politics

Chaplain Daily Touchpoint #352: Doing the Right Things for the Right Reasons

/ japfth / Leave a comment

Bottom line up front: Doing the Right Things for the Right Reasons

Intro: One of the greatest of satirists, Ambrose Bierce, wrote the following: “Politics: A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles, the conduct of public affairs for private advantage.”

That qualifies as a mic drop in my book. Regardless of our political affiliations, I’m sure we could all agree that politics is, to employ an oxymoron, pretty ugly. I have a couple of cousins who are lifelong lawyers, but one of them is very drawn to politics. I love my cousins, and have many fond memories of fishing and hunting together when we were all boys in middle GA, and of being together during holidays over at Momo and Granddaddy’s house for the best food this side of anywhere. If you know what iron skillet-baked cornbread is with fatback in the collards, we may be of the same ilk. Anyway, we were all boys in those days but I would not trade those times for anything. They are sweet, sweet memories.

But I wonder sometimes what it is that draws some folks to politics. I know Christians are commanded to pray for our leaders and those in authority. Scripture is clear (Rom 13:1-7; 1 Tim 2:1-2). But as for me, I just could not pursue politics. I think it comes down to one’s motives, really. Do we do the right things with the right reasons? Motive is key. What’s one’s motive? Do we really aim for genuineness and selfless service or is politics exactly what Ambrose Bierce said it is? You might be able to infer my instinctual answer.

Encouragement: When Paul was passing his baton of ministry to Timothy, he (Paul) wrote, “The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith” (1 Tim 1:5). That’s foundational. In modern parlance, it’s doing the right things for the right reasons.

Chaplain Daily Touchpoint #313: The Root of Righteousness

/ japfth / Leave a comment

Introduction: What does this level of violence reveal about a people? Like many others, I am aghast at the assassination (on video) of Charlie Kirk. He was a model of open debate. He traveled to colleges and universities, supposedly institutions grounded in the free and open exchange of ideas, and welcomed Q & A times with students and faculty. He made a huge cultural impact. The POTUS is even to bestow the nation’s highest honor upon Charlie soon. It’s a posthumous award, of course, but it speaks to Charlie’s testimony as a Christian, husband, dad, and kind warrior for open debate. But I again ask the question: What does this level of violence reveal about a people?

Just weeks ago, a ‘trans’-identifying person (Hale), murdered three children, three adults, and injured scores more at the Covenant School in Nashville, TN. And on 27 August 2025, Robert Westman, another ‘trans’-identifying person, murdered two children and injured twenty-one adults at Annunciation Catholic School, a Roman Catholic school in Minneapolis, MN. And this week, Charlie Kirk bled out on camera for all to see. It was horrifying to watch. He bled out because it appears he was shot by a young man whose shell casings are stamped with Leftist slogans. There’s even video of people cheering the public assassination of Kirk. Regardless of one’s politics, that ought to break our hearts, that folks can be that cold-hearted and blinded by ideology. But Charlie’s legacy will endure because he was an open book. He, contrary to his haters, welcomed open dialogue and debate. In fact, a theme that recurred through his ministry was that if we stop talking to one another, violence is next. And he was proven, yet again, to be correct. He has now been made a cultural martyr for conservatism and open debate and dialogue.

Scripture: Solomon wrote “No one is established by wickedness, but the root of the righteous will never be moved” (Pr 12:3, ESV). Charlie has been murdered by one, it appears for now, anyway, to be yet another bitter Leftist bent upon destruction. I’m sure he’ll be caught soon. But we’ll see how it all plays out. What is clear, however, is that Charlie was right: if and when courteous dialogue and rigorous honest debate are squashed, violence is creeping at the door.

Encouragement: The “root of the righteous will never be moved,” however, just as Scripture teaches. You can murder truth and truth-tellers, but both abideth still.

Religion and Politics, Part two:

/ japfth / 1 Comment

In about a year from now, America will have a new president, and the differences between political parties and worldviews could not be clearer. Many Leftists/liberalimgress/Democrats are calling for more government, more taxes, the redistribution of wealth, political correctness, and socialized health care. Conservatives/Republicans are calling for less government, lower taxes, wealth creation via private enterprise, freedom from political correctness, and free market competition in health care.

