Pastor's Briefing: The Eschatological Presidential Debate

A lot has changed since the first debate back in June. Following a poor debate performance that raised questions about his cognitive faculties, President Biden, despite having secured sufficient delegates to secure the Democratic nomination, ultimately succumbed to internal party pressure to withdraw from the race. In short order, Vice President Kamala Harris not only consolidated and energized the Democratic base behind her candidacy, she effectively made the race a toss-up. Former President Trump now faces a younger opponent his campaign had not planned for, and one who is widely considered a much better debater than President Biden.  

Despite these significant changes, one thing remains the same: the two candidates will lay out plans to facilitate their vision for America’s future. While the names change over time, these two different eschatologically motivated visions have names many will recognize as statements about how things are, how they should be, and how to get there. Most recently, we have had Build Back Better and Make America Great Again. Kamala Harris is going with “Let’s Win This.” Since it’s unlikely the “This” is only referring to the election, the “Winning This” will undoubtedly lead to the perceived mandate to inaugurate something new. 

In laying out these end-games for America, the candidates will recite stump speeches and well-scored talking points on all manner of issues. Using sound-bite-reduced policy positions and personal jabs, their quest is to sway voters to not just their vision but, more importantly, to go to the polls to vote for them on Election Day. Most of the audience will listen for and respond to the zingers and points scored by the candidates. Ultimately, the talking heads will dissect and score each candidate’s performance in a setting reminiscent of an NFL Sunday Postgame.

Christians are called to listen differently – and better. We are called to evaluate the policy positions proposed by each candidate through the Biblical criteria of Christ’s eschatological initiative articulated in his statement, "Behold, I am Making All Things New." Scripture makes clear that Christ’s vision of making all things new (a present and ongoing process) has racial, economic, foreign policy, vocational, family, and educational applications.

To properly evaluate what each candidate is saying regarding their vision for the future, it’s helpful to have a framework to direct our attention and inform our assessments. All debates cover the key issues: the economy, foreign policy, domestic policy,  immigration, and cultural hot topics. But God has given us a broader set of biblical categories. 

Biblical Categories

Imago Dei (the Image of God) 

Considering the Imago Dei requires us to widen the lens through which we make our assessments. In the beginning, we read, 

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 

 So God created man in his own image, 
in the image of God he created him; 
male and female, he created them. 

And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Genesis 1:26–28.

Scripture also clarifies that loving our neighbor as ourselves is an imperative. This is because our neighbor also bears the image of God. Therefore, we are called to focus on how each proposal impacts the divine image-bearing God has given to all mankind. We do not ignore the policy’s impact on us but also think of its impact on others: those who live in this country and those who do not. How do the policy proposals affirm the image-bearing of children, adults, the elderly, the disabled, foreigners, and even our “enemy”?  

This category draws our attention to issues of sexuality, mental health, workers’ rights, homeless care, and the incarcerated. How is God’s description of a human presented? Are all lives being valued at the same level? Are the policies protecting the weak and vulnerable? Since our image-bearing includes ruling over creation, what are the policies’ implications for our neighbors’ drinking water, land, and air?

Shalom/Eudimonia (Flourishing)

The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle used the word eudaimonia to define the end goal of virtuous humans as the pursuit of happiness. Aristotle, however, was building on already-established Hebrew concepts of blessedness (happiness) and shalom (flourishing). The blessedness and shalom of man are well attested in the Old Testament. Jeremiah instructed the elect-exiles headed to Babylon to “seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare. Jeremiah 29:7

As Christians living in the United States, we are directed to pray and advocate for the flourishing of the land in which we live. In 1 Peter, the Apostle opens his letter to the churches of Asia Minor with, 

“To those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: 

May grace and peace be multiplied to you. 1 Peter 1:1–2

Peter’s words draw a direct connection between the Old and New Testament concerns of Christians for the flourishing of their nation. This is not the same as Christian Nationalism; it is national flourishing. Here, we must consider the economic implications of each candidate’s proposals. Is private property being protected? How are just weights and measures, fair trade practices, timely and sufficient worker’s pay, access for the disabled, equity in the judicial system, and care for the poor, which Leviticus 19 calls acts of worship, put forward? More importantly, is “the good life” defined in a manner that aligns with Scripture? 

