I recently heard first and then read the transcript of someone saying this about the 2016 presidential election:
So, personally, I have to find a way to vote to support that which is closest to what is right. But that’s the only choice I’ve got. I can’t stand idly by and say everybody’s bad. I’ve got to say that’s worse, and I’ve got to act in that way, personally.This person didn't say whom he was voting for, but I am asking you to predict what he means. I think he meant something. Later I heard him say and then later read him say something more specific.
If we go down the train we’re going, and if it continues that way and we get Hillary Clinton as President, and everything that is part of that whole platform that is against God, against the Scripture, everything that is not just criminal but immoral escalates and escalates and escalates, in no way does that hinder Christ building His church.Don't google who said it, yet. I think, greater than any other election, churches are seeing divisions right in their own churches over the differing desired outcomes, so that there is more tiptoeing than ever in order not to cause unnecessary disunity. That first statement, I believe, reflects that. Someone else wrote about that possibility, because it is actually being seen as a reality.
I encourage you to celebrate the unity in Christ that transcends political diversity, while remaining steadfast in opposing the deeds of darkness, and making no provision for the flesh. If Matthew and Simeon can share a table with Jesus, then you can share fellowship with someone who will vote for Trump. And when either Trump or Clinton wins, the church’s unity will still stand. If the gates of hell cannot prevail against her, neither can a Super PAC.
It's obvious that churches, evangelical ones especially, feel tremors of disunity over this election. The country is divided like it hasn't been in a long, long time, and that even includes churches. People want to be able to talk about their preferred candidate, but they're afraid they'll offend someone and some kind of fight will ensue. Pastors don't want to be dealing with these problems. They want to be doing actual ministry. On the other hand, can't someone be free to express who he'll vote for at his own church without being pummeled for it?
I think the issues that relate to this election are worth talking about. They can help someone grow. I think we have to be careful, but I don't think we have to run away from the controversy. It's a time where people might have to talk about things they wouldn't talk about otherwise. Evangelism and discipleship don't have to stop. It's an opportunity to learn principles of discernment.
OK, so those first two quotes came from John MacArthur after coming back to his church on August 21 in a question and answer time with Phil Johnson. I believe he signals what he's going to do "personally," the word he uses, as if, however, he is giving others freedom to act otherwise. Or maybe not. If someone followed his basis given to vote, what would he do?