Can Evangelicals Be / Vote For Democrats?

Let’s take a look.  

The Bible says we Evangelicals should have a life that is worthy of the good news (Philippians 1:27). That includes a vote that is worthy of the good news. Meaning, we cannot vote for Kamala Harris.    

Therefore, if you vote for Kamala Harris, you are not an Evangelical.  

By way of reply, that’s a viciously circular argument insofar as it assumes what it needs to prove, namely that the Bible defines “Evangelical” someone whose life is worthy of the good news,” that voting Republican &/or otherwise supporting the Republican National Agenda adorns the Body of Christ, & that what the Bible, correctly exegeted, exposited, understood, & applied is congruent with American Conservatism. One wonders if Mr. Sey understands the term “Evangelical,” & how close he is to, like Greg Locke, & Landon Schott, coming to denying the sum & substance of the Gospel.    

The term “Evangelical,” isn’t a term that automatically attaches to “American Conservatism,” insofar at its root, it takes its definition from Isaiah 52 & Romans 10. 

And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” 

The good news that Paul has in mind is the gospel that God alone saves & that God via His goodness & grace frees us from our works righteousness.  At its very root lays an everlasting promise which carries a strong eschatological meaning & message — namely, God will free us from sin, death, demonic oppression, &, one day, from other forms of oppression like the warmongering, gluttony, sorcery, & systemic inquity that accrues to us both as individuals & in aggregate.  

In terms of Historical Theology, the term “Evangelical” refers to theology that most Protestants would consider acceptable as a credible profession of faith. For example, the 6 membership vows common to Westminster Confession Presbyterian churches + the theology contained a historic confession, like the First London Baptist Confession, or the 3 Forms of Unity, or the 2nd London Baptist Confession, or the Savoy Declaration, or the Philadelphia Confession are all good examples of the sort of theological confession that forms part of a credible profession of faith.   

In terms of Political Philosophy that has wed itself to theological Evangelicals (and, for many Evangelicals, vice versa), the term “Evangelical” is routinely defined in a manner that is congruent with the world’s ideas about the politics of people who are theological Evangelicals. For example, the term “Evangelical,” regardless of whether or not the allegation is true, is viewed as a predominantly White leaning theopolitical lobby/wing of the GOP & other small political sects & parachurch organizations.   

Sey believes that it is morally impossible to be a Theological Evangelical without being a Theopolitical Evangelical who affirms Sey’s  personal beliefs about abortion & any number of other issues. With that in mind, I can’t help but read the Westminster Confession of Faith (about 95 % of which I myself & the members of Philadelphia APC agree) & notice that the Heads of Doctrine that might attach to Sey’s pet sociopolitical issues are several headers below at least 19 to 20 higher order doctrines & about 3 Heads of Doctrine within the Confession do attach to the topics that drive Sey’s adherence to his peculiar sociopolitical beliefs. 

He’s doing what Finney (whom he quotes approvingly) did, namely going for the absolute lowest common denominator with respect to what constitutes a Theological Evangelical — and he does this in reductionistic fashion.  Finney’s Systematic Theology begins with Moral Government & drones on for several lectures before we see much of substance relative to doctrines that Charles Hodge & others considered of greater importance in a Systematic Theology.  

Don’t get me wrong , it’s not that Hodge & John L. Dagg didn’t believe Moral Government wasn’t important; rather they understood that a sound theological foundation is more fit to sustain Moral Government in the long run than a codified ethics textbook that veers into the major heads of doctrine second.    It’s also true that in the Judgment, the Bible depicts the Lord drawing distinctions between people based upon their ethics, but that doesn’t mean that He does so on the basis of works righteousness, ergo we shouldn’t either.   Whether or not someone is a “Bible believing” Christian is not a matter of their sociopolitical beliefs, it’s a matter of both what one believes & how one behaves — especially when it comes to beliefs & behaviors that are result of a deep seated penchant for works righteousness when it comes to both individual & corporate justification, sanctification, & glorification. 

