There is a general sentiment among some fundamentalists that in this election we’ll just have to “hold our nose and vote” or “choose the lesser of two evils.” I’d like to address those that have chosen NOT to vote for the lesser of two evils.
- We are not voting for a pastor of our country and the Bible does not give us the qualifications for a president.
- We are not a Christian nation in the sense that Israel was God’s people. Our country was founded on biblical principles, but we are not a theocracy. We are a republic. We (the people) elect others to represent us in our government. We should try to get the best men available to do that for us.
- In the presidential race, there are only two men available to fill the office. Other names are on the ballots, but one of ONLY TWO will sit in the Oval Office.
- I’m NOT voting for the “lesser of two evils.” I’m going to vote for the best man available to represent me.
- In the end, you are still voting for the lesser of evils! Only you’re voting for the lesser of six evils. Even if you thought you were the best candidate, and voted for yourself, you’d be voting for the lesser of many evils. So, refusing to vote for evil is not an excuse, sorry.
While we cannot separate our Christianity from the public square, we do not act the same in the public square as we do in church. America is not the church, or the kingdom, or any other religious entity. So on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, cast your vote as an American. God put you in this country. Vote for the best man available to represent you.
Had you heard? Obama has an Arab sounding name. Had you heard that his middle name is “Hussein”? Let’s see. I’m trying to think of who else has that same name, except his last name. Does it matter? Not really, but it would at least have me checking out his background and who he supports. What if McCain’s middle name was “Adolf” or “Hitler”? John Hitler McCain. No one should check to see if he has any Nazi associations. Um. No. Like that would happen. He couldn’t win a national election. He wouldn’t even be running. No way he could last. Or how about John Wilkes McCain? But Hussein? You’re racist, a bigot, if you even think about that mattering? Oh really? Since when do the thought police, who strap on the first amendment, get to stop me from considering that with their own clever bit of reverse racism.
But with Obama, not only does he have that Middle Eastern sounding name, but he’s got the major background to boot. Not only does he have the checkered past, but he also lies about it now in a way that ought to be sending up back-pack explosions all over the place. There is no way this guy in a hundred years should be able to get a sniff of the presidency and, yet, he might just win it next week. He’s definitely the favorite. It’s so bad, it almost looks providential, as if God is using this occasion to judge our nation by turning us over to our own lusts. It’s something like Israel picking Saul to be their king because he’s a head taller than everyone else. This pins the stupidity needle like I haven’t seen in my lifetime.
I’m observing this from the standpoint of a dispensational, premillennial approach to Israel. We believe that the Abrahamic and Davidic covenant are still in play. We support Israel. Period. I don’t care if Israel votes for their own nightmare with a kind of blindness and self-destructive ignorance that borders on insanity. We still have the highest hopes for her and our literal approach to Scripture in part guides us in this vote. I wish Israel could get it too. I wish Jews in the U.S. could figure it out. Some do. I sort of get their history. They have pendulum swung the liberal direction ever since the fascists of the late and early twentieth century. They connect dots from Augustine to Martin Luther to Hitler to the Republican Party. They see the right as being frighteningly Christian. They way have the wrong interpretation of what’s happening. I wish they’d wake up and smell the matzo bon. Think Obama Fox–Israel Chicken Coop.
Our future is wrapped up in Israel too, but “no, let’s go ahead and stand right on top of the spot where the earth opens up.” Hint: the future is not with the Palestinian Liberation Organization. Hint: the Jewish hating nations who support Obama aren’t hopeful of a bright American future. But Obama doesn’t have Achmadinejad as one of his advisors. Oh well, everything must be OK. Shewww! I’m going to give these in just the bullet points. Strike that. The backpack points. And, Colin Powell, who is calling Obama a Muslim? I don’t hear anything like that coming from the McCain campaign. Whatever respect I had for Colin Powell just floated down the Euphrates. He’s bitter over how he was treated by the Bush administration. The incredible shrinking former Secretary of State. But I digress. Back to Obama and his scariness to Israel.
