(If you would like to receive Pastor Harris’ weekly sermons via e-mail, Click Here)
Pastor Scott L. Harris
Grace Bible Church, NY
November 4, 2012
Morality & Voting
This morning I want to address a topic that I don’t really care to address in a sermon, yet the moral decline in our nation, state and communities demand that it be addressed directly. I am not hopeful that what I say will bring about any substantial change in society. It may already be too far gone. The reality is that in a democratic republic, our government leaders and therefore our laws will reflect the desires of the people. In view of the lack of moral character in so many of our elected officials and the immoral nature of laws they have passed, there can only be three possible roots for it. First, too much of American society has descended into the same immoral pit. Second, too many Americans are so out of touch with the truth that they are easily swayed by the lies of politicians and political campaigns. Third, too many Americans are selfishly indifferent to what is going on around them as long as they are personally doing well. I believe our current condition is a combination of all three of these factors. That is why I do not believe there is a political solution to our problems.
I say this despite the claim that I have heard for decades that if Christians would go out and vote, then the outcome of elections and the direction of our nation would change. If that did happen, we might enjoy a reprieve from our moral free-fall, but it would only be a parachute that would slow the descent. The sad reality is that only a relatively small percentage of self professed Christians do vote, and many of them vote in contradiction to what God’s word has to say about the issues facing us.
While I do fervently wish we will get a parachute in this next election, the truth is that our only real hope is revival. We need an out pouring of the Holy Spirit in bringing people to conviction of their sin so that they will turn from it and place their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. That must begin among those who claim to be Christians. The horrible fact is that the majority of those claiming to be Christians live their lives with little or no substantial difference from those who are not. That also shows up in the issues that are important to them and therefore determines how they vote.
Why then address the issue of morality and voting? There are two main reasons. First, there is the strong desire for a reprieve. Because I love my family and my nation, I desire to see it still reflect the values it once held and allow them to live in godliness and peace. I desire to see the door continue to be open for the gospel throughout our land instead of the hindrances and persecution that have been arising. I desire to see our nation blessed by the benefits that come as a consequence of living according to God’s standards. An outworking of Christians being obedient to all that God has taught (Matthew 28:20) will be a moral purification of society. History has demonstrated this time and time again. In 1 Timothy 2:1-2, the apostle Paul calls on us to pray for that saying, “First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.” My current prayers for this nation are much like Abraham’s entreaties for the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. I plead for God’s mercy for the sake of the righteous remnant that they may live “a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.”
Second, and much more important, Christians should be marked by coming to understand the world from God’s perspective and being obedient to Him instead of pursing their own desires according to their own wisdom. We have seen in our study of Proverbs over the last nine months that God’s wisdom is often the opposite of human wisdom. We saw this same truth in relationship to the political realm a couple of weeks ago when we examined Proverbs on good government. Whether what I say today sways you in your vote and there is a better outcome in the election, and I do wish that would be true, much more important is that you faithfully fulfill your responsibility in a democratic republic and vote in a way that will be honoring to God.
These two issues join together when it is realized that the real problems of our society are moral. If the moral issues are addressed, then the economic ones will also be solved.
The Myth of the Christian Candidate
Before I get to those issues, I want to first expose the myth of the Christian candidate. It would be nice if all we had to do was to figure out which candidate was a Christian and then vote accordingly trusting they would follow Biblical principles when they get into office. However, there are several problems with this. First, it is easy for someone to make that claim, but that may not match their personal life and the policies they support. For example, both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were touted among Christians as the superior choices because they both were members of Southern Baptist Churches. Those who paid attention were suspicious because policies they advocated were not in keeping with the Scriptures, and Bill Clinton proved to be a lying adulterer on top of everything else. Their actual religion could be more accurately described as leftism or progressivism with a veneer of Christianity as a cover. That is a very good description of a lot of current candidates.