Yes, you can be a Theological Evangelical & vote for Mrs. Harris, & to allege otherwise heads into the territory occupied by Greg Locke, Landon Schott, & the members of Reformation Charlotte who question if someone who votes Democrat is regenerate. On their view, if someone affirmed 95 % or more of the WCF, but disagreed with American Conservatism on social justice issues, abortion, &/of homosexuality, they are not Evangelicals —&— they are probably unregenerate. That’s right up there with Justin Peters assertions that homosexuality is a de facto sign of reprobation.    

As to abortion, as a reminder God doesn’t condemn & commend us without regard to our motives & purposes. I Samuel 15 clearly teaches that God commanded the deaths of infants, thereby proving that the early terming a pregnancy & an infant’s life is not murder regardless of motive & purpose.      

As to abortion, the Theopolitical response by a great many American Conservatives in the churches  was to seek to dismantle Roe v Wade, then, as an attempt to outlaw abortion altogether, let the states handle it.  Did anybody consult with the Lord & His Narrow Way on that particular strategem?  

How would that work in the Bible? Where does the Bible throw these issues to the 12 Tribes of Israel as a “tribal rights” issue? Nowhere!    

Abortion is a systemic social evil that, from a theologically conservative POV, should fall into the same category as divorce and slavery. In the Bible, laws regulating such evils were national, not just tribal.  Therefore, we shouldn’t regulate these issues via the States, while excluding the Federal Government; nor should we make a habit out of either excluding the Federal Government (as if many a supremacy clause did not exist), or allowing the States to dictate public policy to the Federal Government.   The Bible presents a largely top-down model for law making.   The Realm is a Constitutional Monarchy with an empowered God & Governor at its head.

In the Bible systemic issues arise out of economic conditions as well as other causes like warmongering and the loss of a society’s philosophical and theological underpinnings. How does the Bible deal with systemic problems, particularly during declension in both religious institutions and society as a whole?    

For example, according to Matthew 19, divorce is a concession to human hard heartedness.  The Penteteuch and the rest of the Bible regulate it tightly. In addition, chattel slavery was regulated regulated into indentured servitude. Also, the New Testament states slaves should seek their freedom in an orderly manner if possible. (Philemon, 1 Corinthians).    

Abortion should be regulated away just like debtors prisons and chattel slavery - but not made illegal. Abortion for any reason whatsoever isn’t biblical. However the Bible never says the early termination of a pregnancy is always murder. In 1 Samuel 15, Samuel commands the death of infants in war, & the Bible doesn’t state that the death of infants is always a capital crime like murder. It teaches that morality runs through motives, not just purposes & goals.  Neither does the Bible teach we should oppress women.    

Abortion laws must take all of this into account and carefully regulate abortion without criminalizing women and mansplaining abortion and Women’s Health. We should also work to make adoption more affordable.    

How does the Bible regulate systemic social evils like abortion? By making them universally illegal from the start, or does it do so by way of regulation of evils (like indentured servitude and divorce), while society grows up?    

It is well past time for Theopolitical Evangelicals take a long look in the mirror.  Mr: Sey’s article made it to the Christian Post.  You, the readers of The Prophetic Presbyterian & History Narrow Way ought to take a look at what goes on at the CP. 

Paul wrote the Corinthian church a letter exhorting them to deal with sexual immorality in their church, & their response was to point fingers at each other & the world around them. Every week, CP publishes a casualty list that runs through the moral failings of one or more theologically Evangelical public figures. In addition, the SBC is self-destructing, & Dark Providence is all around us. 

The American Church is falling apart from the inside out, & it’s being systematically dumbed down by political idolatry & bad theology — and sociopolitical liberals are not all to blame.    We can do better as a nation & people. It’s time we stop accusing each other based on our political ideas. It’s time to open up the Bible & understand it correctly, & that means getting rid of the sloganeering that indexes theological truth & accuracy & assumes that American Conservatism is the way to go.      If that means we wind up voting for Democrats, then sobeit. 

God bless us all, each & every one. Now go & sin no more.