Choosing the “Lesser of Two Evils”?

Posted on October 30, 2008
Filed Under The State |

“He who rules over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.” 2 Sam 23:3 (NKJ)

This is the verse upon which Noah Webster based much of his statements about voting. His argument goes something like this: since our form of government grants us the “authority” to select those who will rule over us, then we have a responsibility to select men who are just and who will rule in the fear of God. That is our obligation before the Lord. If we select unjust men who do not rule in the fear of God, then the consequences are predictable: politics becomes a power game; government becomes corrupt; laws become unjust; public funds are squandered; rights are violated.

However, some of you have raised a legitimate question: what if we aren’t too thrilled with any of the choices that are presented to us? One of you commented that this kind of “wisdom” isn’t very wise at all because selecting the “lesser of two evils” just gives you someone who is evil…so why vote at all?

Valid questions.

When we look at the passage that Webster was referencing, we find that 2 Sam 23 begins with these words: “Now these are the last words of David…”, the last words of the king whom God declares to be a “man after My own heart”. In verse 3, David then quotes the Lord regarding the quality of the ruler who “must be just and rule in the fear of God”.

But, in the next chapter, we read how David’s sin of numbering the people resulted in God’s judgment and the death of 70,000 citizens. Is this a king who ruled in the fear of God? We could also recall David’s sin with Bathsheba or his murder of Uriah? Is this a just man?

Is this a man after God’s own heart? Yes…but one who was imperfect, finite and flawed.

Moses dishonored the Lord before the Rock in the wilderness; Peter denied the Lord three times.

God “voted” for all three of them.

The reality is that there has been only One who lived perfectly upon this earth…EVERY other selection is a selection of a fallen, broken creature. We will never have a choice that is perfect. However, one of the respondents to the blog offered this counsel: “selecting the lesser of two evils just gives you evil”. But this is a recipe for eternal inactivity, for there are deep faults present in every human creature.

Instead, the command lays out a standard for us to pursue: just men who will rule in the fear of God. Our responsibility is to determine which of those before us will best do this. If you do not think either is very good, then do your homework, vote for the best, and then get busy to train and raise up the kind of men that will eventually give you a better choice. We have neglected this vital “preparation” part of our responsibility and somehow have thought that it is someone else’s job to magically make this happen.

In our local elections, we have selected people who are not viable candidates for higher office. Instead, we often settle for “good ol’ boys” who just vote the way we want. This isn’t good enough any more. We need to start at the local level and place into office those who have the character, the skills and the knowledge that will do more than just have a good voting record. We need to raise up those who have the potential to vie for leadership positions at the national level—those who will give us increasingly better choices on election day.

In the end, I believe that Webster was right on track. The responsibility lies with us.

We will get exactly what our actions or inactions deserve.

Comments

16 Responses to “Choosing the “Lesser of Two Evils”?”

  1. Troy on October 30th, 2008 11:11 am

    Del,
    This series on politics through the eyes of Noah Webster has been very enlightening. Today’s post, however, has prompted a further question in my mind, regarding just, God-fearing rulers. How do you (or how would Webster) approach the issue of third-party candidates when a third-party candidate is more just and God-fearing than the first two candidates but, statistically speaking, will not be elected? In other words, do you or Webster allow for a sort of pragmatic wisdom in voting? Why or why not?

  2. micahdriscoll on October 30th, 2008 1:50 pm

    The quote “the lesser of two evils” leaves the assumption that there are only two “evils” (I’ll call them candidates). When in reality, in almost every state there are more than two.

    Do your homework really means ‘do your homework’. Go to your Secretary of State website, see who is on the ballot for each office that you will be voting for and then research each of those candidates.

    I would also suggest homework does not mean watching political adds on television nor depending on the evening news for the information you need.

    Enjoy your homework. Of course I sometimes like this homework too much.

