John Calvin, Clintons and Trump

Why Christians had no problem voting for Trump

perfectchaosMany Democrats (and some "NeverTrumper" Republicans) seem to be perplexed over how Christians could have voted for Trump. The Democrats will claim there are situational ethics going on that allows people to condemn the corruption of Hillary Clinton and yet ignore the corruption of Donald Trump. Rather, since many Democrats are not religious or at least not Protestants (JFK was Roman Catholic, Harry Reid is Mormon, Obama seems like his religion is contrived Social Justice); Democrats don't understand the Calvinistic underpinnings of American Protestantism. Calvinism simplified sees all humans as fallen or corrupt in nature. All humans are not naturally "good" but by nature "bad". So, a Christian waiting for the "good" candidate is an impossibility; there is none good, no not one (Romans 3:10). With this, a Christian must decide which "bad" candidate to elect. It is a deeper variation of the "lesser of two evils" concept. This conflict is the reason some Christians don't vote at all and leave civil
government to its own devices.


But lesser of two evils merely exposes the Christian to the dilemma of voting in the first place. If we can't support a righteous candidate then perhaps we shouldn't vote at all. And that is exactly what happens, many Christians will not vote if they see both candidates as corrupt. The reality is, both candidates are ALWAYS corrupt; at least as far as their nature goes. Next comes individual actions. While the Bible doesn't typically rank a sin as worse than another, except perhaps calling some sins "abominable", we humans still try to rank which sin is worse than another then we tolerate the candidate with the more tolerable sins. Instead, Calvinists should already see all candidates are equally fallen, equally corrupt. Individual actions should not matter as much as the ideas the candidate wants to implement. Especially since there is really no way we can ever know all the individual sins of the candidates. Nor his or her heart (Jer 17:9). Talk about engaging in situational ethics. Trying to figure out if your chosen candidate is lying is difficult, especially as the media we consume may be biased.


In politics, people like to shame other people for being "ideologues" but in reality politics is all about ideas. There is a reason various parties become associated with the ideas they support. Democrats might be thought of as pro-abortion and pro-socialism while Republicans might be thought of as pro-life and pro-freemarket. Whether these associated ideas are consistent or accurate with each party's actual platform, it is the impression they emanate. So, everyone is either an ideologue to some degree or a complete chaotic schizophrenic. We support things, not just candidates based on whether the stated ideological agenda supports our own. To pretend differently is dishonest at worst or naive at best.


A Calvinistic Christian need not defend why he or she "voted for a corrupt candidate" since in the Calvinist view all candidates are corrupt. We merely need to state how and why think our elected candidate will advance the ideas we want into tomorrow and beyond. So when people ask about how we can ignore Trump's affair with "Stormy Daniels" while criticizing Bill Clinton for his sexual relations with "that woman"; Monica Lewinsky we Calvinists can boldly say that we realize all candidates are corrupt and we have no desire to go through ranking which sins are worse than others but rather we seek to advance the ideas we see as beneficial to our and our descendants' future. If we had to wait for a sinless candidate, we'd have to wait for Jesus to run for president and we don't think that will happen. In fact, it has been one stratagem to cause Christians to retreat from politics, education and entertainment -- make it all so unpalatable that we stop engaging. Whether we Christians engage or not, the corruption will remain since it is the core of humanity, but if we dropout then our tomorrow will be much different than we'd like. Finally, as Calvinism also advocates that God plans all things, some people might claim it is then pointless for a Calvinist to worry about effecting tomorrow. While we hold God's Sovereign control as a key tenant of our Faith, we couple that with the command to also call evil evil and good good. (Is. 5:20) If an idea promotes evil (such as abortion) then we should call it evil so that the idea does not carry on into tomorrow.

Add new comment

COMMENT POLICY philosophy of transparency, honesty, and liberty allows for guests to make comments without registration or login. Note all comments will be moderated but most legitimate comments will be published even if critical. -- Thanks for commenting - RECENT COMMENTS