Before speaking to that question, I’ll tell you a bit more about this post by promising to answer three other questions as well:
- Who sounds most genuinely friendly to the Christian faith: Clinton, Cruz, Rubio, Sanders, or Trump?
- Who are the Christian candidates in the race?
- What should be my role in the process?
Yesterday I thought again of the bizarre nature of national Presidential politics in the United States. The towering gullibility of the collective American mind is demonstrably bizarre.
Consider the two-ring caucus presently launching the opening act of Let’s Elect a President 2016.
The hawk-eyed Iowans will gather tonight to chatter and vote their hearts or minds in an effort to select a party standard bearer in each major political party. What comes out of Iowa tonight is supposed to be Really Significant.
Look. I don’t want to be unkind or sarcastic, but I have to be blunt. Iowa is only one of fifty states. What’s with making the results tonight so significant? Weird.
Not only that, Iowans don’t even represent 1/50th of the American vote. If 350,000 of them vote tonight, that’s only about 1/1000th of the US population. And yet what they decide will cause campaigns to wax and wane. Weirder.
Nevertheless, the polls and the pundits, the talkers and the bloggers, the politicians and the mathematicians will rule the night and the process. Provided the shadowy “Masters” approve, of course. Provided the dark prince of this world gives his nod.
All these rallies, caucuses, and primaries may be a charade, a game, a pacifier. The “Masters” may have an unprecedented, Constitution-conquering surprise awaiting on January 20, 2017.
But never mind that. Let me give you the foundation for a faithful Christian perspective on the Presidential race: God is sovereign. All that happens in the universe, be it micro like US Presidential elections or macro like the broad scope of human affairs, is irrevocably subject to the oversight and overrule of God Himself.
Nothing spins out of control for the eternal Almighty. Nobody surprises Him. Nobody thwarts Him. Nobody defeats Him.
We could speculate about whom the Sovereign One will elevate to the Presidency next. I would rather consider the other three questions.
Who sounds most genuinely friendly to the Christian faith: Clinton, Cruz, Rubio, Sanders, Trump? I suppose Ted Cross does. (You do know cruz is the Spanish word for cross, right?) Then again, the man who would be trumped by no one says he has a great relationship with God. (Just never mind his godless speech about others and his manifestations of an unbiblical value system.) Actually, the better question is this: Who will actually accomplish God’s purposes? I don’t know, but it could easily be the one who will carry forward the last seven years.
Who are the Christians in the race? I suggest a very stringent test which requires a Yes to each of the following questions:
- Have they left all to follow Jesus?
- Do they seek first God’s kingdom and righteousness?
- Do they love God with their all and their neighbor as themselves?
- Are they faithful to the Scriptures?
- Do they reject the Immaculate Conception?
That’s a hard test. Is it an unjust one? Is it incomplete? Is it God’s? Do I pass?
What should be my role in the process? My role tonight is to not vote — I don’t live in Iowa. My role later is to abstain from voting at all — my primary citizenship is not in the USA; I’ve pledged allegiance to another kingdom. My role is far harder than casting a political ballot. My role is to pray. And I don’t do that much at all. My praying is too absorbed by other matters. I mustn’t pray less about those other matters; I should pray more so I can include political matters, don’t you think?
Maybe your key question is this: What’s with the prophet stuff in the title? It’s to catch your attention. It’s a hat-tip to others’ labeling. It’s a shrug toward certain tests and quizzes (which I haven’t done in decades, OK?). It’s a distraction. But I’ll make a point from it anyway…
I don’t profess to foretell the future. If I’m a prophet, it would be in the sense that I declare (“forthtell”) God’s truth. That’s not a claim; it’s just a clarifying statement.
If you are a Christian who voted in the last Presidential election or two, answer these questions and ponder the implications of your answers:
- Do you believe God always raises to power whom He will?
- Did you vote for Barack Obama in either election?
- What did your vote accomplish?
I close with a question: How should I pray regarding this election and the process leading up to it?
Two other posts from longer ago — they have Scriptures in them to explain my thoughts:
You missed the most significant Christian candidate!, and although he fell back in the polls because the liberal media attacked him after he started edging Trump out of the lead. In my estimation Dr. Carson is the only candidate that I think is a real Christian.
While yes I agree the Bible has much to say about God raising up whom he wants in charge of countries it has just as much to say about our responsibility to pray for the right person to be there and not just leave it all up to His sovereignty alone.
Don’t count out the insignificant shepherd in the back fields of Jerusalem that the Lord raised up to be king instead of one of his popular well known brothers in the city. I am personally praying for Dr. Carson, and I agree these early caucuses don’t decide, the Lords will, will be done.
Thanks for the post – I came here from Craig Alan Myers’s Dunker Journal blogroll. I’m not sure that any of the candidates are particularly Christian, or particularly non-Christian, at least not in any Biblical way. Some are more fundamentalist and some are more progressive, but they all strike me as variations on the harmless civil religion style of Christianity that marks our public discourse. I am distrustful of those who proclaim their faith the loudest, as I believe that one cannot be a good Christian and a good President. Sooner or later you’ll have to choose, as what is best for the country is not always what is best in God’s eyes. You’re right, also, about Iowa. It isn’t particularly important, but capitalism encourages the media to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and the horserace aspect of presidential politics is far more interesting and entertaining than actual policy reporting and analysis. I doubt that 1% of the caucus goers could explain any policy difference between Cruz, Rubio, and Bush (not that I could either.) Thank you again for your thoughtful post.