HOW SHOULD WE VOTE?

[Genevanpreacher]

I don't know where the idea comes from that our system of voting for a leader is scriptural.

If someone would give scripture, it might be beneficial.

The only thing that comes to my mind right now for 'leaders', relating to us who are saved, is to pray for those in authority that we may lead peaceful lives. Where is the involvement of Christians voting for leadership?

And no, I am not looking for OT 'examples', though those ARE important, just verses saying we should help get godly leaders to lead our country.

Thanks!

By the way - what does Romans 13:1 mean, if we are to 'choose' our leaders? Are they still 'ordained' by God?

[Invicta]

We should vote for Brexit.

[John81]

How about:

None of the above. Start over with better options.

[HappyChristian]

GP - Romans 13 lays the groundwork for understanding government and the fact that God ordained government. Nowhere in scripture, though, does it indicate that there is only one specific type of government which God ordained. Type of government would necessarily fall under human choice since God doesn't specify.

Nations are founded for various reasons, by various peoples, with various styles of government. America was founded as a federal constitutional republic in which law was king rather than man (for the purpose of equality under the law and avoiding the type of "justice" handed out by the oppressive king), with authority and power not specifically given to the federal government reserved to the states and PEOPLE. Hence the fact that the people of the US are, after the Constitution, the authority.

God allowed (using your terminology, ordained) America to be founded in the way in which it was. And part of that founding is the privilege of voting for our servant-leaders. Yes, there have been changes made to the voting process over the years, but the WAY those changes were made are consistent with the Constitution. 

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers..." In America, the highest earthly power is the Constitution and the law (our founders used the term Rex Lex for a reason). And so every soul is to be subject to that. And in that document, we are given the parameters for the governing of this country. We the People choosing our servant-leaders (forgive me for seeming to be repetitive, but repetition is the key to learning). (and, just FYI, the word  for powers is the same as translated "this liberty of yours" in 1 Cor 8:9,,,so, technically, we are to be subject to liberty...and that liberty is from [and under subjection to] God.)

Reading Romans 13 in light of the fact that the powers that are ordained of God in this country are the Constitution and the law (and liberty) should open some eyes. I hope. 

[Genevanpreacher]

13 hours ago, HappyChristian said:

GP - Romans 13 lays the groundwork for understanding government and the fact that God ordained...

God allowed (using your terminology, ordained)

Just to point out, for readers online here who aren't looking up the verse from Romans 13:1 - The Lord put the word "ordain" in this verse, not my "terminology" at all. Read it -

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God."

Just clarifying.

[Genevanpreacher]

Sorry HC. Not trying to be flippant or disrespectful.

I just want the thought put out there for 'patriotic' American Christians, just where thescriptures say to the NT Church to vote for world leaders.

As for the Constition, men are in control, and where men are in control, they will mess it up. Everytime.

The Constition can be changed. It protects nobody. Only God does.

Since men are in 'control', they wield the 'power', and we are subjects to them.

Under God's will of course. According to Romans 13.

Edited March 26, 2016 by Genevanpreacher

[Invicta]

15 hours ago, HappyChristian said:

ations are founded for various reasons, by various peoples, with various styles of government. America was founded as a federal constitutional republic in which law was king rather than man (for the purpose of equality under the law and avoiding the type of "justice" handed out by the oppressive king), with authority and power not specifically given to the federal government reserved to the states and PEOPLE. Hence the fact that the people of the US are, after the Constitution, the authority.

Not sure that America has always had equality.  In fact I am sure it has not, especially if you were aboriginal or black, or hispanic.

[HappyChristian]

Sigh.  For starters, GP, I know very well that Romans says ordain. As to my referring to it as your terminology, I was simply pointing out that was the word you used vs the word I used - allow. 

As to  your fallacious idea that we are to be subject simply because men are "in control" - your logic does not follow through. If God indeed ordained the men who  are "in control" vs actual government (and specifically in America, it is the Constitution and the people, with liberty) then we must support abortion, same-sex marriage, etc., etc. Because God hand-picked those who decided how we are supposed to live our lives...

But, no. You'll say that we must obey biblical principles and so we are not to support abortion and same-sex marriage in one breath. But in the other you say we're to be subject to those who wield power (even though that is nowhere near what Romans 13 says, but, hey, it sounds good). That's a double-minded way of viewing things. For too long Christians have made the mistake of dividing up what we are and aren't to do. If laws are made that are anti-biblical, we pontificate on how we don't have to obey them. But yet we're supposed to obey the "power wielders", men whom we elect as our servants. Convoluted and wrong thinking at best.

As to voting for "world" leaders: nowhere did I or anyone say we should/could/do vote for world leaders. We vote for the servant-leaders here in America. 

Again, let me be clear, since it seems you either don't understand what I said or you are purposefully choosing to ignore it:

God ORDAINED government - and that is what Romans 13 is addressing. He did NOT ordain a specific style of government. Nations choose their STYLE of government at their founding (some nations choose different styles at times throughout a nation's history...review Russia's governmental history for just one example). America CHOSE the REPUBLICAN form of government at its founding. LAW. The CONSTITUTION. The PEOPLE. And in the founding, VOTING and CHOOSING servant-leaders was established as the way things were to be done. We are to be subject to the higher powers...in AMERICA's case, that means the CONSTITUTION...and so we get to VOTE.  And it is completely biblical.