  3. Mike M on October 30th, 2008 2:48 pm

    I agree . . . “In the end, I believe that Webster was right on track. The responsibility lies with us. We will get exactly what our actions or inactions deserve.”
    We need to look closely at how we respond to these thoughts not only in the political realm, but in all the spheres of life that God has established. We can begin with taking seriously Jesus command “. . .teaching them to obey EVERYTHING I have commanded you. . .”
    We must ask ourselves why I am making the choices I am making . . . as weight our decisions against the commands of God — Loving Him and Loving others — as He does.

  4. Mike Weaver on October 30th, 2008 3:04 pm

    Amen and amen!

    It’s going to take a lot of hard work to bring politics back to as nearly as they should be. Now is not the time to “check out”. Heart to heart and shoulder to shoulder, let’s join together, each doing our part and see what God might do! Fear, cynicism, and pessimism are from our sneering enemy who seeks to divide, intimidate and destroy.

    Soldier on!

    Mike W.

  5. Betsy Markman on October 30th, 2008 4:21 pm

    I really wanted to vote for one of the more obscure candidates, a man who definitely fits my values and beliefs far better than either of the front-runners. But since my preferred candidate didn’t have a prayer of winning, I felt that a vote for him would be thrown away, arguably the same as a vote for my least favorite front-runner. At least if I voted for the “lesser of the two front-running evils,” my vote would strike a blow against the “greater evil.” (Am I saying that clearly?)
    Someone I know disagrees. She says “you vote for principles, not for men.” So she’s voting for the obscure candidate.
    I’ve already cast my vote, but I’d still love some more wise input on the subject.
    Thanks in advance!

  6. Michael Robinson on October 30th, 2008 7:42 pm

    Research, Evaluate, Pray, Choose, and Vote.

    But it doesn’t stop on Nov 4. For far too long the citizens of the United State have made their choices and then sat back for 4 years and complained that things are not going well. It is the day after the election that our real work begins. Just as we pray for and pursue the unsaved friend or acquaintance at work, we should also pray for and purse our local, state and federal elected representatives. They are imperfect men and women whose hearts and minds are open to the influence of the Holy Spirit and their constituency. Pray for our leaders and let them know that you are. Let your voice continue to be heard long after you cast you ballot. It is the continueous active involvement of the citizens in our democracy that makes it great. It makes it just that, a Democracy.

    Mike

  7. David Ritterbush on October 31st, 2008 9:59 am

    Perhaps framing the statement as “lesser of two evils” is too stark. But to use Mr. Webster’s (and Scripture’s) qualification of “a just man, ruling in the fear of God,” how then ought we vote if no such man is on the ticket? Are these qualities of justness and godly fear on a spectrum in which, neither candidate clearly qualifying, we determine which is “closest”? And give hearty approval to the closer candidate by our vote?

    A better biblical illustration than that of David might be that of Saul, who was the king given by God to the people when they cried out for a king. In rejecting God, He gave them the leader they sought, as they looked on the outside when He looks on the heart. Not only was Saul imperfect (as David was), but he did not rule in the fear of God–instead, time and again, seeking rather the opinion of the people and ruling in insecurity or cowardice. But if such a man seems “closer” to divine fear than another, are we to vote for him?

    While the two-party system may propose but two candidates, our consciences are not so restricted. Vote (or do not vote) as the Lord directs you.

  8. Deborah on October 31st, 2008 12:20 pm

    What has been most helpful for me in making a decision has been to analyze the candidates in the context of the relationship of authority and submission. Which candidate in this relationship will or has treated me with love through his words and actions? If I were in a sense married to what the candidate represents then will I be satisfied with “baubles” or “entitlements” thrown my direction to secure my fidelity or do I want an authoritative partner who will give himself to serve me, to fight for me when my honor is threatened, and to affirm me in my own role of service to my country? These are tough questions but if all in the world follows a pattern of the image of God then the relationship of the government and the people must also follow this pattern to work at its best.

  9. Amber on November 1st, 2008 11:24 am

    Great post! Thanks for being a Godly man with tact, wisdom, and discernment!

  10. Anders on November 1st, 2008 12:03 pm

    Like may others, I am disappointed in our choice of presidential candidates. I am reminded of that sad verse at the end of Judges - In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.
    Hope it doesn’t come to that.

