Biblical Ignorance, Politically-Driven Hermeneutics, and the New Testament Basis for Refusing to Vote

I recently heard an Evangelical speaking about Christians not voting and ascribing such arguments and positions to Biblical ignorance. He then proceeded to appeal to the prophets and the way they testified to the kings. Drawing an analogy, he suggested this means that we are to fulfil that same role and speak to the kings (or leaders) of our society. And we do so (it would seem) by voting.

Please note that this all pretty much limited to Western contexts and particularly that of the United States. The history of Evangelicalism (or we should say its romanticised understanding of its history and the history of the country) plays a huge role in this kind of reasoning.

The irony here is that his Biblical argument is actually rooted in the very kind of ignorance he decries. I'm not going to revisit the larger question of Christians voting and the nature of civil engagement - things I've already written about extensively. At this point I wish to engage his erroneous analogy in connection to the prophets.

Some theologians have referred to the Covenant Lawsuit - in other words the prophets (as types of Christ) had access to the Council of God where they could hear God speak from His throne. They were then to repeat these words like lawyers bringing suit. Their words were (quite literally) revelation. And to whom did they speak? They spoke to the kings of Israel and Judah and while some were apostate, they were still in reference to the covenant. The kings were the rulers of the covenant people, the covenant nation. The Kingdom and kingship were also typological pointing to the coming Christ (or True King) and His Kingdom.

The prophets did issue condemnations to the nations but it was never in a covenantal context. They were denounced for their wickedness, their pride, and their evil deeds - especially in reference to the covenant people. But they were never condemned for failing to keep covenant - for breaking Sabbath, dietary laws, or for failing to worship rightly in the Jerusalem Temple.

I don't see how they 'voted' on the basis of a series of choices as to which candidate or issue they thought best served God or reflected His teaching. And of course with democracy (if it's truly believed) one must accept the results - the people have spoken, and in democracy that has a moral authority and implied obligation. Is this how the prophets behaved? Is this how the New Testament tells us to behave vis-à-vis the world?

Of course not. The very notion is ridiculous.

Some think Jonah provides an example with regard to a pagan nation being called to follow God and be saved. The Jonah episode was both anomalous and typological. He was sent to a people outside the covenant, a Gentile (even Bestial) nation. And yet their repentance did not bring them into the covenant and within a few generations Nineveh was sacked and its empire was in ruins. Like the Naaman episode, or Elijah visiting the woman of Tyre, this was part of a pattern, foreshadowing the coming Gentile inclusion under the New Covenant, when God's mercy would extend to the nations. The Jonah example was not something normative or prescriptive but part of an unfolding story of redemptive-history.

And so we're back to prophets and the kings and the claims of Biblical ignorance. It would seem the activist who said this (Bill Banuchi of NY Faith & Freedom Coalition) is the one who needs to revisit and relearn how to read the Bible. His analogy fails from no matter which angle you look at it.

He decovenantalizes the prophets and turns them into social activists. This is ironic given that this is exactly what the Modernist Theologians do, those connected to the academy and the Mainline denominations. They don't believe the prophets were inspired and as such they see them as Gandhi and Martin Luther King-type figures agitating for social change. This is to completely misunderstand them and the covenantal and revelational context of their prophecies and interactions with the kings.

We frequently hear statements like the one made by Banuchi but we need to take note - that such declamations and appeals are often made in ignorance or are of a manipulative character. One sometimes gets the impression that such activists will say almost anything to get people to vote and support their agenda and alliances - even to the point of twisting Scripture. I don't pretend to know what motivates Banuchi but I did take offense at his statement and in response to call out just who it is that is ignorant of Scriptural teaching.

This is all the more troubling as he purports to be some kind of pastor (or 'reverend') and yet there's no indication that he's actually holding office in connection to a church. But as one who claims (right or wrong) to be an officeholder in Christ's Church he is supposedly 'apt to teach' and knows how to handle the Word of God. Whether this is so remains an open question but we have reason to doubt.

See also:

https://proto-protestantism.blogspot.com/2026/05/twisting-scriptures-undermining.html 

https://proto-protestantism.blogspot.com/2014/10/exiles-in-babylon-should-christians-vote.html 

https://proto-protestantism.blogspot.com/2022/10/the-false-dilemma-of-2022-election.html

https://proto-protestantism.blogspot.com/2020/11/providence-power-and-second-class.html

https://pilgrimunderground.blogspot.com/2014/11/inbox-what-about-refusing-to-vote-as.html