Second, God has entrusted government with certain basic responsibilities. Two weeks ago I pointed out the three major functions of government which are: 1) Carry out the principles and precepts of God’s laws. 2) Protect its citizens from the evil actions of both those outside and those within its realm. 3) Promote what is good among the people.(See: Proverbs on Government). Governments that carry out these functions of righteousness become established (See Proverbs 12:19, 16:12, 25:5, 29:14, etc.). Those that do not, place themselves in grave danger of being removed because they make themselves illegitimate. While many arguments could be presented about why a Christian should be more capable of fulfilling God’s requirements for government, the reality is that a competent non-Christian that fulfills these responsibilities is better than a professing Christian that proves to be incompetent and does not. There is no Scriptural requirement that government leaders must be worshipers of God. He has established many that were not at the heads of nations including Nebuchadnezzar whom God calls “My servant” in Jeremiah 25:9, and Cyrus whom the Lord calls “His anointed” in Isaiah 45:1.
Third, there are also the situations in which all the candidates claim to be Christians, or none of them do, or you figure out their claims are false.
In a democratic republic such as ours, the people have the responsibility to choose those who will be their government leaders. It is imperative that those who identify themselves as Christians live accordingly in fulfilling this responsibility by knowing enough about what the Bible teaches and the positions and lives of the candidates to make
an informed and wise vote. Proverbs 25:26, “Like a trampled spring and a polluted well Is a righteous man who gives way before the wicked.” Ignorance about the candidate and ignorance of what the Bible teaches can easily result in being swayed to vote for those who will govern in wickedness. Many Christians have had their own values polluted by the arguments of politicians and then share responsibility for their wickedness because of their vote.
So while it would be wonderful to be able to vote for strong and competent Christians for the various offices, that option is often not available. You must then strive to make the best choice among those that are running on the basis of who is the most consistent with Biblical principles, or if none of the candidates are acceptable, cast a write-in vote as a protest. Let me emphasize that. You should not be casting your vote for the lesser of two evils, but for the candidate that is most consistent with Biblical principles. If all the candidates are contrary to foundational Biblical principles, then don’t leave it blank, write-in a name as a protest even if that person is not running. (That will be true this year for those in the Congressional district where I grew up in California).
What then are those foundational Biblical principles? They arise from the three major functions of government mentioned earlier. 1) Carry out the principles and precepts of God’s laws. 2) Protect its citizens from the evil actions of both those outside and those within its realm. 3) Promote what is good among the people.
Use of the Old Testament
Now before I get to some of the specific issues, I need to address the usage of the Hebrew Scriptures in developing and understanding of what is right and wrong before God in society. There are those that quickly try to remove the implications of verses from the Old Testament by citing something Jesus said or Paul wrote and then assert that the Old Testament does not have any claim on those in the church or in modern times. They forget that the Old Testament was the body of scriptures for both Jesus and Paul. They forget that Jesus also said in Matthew 5:17, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.” They forget that Paul said, “So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good” (Romans 7:12). He also said that faith does not nullify the law, but establishes it (Romans 3:31).
What then does it mean that we are not under the Law, but under grace? (Romans 6:14-15). Simply that the purpose of the Law was to bring the knowledge of sin from which we must repent (Romans 3:20; 2 Corinthians 7), and that we are justified and made righteous before God by a gift of God’s grace through faith in the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ and not through the Law (Romans 3:23-30). As Christians, we are not to place ourselves under the works of the law (Galatians 3). We have no obligation to keep any of the aspects of the law that made a distinction between the Jews and the surrounding nations (Acts 10, 15). We are obligated to know the character of God and the revelation of His will concerning all moral issues.
Some of God’s commands were given prior to the revelation given to Moses. It is easier to understand that they apply to all people. The Mosaic Law was specifically given to the Jewish nation with many aspects only applied to them. However, the Mosaic Law also gives us keen insights into both the character and moral will of God and therefore the obligations that all people have toward God. Recall in Acts 17 that Paul points out that while God was patient toward the Gentiles in the times of ignorance, he was calling on all people everywhere to repent. What were they to repent from if there was no law from God to them? Remember as well that Jesus and all the apostles were quick to go back to the Old Testament to support their points. We should not be shy about doing the same.
