The Christian Responsibility to Vote

Over the past several years, I’ve pondered how Christians should be involved as citizens of a democratic republic. Early Christians had no say in public policy of the Roman Empire. So, the Bible says little about government involvement.

In several nations today, however, Christians have a voice in their government. God has given us many gifts, one of which is having democratic freedom and the ability to vote.

Not everyone is called to become involved in the political process, but as citizens, we ought to engage in the election process. Instead of burying that gift in a hole, we are excepted to be good stewards of our vote (See Matthew 25:14-30). Research the candidates and issues and select those that best align with a biblical worldview.

More on Engaging with Government

The Stream, a conservative Christian news and commentary site, has published Foundations: Why Christians Should Be Involved in Government, which lists reasons why American Christ-followers should be involved in our political process.

The Family Research Council offers a 20-page PDF from their Biblical Worldview Series Biblical Principles for Political Engagement: Worldview, Issues, and Voting. (available in Spanish)

Christians are called to honor God in every area of their lives. Therefore, we should seek to submit everything to the Lord, including our political engagement. Engaging in politics is not only unavoidable, it is also an opportunity to obey God and show love to our neighbors. American Christians, with our right to vote, have a unique opportunity and duty to affect the political process. To that end, the goal of this publication is to help Christians filter all issues, candidates, and party platforms through a biblical worldview and encourage God-honoring, faithful political engagement.

—David Closson

Follow through on your God-given ability to vote on November 3, 2020.

2 thoughts on “The Christian Responsibility to Vote

  1. I often read Lorinda’s posts with interest. This one is no exception. I have read David Closson’s pamphlet and find the first two sections informative and helpful offering a Biblical exhortations to Christians to vote. However, I am troubled by the assumption that there is only one correct interpretation of the Scriptures. As an Episcopialian I and many members of other Christian denominations hold various interpretations of both scripture and issues. I would argue that the Biblical interpretation of priviliging the life of an infant over the life of the mother is indefensible. Additionally, no where in the Bible does it suggest that the the secular government should have jurisdiction to uphold religious beliefs. It is not the place of the government to legislate morality except in the case of the rights and responsibilities of persons. To be considered a person, one must have the ability to exercise both rights and responsibilities. The unborn have neither. It is the obligation of the woman to live a moral life, and the physician to do no harm. These decisions cannot be made at the level of government and have no place interfering in those decisions.

    As for the issue of homosexuality, the Bible says nothing that applies only to same sex relationships. If marriage is only between a man and a woman for the purpose of bearing children then sexual acts, which do not lead to intercourse should not and may not be performed no matter without regard for who is performing them. It is clear that much of what is stated in the Bible, including the relationship between a man and a woman has changed over time, then it stands to reason that as our understanding of the nature of homosexuality and marriage have also changed. Much has changed in the nature of families due to job mobility, and other factors that affect marriage. For example Divorce is much more common than in the past, Marriage within this society has a much more important function than simply the bearing of children. It determines the financial, medical, and social rights of spouses. Marriage creates families and some of those families take place later in life, are between people who would not otherwise find love, or individuals suffering disabilities. Additionally, many persons discover that they are not attracted to persons of the opposite sex after they have already been married within their religious communities. Therefore the narrow interpretation of marriage as between a man and a woman was applicable during earlier times but now it has been weaponized in the current political arena. I hope your readers will consider these things when they go to the submit their ballots. The main teaching of Jesus was to love one another as he loved us. Jesus never supported actions that harmed anyone Jew, Gentile, or anything in between.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.