I want to be clear here: I am not against saying, "the Bible requires you to vote for/against this candidate or this policy" if there is clearly some teaching at stake. I think that the Bible's application sometimes needs to be pointed and specific, and I do think that occasionally it needs to be pointed and specific in the area of politics. What I am against is the use of God or the Bible in an attempt to manipulate people.
That is why I object to former President Barack Obama's tweets yesterday in response to a shooting in a Texas church. This is what he said:
We grieve with all the families in Sutherland Springs harmed by this act of hatred, and we’ll stand with the survivors as they recover...— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) November 6, 2017
Grief, condemnation, solidarity, and prayer are all appropriate. So is a reminder that action will be needed in response to the threat. My criticism is with the rush to propose a solution that God would supposedly approve of. Reducing violence is hardly a debatable goal, but reducing weaponry is. In the light of the weighty Constitutional, practical, and social questions involved, a unifying leader would have left such a specific proposal to the end of public discussion, not inserted it at the beginning. He would have stated it as a human policy solution, not as the infallible gift of divine wisdom. Just as in Pence's video, a politician is again adding to the words of God to lend credibility to his own private goals. May God rebuke them both.May God also grant all of us the wisdom to ask what concrete steps we can take to reduce the violence and weaponry in our midst.— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) November 6, 2017
