The 1960’s TV show The Beverly Hillbillies included an interesting character named Jethro. As portrayed in the show, Jethro was not, well, the sharpest tool in the shed. But he was decent at having difficult conversations about life choices. For example, he once had this conversation with his Uncle Jed:

Jethro: “I hope this ain’t gonna break your heart, but I just gotta say it.” Uncle Jed: “Well come on, get it over with.” Jethro: “Uncle Jed, I decided I ain’t gonna be a brain surgeon.” Uncle Jed: “Well I reckon I can bear up under that.”

So, Jethro of Beverly Hillbillies fame is a good example of making difficult life choices, but he is not the only Jethro with that skill set. Moses’ father-in-law, who was also named Jethro, encouraged Moses to consider four criteria as he selected civic leaders. And his list of qualifications–what I have termed “Jethro’s Voting Guide”–can assist us in the complicated moral exercise of voting for civic officials in the United States.

In these difficult days, with trusted Christian leaders giving conflicting advice about voting, I know of only one thing to do–go back to Scripture. I hope the following is helpful in the sense that it gives a Biblical framework for choosing leaders. I understand that many Christians have already voted; but, unless you plan on moving out of the United States or dying before the next election (that was a joke, people!), this election will not be the last election you participate in. So, let’s look at some ancient wisdom for this election and every other. I will address each of the four criteria listed by Jethro and then address some commonly asked questions raised by this election cycle.

Jethro’s Voting Guide

Before I jump into this, I should note that The Good Citizen Project and the The Daniel Initiative in Indiana are non-partisan ministries, and I will not be telling you which party to vote for or which candidate to support. Rather, I intend to address the numerous and even conflicting moral and Biblical principles bound up in this exercise. My approach is to equip Christians with sound Biblical principles and then encourage them to apply those principles according to their conscience. That said, let’s jump in.

When Moses became overwhelmed with his responsibilities in leading the children of Israel and acting as a judge of their disputes, Jethro encouraged him to appoint officials to help bear the burden of leadership. Jethro told Moses, “…provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens: [a]nd let them judge the people at all seasons…” (Ex. 18:21).

Here’s a summary of those qualifications: we should choose elected officials based on (1) competence, (2) morality, (3) honesty and (4) financial integrity. Let’s take a closer look at each of these qualifications.

#1 Competence. Elected officials should be able or competent in their work. Candidates should evidence the requisite skills and experience to serve the office they seek. Sometimes, Christians overlook this qualification, but we shouldn’t. Competence is critical.

#2 Morality. Elected officials should fear God. In the context of a plural society, I analyze this qualification as follows: a candidate’s sense of right and wrong should be based on eternal principles and not the whims of society or their own self-interest. Public officials should understand their role as “God’s minister” for our good (Rom. 13) and that they are ultimately accountable to God for their actions. I am, of course, aware of and support the constitutional ban on religious tests as a requirement for public office. But I am not referring to formal government action in this section. Rather, I am setting out Biblical principles for Christians as they evaluate a candidate’s character and fitness for elected office. If a candidate’s moral compass predictably spins toward popularity over principle and power over service, then he or she is not fit for office. Further, government officials should promote that which is right, true and beautiful according to God’s definition. I have previously explained a star-shaped platform with five key issues that reflect God’s good design for human societies, and government officials should promote and defend these principles:

#3 Honesty. Candidates for elected office should display a high degree of and a deep regard for truthfulness. If a candidate has repeatedly or blatantly lied in public or private life, we should not entrust him or her with high office.

#4 Financial Integrity. Elected officials should hate covetousness. Candidates should evidence a deep commitment to serving the common good rather than their own financial interests.

In sum, Christians should prioritize competence, morality, honesty and financial integrity when they choose elected officials. Though other voting guides can be helpful, this Biblical guide should be the first one we consult. Now, unless Jesus is on the ballot, we will always be voting for the lesser of two or more “evils.” Every human being is fallen in some way. So, we should consider these flaws and failures in context and in conjunction with the qualifications set out above. That said, as Christians, we should never spray-paint over such failures as if they are not a problem or, in some cases, sinful. The better approach is to praise a candidate for actions that are in line with Scripture and question faults or actions that are not. Ultimately, we have to decide and cast our ballot, and we should consider all of the above factors when we do.

Next, let’s jump into some frequently asked questions. Note that I am moving from Biblical principles to my best efforts to apply those principles in public life.

FAQs

Should Christians engage in the two-party system?

In my opinion, yes. But we should review how we engage with political parties. We should be bending or moving the party platforms back toward God’s good design, but Christians in both parties have long been trained to be silent about morality in exchange for electoral victories. For far too long, the parties have assumed the support of Christians without giving more than lip service to Biblical values. That is primarily our fault, or at least it is our fault if we do not operate differently now.

Some Christians have chosen to vote for third-party candidates due to moral concerns with the two major parties or at least their Presidential candidates, and I respect that decision. But, for now, choosing to abandon the two primary parties would mean the forfeiture of almost all meaningful political influence in the United States and would cede control over the country’s future to those that hold a different worldview. If we lived in a European country under a proportional electoral system (where voters in minority parties still achieve representation in the legislature) rather than a winner-take-all plurality system, I might agree with the third-party approach. But my current view is that proper stewardship of our Christian citizenship in a democratic republic argues for participation in the two primary parties.

