|
Replies: 19
| visibility 1978
|
Top TigerNet [29765]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Does the moral character of our leaders matter?
3
Apr 4, 2025, 5:34 PM
|
|
I'd love to hear a rational discussion on this issue, but I fear it will quickly turn into a typical flame throwing set personal insults, the way most political discussions quickly end up.
I'm posting this on the Religion board, not the politics board because I specifically want to hear what Christians think. "From the Christian worldview, does the moral character of our leaders matter?"
For at least 50 years I have heard Christians say, "I'm voting for a president, not a Sunday School teacher." "It's the church's job to teach morals, not the government." "As long as they have good policies for America, I don't care about their personal beliefs and personal life."
But, I've also heard Christians lament the "cultural state of America." I've heard Christians say, "America has forgotten God. We have to return to God as a nation."
I think it is very important for Christians to select (in the primaries) and elect (in the general elections) people who support Biblical principals.
But, is it important to select and elect people who not only support Biblical principles, but also exhibit a character consistent with Biblical principles?
Here are two lists of characteristics of a person.
1. sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like
2. love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control
In 2028, Democrats and Republicans will have the opportunity to select from a group of candidates running for the nomination of their party. Political positions are important. But, how important are the two lists above when deciding who to vote for?
Message was edited by: bretfsu®
|
|
|
|
 |
Campus Hero [13178]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 15323
Joined: 2003
|
I dont think there is a hard rule here. Ill give you some
3
Apr 4, 2025, 6:56 PM
|
|
examples.
Bill Clinton-I didn’t vote for him and almost loathed him because I was in the throes of the Limbaugh whirlwind criticism. All the extramarital crap bothered me. At the same time, I could see he was creating fiscally responsible policies and he was a gifted foreign policy leader. In my view, he was a very good president.
Dubya- I voted for Dubya twiced. Yes he was a hellraisin’ coked out rich kid in his young years, and though I don’t buy the re-born crap espoused by many, I felt he was grounded in something real. And Laura had nice hair. I think Dubya was mistreated by a lot of the new internet media and cable news for being dumb. I never got that sense about him. When he gave a speech on national tv about not allowing stem cell research, he gave his opinion on why it was wrong. Didn’t like it, but respected his reasons.
I thought he did an admirable job post 9/11 healing the country. And despite all the criticism about his Iraq decision, nearly every congressman voted for going on the intelligence at the time. In my view, he was a very good president.
Trump-has zero moral foundation and cheated his way through lofe despite being born with a silver spoon up hisbutt. I even voted for him once because I couldn’t stand the thought of Hillary as president. Gawd was that thinking wrong. I thought trump would calm down and act presidential once the election was over, but he did the opposite. Behaved like a child who lost his sucker whenever someone disagreed with him. Tried to turn the WH into a daily reality show with him as the star. I saw the failure as a leader and a person.
So, for me, of someone is a Christian has little value in the evaluation of a presidential candidate. Is he/she someone who has a moral foundation is critical. The way evangelicals have embraced trump has makes that form of Christianity unacceptable to me. And I’ve been a member of the Methodist church for 43 years. Someone belting out scripture on the campaign trail is not likely to ever get my vote. You want to show your moral code by actions, I’ll buy that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25916]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: I dont think there is a hard rule here. Ill give you some
2
Apr 4, 2025, 8:57 PM
|
|
JFK apparently had sex with someone other than Jackie several times per week. Many times this was with White House staffers, behavior for which people today are in jail. JFK is almost universally revered. Your point, or question, is whether we should honor him as Pres while knowing this character defect. I dont know. I do know I have no moral platform from which to judge him. But whatever the answer, it has to be uniformly applied, imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [13178]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 15323
Joined: 2003
|
Maybe this would be a better way to frame my answer
2
Apr 4, 2025, 11:35 PM
|
|
considering Bret’s question. As Christians and followers of Jesus, we are here to serve. Jesus didn’t come into the world wielding a sword , he came a humble servant. A leader to be valued by Christians must have a servant heart. Now, I don’t remember Ford, but I can say from Carter to Obama, our Presidents understood servant leadership.
That concept is foreign to trump. He has only served himself at every moment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25916]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: Maybe this would be a better way to frame my answer
1
Apr 5, 2025, 11:54 AM
|
|
My assessment of past/current presidents is more middling than yours - not saying I'm right - but I agree with your view of leadership.
JFK was actually not the terrible things he would be known as today if he had another name. We allowed more bad-good-mix than we do today. I think the most difficult thing I do - and it's probably impossible - is to view people for who they are rather than who I want or need them to be.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1699]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: I dont think there is a hard rule here. Ill give you some
1
Apr 7, 2025, 8:25 AM
[ in reply to Re: I dont think there is a hard rule here. Ill give you some ] |
|
Keep in mind also that Kennedy enjoyed what had been a long standing "gentleman's agreement" with the press. Much like the Royals enjoyed at one time. Printing stories of their personal exploits was off limits. Post Nixon, that all changed. Getting the "dirt" sells. That being said, I feel that what we've discovered is not that any of these people were morally bankrupt (although the case could be made otherwise) but they were not in fact, perfect.
