In my previous column, I asked why God permits the wicked to win elections. A reader responded: “Why do you ask this when James Talarico wins, but not when Trump wins?” He then listed what he considers Trump’s personal moral failings. The objection shifted the focus from policy to personality.
The question became sharper when Ross Douthat asked President Trump whether he could forgive his enemies. Trump answered, “I probably cannot do that, no, because I do hate some of my enemies and I always will.” His remarks at Charlie Kirk’s memorial service had suggested as much. A Christian cannot simply dismiss that answer. But does it settle the question of how Christians should judge political leaders?
Some evils are worse than others. Beware.
You may remember when JD Vance stirred up the left by talking about the order of love. Love moves outward in concentric circles. We do not love everyone in the same way. We love our families and neighbors differently from complete strangers on the other side of the world.
In a related way, there is an order of evil. Every sin deserves the wrath of God, both in this life and the next. Yet not all sins are equally grave. The Westminster Shorter Catechism, Question 83, says, “Some sins in themselves, and by reason of several aggravations, are more heinous in the sight of God than others.”
What makes some sins more heinous? The Westminster Larger Catechism identifies aggravating circumstances: the position of the person committing the sin, the person against whom it is committed, and the harm it causes. It specifically identifies offenses against Christ and his grace, as well as sins committed by those who guide others. A false teacher who leads thousands away from Christ commits an offense with consequences far beyond his private life.
Think of Christianity and the culture it produces as a building. Some beliefs are more foundational than others. Striking at those foundations threatens the entire structure and everyone who relies on it.
Love is directed toward the good. When you tell someone “I love you,” you want what is good for that person. But if you do not know what is good, you cannot love another correctly. You may have good intentions and still lead someone away from what is truly good. Good intentions, as the saying goes, pave the road to hell.
If the order of love begins with what is most central to our lives, the order of evil begins by attacking what is most central. The Shorter Catechism opens with the question, “What is the chief end of man?” Its answer is that man’s chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever. It begins there because everything else depends on knowing the highest good.
Augustine made a related point about evil. Evil has no independent substance; it is the absence or corruption of good. A counterfeit seeks to resemble the real thing while lacking its true value. Evil often works the same way. Its appeal comes from the good it imitates. That is what makes the counterfeit so dangerous: Evil need not announce itself as evil.
RELATED: Why does God allow the wicked to win elections?
Sometimes evil appears openly, in direct attacks on Christ or the Bible. Those attacks harm people at different stages of faith and can have consequences beyond the church.
More often, evil twists something good into a counterfeit. The imitation may still look attractive, but something essential has changed. Politicians can operate this way. They appeal to marriage, family, love of neighbor, education, and fairness, while detaching those goods from the highest good and making them serve changing human desires. A promise of fairness means little until we know whose claims will be honored, whose will be denied, and by what principle. The appealing word alone settles nothing.
To recognize the order of evil, we must be able to judge between good and evil. Our culture often treats Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:1 as a prohibition against making moral judgments at all. Yet later in the same chapter, Jesus warns: “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves” (Matthew 7:15). We must distinguish the true prophet from the false one.
How does this apply to politics? We must ask whether a politician understands what is good for a country, whether his promises serve that good, and whether he is offering a convincing counterfeit. That requires recognizing the assumptions behind political claims, distinguishing things that appear alike, and judging the wisest means of achieving good ends.
RELATED: Why Christians lose elections
For example, on the Texas House floor in 2021, James Talarico declared that “God is nonbinary.” In a May CBS News interview, he called that remark “intentionally provocative” and referred to some past statements as “cringey comments.” But he maintained that “God can’t be defined by human categories,” invoking Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
Yet God tells us to use human language when he calls himself “Father.” Talarico quotes the Bible to undermine what the Bible says about God and about us. He also cites Scripture to defend government policy — something the left often says the right should not do.
Nor does the Bible excuse a ruler’s personal sins. Trump’s refusal to forgive his enemies deserves moral scrutiny. But examining personal conduct does not relieve us of the duty to examine the principles a politician advocates and the consequences of putting those principles into practice. We must judge both.
Jesus’ warning about wolves in sheep’s clothing is especially serious when those claiming religious authority lead others into error. James 3:1 warns that teachers face stricter judgment. The more influence a teacher has, the greater the harm when he uses that influence to undermine the gospel. A false teaching about Christianity’s foundations is not simply another private indiscretion.
Some evils are worse than others. Beware.
Continue reading...
[H/T Blaze Media]