- His dad a Muslim.
- He grows up in rabidly Moslem Indonesia.
- Bill Ayers. Obama Unapologetic Terrorist Bomber Friend.
- Anti-Israel Jeremiah Wright (his amillennial black liberation theology results in hatred of Israel; see this video).
- Louis Farakhan.
- Wright and Farakhan sittin’ in a tree with Muammar Gaddafi.
- Endorsement from Hamas.
- Anti-Israel, Pro-Palistinian statement by Jesse Jackson.
- Close friendship and support of Rashid Khalidi, Yasser Arafat’s former close personal assistant (see the Fox Videos, and that LA Times won’t release theirs as part of media bias and cover-up, same man that set up Achmadinejad speech at Columbia University).
- Hiding Anti-Israel Views.
- Supports Kenya violent Islamic dictator Odinga (and read this, and this, also claims to be Obama cousin).
- Muammar Gaddafi: Arab world ready to finance and back Obama.
There is too much here to simply dismiss it as fearmongering. It’s not like it took any kind of real heavy lifting to put this together. I don’t think Obama is a Muslim. Let that be known. Also, I don’t think it matters. Jeremiah Wright isn’t a Muslim either. I don’t think that matters either. What I do say is that this above list should be scary for Israel, and for America too.
The polls say Obama will be our next President. We can discuss how accurate and/or reliable the polls are. Ann Coulter has an outstanding article on polls, demonstrating that they are reliably skewed in the Democratic candidate’s favor. In one sense, the polls are unreliable. But in another sense altogether, the polls are entirely reliable. They are reliably unreliable. And they are reliably skewed in favor of the Democratic candidate.
But we should also note that, although the numbers have always been inflated for the Democratic candidate, these same polls have also accurately picked the winner. Clinton had a 12-15 point lead in his first election. He didn’t win by 12-15 points, but he did win. Clinton had a 9 point lead in his second election. He didn’t win by 9 points, but he did win. In fact, in each of the examples that Coulter gives, the polls picked the winner. Their assessment of the spread was off, but their winner won.
Last Sunday, according to Zogby, Obama had a slight lead (about 2 points) over McCain. This week, that lead moved to as high as 12 points. If you have been following Zogby’s daily tracking, you might have noticed that Obama’s lead seems to be very volatile. Coulter’s explanation could be correct. But still, Obama holds the lead.
So, like it or not, we are likely to be saying “President Obama” for the next four years. The ObamaNation will have its day, as it appears now.
Discouraging? May I remind you that, in the sovereignty of God, we could get the President we want, and that could be the worst thing that ever happened to us. Or, we could get the President we fear, and that could be the best thing that ever happened to us.
That might be hard to imagine, so let me demonstrate. The first proposal for an income tax came during the administration of James Madison. The first time an income tax was imposed was during the administration of Abraham Lincoln. And Teddy Roosevelt was the first president to openly propose both an income tax and an inheritance tax. You can read an interesting history here.
Republicans gave us the Patriot Act. Republicans founded the Department of Homeland Security. A Republican administration (a pretty conservative one, too, as I recall), nominated Sandra Day O’Conner to the Supreme Court. Another Republican nominated John Paul Stevens. Another Republican nominated David Souter. During Republican administrations, America has not moved closer to repentance or revival. Churches have grown more worldly and apathetic in the last eight years. As has already been pointed out, no Messiah will be forthcoming out of Presidential Politics.
The fact is, if we “win” this election, we will likely breath a collective “Shew-w-w! that was close!” We will likely wipe our collective foreheads, dry the sweat off our collective hands, and continue on in our collective complacency, in our collective apathy, in our collective lukewarmness, and in our collective slide towards Gommorah. Just like the last 8 years.
If, on the other hand, we wind up losing this election, that could be the best thing that has happened to us in some time. Will we get more serious? Will we pray for our nation, more earnestly? Will we repent and seek the Lord for a revival?
I have to think so.