  11. Leonard on November 2nd, 2008 4:31 pm

    Voting Men or Principle?

    Betsy shared a friends comment that we are suppose to vote our principle not the man. But I don’t see principles listed on by ballot! We do vote for men. That is what the contest in an election is between - men. So you must, after prayer, consulting Scripture and doing your homework - including consulting other godly men, choose. That is how the will of God is revealed in our lives: prayer, consulting Scripture, doing your homework, consulting with other godly people, and then choose.

  12. Barbara on November 5th, 2008 7:49 am

    This whole discussion has been wonderful and I appreciate your wisdom. We do need to seek those who operate in the fear of God, and you are correct in stating that we need to raise up such leaders. To that end, my husband and I homeschooled our four children for 21 years so that we could teach them Christian values and give them a solid foundation. It has to start in the home and then, we need to continue to work in our society to raise up godly leaders. Thank you for sharing this wonderful insight.

  13. jonathan on November 7th, 2008 10:31 am

    Refusing to make a choice between “the lesser of evils” does not mean apathy. People who vote are just as likely as those who abstain to be apathetic. The difference between these two kinds of apathy are that apathetic voters cast a ballot and then go home and do nothing, expecting a politician to fix it all. Apathetic abstainers see no hope in affecting the world in a positive way at all, least of all via the powers.

    I suggest a third option: take all the energy and faith you would have put into supporting a political candidate and take it away from this earthly kingdom and start serving the Kingdom of God instead.

  14. Mark on November 24th, 2008 12:33 am

    Dr. Tackett, I am somewhat embarrased about my lack of American History but despite this I have some very anti american type questions to ponder.
    I do love my country but after viewing tour 10, I need to ask.
    1) If a military officer (a Christian) swears by oath to protect and defend his country foreign and DOMESTIC and then finds that the history of his country has changed to the point that his enemy is now him, does he continue to obey his superiors, his conscience, or his God )?
    2) Under the Territories declaration, a state was to declare under oath I _______swear to my God etc. regarding all the requirements to become a state. The example used was Delaware. Has the Truth Project researched history to find out which state if none at all still hold fast to this declaration and if they do not, could the statehood charter be removed? Could the Christian contigent of a certain state look at this as the State not abiding by their own charter/constitution? I wonder just how much any one is really paying attention to the changes/truths are going on around them.

    Note: I love this program and am currently training to be a Leader on a navy base in Japan.
    I pray to God that I can be honorable in his site.

    sole fide
    mark

  15. Wolf on December 1st, 2008 8:05 pm

    I followed the American primary and presidential campaigns closely and repeatedly found myself thinking through just what it means to be a leader with personal Christian convictions in a secular government . There have been Christian leaders in the USA and in my country, Canada, who have been persons of integrity and faith but not necessarily good leaders. Providing leadership, participating in the legislative processes about civil and moral issues, representing a pluralistic constituency - these are tremendous challenges for an elected person who may have to support issues which are not in harmony with his or her Christian faith. And yet, our God has given these individuals the privilege and responsibility to be in public office, and to us God has given the responsibility to participate in their election. Should we expect a Chrisitian leader to make political decisions which are in harmony with our Christian perspective, or should we rather support them with our prayers and expect them to work in the political world as honest individuals making decisions and providing leadership to the best of their God-given ability?

  16. Peter on May 2nd, 2009 11:58 am

    God “voted” for all three of them. –God can immediately remove them, God can kill them. We can’t do such a thing with our leaders. These men were humble and repented of sin; our leaders just cover their sins up or get the approval of the evil majority and scoff at those who object.
    If we choose the lesser of 2 evils we still choose evil and violate the principal of Romans 3:8. Who do you chose between Hitler and Stalin?
    Voting for the lesser of evils means turn your head and pretend your party is not doing evil, but if the opposing party does the same, you must pounce on them.
    Even after doing your homework, how can you determine the possible damage the evil candidate will cause? If the evil candidate is doing evil in one area, how do you determine if he is lying or misleading people in what appears to be good?
    Vote for righteous men. Never do evil that good may come.