John MacArthur thinks he can vote for a better worldview by voting for Trump
Seems to have forgotten that if you back a guy who claims your worldview (sometimes) but behaves contrary to your worldview, he is worse than having no representation at all. There is no Christian in Trump’s actual (as in functional) worldview. Zero. And zero cannot be “more than” an alternative.
So as far as worldview goes, we have two options from the major parties:
a. a wolf (Hillary)
b. a wolf in sheep’s clothing (Trump)
Which is “worse”?
(JMac… not one of your better days)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Pro-life Democrats are few and far between
One could, in my mind, use that argument to vote for Trump
California (where John Mac votes) will go massively for Clinton - probably double digits.
1- Vote for Hillary
2-Vote for Trump
3- Do nothing
If you do nothing you are neglecting the sovereign God’s choice to empower you to vote. Can you morally do that?
If you vote for McMillin, or Johnson, you are really voting for Hillary.
If you vote for Jill Stein you are really voting for Trump.
One of these two will be our next president, like it or not. (And most do not.) Whose record and stated policies are most detrimental to Christian freedom and societal well-being? According to my understanding, Clinton is extremely dangerous to Christians. Trump is probably only mildly so, and could well be beneficial, in that he may stop and even reverse many of the forces attempting to destroy Christianity. A vote for anyone but Trump helps Clinton. As much as I dislike him personally, my vote’s for Trump. May God rescue America!
G. N. Barkman
I was not planning on voting but since Georgia is tight, my vote might make a difference.
I will be voting for Clinton. I despise them both with every bone in my body but Clinton is the least dangerous of the two from my perspective. I do not believe one single word that Trump has uttered during this campaign. He has said whatever he has had to say to get the votes of evangelicals who are foolish enough to actually believe him. That by the way includes abortion though I do not believe that abortion is the only big issue in politics and should not be the litmus test for voting that many evangelicals make it.
Clinton at least has the brains to surround herself with smart people and will listen to them. Trump is a worthless fool who will never listen to anyone. I see both of them as moderates who are basically the same. However, the difference is that Trump is mentally ill.
While I concede that the FBI isn’t doing much about the matter, it strikes me as odd to think that someone whose behavior has been criminal since Watergate (when she was fired for moral lapses during the investigation), and who has been tolerating her husband’s infidelity for almost the same time, would not be mentally ill to some degree. I’m no psychiatrist, but NPD comes to mind from the symptoms both of them show. Same thing for the current guy, really.
Our ideal case, sad to say, would be a President who unleashes the FBI and DOJ to put thousands of people in DC into jail. We’re not going to get it for a while, barring huge repentance by the winner. But my dream is for a President who, just like Reagan brought the Iowa and New Jersey out of mothballs, would bring Alcatraz out of mothballs for corrupt officials. Just make sure the Bay is well stocked with sharks, and let a few “escape” from time to time.
And MacArthur’s comments? I think he’s making a good point—while I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump were a Clinton plant (they’ve been friends for decades), he’s at least saying some of the right things and…..he’s the one whose party wasn’t willing to overlook clear perjury and obstruction of justice to keep him in office….I’ll be voting for the one who can be impeached when he misbehaves. And then we can send him to his buddies in the San Francisco Bay.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Just a quick note on a Sunday afternoon in New Zealand: so I am seeing a lot of discussion about voting, obviously. And I am seeing a lot of folks saying it is my DUTY to vote, and, of course, to vote for Donald Trump so as to stop HitlerStalinMaoPolPotDarthVaderHillary Clinton from establishing the First Intergalactic Empire based in Washington, DC. And of course, if I do not do that, I am guilty of every evil thing HRC has ever done, has ever thought of doing, will ever do, etc. The souls of the damned will torture me at night, I will probably lose my salvation, and all the other stuff being communicated in wild-eyed memes.
So, first, let me reiterate: I am not voting for HRC, and I happen to agree with those who cannot possibly fathom how any believing Christian who takes a scintilla of God’s Word seriously ever could. Yep, she’s evil, the High Priestess of the Culture of Death, and all of that. Dishonest, criminally so, dedicated to the destruction of all that is good and right, destroyer of liberties–yup, it’s all true, and all the leaked emails only prove it. The very fact she lives a luxurious life of riches while feeding off the corpse of what was once a powerful and free nation is one of the greatest examples of the downfall of that nation. A people with the slightest idea of history, morality, etc., would not put up with such people, let alone celebrate them. Got it, agree.
And I am not voting for DJT either. I wish there was an alternative that could actually accomplish something, but alas, there is not, and I have explained that I see this as judgment upon the nation for its many manifold sins. If he were to win and even be something just slightly less than a disaster, well, I will be thankful for that, and admit I had nothing to do with putting him there. If he wins and turns out to be the disaster I expect from any spoiled, immature, covenant-breaking playboy-turned-faux conservative, well, I won’t even need to say “I told you so.” But in any case, my conscience will not allow me to positively promote a man of his character and historical worldview. Whatever he ends up doing, you won’t be able to blame me for it. I wash my hands of both of them.
Now, some folks are not just holding their noses, but chucking Pepto and taking other extreme actions while pulling the lever for DJT because they find HRC so horrifically offensive and dangerous. OK, that’s your right. I can’t do it, but I am not going to get into FB wars over your choosing to take that course. That’s up to you. If you can live with yourself at night casting that vote, good on you, as they say down under. I get the feeling that is what John MacArthur is doing from what I’ve been seeing about his comments at the recent summit (I haven’t watched it…hotel internet is dreadfully slow down here, so it just is not worth the effort). Some people have gone ballistic about that–not me. His right, his choice. Others have tried to rub that in my face, some who have promoted Trump from the start. Bad on ya.
