A video clip of Pastor Philip Anthony Mitchell has circulated in which he challenges Christians to reconsider how they approach voting. His argument was that our political decisions should not be determined by race, political affiliation, or cultural expectations, but by the values of the kingdom of God. And to that point, I agree. If our identity is rooted in Christ, then our values should reflect the kingdom we claim to represent.
But here's where I want to challenge that argument. What exactly are the values of the kingdom of God? And who gets to determine which of those values matter most when we enter the voting booth? Reporting on the broader sermon also describes Mitchell’s opposition to abortion as a conviction shaping his political decisions. I respect the importance of moral conviction, but I disagree with any approach that risks reducing kingdom values to one political issue.
The kingdom of God is much bigger than abortion, marriage, immigration, racial justice, or religious liberty. And certainly bigger than the Democratic or Republican Party. If kingdom identity is supposed to shape our political decisions, we have to examine the whole of what that kingdom represents. That includes the positions we defend, the methods we use, and the character we demonstrate while defending them.
The Kingdom Didn't Begin in Washington. It Began in Genesis.
Before there was a Republican Party, a Democratic Party, a United States, or even an earthly government, there was God. Genesis 1 introduces us to a Creator who establishes order, gives life, defines purpose, and entrusts humanity with responsibility. In Genesis 1:26–28, God creates humanity in His image and gives human beings dominion over the earth. But notice something: humanity was given dominion, not ownership; authority, not autonomy; responsibility, not unrestricted power. We were created to represent the character of the One who gave us authority.
Genesis 2:15 describes humanity's responsibility to cultivate and care for what God had created. Leadership was never intended to be simply about having power over something. It was about being responsible for something. When sin entered the world, humanity's relationship with God, one another, and creation became distorted. Power intended for stewardship could be used for domination, authority could become an instrument of oppression, and leadership could become a pursuit of personal glory. Does any of that sound familiar?
Jesus Redefined What Kingship Looks Like
Fast-forward to John 18, where Jesus stands before Pilate, a representative of Roman political authority. Pilate questions whether Jesus is a king, and Jesus responds: "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight..." (John 18:36). Think about the significance of that statement. Jesus does not deny His kingship; He distinguishes His kingdom from the kingdoms of this world. He doesn't need an army, manipulation, or political domination to prove that He is King.
That doesn't mean Christians cannot participate in government, advocate for justice, or exercise their right to vote. It means the kingdom of God cannot be established through the same methods earthly kingdoms use to secure and maintain power. Coercion, manipulation, intimidation, deception, and the pursuit of power at any cost contradict the character Jesus demonstrated. So perhaps we should ask more than whether a political party supports something we believe is biblical. We should also ask whether the methods being used to advance those beliefs reflect the character of Christ. A biblical position does not automatically justify an unbiblical method.
In Mark 10:42–45, Jesus contrasts rulers who exercise authority over others with the leadership He expects from His disciples. Whoever desires to be great must become a servant, and whoever desires to be first must become a servant of all. Jesus transforms our understanding of what authority is for. Philippians 2:5–11 presents Christ's humility, obedience, and sacrifice before describing His exaltation. The King of Kings demonstrates greatness through service, power through sacrifice, authority through righteousness, and victory through love.
No Kings? Actually, We Serve One.
The "No Kings" protest movement challenges what its supporters see as a growing concentration of power under President Donald Trump. And I understand the concern behind the slogan. No president should be above accountability, no political leader should possess unlimited authority, and no government official should be treated as though the nation belongs to them. But as a Christian, the phrase makes me think about something deeper, because we do serve a King. Perhaps we've forgotten what legitimate authority is supposed to look like in the first place.
Here's the distinction I want us to consider. When people say "No Kings" in the American political context, they're generally rejecting unchecked human authority, not making a theological statement against Jesus Christ. Christians can examine that concern on its own merits. Our theology also reminds us that we don't need an earthly king who demands the allegiance that belongs to God. We certainly don't need to transform presidents, politicians, pastors, or political movements into saviors, because no human leader can carry the weight of an identity that belongs to Christ alone.
We should have accountability in government. The deeper question is whether we recognize the difference between authority that serves people and authority that seeks to control them. That distinction must be examined regardless of who occupies the White House.
What Are the Values of the Kingdom?
