Political Musings

“The powers that be are ordained of God.”

In light of the election coming up and the direction our country may head, what does that mean?

If it’s taken at face value and applied universally it means the status quo in government should never be challenged by God’s people. I heard a preacher say once that our Founding Fathers were sinning by breaking away from dictatorship (and consequently establishing religious liberty) because they challenged “the powers that be.” That’s one way to look at it.

But then Ehud was sinning also when he assassinated Eglon. And Joshua when he overthrew the Canaanites. And Esther when she tried to stop the genocide ordered by Haman. So it can’t mean God disapproves of us challenging evil governments.

We tend to think “ordained” means “authorized and approved.” It really means “arranged”—at least in this instance.

God has a plan and that plan involves not only His people, but His enemies as well. He is writing (actually has written) a great novel, and like any novel it would not be great if it didn’t have villains and tragedy as well as heroes and triumph. God arranged for Nebuchadnezzar to come to power—and He also arranged his downfall. He arranged for Hitler to come to power—and also arranged his downfall.

If He arranges for a socialist raised in Muslim schools to become the nominal leader of America, that doesn’t mean He approves of Obama’s actions--or that we must all passively consent to every anti-American, anti-Christian proposal that comes out of his administration. It means it is part of the plot, part of God’s temporary arrangement.

We still have to play our own role in the story, regardless. Part of my role as a Christian will be to vote against Obama in two weeks. But I won’t be depressed about a negative outcome because God is writing a story for His people and it doesn’t always rely on politicians and nation-states.

In any event, we shouldn’t complain too much about media bias or crooked community organizing or leftist textbooks unless we’re willing to do something about it. The truth is, the anti-Christian leftists had a sense of dominion the last one hundred years and Christians did not. I’m not saying that Christians should focus exclusively on influencing civil institutions; but if we aren’t going to be the salt of world, we can't complain that the world has lost its savor. And it’s difficult to function as salt unless you put yourself in a saltshaker.

Do you think the early apostles, if they were alive today, would utilize the internet? Would try to get on radio or cable TV? Would go into schools and universities? Would publish? Would hold forth in front of a microphone on the steps of the U.S. Capitol? Not to advocate for political change; but to spread the gospel of the kingdom and change the hearts of men. Political change is secondary or even tertiary and won’t come about anyway unless the hearts of men are changed. That’s what happened in the American Revolution, which followed many years of spiritual revival in the colonies.

Anyway, I’m not sure I’ve done anything but muddy the waters further on this topic, but I’ll leave you with this anecdote:

“And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them, saying, ‘Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? And, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us’. Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, ‘We ought to obey God rather than men’” (Acts 5: 27-29).

In this instance, who were “the powers that be”? The council or the apostles?