But I simply want to say that anyone making the argument that I, as a Christian, MUST vote should be very, very careful. There isn’t a micro-particle of biblical evidence to support the assertion that a Christian citizen of a socializing nation in the 21st century is under any obligation to vote for evil men or women. None. You can talk about standing for righteousness till the cows come home, but there remains a very large chasm between that and positively voting for one of two utterly evil, despicable candidates. Be careful that your zeal for things political does not drag you across the line of legalism and the twisting of Scripture. You could very well find yourself facing even worse choices in the future, where the illusive hope that the “lesser of two evils” will actually help the situation is no longer believable by even the most gullible, and then you will be on the horns of your own self-made dilemma. I have not seen anything but the most vague, nebulous argument set forth as to how it is somehow my duty to involve myself in Caesar’s show. Exercise some caution, folks. You will still have to handle the Word of God on November 9th.
Who says he believes in the sovereignty of God, will not fulfill the charge he has from God to vote. God picked those two candidates, correct? Precious few in the history of civilization have been given that privilege and responsibility, and he is throwing it away. Sad to see.
Who says he’s not voting? His comments were directed towards those who would judge Christians for not voting. He never said that he wasn’t voting. And who know? Maybe he’s voting for a 3rd party candidate
[Mark_Smith]1- Vote for Hillary
2-Vote for Trump
3- Do nothing
If you do nothing you are neglecting the sovereign God’s choice to empower you to vote. Can you morally do that?
If you vote for McMillin, or Johnson, you are really voting for Hillary.
If you vote for Jill Stein you are really voting for Trump.
Such a misnomer about 3rd party candidates this year because the millennials don’t fall into polarizing left vs. right categories For example, there are many, many people who I know (both non-Christian and Christian) that were for Bernie Sanders that are now going to vote for either Gary Johnson or Evan McMillin. I’ve seen articles in certain states where Johnson is taking more votes from Hillary than from Trump. Some like Johnson because of his criminal justice reform polices and legalization of weed, and his view that abortion laws should be decided by states. Some like McMillin because he is for immigration reform, pro-life, and more informed about foreign policy.
A charge from God to vote? I must have missed that verse.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
[Mark_Smith]Who says he believes in the sovereignty of God, will not fulfill the charge he has from God to vote. God picked those two candidates, correct? Precious few in the history of civilization have been given that privilege and responsibility, and he is throwing it away. Sad to see.
Mark, you misunderstand the sovereignty of God and are making a logical error.
On the sovereignty of God:
- While I don’t view voting for any Presidential candidate this quadrennial as inherently evil; if both choices were evil, God would not demand his child to do evil
- On “God picked those two candidates, correct?”: Because there are more than two on the ballots in 51 states (including DC), your statement is not correct
James Anderson, Associate Prof of Theology and Philosophy the Reformed Seminary Charlotte, jokingly tweeted that “the 2016 election as a variant of the Trolley Problem where you have no idea how many people are on the r-hand track.”
But there are 51 elections with millions of switch masters and multiple choices.
Thanks Jim, for posting the analogy by James Anderson. In this case, there are millions of voters engaging in a tug of war to pull the switch for either the main line or the spur line.
But since there are more than two candidates, there are additional spur lines that the graphic does not show. There are also only a few voters willing to stand by the switches to change the path of the trolley to those additional spur lines. And the question is, why so few?
Herd mentality is a powerful psychological barrier to overcome.
I have voted for a third party candidate since I believe that there are NO individuals on the spur line that he represents. My lament is that if enough people joined us, no one would have to be hit by the trolley.
John B. Lee
Third Party Candidates Could Have Their Best Election Day in Years
Polls show that a majority of Americans support the idea of having choices beyond the Republican and Democratic tickets, with 57% telling Gallup in September that a third major political party is needed. The number of self-identified independent voters has hit record levels in recent years, though many of those voters lean toward one major party or the other.
“The Libertarian Party is the only political party that is growing by partisan registration in the entire country,” said Nicholas Sarwark,chairman of the Libertarian National Committee. “The Democrats, the Republicans, the Greens, the Constitution [Party] —they’re all in decline. Only Libertarians are going up.”
Yet the U.S. political system from the very beginning has been dominated by two parties—initially the Federalists versus the Democratic-Republican Party, then the Whigs versus the Democrats and finally the Republicans versus the Democrats. No independent or third-party candidate has ever won the presidency, though a number have played important supporting roles in elections.
….regarding Elon Musk and Tesla is that when you count up the carbon emissions to build one of his sports cars, it’s actually an environmental minus, especially when you account for the fact that nighttime power generation is primarily with coal. Mining lithium requires a LOT of energy since it’s so diffuse in the ores that contain it. So yes, we are paying Mr. Musk billions to pollute the environment. And Toyota, and GM, and others.
(Musk is a genius, though—it’s just genius at mining public subsidies, not making environmentally sound vehicles)
Same basic thing with solar panels and windmills—until 2010, solar panels actually required more energy to make than you get out of them, and I’m not sure that statistic counted the power added efficiency of the power plants generating the electricity for the wafer fabs. You’ll also find the same thing with public transit (about 25 passenger-miles per gallon of diesel is typical) and other DOE initiatives like ethanol. Yes, you the taxpayer are paying tens of billions of dollars each year to increase pollution.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Discussion