I was born in the late 1960s, so I didn’t really begin to understand political worldviews, or take much of an interest in government, until high school. Then I was working my first real jobs, where I’d look at an actual paystub. I learned the hard way about taxes. Federal, state, and local taxes were taken out. Social security taxes were taken out. Insurance costs, etc. I learned, painfully, about the difference between gross and net income. And I learned that the way voters thought (the worldviews) affected the ways they voted.

Several weeks ago, I wrote about how Christians should vote. Specifically, my concern was the question of criteria. What parameters should Christians bring to bear upon the ballot box? A few fundamentals I suggested included character, the sanctity of human life, and respect for the U.S. Constitution.

Now that we have witnessed the Leftists debate (Hillary Clinton, Martin O’Malley, and Bernie Sanders) their worldviews are quite similar. Homosexual rights (sexuality now is akin to one’s race in Leftism; it can even be changed); women should be able to abort their babies at any time they want; wealthy individuals and their companies should be taxed as punishment for their success; more taxes should be levied from working Americans; climate change (it used to be called “global warming”) is crouching at the door of the planet if we don’t leave off using fossil fuels; Islamic terrorists will somehow quit slaughtering the non-Islamic world if we just have more meetings; and America does not really need to enforce current immigration laws. We don’t need borders, after all, as that could hurt people’s feelings. Borders might suggest that we’re a nation of laws. And of course, only certain lives matter. Cops’ lives apparently don’t matter as much as other lives.

We’ve also witnessed the conservatives/Republicans debate. They, too, dovetailed in many areas. Strong national defense, the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, immigration policies should be enforced, as their lack of enforcement undermines the very essence of law and the U.S. Constitution; lower taxes; Islamic terror should be defeated, not placated; and all lives matter. As to “climate change,” they agree that the science is anything but monolithic in demonstrating man’s impact upon the planet; therefore, we should research clean energy, but not cripple the world’s engines that run on fossil fuels.

There are nuances among both parties and both worldviews, but no honest person can deny the collision of worldviews represented by those on the Left/liberal side of things vs. the Right/conservative side. I do not know of a more polarized time in our culture than what we’re witnessing.

Has America been “fundamentally transformed”? If you had told me as a boy that in my lifetime, women would marry women, I would have been incredulous. If you had told me that men would be vying for legal sanction to marry boys (yes, it’s true), I would not have believed you. If you had told me that the U.S. Capitol would have been lit in celebration of the nation’s Supreme Court legalizing what has always been deemed abominable, I would have said you were in jest.

But I would have been wrong. Polygamy, pederasty, fluid gender identity, etc. are all in the cultural discussion today. Infanticide and Planned Parenthood videos don’t even shock us into repentance. What does that say about the worldviews some of these candidates have?

I hope to vote for righteousness next year, but I submit to you that all worldviews are not the same. May we at least be honest enough about the worldviews at stake.

The Forbidden Topics: Religion and Politics (Part one)

/ japfth / 2 Comments

 

imgresimgres-1No, I would not presume to tell anyone for whom to vote, but I would presume to speak to Christians about biblical guidelines for voting. Christians have an objective guide. Scripture is to inform our beliefs and behavior. In other words, the Christian worldview is to be shaped by the Bible. That means Christians are to be a discerning people. In a culture given over to superficiality, glitter, and celebrity, Christians ought to discern the differences between what God reveals as praiseworthy and what God reveals as wicked.

The media traffic in whipping up people’s emotions. The days of articulate, well-reasoned, thoughtful debates are long gone. I saw about three minutes of a recent debate, and that was about two minutes too long. Why? Instead of debate about substantial ideas, I heard almost nothing but ad hominem attacks. Interrupting one another, finger-pointing, crass language, and juvenile insults degraded the once noble office of U.S. president. So, what should the Christian do? Give up? No, I don’t think that is biblical. We are called to be good citizens, to pray for those in authority over us, and to live godly lives in an ungodly world (Mk 12:17; Rom 13; 1 Pt 2:13-17).

So what are some basic biblical guidelines for Christians when it comes to voting in this country, especially when our options are, to some degree, out of our control? I’m suggesting at least three here (more are to follow): character, a demonstrated commitment to life, and demonstrated commitment to upholding the Constitution. Other guidelines may follow in subsequent articles, but today my focus is theological/philosophical and specifically upon Christian U.S. voters.

