Presidential Behavior: A Handy Guide for Gals Who Vote.
If the punditry proves correct, this election will come down to the female vote. Some of these ladies are currently “liberated” into Molech’s harem and will vote exactly like he tells them to. These Molech gals are also convinced that all of the bible is just a big volume of mansplaining (they know this because their husband told them so). I don’t have much to offer these gals except my condolences and prayers.
On the other hand, I happen to believe a wide swath of American women are really interested in thinking for themselves and are especially sensitive to the question of which president behaves the most “presidentially.” These women are really looking for wisdom and even if they are not Christians with a capital “C” — they are more than open to listening to the Bible’s take on the question. That’s where I, a low level semi-pro theologian, might have something to contribute.
This “presidentially” question is, in my deeply patriarchal opinion, exactly the kind of question a smart woman should be asking! No seriously, this really is a perfect question. So how bout it? Which candidate appears to be more presidential?
Answering this question depends on getting some objective and true definition of the word, “presidential.” Does the bible really offer such a thing? You betcha! But then again, there are thousands of potential definitions of the word and that’s a problem.
When, in his righteous judgment, God separated the languages of Babel, he did so to frustrate one particular element of their prideful progress — namely their unity. This is a helpful reminder that no one attribute of God has any value apart from God. Unity is usually thought to be a good thing but we see clearly in the instance of Babel (and 1930s Germany for that matter) that unity focused on divine rebellion is an evil to be condemned.
Therefore it should not surprise us to see that in the past several decades, God has begun systematically separating the collective language of the West. He will not allow our scientific and civilizational advances, which had their root in Christendom, to be turned against him.
For God, disunity is better than unity, when the unity in question is full of pride.
In Babel, God divided their language by causing a formerly united people to begin speaking new and foreign tongues. In America, God has divided our languages by allowing each individual or tribe to ascribe new meaning to existing words.
This is why we keep talking past one another. So, while we continue to share a common language, we have ceased to share a common lexicon. Foundational words like love now have dozens of necessarily contradictory meanings. Make no mistake, this is God’s judgment. A civilization cannot stand upon a thousand contradictory dictionaries.
I hope to write more about this phenomenon in the future. For now, I would like to take up a relatively new word in the western vocabulary, namely the word “presidential.”
What does it mean for a person to act presidential? This question has deep relevance for a people just days away from a presidential election. In choosing a candidate, we must ask ourselves, “who among these goobers has shown, by a combination of words and actions” to behave most ‘presidentially’?”
Perhaps surprisingly to some, and not surprising to others, the Bible offers a definition for this word that all Christians should be able to agree upon.
The presidency is an office of federal headship. To act “presidential” is therefore another way of describing a manner of behavior that is consistent with the behavior God requires of federal heads.
This is a category of behavior clearly described in the scriptures. In Ephesians 5:22–30 we find,
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. 25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. — Ephesians 5:22–30
Here Paul gives us a clear standard for federal headship behavior by connecting a lesser federal head (the husband is the federal head of the home) with the ultimate federal head, namely Jesus Christ, the federal head of the church.
All of this language applies to our question of presidential behavior because the rules for federal headship apply at all levels of human (and spiritual) institutions. If it applies to Christ, then it applies to every other kind of federal head. Husbands? Yep. CEOs? Yep. Generals? Affirmative. Presidents? You betcha!
As we see in Ephesians 5, the first standard of federal headship involves self-sacrificial love for the entity he is leading. For Christ, this looks like the cross. For husbands, this looks like laying down his life for his bride out of sincere love for her. For presidents, the first marker of federal headship behavior is a deep love and regard for the body he is representing and a willingness to sacrifice his personal gain for its sake.
From this scripture, we derive two definite requirements of presidential behavior. Firstly, presidential behavior requires love for the country he is called to represent.
To put this in marital terms, we are not looking for the kind of husband who says, “I’d love if you if you only did XYZ” and we are looking instead for the kind of husband who says, “get over here you crazy broad and let me give you a kiss!”
Secondly, presidential behavior requires self-sacrifice to protect and improve that country.
Again, to put this in marital terms, we are not looking for the kind of husband who has systematically fed off his wife’s productivity for say, 47 years or something. Instead we are looking for the kind of husband who sacrifices his comfortable life for the sake of his bride.
To be truly presidential is in some ways to leave office worse off than when you entered it. It certainly requires a kind of self-evident sacrifice over and against self-enrichment. As I always tell the guys at my church, “there’s a reason men die before women, we wear ourselves out to make their lives better!”
In 1 Peter 3:7 we are given a third quality necessary for federal headship.
Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.
The third quality of federal headship involves a kind of gentleness towards the thing you are called to lead. A federal head must be kind-hearted and soft-handed with the entity he is called to lead.
To put this in marital terms, we’re looking for a husband that is kind and gracious and understanding, even when their wives are wrong. Especially when their wives are wrong.
But, it should be understood that gentleness is never universally applied in all directions. In order for a man to be gentle toward his wife, he must often be hard on himself. True gentleness is always expressed in some kind of well-aimed violence. This is even more evident in how a man protects his wife from those who seek to harm her. For a man to be gentle toward his wife, he must often be “rough and ready” towards the rest of the world. Indeed, in order to be kind to her, he must be cruel to those who would hurt her.
To put this in marital terms, we’re looking for a husband who exhibits self-discipline, a diligent work ethic, and is also a kind of a bad-ass towards those who would do his wife harm.
As an aside, I find that far too many men are failing to be gentle with their wives by being friendly with her biggest enemy, namely her sin. Especially the sin of fearfulness. Again, unity, even marital unity, is a lousy counterfeit god. But that is a talk for another time.
The point I’m trying to make is that the Bible shows us plainly what it means to be “presidential.” Someone who is acting presidential must possess the following qualities:
He must love his country.
He must lay down his life for his country.
He must be gentle and understanding toward it.
He must be fierce with himself and his country’s enemies.
As with husbands, our presidents are never a perfect package of all of these qualities. Wouldn’t it be great if one of the candidates were totally presidential? Wouldn’t it be great if husbands came so perfectly complete?
The bad news is that presidents and husbands aren’t perfect. The good news is that Jesus is. One day he will be our only federal head! Happy times at last!
Conclusion:
Some women are good at picking out men who show potential and others are good at picking out parasites. I expect the election to show much more of the same.
So ladies… chose your man.