Let me now quickly go over some of the major issues and give you some questions that should be in your mind as you evaluate any candidate for any office. I will be presenting these in rough order of importance in light of current issues facing us. While there are many other issues that can and should be examined, these are the critical ones. If the candidate and his positions are contrary to Scriptures on these, then the other issues are relatively unimportant. In other words, and I will state this very strongly, it would be wrong to vote for them. Why? Because it would be putting someone into office who is or advocates what is clearly wicked according to the Scriptures.
1) Life: The first moral priority is human life. God is the creator of life and all human life is made in His image, so all human life has inherent worth (Genesis 1:26,27). This is the reason God prohibited murder of human life and required capital punishment for those that do. Genesis 9:6 states. “Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man.” Other punishments were given for those that accidentally killed a human (Numbers 35). 2 Kings 24:4 cites that the blood of the innocent that were murdered as one of the reasons that God would destroy the kingdom of Judah.
The Bible is also clear that human life begins in the womb. Psalm 139:13 states that God formed your inward parts and wove you in mother’s womb. Jeremiah 1:4-5 makes it clear that this is more than just the physical aspects of the body. “Now the word of the Lord came to me saying, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations.” God knew and consecrated, set apart, the person of Jeremiah before he was born. Even with this, some claiming to be Christians would still argue that the unborn child is still just a mass of tissue they do not consider human. They are blind to the obvious, but their argument completely falls apart with Luke 1:41-44.
“When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. And she cried out with a loud voice and said, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! “And how has it happened to me, that the mother of my Lord would come to me? “For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy.” First, notice that what is said here is by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Second, notice that the leaping of the baby in her womb is for joy which is an emotion that is a characteristic of personhood. The unborn baby is not a blob of tissue. He or she is a human being in every sense.
Even from the biological and legal standpoint the unborn child is a human life. The identity of any animal is based on its chromosomes. Once the egg and sperm unite to form the zygote, a new human life has been created. The child is not an extension of the mother’s body, but a unique individual totally dependent upon the mother.
Legally, even the atrocity of the exercise of raw judicial power in Roe vs. Wade recognized limits on abortion. Many arguments revolved around viability of the unborn child. With modern medical technology, viability has dropped to 20 weeks or less, yet abortion advocates even fight against restrictions on late term abortions. The Declaration of Independence proclaimed that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were unalienable rights given to us by the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God. Abortion advocates recognize that if the unborn child is recognized as a human life, then the legal basis for abortion, as twisted as it is, disappears. That is why they fight so hard against any attempt to establish laws which recognize a child in the womb as a human life. That includes the laws that reinstate additional criminal liability for killing or injuring an unborn child that occurs by actions that kill or harm the mother.
To purposely kill a baby in the womb
, medical abortion, is the willful taking of a human life, an act of destruction to the work of God and an attack on His image. Abortion is murder before God regardless of what laws are enacted by man. God is the final judge and He will hold accountable those who perform abortions and those that enable it. That includes nations such as ours that legalize and promote it.
Infanticide and euthanasia are related issues. After our laws protecting unborn babies were overthrown by Roe vs Wade in 1973, it was not until the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in 2002 that infants born after a failed abortion were protected from being murdered outside of the womb. It helps that the law is on the books, but that does not mean those who have such little value for life do not find other ways to accomplish their purposes without being reported. Many already fail to report minor girls who come in as victims of rape, incest and statutory rape.
Euthanasia has already been legalized in Oregon and Washington. Probably not good states to retire in anymore if you get sick. Three states have revoked the laws that criminalized assisted suicide (NC, UT, WY), or three are unclear (MT, OH, VA). While the compassion involved in so called mercy killings is understandable as a means to end the suffering, it is a misplaced compassion. First, euthanasia is still murder and places the person doing so guilty before God. Second, if the person is not a Christian, euthanasia puts to an end their opportunity to repent, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved. It then speeds that person to a greater suffering under God’s eternal judgment. That is not compassionate. Third, a Christian in their right mind will reject the idea of euthanasia or suicide since they understand that life belongs to God, and only He can give it and righteously take it away.
