Now that the primary election is past...
May. 24th, 2006 10:00 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
songofjoy02God's will and politics (written on May 3, 2006)...
God’s Will: Predestined or Permissive?
A personality test I took recently mentioned that I probably have difficulty making decisions because of my drawn-out way of analyzing situations. I have to admit the truth of that statement because I always take a while to decide about things that do not fit into perimeters that I have already clearly defined. This year, one issue that has loomed large in my mind has been politics. Between newspaper articles, online blog posts, and radio commentary, it seems easy to conclude that politics is a dirty business. There is a reason for the idea that “Compromise is the name of the game.”
Earlier in my life, I did not spend much time considering political issues. I lived in Hawaii, where a person’s best choice of a candidate consisted in picking which one was least bad. Granted, that seems to be true elsewhere as well, but Hawaii was especially prone to having what we now call “liberal” candidates (liberal meaning that they dig money out of our pockets to hand out to whomever they see fit, not that we can do much complaining when we obviously elected them). Arkansas, however, was quite a different story. Not only did people I had seen or met run for office, but virtually all of the candidates, even the so-called “liberals,” were more conservative than the candidates we had seen in Hawaii.
This has posed quite a problem for me, partially because it has forced me to evaluate my own political perspective, a great difficulty. Nearly all of the tests I have taken showed that I am a moderate or a centrist, or, in other words, that I cannot make up my mind. Seriously, though, the candidates here seem to have very minute differences at least with respect to those things that I can easily observe. They all call themselves Christians (so what’s new?), they are all active in the community, and they all have pretty similar political ideology. How should I choose?
The candidates that I have met have generated a large degree of controversy. I have not figured out exactly why. Their goal is to live out their faith in a practical way. Sometimes, they are rather uncouth in presenting it, but I think that their goal remains apparent. And I do trust that God can work even with the uncouth, because He said He would do so with Moses. These candidates refuse to compromise even on the smallest issues, unless inexperience does not lead them to be on their guard in rare circumstances.
Critics have suggested, however, that government and religion should not be intertwined and also that these candidates are so uncompromising that they are ineffective. These objections deserve full consideration; however, they do not deserve unthinking acceptance. Why should government and religion be separate? Is it really true that they must not ever be intertwined? Is it true that compromise is necessary for political effectiveness? Is political effectiveness the goal? Should it be? How should the answers to these questions affect my voting?
It is not my purpose to establish answers to these particular questions. While I do believe that each voter should consider them, I do not believe that we will reach the same conclusions on these issues. My priorities in life will enable me to answer these questions only for myself. I really believe that there are contradictory answers that will be equally valid (this does not mean that they are correct or absolutely true, just that they are often supported by answers that seem to me to be equally convincing).
Reaching this point in my thought process was very difficult because I wanted a definite answer. “If these guys are doing what God wants, then I should support them—end of story.” Or is it really that simple? No matter how much I have considered the matter, I cannot reach a definite conclusion on whether what they are doing is “right.” My primary conclusion is that they are doing what they believe is the will of God. But how far does the “God’s will” argument hold water? God willed for Judas to betray Jesus, right? But does that mean that I would want to be Judas? Was it obedience that motivated Judas’s betrayal?
And then what about situations where the answers seem to be the same in terms of God’s revealed Word? In Bible Study Fellowship recently, I had to answer a question about the difference of commands regarding the famine in Isaac’s time and the famine in Jacob’s time. God told Isaac not to go to Egypt. Jacob could have just determined then that it was morally wrong for any Israelites to go to Egypt. But instead he asked God for direction and God told him to go to Egypt. God’s will was not the same for both people at both times. I tend to prefer formulaic approaches, to have it all in my head so that I can decide at the drop of a hat whether or not something is appropriate to do. Yet not all things are so easily determined.
Catherine Marshall said that she once dreamed of a head that was disconnected from a body and set on a pedestal. She dreamed that a woman walked past it and said, “It stinks.” In a later conversation with a cleric who had studied dreams extensively, they discovered that her dream had reflected her struggle with putting the intellect on a pedestal instead of allowing the body to function as a whole. This account reminded me of how important it is for me not to assume that I can “figure everything out in advance.”
Catherine Marshall also told the story of a baby who was rescued from a fire because one woman responded obediently to the Lord by picking the baby up just hours before the room where the baby would have been sleeping erupted in flames. All reason would deny that there was any moral consideration in the situation, and yet God was working in the woman’s heart to do something very important, even though she may not have understood why.
Is God’s will ever so “mystical” as this? Some people would say not. They hold that God’s Word is the answer to all questions and that we have freedom to decide on anything not specifically addressed in Scripture (whether through direct injunctions or less direct principles). To them, it seems implausible that God might communicate more specifically to man. To a degree, I actually agree with them, mainly because a mystical understanding of God’s will is not my real issue in this situation.
What is the real issue is that I act according to what I do believe God desires me to do. True, I cannot prove everything logically. I cannot give you any astoundingly inspiring reasons for supporting controversial political candidates. But if I cannot proceed with full faith, then I am guilty, for “whatever is not of faith is sin.” I think that this was the real issue all along: I wanted to be able to convince everyone of my point of view. But I cannot do that. In this case, I am not even sure I want to do that. But my point of view is valid so long as I am willing to let God change it and make it into what He wants it to be.
The political candidates that I will probably support are committed to being different from the world and to using their campaigns as springboards to share the Gospel with a lost and dying world. That may not be politically expedient, but it definitely fits with my goals in life. While there are other candidates who may have similar goals, I could not proceed with them in full faith. Therefore, I will stick with these candidates at the moment and trust that God will make His will clear if this is not where He wants me to be.