 I already quoted this in an earlier post, but I will reiterate: God gives liberty. And in the case of this country, He gave us a form of government that was designed to protect those liberties (10 of them spelled out in the Bill of Rights...thanks to the BAPTISTS of our founding era). And He gave us the privilege (and duty) of voting to ensure the protections were not removed.  We are to be stewards of all He has given us. That would include this country and our liberties. One way that we do that is by voting. For men who will uphold the Constitution, the law, and our liberties. "Moreover it is required in a steward, that a man be found faithful."

Invicta, equality under the law meant that no one person could condemn another in the manner a king could. Yes, there have been problems throughout our history in regards to certain groups of people (hispanics? I don't think so...) and that falls squarely under the idea GP brought up: that men fail. No system of government is perfect because people are human. Even in a republic like America, where the people are, after the Constitution, the authority, people are fallible. And over the years have chosen poor servant-leaders. And then grumbled about it, but not done anything to really change the destructive pattern.

[John81]

3 hours ago, Invicta said:

Not sure that America has always had equality.  In fact I am sure it has not, especially if you were aboriginal or black, or hispanic.

There is no such thing as equality whether we try to aim for such or not.

Was the peasant girl the equal of any of the kings of England? Is the peasant girl today the equal of Queen Elizabeth?

America began as an English colony and the dealing with blacks and American Indians began as English ways and carried on from there.

I don't know of any country where actual equality exists. The term and concept of such is used today as a divider and a wedge rather than an actual attempt to bring about the ever elusive state of equality.

[Genevanpreacher]

No disrespect HC, but do you realize you didn't answer my question? You went completely around it by explaining the 'normally understood Christian way of explaining voting for a President'.

(And your disrespectful way of saying "Sigh" at the beginning of a post?)

I simply ask - is there somewhere in scripture that can be shown in words that it is a Christians duty in America to vote to get the correct President that God wants us to have?

If the answer is 'no', then so be it.

If the answer is 'yes', give the reference.

I get tired sometimes HC with some of our 'banter' too, but, from my end of the line, I am old and sometimes will repeat myself. I am sorry you felt like sighing when you replied to my post. I do not always have time to read all the posts in a subject, so I may have missed something. I apologize.

I like to see scripture say what we are to do and not just take another Christians word on what scripture 'means'.

Thanks.

 

[HappyChristian]

Sigh. Again. I'm not one of your children, so my sigh is not one of disrespect to my parent or elder. Do not chastise me as though you were either.

I have posted references that apply to your question. And you know it. You know very well there is not a "thou shalt" regarding it, so you are purposely being disingenuous. Hence my sighs.

You are as aware as any of us that there are times when scriptural principles are to be followed, rather than just simply straight out instructions.  My answer was an explanation. And I did give scripture that upholds the principle. Your question was thoroughly answered.

 

[Invicta]

The constitution is only a man made document and would not over rule God if he chose an alternative. If for instance Japan had won the war then you should have prayed for the emperor, just as Christians who were non Romans were told the pray for Caesar.

[Genevanpreacher]

I agree Invicta.

I don't seem to remember Paul nor Peter nor any of the disciples getting active in any political arena, nor getting fellow believers to do any of that sort either.

Their focus was on living amongst, but separate.

I am sure that is not a popular conception at all here.

[Ukulelemike]

I have to be very honest in this issue. I almost fear voting for a 'Christian" candidate for president. Why? Simply, because virtually ALL Christian so-called candidates of late have been cultists (Romney, Kennedy, Robertson), Charismatic (Palin -okay VP), or whatever brings the votes, ie phonies (Bush, Obama, Cruz, Clintons, et al). Not a one do I trust. Many who run on conservative Christianity tend toward dominionism, and would want to make it a 'Christian' government with 'Christian' laws, usually based poorly on the OT laws, which were not designed for any other people than Israel.   Personally, I might prefer an atheist who is a constitutionalist.   Now I know that sounds like it wouldn't work, and I agree in part-after all the constitution is based on the premise that the constitution outlines RIGHTS given by GOD, not privileges granted by the government, and an atheist might have a hard time with that. However, if one truly believes, regardless of where the rights originate, that the US Constitution is the LAW OF THE LAND and will actually follow it regardless of their personal thoughts, I suspect I might trust that person more.

That being said, I think the only open atheist running for office right now is Bernie Sanders, but he is clearly not a constitutionalist.

Personally I believe a true godly believer would not want to take the lesser position to go from being a pastor, a preacher, a missionary, a speaker of the gospel of Jesus Christ, to becoming the President. Ours is a higher calling.

[heartstrings]

How should we vote? Would you "vote in" a new pastor which preached some kind of heresy? What if he believed abortion is OK? So why would we support some reprobate who said he believes in a "woman's right to choose"? And this thing about Republicans being "establishment"? I look at a man's track record, his VOTING record if he has been a legislator. I was a registered "Democrat" until Bill Clinton showed me what Democrats are OK with and I went down to the courthouse and re-registered as a Republican. Republicans TEND to be FOR the right values. Do they all? Of course not. But if you vote for some independent, he is NOT going to be elected POTUS.

Here is my Republican governor signing a new bill into law, is he perfect? NO, but will you ever see a Democrat doing this, not likely. I am a business person, but I do NOT vote for the person I think will benefit the economy; I vote for people I believe will try to do what is RIGHT because if we do what is right, then free enterprise will take care of the economy without the government's help. Stepping off soapbox now. ...and yes, I voted for our present governor.........

http://www.lifenews.com/2016/03/28/florida-gov-rick-scott-signs-bill-to-defund-planned-parenthood-abortion-business/

 

....one more thing. I don't vote "Republican" just to be voting Republican anymore than I would go to any Baptist Church just because it's a "Baptist Church"

Edited March 28, 2016 by heartstrings