We could say from a Christian point of view, "He who is without sin...." But our politicians or leaders aren't running to be moral leaders of our country. There was a real concern of electing a Catholic in Kennedy's case. I think there was some of that still around that kept people from voting for Romney, a Mormon. What I personally look for is that there is some moral compass that guides our leaders. And that compass comes from not waving that Bible around during speeches or getting photo-ops sitting in church or even saying that they "prayed on it". It comes from their actions prior to and during their time in office. And whatever you believe, the leader MUST believe they are answering to a higher voice. Whether that voice is God, Allah, Buddha or the people they represent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: I dont think there is a hard rule here. Ill give you some
1
Apr 7, 2025, 11:34 AM
|
|
"And whatever you believe, the leader MUST believe they are answering to a higher voice."
It would have been better for Jews had Adolf Hitler been an atheist. Somehow he convinced millions of Germans that he was doing the lords work.
It would probably be better anyhow if you think about it. Someone who believes this world is all there is would be unbiased and concerned only with making the world a better place, not getting ready for the next one...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1699]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: I dont think there is a hard rule here. Ill give you some
1
Apr 7, 2025, 1:21 PM
|
|
There's a difference between answering to a higher power and believing you ARE the higher power. That is the moral compass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [23374]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 15671
Joined: 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Does the moral character of our leaders matter?
2
Apr 5, 2025, 1:03 AM
|
|
That a great question, not only in the current sense, but in the ancient one to...
A couple of quick examples popped into my mind.
Abraham wasn't exactly a leader, and if one believes his story per Jubilees, he killed a man (more manslaughter than murder) and was still ultimately judged "righteous." It's never said that he asked forgiveness for the killing, or even felt bad about it.
He simply believed that he would have offspring as numerous as stars, and that was good enough for God.
Gen 15:6
"Abram believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness."
Moses was definitely a leader, and definitely a murderer, but he didn't ask forgiveness either. And curiously, God didn't seem to care about that, either. Moses didn't make it to the Promised Land, but not because he killed an Egyptian...it was because he didn't follow God's orders.
For Abraham, the ticket was belief. For Moses, the ticket was obedience. Specifically, God told Moses to SPEAK to a rock, and instead, he tapped it twice with his staff.
Num 20:8
“Take the staff, and... speak to that rock before their eyes and it will pour out its water.”
Num 20:12
“Because you did not trust in me enough to honor me as holy in the sight of the Israelites, you will not bring this community into the land I give them.”
Even Cain wasn't struck down for murder. He was protected with a mark, and made a nomad.
Gen 4:12
"When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.”
The Bible doesn't say specifically, but I just can't imagine Abraham, or Moses, or even David, not getting to Heaven. Cain might not have made it, but he didn't do much worse than Moses (both disobey and kill), so maybe he did get in.
Keep in mind that for the Jews, heaven is only a temporary place anyhow. God is going to descend with New Jerusalem to earth. So being in heaven, ultimately, means you will be AWAY from God. As weird as that sounds.
Rev 21:3
"And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
But as to your OP question, I'm not sure morality does matter (as opposed to belief and obedience), at least to God. Or better stated, some pretty hard-boiled guys have presumably made it into Heaven, having done some pretty bad acts, without even asking for forgiveness or feigning morality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: Does the moral character of our leaders matter?
1
Apr 5, 2025, 2:17 PM
|
|
It’s quite the conundrum. I assume the OP had Trump in mind with this post.
He doesn’t act “Christian” but neither did the OT figures you mentioned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [101827]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 98886
Joined: 2009
|
Actually, trust and obey was the common theme of those who ended up...
1
Apr 7, 2025, 4:46 AM
[ in reply to Re: Does the moral character of our leaders matter? ] |
|
in Heaven.
God told Abram to 'leave your home and family and go to a land I will show you...,' and Abram obeyed God because he trusted Him. God promised Abram a son which from whom a nation would grow as many as the stars in the heaven.
Sarah had a bought with doubt. She laughed when the angel of the LORD told Abram the promise of a son. 'When she considered who promised she judged Him faithful.
Moses trusted and obeyed God. God told him to go to the pharaoh and deliver a message from Him. 'Let my people go!' You know that one.
As for Cain and Able, the foundation of Christian belief is in the story of those two. When Adam and Eve sinned God made them coverings of animal skins to 'hide their shame.' It took innocent blood to cover their sin from God's eye. That is the very picture of Christ, not that He was an animal but that He was innocent.
Cain worked the ground and made vegetable soup as an offering to God and Abel slew the innocent animal to sacrifice. God respected Abel's sacrifice but the veggie soup wasn't suitable.
