In that recently circulated video, John MacArthur argues that, because the world is full of sinners, God has provided four restraints to limit sin: the individual (conscience), the family, the government/state, and the church. He argues that the Democratic party is a systematic

assault on all four God-ordained restraints. Therefore, he argues that a Christian cannot vote for a Democratic candidate.

But the question I have is, why does he limit the discussion about the four restraints to the pet sins of progressives and Democrats? Why doesn't he also

include the sins of conservatives and Republicans?

Individual consciences have been seared by policies put forward by conservatism, such as calling segregation de jure and de facto as "biblical," "traditional," "conservative," or even, "natural." Resisting integration has

continued to be a stalwart of Republican policies; it's just been given different names. Generations of adults and children have been discipled by ideals of social segregation, isolation, and selfishness and have been trained to think that these are good.

Families have been torn

apart at the border and even within our country due to the current President's anti-immigration and nationalistic policies. The support of the school to prison pipeline and mass incarceration of Black and Brown folks cuts directly into the heart of the health of the family and

future generations. Worse still, people who follow the President and his supporters are trained to believe this is what it means to "make America great."

The government is supposed to punish evildoers. So, shouldn't that include police officers who have committed the evil of

police brutality, racial profiling, planting of drugs and weapons, etc? Shouldn't this mean more accountability rather than less for corporations so that those at the top are not oppressing those on the bottom to make a buck?

The church is likely under the most attack by those

within the church who wreak havoc in Christ's name. So many people have left the church because of the covering up of abuse, hypocrisy, defense of injustices, and the mistreatment of and condescension toward others. These are much bigger factors at play than "secular" or

"liberal" agendas being taught.

MacArthur's framework that he offers is not a framework because he doesn't leave it to be a neutral grid to filter the data. He provides a priori criteria in order to make his "framework" fit within the already agreed upon ideals of Republican

conservatism. It's like a game of "heads I win, tails you lose." If he allowed his framework to be neutral, we could easily make the same arguments about the conservative side of the political spectrum.

Lastly, the biggest problem with MacArthur's framework is that it is driven

by an ethic of fear and not love. He fosters a "what if?!" ethic that seeks self-preservation or corporate preservation as the highest good to be achieved, which frames any sharing of justice and power as theft. Under his framework, the Christian voting ethic simply becomes a

game of political wack a mole.

But, where is love, specifically love of neighbor, in MacArthur's framework? If perfect love casts out fear, shouldn't we be better asking not "how can we lose less" but "how can we serve more?" Instead of voting for the sake of what's best for me

and my group, what about voting for what truly results in the peace of the city as we care for the least of these? What does a political ethic of love look like to show the watching world how people who die to self to gain Christ love their neighbor?

In the framework of love, sharing justice and power is an extension of the embrace of Christ that is too deep of a well to ever exhaust.

Here's to a Christian political ethic of love.