The guilt of our society is overwhelming when you consider that well over 55 million children have been aborted in the United States since the Roe vs Wade decision in 1973. Add to that those murdered by infanticide, euthanasia and crime. Their blood cries out for justice. That is why we cry out to God for mercy on our nation for we are well deserving of His divine punishment. Our national and state governments have not only failed to protect their lives, they actively promote abortion and force those who do stand against it to partially pay the costs through taxes.
Here are some questions to consider: What value does the candidate put on human life? What protections does he advocate to protect human life? Is the candidate pro-life, indifferent or pro-abortion? Those who call themselves “pro-choice” are either indifferent or pro-abortion and are usually liars since they rarely support informed consent and waiting period laws. Those that will not protect the life of the most innocent and helpless among us, a baby in the womb, cannot be trusted to protect anything else except their own interests. What is the candidate’s position on infanticide and euthanasia? What do they believe is the proper punishment for someone that willfully murders another human.
In the interest of time, I will not go over the position of every candidate on every issue. There are voter guides in the back that summarize that information. That includes one that simply compares the statements in party platforms on the issues. On some issues, such as abortion, I will point out party positions and extreme contrasts. I do this in like mind as the prophets of old that rebuked even kings for their sin. I also know that in doing this I will offend some, but I would rather offend you than you offend God because you remain ignorant of what His word says and the positions of the candidates.
On the issue of abortion, all the Democrats on the ballots in our area are pro-abortion, the Conservatives and Republicans are usually pro-life with some having mixed records. Mr. Obama is extreme in his position. While in the Illinois State Senate, Mr. Obama not only voted against banning late term abortions, he also voted against the equivalent in his state of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. Mr. Romney is pro-life with the exception of rape, incest and the life of the mother. U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is so radical in her position on abortion that she sent out letters this year which read in part, “This Mother’s Day, I can’t think of a better way to honor all the mothers in the country past and present than with a contribution to EMILY’s List.” Their website states, “EMILY’s List is dedicated to electing pro-choice Democratic women to office.” These women have to support tax payer funded abortions. Our U.S. Senator is so twisted in her morality that she thinks giving political support to pro-abortion candidates is a way to honor “all the mothers in the country – past and present.” Wendy Long is strongly pro-life.
2) Morality. I usually put this lower in the list behind protection and justice, but at present there is a grave threat that seeks to redefine what is moral. This is an internal threat that needs to be thwarted otherwise it become the basis of greater immorality and injustice. Isaiah 5:20 pronounces a woe upon those “who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness.” Tragically, there are now many in our society that do just that. God clearly describes what is good and what is evil in the Bible, but He also pronounces some things as abhorrent and abominations. There are some things that are especially evil which should receive a priority in a government’s protective efforts and application of justice. Some of these things reveal an evil character even when the outward presentation looks good. The Old Testament word for abomination (toebah) is usually used in reference to idolatry and improper worship of God, however, there are also societal actions described that way,
Leviticus 18 lists immoral sexual practices including homosexuality, incest, fornication, adultery and bestiality alongside child sacrifice as abominations which defiled the land. The penalty for most of them was death. Abortions are this nation’s child sacrifices to feminism. Many political leaders now advocate sexual immorality and perversions. The family should be the first social unit of protection, but incest turns it into the first opportunity to prey on the weaker. Adultery destroys the trust that is foundational for marriage and thus destroys families, and with that, society. All sexual perversions including fornication and adultery spread a host of diseases that can hinder or destroy health and leave women infertile. Bestiality and homosexual practices introduce and spread of even more diseases some of which kill. Mortality rates for homosexuals are under 50 while the rates for the general population is in the 70’s and 80’s. Simple compassion should compel us to strive to stop these practices for the protection of society and the individuals practicing them, yet many candidates pride themselves in advocating not just tolerance, but acceptance and societal equality for these things.
We have now reached the bizarre stage in our nation’s history, where it is not just activist judges that are forcing so called same sex “marriage” or some equivalent upon their states, but state legislators are also passing it as was done here in NY in 2011 with our own State Senator Steve Saland being one of the key swing votes that made it possible. It was passed in violation of their own legislative process, but what else could be expected from men and women that would approve of such immorality. President Obama also changed his position last year, but that was not really that surprising since his administration had refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act which prevents the Federal Government from recognizing anything other than a male – female marriage and protects States from being forced to recognize the marriage laws of other States. That is also the position taken in the Democratic Party platform this year.