We should be careful when we focus on what the Bible doesn't say. I do not believe it's possible to trust and obey God without repentance. Repent means to 'turn around.' There's a lot of confusion about exactly what 'turn around,' means.
Some think it involves remorse, sometimes it does. In context it means to change directions. When I repented I turned to God. There was no remorse as far as demanding that I'd quit sinning, turn over a new leaf but I literally promised God I'd do my best to obey and I put my trust in Him to save me.
As far as the OP, the Bible's directions regarding leaders is for us to pray for them. 2 Peter:
"10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities."
Those who despise authority are rebellious against God. Even when one of His disciples cut off the high priest's servant's ear Jesus put it back on. He walked that fine line of obeying the law without disobeying God.
Again, careful claiming that none of those men being discussed ever sought forgiveness of God. Forgiveness is a part of being turned to God to trust and obey Him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: Actually, trust and obey was the common theme of those who ended up...
1
Apr 7, 2025, 7:21 AM
|
|
“Cain worked the ground and made vegetable soup as an offering to God and Abel slew the innocent animal to sacrifice. God respected Abel's sacrifice but the veggie soup wasn't suitable.”
Why wasn’t it suitable?
Takes a lot more work to grow veggies than it does to kill a poor little sheep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3224]
TigerPulse: 96%
34
|
So, we're all sinners....
1
Apr 5, 2025, 8:07 AM
|
|
We're all human beings with strengths, weaknesses, faults, and we can never live up to that perfect standard.
So, I think any Christian should consider that, and not get hung up every moral aspect of someone else's life, such as whether they've committed sexual immorality.
Where I draw the line in leaders is trying to discern who is rising to leadership by wanting to help others vs wanting to hurt others. It's that servant heart vs that attacking heart that matters. You can often see that by looking at language around certain small or disadvantaged groups. To me, this reveals the type of morality or lack thereof that should be important to a Christian.
One example is Adolf Hitler. He rose to leadership within the Nazi Party and later over all of Germany by demonizing and wanted to rid Germany (and later all of Europe) of the Jews. It was explicit eliminationist antisemitism that revealed the hate and attacking heart.
Another example is Stalin, who wanted to "Liquidate the Kulaks", which set off the starvation of millions of Ukrainians. Kulaks were peasants who owned their own farm. They resisted collectivization, and in Stalin's heart, he wanted to annihilate them. Again, within his heart, he had revealed the attacking hatred of an entire class of people. Any Christian that takes the message of Jesus seriously should know that someone of Stalin's hatred shouldn't be able to lead other people.
To me, that's the dividing line that a Christian should be looking at. Does the "leader" try to lift up out-groups, or does he/she demonize and attack them, foreshadowing a destruction of certain communities?
Once you have discerned that, then you can get to things like tax & spending policy, etc. I think we're not electing saints. We're electing sinners. But some sinners are more destructive than others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20078]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Re: Does the moral character of our leaders matter?
2
Apr 5, 2025, 9:20 AM
|
|
I don't think we have any political candidates that meet Paul's description listing the fruits of the Spirit found in those growing in Christ. But, there are none who are without guilt, either. Not one.
I think Americans, and all others that are allowed to vote, have proven they are only interested in self. What is best for the country is forgotten anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: Does the moral character of our leaders matter?
1
Apr 5, 2025, 11:28 AM
|
|
That's one of the major conundrum's of christianity for me...
You should do this and you shouldn't do that, but you can't do this and you can't stop doing that, but if you do this and don't do that you're faith is meaningless.
Church attendance doesn't matter but you should go.
Works are meaningless but prove your faith.
You can't stop sinning but you shouldn't sin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25916]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3224]
TigerPulse: 96%
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
I think we are much better off to have leaders with high moral
1
Apr 7, 2025, 11:11 AM
|
|
character - the higher the better - than leaders with low moral character. That means things like honesty, integrity, kindness, compassion, courage, and dependability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29765]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Thanks to all who answered.
Apr 8, 2025, 7:37 PM
|
|
I noticed that no one answered with "Yes."
A lot of people gave an answer that might be in the category of "Yes, but..." or "Yes, with qualifications..."
Based on history, I think this board is probably a reflection of America on this issue.
1. In 1984 Gary Hart was the leading candidate for Democratic nominee. He had to drop out of the race after he was photographed on a boat, named "The Monkey Business," with a woman not his wife.
2. In 1992 Bill Clinton got the Democratic nomination amid a flurry of accusations about his moral character. Democrats either excused or denied them. Republicans made it a major campaign issue, to no avail.
3. In 2016 Donald Trump got the Republican nomination thanks in large part to "Conservative Christians" over a field of 16 other candidates in spite of his very public "questionable past."
My conclusion, even the majority of Christians do no think the personal morality and ethics of a politician are important if the candidate agrees with them on political issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 19
| visibility 1978
|
|
|
50