God’s Will: Predestined or Permissive?
A personality test I took recently mentioned that I probably have difficulty making decisions because of my drawn-out way of analyzing situations. I have to admit the truth of that statement because I always take a while to decide about things that do not fit into perimeters that I have already clearly defined. This year, one issue that has loomed large in my mind has been politics. Between newspaper articles, online blog posts, and radio commentary, it seems easy to conclude that politics is a dirty business. There is a reason for the idea that “Compromise is the name of the game.”
Earlier in my life, I did not spend much time considering political issues. I lived in Hawaii, where a person’s best choice of a candidate consisted in picking which one was least bad. Granted, that seems to be true elsewhere as well, but Hawaii was especially prone to having what we now call “liberal” candidates (liberal meaning that they dig money out of our pockets to hand out to whomever they see fit, not that we can do much complaining when we obviously elected them). Arkansas, however, was quite a different story. Not only did people I had seen or met run for office, but virtually all of the candidates, even the so-called “liberals,” were more conservative than the candidates we had seen in Hawaii.
This has posed quite a problem for me, partially because it has forced me to evaluate my own political perspective, a great difficulty. Nearly all of the tests I have taken showed that I am a moderate or a centrist, or, in other words, that I cannot make up my mind. Seriously, though, the candidates here seem to have very minute differences at least with respect to those things that I can easily observe. They all call themselves Christians (so what’s new?), they are all active in the community, and they all have pretty similar political ideology. How should I choose?
The candidates that I have met have generated a large degree of controversy. I have not figured out exactly why. Their goal is to live out their faith in a practical way. Sometimes, they are rather uncouth in presenting it, but I think that their goal remains apparent. And I do trust that God can work even with the uncouth, because He said He would do so with Moses. These candidates refuse to compromise even on the smallest issues, unless inexperience does not lead them to be on their guard in rare circumstances.
Critics have suggested, however, that government and religion should not be intertwined and also that these candidates are so uncompromising that they are ineffective. These objections deserve full consideration; however, they do not deserve unthinking acceptance. Why should government and religion be separate? Is it really true that they must not ever be intertwined? Is it true that compromise is necessary for political effectiveness? Is political effectiveness the goal? Should it be? How should the answers to these questions affect my voting?
It is not my purpose to establish answers to these particular questions. While I do believe that each voter should consider them, I do not believe that we will reach the same conclusions on these issues. My priorities in life will enable me to answer these questions only for myself. I really believe that there are contradictory answers that will be equally valid (this does not mean that they are correct or absolutely true, just that they are often supported by answers that seem to me to be equally convincing).
Reaching this point in my thought process was very difficult because I wanted a definite answer. “If these guys are doing what God wants, then I should support them—end of story.” Or is it really that simple? No matter how much I have considered the matter, I cannot reach a definite conclusion on whether what they are doing is “right.” My primary conclusion is that they are doing what they believe is the will of God. But how far does the “God’s will” argument hold water? God willed for Judas to betray Jesus, right? But does that mean that I would want to be Judas? Was it obedience that motivated Judas’s betrayal?
And then what about situations where the answers seem to be the same in terms of God’s revealed Word? In Bible Study Fellowship recently, I had to answer a question about the difference of commands regarding the famine in Isaac’s time and the famine in Jacob’s time. God told Isaac not to go to Egypt. Jacob could have just determined then that it was morally wrong for any Israelites to go to Egypt. But instead he asked God for direction and God told him to go to Egypt. God’s will was not the same for both people at both times. I tend to prefer formulaic approaches, to have it all in my head so that I can decide at the drop of a hat whether or not something is appropriate to do. Yet not all things are so easily determined.
Catherine Marshall said that she once dreamed of a head that was disconnected from a body and set on a pedestal. She dreamed that a woman walked past it and said, “It stinks.” In a later conversation with a cleric who had studied dreams extensively, they discovered that her dream had reflected her struggle with putting the intellect on a pedestal instead of allowing the body to function as a whole. This account reminded me of how important it is for me not to assume that I can “figure everything out in advance.”
Catherine Marshall also told the story of a baby who was rescued from a fire because one woman responded obediently to the Lord by picking the baby up just hours before the room where the baby would have been sleeping erupted in flames. All reason would deny that there was any moral consideration in the situation, and yet God was working in the woman’s heart to do something very important, even though she may not have understood why.
Is God’s will ever so “mystical” as this? Some people would say not. They hold that God’s Word is the answer to all questions and that we have freedom to decide on anything not specifically addressed in Scripture (whether through direct injunctions or less direct principles). To them, it seems implausible that God might communicate more specifically to man. To a degree, I actually agree with them, mainly because a mystical understanding of God’s will is not my real issue in this situation.
What is the real issue is that I act according to what I do believe God desires me to do. True, I cannot prove everything logically. I cannot give you any astoundingly inspiring reasons for supporting controversial political candidates. But if I cannot proceed with full faith, then I am guilty, for “whatever is not of faith is sin.” I think that this was the real issue all along: I wanted to be able to convince everyone of my point of view. But I cannot do that. In this case, I am not even sure I want to do that. But my point of view is valid so long as I am willing to let God change it and make it into what He wants it to be.
The political candidates that I will probably support are committed to being different from the world and to using their campaigns as springboards to share the Gospel with a lost and dying world. That may not be politically expedient, but it definitely fits with my goals in life. While there are other candidates who may have similar goals, I could not proceed with them in full faith. Therefore, I will stick with these candidates at the moment and trust that God will make His will clear if this is not where He wants me to be.