Despite the debate, this st
ill comes down to a very basic moral issue. What is the nature and purpose of marriage? God has defined it and any attempt by man to redefine it to include his sinfulness just adds to the immorality. Passing such perverse laws may gain them legal recognition which will remove the stigma to some degree, but it can never remove it from God’s pronouncement that this behavior is an abomination before Him and therefore also before His people.
Questions to consider concerning morality. Does the candidate seek to protect marriage or make it easier to get a divorce (which usually exploits the woman with children)? Do they uphold the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman or advocate redefining it according to the homosexual agenda? Do they uphold laws against sexual immorality, or do they advocate forcing society to accept as a specially protected class the sexually perverse including homosexuals, cross dressers and trans-gendered?
3) Protection. I place this next because it is a foundational purpose of government. A government that will not protect its citizens from both internal and external threats becomes illegitimate and will end up being replaced by either vote, insurrection or defeat. A police force and local militia protect against local threats while the military protects against threats from other nations. While armed forces can be used by evil men for evil purposes, that very fact proves the necessity of having armed forces for protection. The founding fathers of the United States understood this and that is why the U.S. Constitution enumerated the need of an army, navy and militia to suppress insurrections and repel invasions (Article 1, Section 8) and the role of the President as the Commander in Chief (Article 2, Section 2).
Questions to consider: Does the candidate understand the protective role of government both locally and nationally and advocate law and order? Police should be supported in their protective role while being restricted from becoming oppressors themselves. Do the policies of the candidate enable us to have sufficient police and/or military protection? That is a very serious question at present since the current sequester requirements will have serious consequences in the military being able to carry out its duties. What does the candidate propose to overcome this problem? Does the candidate understand the necessity and proper use of armed forces as well as diplomacy in averting war (Proverbs 20:18; Luke 14:31)? We should strive to avoid war when possible, but when we can’t, there must be the ability to wage it with clear purpose and objectives. Do the candidate’s polices increase or decrease the threats that may arise either domestically or come from foreign sources?
4) Justice: Government has the responsibility to establish and execute justice, and to the degree a government deviates from God’s standards of justice is the degree to which it is failing. Tragically, the United States is failing in many ways to carry out justice due to political corruption by which laws are ignored or changed to benefit the politically favored class. We also have judges that rule based on what they would like it to be rather than what the law actually states.
Let me quickly point out that so called “social justice” is not Biblical justice whenever it is an effort to bring about an equality of an outcome. God has not gifted all people equally, so equality of outcome is impossible without forcibly taking from some to give to others. The word for that is stealing. True social justice is an equality of opportunity or fairness in the application of law.
Justice must also be carried out with the right attitude. Micah 6:8 succinctly states, “He has told you, O man, what is good; And what does the Lord require of you But to do justice, to love kindness (or mercy), And to walk humbly with your God? This statement encompasses what you do, what you desire and what you are. It is humility in walking with God that brings about the proper kindness and mercy that temper justice. We are to be merciful because we have received mercy from God (Matthew 5:7; 18:21-35). However, mercy without justice is injustice and an abandonment of the protective role of government.
Questions to consider: Does the candidate uphold the rule of law? Does he advocate interpretation of law according to what is written and original intent? Is his advocation or opposition to a law based on Biblical standards or something else? Is the candidate fair in their dealings with both supporters and opponents? Is the candidate subject to political corruption by influences either in or outside of government?
Personal Integrity. Proverbs 6:16-19 is helpful in understanding God’s assessment of people and therefore helpful in evaluating a political candidate’s personal integrity. “There are six things which the Lord hates, Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: 17 Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, And hands that shed innocent blood, 18 A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that run rapidly to evil, 19 A false witness [who] utters lies, And one who spreads strife among brothers.”
Haughty eyes refer to that condescending look the proud can give because they think themselves to be superior to the rest of us mere knaves. This is a common attitude among the political elite. Beware of proud and arrogant candidates that think they know what is best for you and want government control over your life. Is the candidate proud or humble?
