Lesser of Two Evils Again

                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                              

An Aussie Christian blogger I hadn't run across before said (in another context) that a quote by Spurgeon appeared often on social media during last year's presidential campaign: "Of two evils choose neither."

I'd not seen the Spurgeon quote before: perhaps because I go on facebook no more often than I stroll through a sewer, and deliberately avoided it during the election season.  But Spurgeon's quote stated fairly well the conclusion I came to at that time, after hearing many Christian friends rationalize their vote for Trump by the "lesser of two evils" thinking.  So I set out to verify Spurgeon's quote.

In his "The Salt-Cellars," p. 297, Spurgeon did indeed write, "Of two evils choose neither. Don't choose the least, but let all evils alone."  (He credits that wisdom to "John Ploughman:" but in the introduction to his book of that name, says "John Ploughman" is his pseudonym.)

(One blogger claimed that the quote was being misused to discourage people from voting, because Spurgeon taught that people should vote.  He also claimed that what was being posted on social media was a different quote by a contemporary writer, John Marcavage: "Of two evils choose neither.  Christians must turn from the endless cycle of voting for the lesser of evils and expecting an unrighteous act to produce a righteous result. From a communist to a cultist, choosing the lesser of two evils is still evil, and never should we do evil that good may come.”

I find Marcavage's thought preferable to Spurgeon's, since it also warns against the related "do evil that good may come" teaching...another false rationale many Christian friends gave for voting for Trump...condemned in Romans 3:8.  But whether or not being misused, my purpose was only to verify Spurgeon's quote was genuine before I used it, and it was.)

I had come to the same conclusion as Spurgeon: though the way I put it was that operating by "lesser of two evils" thinking always results in our choosing evil, knowing it IS evil.

The enemy is infinitely subtle in his deceptions.  The “father of lies” has practiced his “skill” on human beings since the Garden of Eden, and he's incredibly more successful at it than any of us are at keeping ourselves from deception.  Any of us can be deceived by him to make a wrong choice.

By definition, we are deceived any time we trust ourselves to make a decision without exercising, and heeding, the Spirit’s discernment: a foolishness which opens us to greater deception, which deception always produces sin.

We don't ordinarily sin because we deliberately choose to do evil; rather, that we choose to do what we are mistaken in believing is good.  The template for producing sin is that we are persuaded, and convince ourselves, that some evil is, or could be, or would be, actually “good.”  That's where the enemy ordinarily operates.

And very successfully.  With Eve in the Garden, for example, when he persuaded her that disobeying God would confer God-like knowledge.  With many "Christian Conservatives," for example, when he persuaded them that electing Trump would result in "conservative" Supreme Court justices, who would outlaw abortion.  Again, see scripture's condemnation of this "do evil to do good" rationalization in Romans 3:8.

But choosing an evil because it is a "lesser" evil is a different order of sin, greater than being led to do evil by our (hopefully momentary) spiritual blindness that it is good.  When we choose "the lesser of two evils," we willfully choose evil...knowing it IS evil.

If we believe circumstances exist in which we "have to" do evil, we acknowledge that satan is the effectual ruler of all things, and God is powerless against him.  God lied to us, saying He gave us a choice between good and evil, if satan can create situations in which no choice for good exists, and yet we "have to" choose.

Our beloved brother Tim ("Onesimus") in Australia made a comment that seemed to cap all my thinking about the deep consequences of believing the "lesser of two evils" deception.  He pointed out yesterday that what he sees happening in America (and having an even-closer view than he does, I'd whole-heartedly agree with him) is more than mistaken moral vision, greater even that foolish resignation at “having to” do evil.

What Tim saw, and saw truly, is that the "active support and promotion" of evil manifested in many American Christians' "political activism" is a quantum step beyond being deceived by the enemy, to joining the enemy.

I've been concerned at seeing that very thing among Christians I know.  Christians who last year reluctantly voted for Trump as "the lesser of two evils" evidenced they could still recognize evil.   But many of them...perhaps because their pride will not let them admit they did wrong...have now become staunch defenders of his daily lies, and his evil-intentioned actions.

That so-called "Evangelical base," professing to follow Christ while (sometimes even by) "active support and promotion" of evils committed by members of "their" politicians and "their" political faction, are becoming increasingly hardened in their rationalizing, acceptance, and love of evil.  The enemy is increasingly successful, through political deception, in creating a "church" bearing Christ's name which serves evil.

There is no reason to believe the enemy will abandon the tactic which has worked so well for him.  We should expect he will continue to practice it, in hopes of leading more Christians astray.  Christians who have their hearts set on following Christ must be even more alert and discerning about the deceptions the enemy will continue to try to insinuate into our thinking through politics in the coming days.

"Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves."     --  Romans 14:22

                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                              

What Has Christ To Do With Self-Deception ?

Christ is Who He IS.  That's what "I AM THAT I AM" means.

Our identity derives from His.  Acting in His Spirit, a Christian "puts on Christ," becoming one who is Who Christ IS.  Modifying the reality of our identity makes of a Christian one who Christ is not. 

This is a major problem for American Christians, many of whom choose to identify as "conservative Christians."

The problem is, first of all, that "conservative" is a political denominator.  Christians were led to so think themselves by politicians, and the politicians' followers in Christian "leadership:" not by scripture's affirmation.  Modifying their identity in this unscriptural ways, American Christians have foolishly chosen to take their identity from a deeply unChristian political faction, and its unrighteousness...rather than from Christ.