Do all Christians vote the same way? Can a person be a Christian and vote for the party you oppose?

I imagine that Christians that are members of the Republican party will point out quite forcefully that abortion and religious freedom are key reasons for abandoning the Democratic party. And I imagine that Christians that are members of the Democratic party will point out President Trump’s moral track record and Twitter account as reasons enough for abandoning the Republican party. But, just hold on a minute with the tar and feathers. This article is about Christian citizenship. So, as Christians, we should stop thinking about this primarily according to party lines and start analyzing this as members of the Body of Christ.

According to a Pew survey of validated voters in the 2016 election, Christians are deeply divided along racial and partisan lines. In 2016, approximately 96% of Black protestants (there was no category for “Black Evangelicals,” so “Black protestant” = Black Christians) voted for Hillary Clinton while 77% of White evangelicals voted for Donald Trump. Further, voters of other races (including Hispanics) largely split their votes, with 51% voting for Hilary Clinton and 46% voting for Donald Trump.[i] As noted by historian Thomas Kidd, this is nothing new. Orthodox or traditional Christians have never been politically unified in the United States.[ii]

I am always a little leery of stats and figures because they can be easily manipulated, and I am sure you are too. But I am confident that the above statistics prove my central premise: the gospel-preaching church in the United States is not politically unified.

With that in mind, we can continue our current approach of questioning the spiritual maturity and even orthodoxy of our brothers and sisters in Christ that vote differently than we do. Or, we can work to encourage each other to follow Jesus and to promote Biblical principles in our sphere of political influence.

Is there a time and place for encouraging fellow Christians to leave a party over unbiblical principles? Yes. Do I have strong opinions about the five key Biblical issues listed above and how they should impact public life? Absolutely. But, let me ask this. What would it take for you to change your political viewpoint on an issue that is not central to the gospel, such as tax policy or welfare programs? I imagine that the pain of death may not be sufficient to change your mind.

So, why do we expect blanket statements on social media outside of the context of a relationship to change a historic and present reality—political disagreements among Christians? A better approach is to encourage Christians in both parties to follow Jesus in how they engage in public life. Political affiliations and positions may change as a result of following Jesus; but I doubt the reverse is true.

What is the most pressing moral issue?

As Christians, we should not overlook pride (I John 2:16), narcissism (Jer. 9:23-24), sexual immorality (I Cor. 6:18), or disrespect/mistreatment of any person (Eph. 4:23). All of these behaviors are sinful, and they are corrosive to private and public life. But, the legal killing of unborn children made in the image of God is, in my opinion, the most pressing moral issue of our times (Ps. 139; Jer. 1:5). A focus on the proper role of church and state is critical here.

The church’s role is to fulfill the Great Commission and to do good works that point people to Jesus (Matt. 28:16-20; Matt. 5:16). According to Scripture, all sin, no matter how slight or heinous, falls short of God’s standard of perfection and requires judgment and death (Rom. 3:23). But for Christ’s redemptive work on the cross, we would all be bound for an eternity away from God (Rom. 6:23). So, in this sense, the boy who has a hand in the cookie jar before dinner and the dictator who has a hand in murdering millions are in the same position–they have sinned and desperately need God’s forgiveness and grace.

The state’s role is different. Government was ordained by God to punish evil and to promote good (Rom. 13; 2 Peter 2:13-14). And, in government’s role of restraining evil and promoting good, there is a hierarchy of criminal behavior and corresponding punishments. Exodus 21 is an example of God setting out different punishments for different crimes, and all states have differing levels of misdemeanors and felonies that reflect the seriousness of the crimes and weigh the intent of the person that commits the crime. So, once again, pride (I John 2:16), narcissism (Jer. 9:23-24), sexual immorality (I Cor. 6:18), and disrespect/mistreatment of any person (Eph. 4:23) are all sinful and corrosive behaviors. But a disrespectful tweet does not dismember a baby. Narcissism does not slaughter more than 60 million children. And adultery offends the image of God but does not destroy innocent image bearers. In the Noahic covenant, which predates the Ten Commandments, God condemned murder because “… in the image of God made He man” (Gen. 9:6). Therefore, in my opinion, the sanctity of life is the most pressing moral issue.

The most effective legal strategy for preserving life is, of course, a matter of debate. Even with the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett, there is no guarantee that Roe v. Wade will be overturned. From a policy perspective, state legislatures have done the heavy lifting, passing 288 new abortion-related restrictions from 2011 to 2015. And, from a cultural perspective, the real catalyst for change on the life issue is the national pregnancy care center movement. But there is a clear distinction between (1) pursuing differing strategies for ending legal abortion and (2) stating unequivocal support for ending unborn lives.

That said, Christians should recognize the danger of a singular or primary focus on the life issue. This focus can lead to an assumed connection between Christian voters and a particular party and candidate. As I stated above, we should promote all of the Biblical principles in our star-shaped platform regardless of which party or candidate supports them. So, in my opinion, Christians should promote the sanctity of human life while critiquing immoral behavior and pushing candidates and parties to address all of the elements of the church’s public witness. I recognize that other Christians land in a different place, and I respect that decision. But, I am commanded to be fully persuaded in my own mind (Rom. 14:5) and will give an account to God one day for my vote in 2020. This is my best effort to navigate the competing moral considerations and promote a citizenship that is worthy of the gospel (Phil. 1:27).

I went first and shared my thoughts. What are are yours?