First, character. Perhaps I can best illustrate what I mean via a real event that happened a few years ago when I was teaching a debate class to high school students. I asked the students (17 and 18-year olds) who they thought was one of America’s greatest presidents. Immediately, most of them said Bill Clinton. I said, “Okay, can you tell me why you think that?” Well, the class went quiet. I said, “Okay then, well what was Mr. Clinton known for?” Immediately, the class erupted in unison: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman!” They quoted Mr. Clinton’s own words. Thereafter, intelligent discussion ended. They began giggling and joking coarsely about body fluids, interns, and how Bill was a real hero to them. Now, think about this. When teenagers cannot tell you anything substantive about the U.S. presidency except that one of their heroes was an adulterer who lied under oath, what does that reveal about the character deficit in the nation? Not only does the office become cheapened, but the electorate becomes coarsened. Discernment is lost, celebrity is king, and we all lose. It’s important not to confuse categories. The students were, after all, teenagers. Most were not Christians, so I don’t want to stretch the illustration too far. I merely want to suggest to you that lack of character cheapens us all.

For voting Christians, therefore, we ought to look for a man/woman of character. Even though our options for president may not be Christians, we ought to discern the difference between those given over to wickedness and lying versus those who are men/women of character and who are faithful to their words. Is the person running for office noteworthy for his integrity, his fidelity to his promises, his character? Scripture calls us to discern. “Many a man proclaims his own steadfast love, but a faithful man who can find?” (Pr 20:6 ESV).

Second, commitment to life. I’m sure I will take some hits for this, but that is fine. If a man/woman asking for my vote does not protect the sanctity of life, I cannot support him. Not only is the sanctity of human life in our Declaration of Independence (“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”), it is fundamentally biblical. Scripture teaches that all human life is created in the image of God: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gen 1:27). This foundational truth is non-negotiable for the biblical Christian because in it, we see that all human life has value. Because humans are created by the design of the holy, loving, and perfect God, human life is not to be sold for a profit by Planned Parenthood, to be prostituted, to be desecrated or discarded in rubbish tins.

The fact that we are living in a nation where 177 Democrats (no Republicans) recently voted that infanticide is the right of the mother, is disgraceful. Let that sink in, folks. On September 18, 2015, when H.R. 3504 went before the House for a vote to protect babies born alive after their mothers’ attempts to abort failed, and the child was born alive, 177 Democrats voted that the mother should be allowed to legally have her child aborted…even after birth. In other words, the child is alive, outside of the womb, and 177 Democrats voted it’s alright to murder it. You can link to HR 3504 via a simple Google search.

A political party in our nation says that a mother can deliver her child, then have it murdered, and it’s the woman’s right. If that is not barbarism, nothing is. For the Christian voter, the man/woman who would defend such a practice ought to be excluded from consideration as president. We remember that 6,000,000 Jews were murdered in WWII, right? Yet since 1973, just in America, 59,000,000 million babies have been murdered. Today alone in America, 2,900 babies have been murdered. That is a holocaust. If that barbarism does not convict you, I don’t know what will. Ten times as many babies are murdered as the number of Jews murdered in WWII, and yet there is an entire U.S. political party who defends this? The nation that murders its mothers’ wombs cannot, in good conscience, ask for God’s blessing. What would be just is God’s judgment. The biblical worldview teaches that God is the Author of life (Acts 3:15), and that life is sacred: “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made” (Ps 139:13-14a).

Third, the U.S. Constitution. If the person running for U.S. president views the Constitution as an antiquated document with no bearing upon governance of the nation, then Christian voters need to know that. I have paperback copies of the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution that I carry. When I’m sitting in traffic, or waiting in the optometrist’s office, or other places where I’m waiting, I reread them. If Americans do not know these documents, we are complicit in the continual downgrade of intelligent discussion. If candidates for political office oppose the Constitution, we need to be educated enough to recognize that, and vote accordingly.

There is much more to say about Christians in the voting booth. Christians need to discern; we need to recognize trees by their fruit; we need to evaluate demonstrated behavior rather than stated belief. We need to recognize, before it’s too late, that “He [God] makes nations great, and he destroys them; he enlarges nations, and leads them away. He takes away understanding for the chiefs of the people of the earth and makes them wander in a pathless waste” (Job 12:23-24 ESV). God is sovereign over historical events, but Christians are to be articulate and thoughtful citizens and voters. We need to learn that a person’s character, his/her demonstrated behavior when it comes to the sanctity of life, and his/view of the U.S. Constitution (at a minimum for Americans) reveal much. To all who will do the work of thinking deeply and praying for the next leaders of this nation, may we be faithful, to bear witness, and to live “godly lives in the present age” (Titus 2:12).