But the greater problem is that "conservative Christianity" modifies Christianity (and Christians) by a lie...contrary Christ's "Spirit of Truth."

"Conservative" Christians use that modifier to pridefully distinguish themselves from those they call "liberal" Christians.  By "liberal Christians," they mean those who don't believe the Bible is fully God-breathed, or Jesus' mother was not technically a "virgin," or Christ is not literally returning at God's appointed end-time, etc.

I leave it to any Christian who reads here: are such unbelievers in any sense "Christians" !?!?  Is it not a lie to denominate them so, in order to distinguish yourself from them ?  Isn't "Christian," unmodified, the express and complete distinction from "unbeliever" ?

What is the reality of "conservative" Christianity, except that it deceives Christians about who they really are ?

The Problems of "Christian Conservatism"

"Conservative Christianity" has always seemed a problem terminology. We know what its adherents intend it to mean: bible-believing Christianity. But the appended political modifier always raises a question: as opposed to. . . ?

The implied answer, of course, is "liberal Christianity." By the definition "conservative" Christians wish to claim for themselves, "liberal" Christianity must logically be Christianity that DOESN'T believe scripture, and DOESN'T follow scripture's teachings. That's a problem. None of my "conservative" friends would consider such a thing Christianity at all...as I don't...yet their self-identification as "conservative Christians" is based on what manifestly cannot be, being so.

Probably few "conservative Christians" give any thought to the logical problem. What they can't miss, however, is that by identifying themselves with a modifier they proclaim themselves different, and separate, from other "Christians." Their intent is that we perceive them as they perceive themselves: a class of more-truly scriptural Christians (moreso than any others).

Surely they can't miss either, that desire to identify oneself as more scriptural, more true to the faith, oozes self-pride. And self-pride's manifestation in the Body of Christ is factionalism and divisiveness...contrary the unity Jesus prayed for us ("...that they may all be one; even as You, Father,... and I..." John 17:21) Can there be any regard in which the enemy more grievously wounds the Church than in deceiving believers to think of themselves proudly as " the real Christians" ? None of the evil doctrines of "conservatism" in which he misleads American Christians do as great harm to the Church as the enemy's assault on our unity in Christ with others who are in Him.

Honest criticism of any group must examine its teachings as formulated by its intelligent and articulate adherents. A "conservative Christian" friend who is both has written about what he considers essentially "conservative" in his beliefs: it's a good starting-point. This seems to be his central statement of that philosophy:

What then am I trying to “conserve” as a conservative Christian? In a nutshell, I want to protect the liberty provided by the Constitution and Bill of Rights that allows Christians and all other Americans to live peaceably, under the rule of law, free from government control and oppression, so that we may raise our families and practice our religion without hindrance. Put another way, I wish to conserve the liberty that I believe God has granted this nation, and oppose the soft tyranny of expansive government and secular religion that the statists seek to impose.

Political philosophies are always context-specific (and notoriously changeable). That's true of my friend's belief, whose context is America's human kingdom, at this exact point in time. What he defines as "Christian conservatism" here is obviously about this single nation, America, at this specific moment of its history. Christianity is contrary to such narrow political and national intent.

His operative ideas of "liberty" and freedom reinforce that political and nationalist relativism. His conceives both is the terms of American political culture, rather than as defined by scripture. He goes so far as to say liberty and freedom are "provided by") America's national political culture: with the same waffling generic nod to God we see in America's founding documents, which he cites. I'd question whether this philosophy of "Christian conservatism," based on human operative ideas in preference to scripture's, can be called Christian in any sense.

By those culturally-defined ideas, my friend holds that "Christian conservatives' " mandate is to "conserve" America's temporal human political "liberty," in order to "practice our religion without hindrance." He goes on to liken that mandate to Paul's using the privileges of his Roman citizenship to further the gospel.

The analogy doesn't work. Paul treated his earthly citizenship as incidental (secondary) to the purposes of God's Kingdom. He nowhere urges we seek or "conserve" the privileges of that citizenship as necessary (primary) in order to "practice our religion without hindrance." And we know that Paul's (scripturally-defined) liberty was unhindered by lack of those privileges, when he was in chains in a Roman jail.

Heavily telling against "Christian conservatism" is its already-mentioned lack of scriptural attestation. There's no scriptural evidence that Jesus was "conservative," or taught His followers should be. Rather, we know that Jesus regarded the "conservatives" of His time...the Pharisees...as embodying all the ungodliness and hypocrisy of human politics and religion.

But most telling of all is simply that the idea of "conserving" anything of any human system is contrary to the teaching of the Kingdom of God. Are Christians, transferred to the kingdom of God's beloved Son, told to "conserve" any part of the unrighteous world-system they were saved from ? Rather the opposite. As new creatures, living under God's rule even in the midst of an unrighteous world, we pray for God's Kingdom to reign on earth, as it does in heaven. The idea that God's purpose is to "conserve" anything good in human kingdoms, rather than replace human kingdoms entirely with His, is deeply counter-biblical.

"Christian conservatives" can rightly claim the latter identity: their attitudes, beliefs, and values are very much those of that human faction. The question is whether their core ideas may truthfully be called "Christian." In the absence of scripture's teaching those ideas, I'm not persuaded. And in "Christian conservatism's" operative pride, factionalism, nationalism, et al...I'm convinced contrariwise. I regard my friend's "Christian conservatism" is exactly the "secular religion" he opposes: and the enemy's deceit for calling itself "Christian."

God, in Your mercy, open the eyes of the hearts of Your deceived people !!