I have 4 extra tickets for the Robbie Knievel (son of Evil Knievel) event at the Home Depot Center ( Albany, Oregon ) this weekend if anybody wants them.
He’s going to try to jump 5,000 Obama supporters
…with a bulldozer.
Should be a good time. Let me know…
By this time, most people have read about the Clinton war room for the 1992 election, where then Governor Clinton’s senior strategists, James Carville and Paul Begala, posted the statement on a whiteboard, “The Economy, Stupid.” This was the first time I had heard the terminology, “talking points,” and probably you heard it by now, but instruction for a winning campaign—“Stay on message.” There was actually a haiku of three phrases on Carville’s whiteboard: Change vs. More of the Same, The Economy Stupid, Don’t Forget Health Care. As much as people make a gigantic deal about the success of these Clinton talking points, some people fail to remember Ross Perot got 17% of the votes out of that election and Clinton himself received way less than 50%. Perhaps they should have written, Ross Perot Stupid, on that board. Them were no geniuses.
We need our own war room and our message wouldn’t be that much different actually. I’d leave out only the third phrase of the Carville Mantra. The strategists drilled into Clinton the importance of repeating the talking points and staying on message. We should do the same. You already know that we won’t change the nation through political issues and elections. We need change and not more of the same. But how will change happen? It isn’t the economy. Although that’s what most Americans think. It is the gospel, stupid.
I’m not calling you stupid. Carville wasn’t calling Clinton, stupid. He was saying, “You’re stupid if you forget this talking point.” I’m saying, put The Gospel on your whiteboard. We’re all stupid if we forget it. We’re stupid when we even start forgetting the gospel. If Obama wins this election, the answer is the gospel, stupid. If McCain wins, it’s the gospel, stupid. Sometimes it takes an Obama to remember the gospel, stupid. When I catch myself thinking too much about Obama, Ayers, Wright, and Acorn, I need to remember the gospel, stupid. Do you think in a given week that we’re better off thinking and talking and writing more about this election than we do the gospel, stupid? It’s worth some time, just like bodily exercise is worth some time. But it “profiteth little.” The gospel profiteth much.
I believe that Jesus was talking about this election in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 6. People worry about the economy. They worry about their own physical needs. The Lord said in verse twenty-five, “Take no thought” of these things. Don’t make those your thinking or talking points. God will take care of you. He’ll meet your needs. Instead, make this your haiku, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness.” The economy and anything else God wants you to have will be added unto you.
Things Stupid about an Election
- It can’t take away sin, which is man’s real problem.
- It can’t make people do what they’re supposed to do.
- It can’t reconcile man with God.
- It can’t stop people’s greed.
- It can’t create honest leaders.
- It can’t stop men from dying.
- It can’t get anyone to heaven.
- It can’t eliminate the chief reason for crime and war.
- It can’t produce genuine love between people.
- It can’t cause human government to succeed.
- It can’t be the kingdom of God on earth.
- It gives people a false hope and a false sense of security about the future.
Things Stupid about not Elevating the Gospel above Elections
- We can persuade people to vote for our candidate, but they’ll still go to hell.
- When we’re talking about our candidate, we’re not talking about Jesus Christ.
- Even if our candidate does win the election, without preaching the gospel, the numbers of a right type of voter will still shrink.
- Someone for whom we vote will not bring in the kingdom of God on earth, but Jesus will.
- Jesus said, “Let the dead bury the dead,” so surely an election is below following Him.
- Other people might get the idea that elections are more important than gospel preaching.
- While we are spending time on the election, people will not be hearing the gospel.
- God commanded us to preach the gospel and He said nothing about elections.
- The gospel has the power to save someone forever and a politician or the election itself doesn’t have close to that power.
- The change of the gospel is eternal and the change wrought by an election winner is temporal.
- The gospel can transform someone on the inside and an election can’t.
- God’s Word says a lot about the gospel and it says very little about human government.