Oikonomia (Stewardship and Administration)

This category draws our attention to the method of policy implementation and where the responsibility and accountability for the implementation reside. Again, this concept was well-known to the Ancient Greeks and also the early Christians. Jesus used the following parable to point out the importance of proper administration:

He also said to the disciples, “There was a rich man who had a manager, and charges were brought to him that this man was wasting his possessions. ² And he called him and said to him, ‘What is this that I hear about you? Turn in the account of your management, for you can no longer be manager.’ And the manager said to himself, ‘What shall I do, since my master is taking the management away from me? I am not strong enough to dig, and I am ashamed to beg. I have decided what to do, so that when I am removed from management, people may receive me into their houses. Luke 16:1–4.

While doggedly insisting that the government is committed to wasting our money and denying the rights of citizens is a popular sentiment on social media, it’s not a helpful perspective. Instead, we are called to a position of discernment regarding the manner in which those who rule over us administer the policies for which they advocate. Are the policies aimed at equality of outcome or equality of opportunity? Are they mindful of local differences in need and implementation methods that might make a national policy cumbersome and inefficient?  Is this a wise use of funds? Are the policies empowering national and local governments, private businesses, or families and individuals?  How are the stakeholders impacted by this policy? Some will hear “stakeholders” and immediately presume the promotion of socialism or “ESG (Environmental, Social and Government).” However, as biblically informed Christians, one might consider how gleaning laws of the Old Testament, enacted by Boaz (a private property owner), affected the lives of Naomi and Ruth (sojourners and stakeholders). 

Once we have our biblical categories in view, we need biblical questions to ask to lead us toward a wise assessment of each candidate’s views.  

Biblical Assessments

What is good that requires encouragement?  Listen to the candidate’s assessments of what is good. What are they identifying as good, and how would they seek to encourage it? Is their classification of ‘good’ resonant or dissonant with the Biblical categorization of the good?

What is broken that needs restoration?  Defining the broken presupposes an accurate understanding of the intended condition. To restore something, one must know what restoration would look like when completed. How this restoration will happen is secondary, but not unimportant, to the vision of restoration.

What is missing that awaits creation? In the Garden, God tells Adam and Eve that part of their primary work is cultivating the incomplete creation. This cultivation necessarily included developing best practices for farming, creating markets for exchange, and inventing new technologies that would improve flourishing. What do these candidates believe is missing in the life of our nation? What do they propose to create in order to bring about flourishing?

What is evil that demands opposition? Given the nature of current political discourse, defining evil seems the preferred manner of classification for all policy issues. In fact, we have come to the place where many believe that those holding a position on the other side of the political spectrum are evil themselves. Again, those who have embraced whole-life discipleship must think differently. Just as defining good is critical, it is imperative to properly and Biblically define evil. Scripture accentuates the importance of proper distinctions between good and evil in the Prophet Isaiah’s words to the soon-to-be-exiled people of Israel, 

²⁰ Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, 
who put darkness for light and light for darkness, 
who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Isaiah 5:20.

As such, listening and evaluating what each candidate defines as evil should always beg the question, “Is that actually evil?” Does the candidate’s classification of evil match Scripture? What methods do they propose to oppose the evil? 

As Christians, we must listen with an ear, not just to our own flourishing but to the flourishing of others. In doing so, our standard must be, “How does each candidate’s vision align with Christ’s vision of “making all things new.” 

In Sum

We must take comfort in the fact that while the success of the current progressive, conservative, or libertarian eschatological visions rests on policies and public effort, Christ’s promise of making all things new is brought about through the Risen Son of God, and he is perfectly faithful to his promises, regardless of the outcome of any debate or election. As Christians, we are not the inaugurators of the eschatology but joyful participants, offering our neighbors and our nation foretastes of the coming Kingdom.

Tonight’s debate starts at 9pm ET. 

The vision of Faithful Presence is to equip servants and leaders working in our nation’s capital to flourish as they participate in Christ’s mission of making all things new. Support this ministry and receive additional resources with a supporting subscription.

Find Us On: LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook | X | YouTube | Apple & Spotify