Consideration of Christianity

I was doing some research on Barack Obama's profession of faith and I came across a blog with a few comments in it, and a comment sprang up from me.

I was struck by what seemed to be indignation that Christians would seek a leader who reflected Christian values. There also seemd to be an assumption that for Christians to want the nation's leader to be a Christian was evidence of Christians wanting to institute a theocracy. I was obviously compelled to respond.

Now, I'm sure I do not represent all Christians (I have enough trouble adequately representing myself), but I pray I have at least represented the truth.

------------------------------------------

I don’t think Christians expect a theocracy, and I’m pretty sure the New Testament never advocates such government, but to tell Christians they should not expect a Christian President is the same as telling non-Christians they should not expect a non-Christian President.

It’s true on both counts, but the point is you have a right to your expectation, your beliefs, and your vote.

Christians feel that faith is a virtue; therefore they will (as is their right) consider the presence, lack, or pretense of such virtue when casting their vote. To assume this means all Christians vote based on some judgmental measure of their fellowman’s righteousness is about as logical as assuming all non-Christians vote based on a selfish, prideful resentment and rebellion of God. It’s just not so.

Many people are trying to vote according to what they feel is best for the nation. Is it always best for the nation? No, but you can’t reserve credit for the attempt to only those who vote like you.

When it comes to Barack Obama’s faith, would you call someone who cannot swim a swimmer? Or someone who runs once every two months a runner? Yet, our culture regularly celebrates as Christians those who do not believe in the standards God set or his Son, the Christ (the foundation and identity of Christianity).

In case you’re missing the point, imagine how indignant you might feel if Obama regularly attended a Bible believing church, surrounded himself with a Bible believing cohort, carried a Bible everywhere he went, and was known to regularly read and quote scripture and voted according to God’s standard of morality, yet he claimed to be of no particular faith and professed to represent all non-Christians…as well as Christians, of course.

It’s only reasonable that you’d be skeptical of his professed life philosophy. You would scrutinize his claim to the non-Christian religion, and where you found evidence that that claim was erroneous, you would cry, “charlatan!”

In a country where freedom of religion reigns, why should the religion of Christianity be any less welcome in politics than the religion of individualism, homosexuality, or feminism (yes, though not theistic in nature, they are religions)?

It is not my place to judge Obama’s relationship with or profession of faith to the one true God. It is my calling, however, to look at Obama’s fruit and test it against the Biblical measure. In my humble opinion, he comes up short. Does that mean he is damned, that’s above my pay grade; but it does mean I reasonably assess his beliefs and his politics to be incongruent with mine, and I will not vote for him…as is my God given right.

Vocation Is Not Salvation

Can a godly woman serve as Vice President?

Yes, it’s that time again; time to ask some religious questions within a political forum. Of course, on this blog it’s a religious forum and the question is political. Believe it or not, we’ll sort through the confusion before it’s over.

So, the question of the day: Can Sarah Palin, or any woman, serve as Vice President of the United States, or in any government leadership position, and not betray the biblical roles and relationships ordained by God for women?

I believe that the simple answer is yes, but since it says in the Bible to test everything, let’s not settle for the simple answer.

Does the Bible say that a woman cannot lead? No.

While the Bible does seem to indicate that women are not to be the heads of a/the church, we see in the Old Testament that women, on rare and obviously special occasion, were judges over Israel. Proverbs also lays out the responsibilities of a woman, specifically a wife, which clearly indicate that she is serving in a leadership capacity, but that same woman is called to submit to her husband (and ultimately her family) in all those things.

So, does that mean that a woman can only serve if there is a man over her? Does that rule out President of the United States? No on both counts.

I think (and I’m no biblical scholar) that the Bible makes it clear that faith in and service to God is first for men and women. God calls men and women to humbly serve Him and one another before self, and the hierarchy within the family helps to maintain the purity and heart of faith and service. For this reason, I think as God addressed the hierarchy within the family He also addressed the hierarchy within the church. God never, however, addresses the hierarchy of secular government.

When God gave Israel the kings that they asked for, He told them it was a bad idea and that they would regret it. Just as God differentiates between good and evil, He differentiates between His rule (good) and man’s rule (evil). If man rules apart from God (almost the definition of the US government), what does it matter who is in charge; can man alone do good (for all you dreamers and schemers, the answer is no…sorry)? If a man (women included) serves God and serves as a leader as unto God, again, what does it matter who is in charge; will not God bless such leadership?

The Bible makes it clear that women are valued equally in the sight of the Lord, women are more than capable of bearing significant responsibility, and a woman, with God’s calling and blessing, can serve as a leader of the people.

If we say that a woman must stay in the home to serve her family in a godly manner, we are merely translating God’s call for a woman into a legalistic mandate. There are plenty of women who stay home and completely miss the mark.

Career is a religion and the office is the temple, in both the private and public sector, for men and women alike. The world is an incredible temptation promising deliverance which it cannot provide; “you will not surely die.” So, while it is prudent to avoid legalism, it would be horribly misleading to say that women can serve their families in a godly manner outside the home…if you do not also offer this singular caveat: by the grace of God.

If Sarah Palin is without God, there is absolutely no difference between her and any other run-of-the-mill politician. If she is with God, what man (women included) can be against her. Either way, make no mistake, the next leader of this nation is there only because God allowed it, and regardless…

His will be done.