The election seems like big time. The news media talks about it. For a little bit of time, we share an opinion with millions of other Americans. Maybe we even feel some strength in numbers. But it’s not the way that God chooses to change the world. He chooses the weak things of the world to confound the strength of the mighty. He didn’t choose elections as His way for men to align themselves with Him. He did choose the preaching of the gospel. Let’s not be stupid.
The United States will fall some day. Election 2008 might mark the watershed moment of its sharpest ever decline. Paul wrote Timothy, “The love of money is the root of all evil.” I’m not sure that our country wouldn’t vote for a sadistic axe-murdering cannibal if he promised it a better economic package than the other guy. Twelve years ago Robert Bork wrote Slouching Towards Gommorha. The slouch has turned into a slippery slide.
What has so destroyed the discernment of American people that they have become so out-of-touch with God-given values? David Wells writes in No Place for Truth (p. 56):
Those who can manufacture such abundance are not immune from the moral corruption that multiplies in the abundance. Genius is never antiseptic. No matter how brilliant the Western achievements are—and they have been brilliant—like all other human achievements, they, too, serve as vehicles for the vices to which fallen human nature is constantly prone. The values that often accompany Western plenty are not made hygienic by the genius whose company they keep. On the contrary, they have become the acid that is eating at the Western soul. The hand that gives so generously in the material realm also takes away devastatingly in the spiritual.
What happened? Wells continues (pp. 57-59):
The Enlightenment world liberated us to dream dreams of the world’s renovation and of ourselves at its center, standing erect and proud, recasting the whole sorry scheme of things bare-handed, as it were, leaning only on our reason and goodness. . . . It is as if the ability to make better cars and better airplanes and better medicines and better theories imply an ability to make better selves. . . . The need to be in motion, moving toward the future, to know that we are leaving behind periods of lesser achievement and shaking ourselves free of what is obsolete, is obviously very great. . . . [B]eneath all of the difficulties and disappointments that modernity has brought, there still resides a belief in progress; we continue to think, or perhaps fervently hope, that we are still moving toward a better future. . . . There is always hope because things are always improving, despite the fact that under secular auspices there is no truth by which one can judge whether a culture is moving foward or backward.
This is Obama’s belief in change for change’s sake and the hope in hope and the hope in change. None of these are hopes rooted in absolute truth. They are rooted in the enlightenment optimism in change. Change means progress.
But does change mean progress? Not according to the Bible. Without God, we’ll change for sure. That change will always be a change toward the worse. It will start with spiritual deterioration and end in psychological and then physical devastation. God hasn’t made this world to change for the better without Him. We only change for the better by the grace of God. Without Him, its always a change for the worse.
This trust in progress separate from God leaves the absolute truth of God’s Word to relativism and then to secularization. Man becomes the new standard, elevating his own thoughts above God’s. Without inalienable truth, the culture loses its ability to transmit its values or even meaning from one generation to the next, so neither can it regulate behavior.
With the now uncertain standard, more important than substance is style, the ability to relate and make someone feel happy and secure. A previous world prized permanence. Ours wants change. Wells writes (pp. 42-44):
They made houses and shoes to last; we build obsolescence into many of our products, and our houses last only about forty years. . . . Men’s socks used to be darned and shirt collars and cuffs turned to make them last longer. Now we simply replace them. . . .The norms, values, and principles that were once seen to be enduring absolutes, along with the knowledge of God in which they were grounded, now seem quite uncertain and perishable.
Men will place their hope in change. They know they’re enlightened and they’ve progressed. They moved from the old ways to new ones. They prove to themselves that they’ve been liberated from any bondage to race, gender, sexual orientation, or system of morals. Imagine a nation that prefers a candidate who promises to steal the possessions of a few Americans to spread their earned or inherited wealth to everyone else, who blocked a bill that would protect infant survivors of abortion attempts, and who is unrelenting in his assocations with an unrepentant domestic terrorist who bombed our capital. He looks good. He sounds amazing, or at least that’s what the experts tell us. And he’s promising change.