A lying tongue reveals a dishonest and selfish character striving to do what is best for themselves instead of what is best for others. It seems many politicians strive to make lying an art form, but a person that is characterized by lying cannot be trusted on anything. The Bible gives strong warning against it including that those who practice it will be cast into the lake of fire (Leviticus 19:11; Proverbs 12:22; Colossians 3:9; Revelation 21:8). All candidates will fail at some point, but more is revealed about their integrity by whether they are honest about it or not than in the particular failure itself. Is the candidate characterized by honesty or lying?
Hands that shed innocent blood include both the culprit and the accomplices. Those who allowed it to happen because they either advocated the laws permitting it or were complacent in their duties to prevent it are also liable. Again, what is the candidate’s position on abortion, infanticide and euthanasia as well as their positions on law enforcement, military and justice?
A heart that devises wicked plans will be revealed by what the candidate advocates. Does the candidate’s vision for the future and goals for the present line up better with what God would want or Satan? Do they promote what is moral and godly and strive to restrict what is evil, or do they call good evil and evil good?
Feet that run rapidly to evil describe the feeding frenzy of sharks that strive to get whatever they can when someone has fallen victim to another. They may join in the evil themselves or just watch it with glee. They see another person’s downfall as an opportunity for gain for themselves. They broadcast the shame of another instead of trying to correct and heal it. What is the candidate’s response to the evil that befalls others? Intervene? Watch? Join in?
A false witness is worse than the general liar because his lies make someone else his victim. It is bad enough to lie about yourself so others will think you are something you are not or can do something you can’t, but it is a lot worse to try to destroy another person with lies. That includes spreading gossip or having others do that in his stead. This has become common political practice. Does the candidate lie about others? Verify content of political attack ads.
The final abomination in this list is spreading strife among brothers. Relationships that should be close and harmonious, or at least cooperative, are strained or even destroyed by the actions of an antagonist. They can generate
the strife themselves or just take advantage of a rift or strain already present and make it wider through lies, gossip, rumor and innuendo.
When these various abominations are combined, we have the politics of personal destruction. An evil, but effective tactic, used by wicked people to gain political power. We have lost good government leaders to it, and even more good people refuse to run because of it.
Let me quickly add here that having solid convictions and firm positions does not mean you have to be obstinate. The truth can and should be spoken in love. Even strong rebukes can be given with a sense of caring. A position can be stated firmly without joining in the rants and rage of the opposition. Is the candidate able to hold firmly to his convictions and still be gracious or is he antagonistic?
There are many other Biblical moral issues, such as stealing and graft, that could also be addressed and should be applied to politics. There are also all the things the Bible says about economics. (See: Proverbs on Economics) This sermon was only to prod you to think according to Biblical values and priorities when voting, running for public office or serving in one. Moral character and personal integrity are much more important than any set of proclaimed policies and promises. You will never find a candidate that agrees with you 100% on every issue, but we are to evaluate carefully and make the best vote we can.
As Christians, our first priority is always to please our Lord and trust Him to bring good out of any situation even when they are not to our liking and are antagonistic to His stated moral will (Romans 8:28; James 1:2-4). While each of us will want our candidate to win and may work hard to achieve that, our primary goal is to please the Lord, not be on the winning side. If running for office, your primary goal is to please the Lord, not win the election. If in public office, your primary goal is to please to the Lord, not win re-election or please the people. The goal for each of us should be to one day stand before our Lord and hear Him say to us, “Well done thou good and faithful servant.”
