legislation, it is interpreted as any health issue, including mental health. Thus if having a baby would likely create mental anguish, the abortion is allowed, since this would apply in every case. The end result is that nothing is prohibited. This health of the mother issue is a hideous lie and smokescreen that the pro-abortion lobby hides behind. Specialist after specialist testified in Congress that there never has been and they could not foresee a case where one would have to choose between the life of the mother and the baby.
The issue of homosexual marriage has never been about the state forcing a church to marry two men or two women. It has been about whether homosexual marriage has any legal meaning. Thus there is very little distinction between homosexual marriage and a civil union, unless the law makes a distinction in the rights each one entails. Biblically, homosexual behavior should not be legitimized, encouraged or given any rights by society. It is wrong and harmful (I will further elaborate in a future article).
The issues important to you are secondary issues to the issues of life itself. Helping the poor and healthcare are issues to debate and explore which of the institutions ordained by God, family, church or government, should support and to what extent. To suggest that a war to terminate a dangerous tyranny and extend democracy is inherently as wrong as taking an innocent life in it’s mother’s womb is not biblically supportable.
Describing a biblical worldview to someone who has not spent a large amount of time studying the most important book in the world, the Bible, is difficult. However, I pray that perhaps my insights may better help you understand what’s important in life and how you should make your decision to vote tomorrow.