This is where I believe the conversation needs to expand. We often identify kingdom values through political issues such as abortion, marriage, immigration, poverty, healthcare, religious freedom, and justice. Scripture speaks to the moral principles behind these conversations. But when Paul describes the evidence of the Spirit's work in the life of a believer, he doesn't give us a political platform. In Galatians 5:22–23, he identifies the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance. These qualities reveal the character of the kingdom we claim to represent, and they provide an important test of our political engagement.
Can we claim to defend life while demonstrating indifference toward human suffering? Can we claim to value justice while excusing dishonesty? Can we claim to defend religious liberty while seeking to control the conscience of others? Can we claim to promote peace while encouraging hostility toward people who disagree with us? Can we claim to represent Christ while abandoning kindness, patience, and self-control whenever politics enters the conversation?
Now, this doesn't mean that kindness requires agreement or that love prevents us from confronting wrongdoing. Jesus confronted injustice, challenged hypocrisy, and spoke truth even when it was unpopular. But His methods were consistent with His character. The fruit reveals the nature of the tree. Perhaps we should examine the fruit of our political engagement just as seriously as the positions we defend.
When Both Parties Reflect Something We Value
Here's where the conversation becomes difficult. A Christian may identify with Republican positions on abortion, traditional marriage, or parental rights. Another Christian may identify with Democratic positions on poverty, healthcare, civil rights, or immigration. Both may appeal to Scripture to explain their convictions. While the parties' proposed solutions differ, the underlying moral concerns deserve examination.
So what happens when the party that supports one of your convictions takes a position that conflicts with another? Do you challenge it, or do you begin finding reasons to excuse it? If we're willing to condemn wrongdoing from the opposing party but defend similar behavior from our own, what does that reveal? Are we consistently applying kingdom principles, or have we allowed our political identity to determine which biblical principles we emphasize?
I believe this is where Pastor Mitchell's challenge about identity becomes especially important. But I would take the question further. If kingdom identity is supposed to determine our political values, then no political party should be exempt from the examination of those values. That includes Democrats, Republicans, and certainly the politicians we personally support.
Are We Voting Our Values or Our Fears?
There's another dimension to this conversation that I don't think receives enough attention: fear. Listen carefully to how we often discuss elections. If this person wins, we'll lose our freedoms; if that party wins, our families will suffer; if these policies pass, our country will never be the same. I am not suggesting these concerns are imaginary. Political decisions have real consequences, and some fears are grounded in legitimate threats. But what we fear losing often reveals what we believe is most important to protect.
Are our political decisions being shaped primarily by the convictions we hold, or by the outcomes we fear? First John 4:18 tells us: "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear." This doesn't mean faith eliminates every concern about the future. It means fear should not become the foundation of our identity or the controlling force behind our decisions. When fear becomes our motivation, we may begin justifying things we would otherwise condemn.
We excuse dishonesty because we're afraid of the alternative. We overlook injustice because we're afraid of losing influence. We tolerate behavior that contradicts our convictions because we're afraid of what happens if the other side wins. Before long, we're no longer asking what reflects the character of Christ; we're asking what we're willing to compromise to prevent what we fear. So are we really voting our values, or are our fears determining which values we're willing to defend?
The Lesser of Two Evils
We've become comfortable describing elections as choosing the lesser of two evils, and I understand the reasoning. We live in an imperfect world, and no political party, candidate, or government will perfectly reflect the kingdom of God. Sometimes people make difficult choices because they believe one outcome will cause less harm than another. But have we become so focused on identifying the lesser evil that we've forgotten our calling to overcome evil with good?
Romans 12:21 says: "Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good." Our calling goes beyond identifying which form of evil is more tolerable. We're called to demonstrate the character of Christ: greatness measured through service, enemies met with love, truth without deception, justice with mercy, and power demonstrated through sacrifice rather than domination. Matthew 5:14 reminds us: "Ye are the light of the world." Light doesn't overcome darkness by becoming a more acceptable version of darkness. It overcomes darkness by shining.
Voting can be one expression of our civic responsibility, but it cannot become the full expression of our kingdom responsibility. Our calling extends beyond Election Day. It is reflected in how we treat our neighbors, respond to injustice, serve the vulnerable, speak truth, and engage those who disagree with us.