Sermon Notes – 11/4/2012
Morality & Voting – Selected Scriptures
In a democratic republic, the leaders and laws reflect the desires of the ______________
We should desire a _____________ from the current moral free fall
A Christian’s vote should reflect their understanding of and obedience to the ____________
The Myth of the Christian Candidate
Many politicians that claim to be Christians do not have lives or support policies that ______their claim
__________in fulfilling the God given purposes for government is what is required, not being a believer
Situations arise in which ____ candidates or _____ candidates are Christians
We must know enough about Scriptures and the candidates to vote ___________
Vote for the candidate _______ consistent with Biblical principles, or write-in a name as a protest
Use of the Old Testament
Jesus and the apostles affirmed the _______ Testament and used it – Matt. 5:17; Rom. 3:31, 7:12
We are justified & made righteous by God’s ________ through faith in Jesus and not through the _____
God had given general ______________ to all people and specific commands to the nation of Israel
The Mosaic Law gives ____________ into the character and moral will of God which all should obey
Evaluating the Candidates and the Issues
1) ___________ is the first moral priority (Genesis 1:26,27; 9:6; Numbers 35; 2 Kings 24:2)
Human life begins in the __________ (Psalm 139:13; Jeremiah 1:5-6)
A baby in the womb is a human being, a __________ (Luke 1:41-44)
Biologically, the child is a ____________ human, not an extension of the mother’s body
The twisted legal basis for abortion falls apart once the ____________of the unborn child is recognized
_______________ willfully ends a human life, destroys a work of God and attacks God’s image
Euthanasia results in murder, ends the opportunity to repent, sends unbelievers to eternal ___________
Questions: What value does the candidate put on human life? Are they pro-life, indifferent or pro-abortion? What is their position on euthanasia? What is their position on punishment for murder?
2) Morality – Isaiah 5:20 – woe to those who call evil good, and good evil
Some things are especially evil and God pronounces them as abhorrent and ______________
Leviticus ______ – immoral sexual practices and perversions and child sacrifice
The family should be the first social unit of ____________, but incest turns into the first exploitation
Adultery destroys _________, the foundation for marriage, and with it the family, and with it, society
Sexual perversions spread ___________, some of which are deadly
Political leaders now openly ___________homosexuality and making it a moral equivalent to marriage
The nature and purpose of ________are defined by God, not man, and He will judge man’s perversions
Questions: Does the candidate seek to protect marriage or make it easier to get a divorce? Do they uphold the sacredness of marriage between a man or a woman or advocate redefining marriage and the family? Doe they uphold laws against sexual perversions or do they advocate forced acceptance of it?
3) Protection of its people against internal and external threats is a __________purpose of government
Police & militia ___________ against internal threats while military protects against external threats
Questions: Does the candidate understand the protective role of government both locally and nationally? Will his polices enable sufficient police / military protection? Does he understand the necessity and proper use of armed force as well as diplomacy? Will his policies increase or decrease domestic or foreign threats?
4) Justice: To the degree a government deviates from God’s standard of justice, it ___________
True social justice is equality of opportunity or fairness in the application of law, __________________
Micah 6:8 – Justice is to be tempered by mercy. Mercy without justice is _____________.
Questions: Does the candidate uphold the rule of law? Does he advocate interpreting the law according to what is says and original intent or what he would like it to say? Is he fair in his dealings with supporters and opponents? Is the candidate subject to political corruption either in or outside of government?
5) Personal integrity: Proverbs 6:16-19. Seven things that are abominations to the Lord.
Haughty eyes – The condescending look of the _______& arrogant. Is the
candidate proud or humble?
A lying tongue – Liars cannot be __________. Is the candidate characterized by honesty or lying?
Shed innocent blood – _______________ advocate laws allowing it or are complacent in preventing it.
What is the candidate’s position on abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, law enforcement, justice?
A heart that devises wicked plans – Do the candidate’s policies _________God’s or Satan’s standards?
Feet that run rapidly to evil – What is their ___________ to evil? Intervene? Watch ? or Join in?
A false witness – done to ___________ the other person. Does the candidate lie / slander others?
Spread strife among brothers – either generate it or perpetuate it by lies, __________ and innuendo
Is the candidate known for antagonism or graciousness and cooperation?
Strive to approach politics according to _______values and priorities instead of personal ones
Our first priority is always to be pleasing to our ________& trust Him whether voting, running or serving
Our goal is to hear the Lord say to us, “Well done thou good and faithful servant.”
Young Children – draw a picture about something you hear during the sermon. Explain your picture(s) to your parents at lunch. Older Children – Do one or more of the following: 1) Count
(If you would like to receive Pastor Harris’ weekly sermons via e-mail, Click Here)
For comments, please e-mail Church office