I recently received an email with a link to an article by
Wayne Grudem entitled, "
Why Evangelicals Should Support Mitt Romney." Let me preface my comments here by saying that I am terribly disillusioned by any and all politics; I don't think we should bury our heads in the sand, but, at the same time, I see very few real changes happen when "my side" wins elections. That said, I highly regard Dr. Grudem, and I thought this might be worth reading.
Grudem begins with a clear statement of his position on the matter:
As an evangelical professor of Bible and theology, I have decided to support Mitt Romney for President (even though he is a Mormon) for two old-fashioned reasons: First, he is the best-qualified candidate, and second, he holds moral and political values consistent with those in the Bible.
The rest of the article reads like a systematic theology paper. He clearly addresses why he thinks Romney is the best-qualified candidate, why he thinks Romney holds values consistent with the Bible, questions about Romney's religious views and their impact, and finally Romney's ability to win.
I thought it was helpful. What do you think?
Todd
HT: Thanks Justin G. for the email!
2 comments:
I think he could use a copy of The Fallacy Detective.
"The Bible tells us to pray not just for Christians who happen to have government offices, but “for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way" (1 Timothy 2:2). It is not just Christians in government but all governing authorities who are “instituted by God” (Romans 13:1) and whom Paul can call “God’s servant for your good” (Romans 13:4)."
Christians didn't exactly get to vote for their favorite Roman to be emperor. There is a real difference in being subject to current authority and selecting the next authority. Remember that Israel decided they wanted a king(man)to lead them. What were the consequences?
I believe that nations cannot be Christian - only individuals are. Nations are man-made creations. When we elect leaders, they are always fallible sinners. Every one of them will have faults from an "evangelical" position. Is a rich, smart, double-minded man that believes in missing gold plates "better" than a gun-grabbing abortophile?
I see the United States of America not as instituted by God (a Christian Nation), but a creation of men, many of whom believed in God (a nation of Christians). It appears that Grudem believes the same based on his litmus test statement. As citizens, we are bound to its original agreements - so I am a constructionist. I can agree with Grudem there. However, I believe that Ron Paul best fits those interests and has demonstrated it through his impeccable voting record and legislation he has sponsored over the years. Grudem would say he doesn't have a chance, so he is willing to compromise to "win". I am sick of that game and supporting any of the self-serving political parties. These days, "solving large problems" (and I could care less about the absolutely corrupt IOC and their games) usually means compromising liberty in the forms of restricted freedom(s) and/or increased taxes so that government can "fix" things. I think Romney's record reflects that he is willing to do both.
I'm not so sure I support Grudem in this. While Romney is against and for things that I am against and for, there is still the issue of him being a Mormon. When we as believers (as a whole and within our specific church) talk against Mormonism and pass out DVDs to the community that shows how Mormonism is wrong...then what kind of message do we send if we then rally behind a Mormon?
I have to wonder why evangelical Christian leaders have not been voicing support for Mike Huckabee...who holds the same conservative beliefs and is a Southern Baptist ordained minister.
Post a Comment