What Does It Mean to Be the Light? Isaiah 58 Gives Us the Answer.
If we're going to talk about overcoming evil with good, we need to understand what that actually looks like. It's one thing to tell people to be the light; it's another thing to demonstrate what light does. What fascinates me about Isaiah 58 is that God is addressing people who are practicing religion. They're fasting, seeking God, and participating in religious activities, yet God challenges them because their practices aren't producing the kind of lives He desires. They were practicing religion while neglecting the very principles their religion was supposed to represent. Does that sound familiar?
We can defend biblical values, quote Scripture, attend church, and argue about morality while overlooking the suffering of the people around us. In Isaiah 58:6–7, God explains the kind of fast He has chosen: to loose the bands of wickedness, undo heavy burdens, let the oppressed go free, break every yoke, feed the hungry, provide shelter for the poor, and clothe the naked. Notice what God is emphasizing: justice, mercy, compassion, restoration, and responsibility. These are expressions of God's character, not secondary concerns of the kingdom.
Then comes the promise in Isaiah 58:8: "Then shall thy light break forth as the morning..." There it is: light. But notice when the light appears. It appears when people's relationship with God produces justice, compassion, and practical concern for others, rather than simply a proclamation of religious convictions, a winning argument, or political influence. Isaiah 58:10 takes it even further: "And if thou draw out thy soul to the hungry, and satisfy the afflicted soul; then shall thy light rise in obscurity, and thy darkness be as the noonday."
We're often so consumed with identifying the darkness around us that we forget we've been called to bring light into it. We identify evil in political parties, government, and society, and some of those concerns are legitimate. But what are we doing about the suffering we see? Are we feeding the hungry, helping the oppressed, restoring broken communities, and defending the dignity of people who cannot defend themselves? Are we addressing the conditions that allow injustice and suffering to continue? Or have we become more committed to identifying evil than demonstrating good?
Romans 12:21 tells us to overcome evil with good, and Isaiah 58 shows us what that good looks like. The kingdom of God is also about what we're called to build. Jesus healed the sick, fed the hungry, welcomed the rejected, restored dignity, challenged oppressive religious practices, and served those whom society overlooked. He demonstrated the kingdom He proclaimed. If we're going to claim that our political decisions are based on kingdom principles, our lives should reflect those same principles beyond the voting booth. We must examine both the evil we're willing to vote against and the good we're willing to do.
What if our greatest contribution to society isn't simply choosing who governs it, but demonstrating what it looks like when God governs us? What if our response to darkness includes becoming people who actively confront suffering, injustice, and oppression with love, truth, mercy, and service? The kingdom Jesus established isn't waiting for an election to begin its work, and neither should we. The world needs Christians whose lives demonstrate the light.
A Final Thought Before You Vote
As you prepare to cast your ballot, I'm not here to tell you to vote red or blue. I'm asking us to examine something deeper. If our identity determines our values, and our values influence our decisions, then what do our political decisions reveal about our identity?
Do we value truth even when it challenges our preferred candidate? Do we value justice even when it benefits people we disagree with? Do we value religious freedom even for those who don't share our faith? Do we value life beyond the political issues that receive the most attention? And are we willing to hold our own political allies accountable to the same standards we demand from their opponents?
I believe the greatest danger is that we might become so consumed with defending an earthly kingdom that we lose sight of the character of the heavenly one. Jesus instructed us to seek first the kingdom of God. If that kingdom truly shapes our identity, its principles should challenge every political platform, including the one we find most appealing.
Before we ask which party best represents our values, perhaps we should ask whether our values truly represent the kingdom. Before we allow fear to determine our choices, perhaps we should ask whether our faith is shaping how we respond to that fear. Ultimately, the question is bigger than who wins an election. Are we allowing our faith to confront our fears, or are we allowing our fears to redefine our faith? And when the election is over, regardless of who wins, will the world still recognize the character of Christ in us?
Scripture excerpts are from the King James Version (KJV); ellipses mark shortened quotations.
Sources and context: EEW Magazine’s report on Mitchell’s voting remarks (https://www.eewmagazineonline.com/latest-news/2026/10/29/philip-anthony-mitchell-voting-sermon-midterms) and Philip Anthony Mitchell’s “A Chosen Identity” sermon reference (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d68HPJS0_Pg).
