Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 9
Matt argues Christians should resist the “false partisan political alternatives” (either support Trump or support his opponents) and even calls it a legitimate prayer that a president would step down because the office is “responsible for killing others” (citing Hippolytus); how does “none of the above” expose the limits of partisan imagination, and what would it cost you socially or economically to live there?
Another way to ask: How does choosing “neither side” show the limits of normal party politics for Christians? What might it cost you with friends, work, or money to live that way?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
Based on the speaker, “none of the above” exposes how partisan politics traps Christians into choosing between unfaithful options, while kingdom thinking asks first what Jesus taught—even if that isolates you from normal political coalitions.
- He says Christians should “resist becoming entrapped by false… partisan political alternatives” like “either… against Trump or for… the other side.”
- He calls it a “perfect legitimate prayer” that a president would “give up his decision… because it’s inconsistent with Christ to have a role… responsible for killing others.”
- He cites Hippolytus (200s): if you’re a magistrate, “you have to leave that,” showing this concern isn’t merely modern.
- He gives a concrete partisan example: do we have to choose “Democrats who want to bomb Iran or the Republicans who want to bomb Iran… perhaps neither.”
- He notes partisan systems lack a checkbox for “none of the above,” but “Kingdom Christians say, none of the above.”
- He adds even a “less radical view” could say “there’s wrong on both sides,” pushing back on the demanded binary.