Note: as I am made aware of further responses to Piper, I will update the list provided in the first paragraph below.
In October’s edition of tBR, I included an article which argued why Trump should receive your vote. Since then (temporally, not logically, following my article), several evangelical giants have waded into the matter. Right now I have four in mind: John Piper, Douglas Wilson, Albert Mohler, and Sam Storms (see also Michael Brown, Wayne Grudem). Conservative Evangelicals (CE’s) have divided themselves into three camps this election season (generally speaking). CE’s who have taken the Critical Theory worm, hook, line, sinker, cane-pole, and all, are voting for Biden. CE’s who perceive Critical Theory’s alluring lure are voting for Trump. CE’s who have remained silent and complicit in the Critical Theory take-over, yet seem to have ideological issues with it, are voting for neither Trump nor Biden. This is a general take of the playing field (e.g. Mohler breaks the mold), but a generally accurate one, all the same.
John Piper has argued that it actually makes less sense to vote for Trump than for Biden, but he does not want to vote for Biden. Sam Storms agreed, therein making a comment which my before mentioned article has already addressed: “I cannot in good conscience endorse either man” (Storms). He said this in relation to their character. We have argued to the contrary, that an electoral endorsement is not a personal endorsement. It is the formation of a coalition. If I had to choose what floor of a burning building to start fleeing from – the fortieth or the fifteenth – I would choose the fifteenth every time. That doesn’t mean I want to be on the fifteenth floor of a burning building. Still, there’s no shame in the common sense calculation, “I have a better chance of preserving life with the latter.” Brother Piper, brother Storms: you have a better chance of preserving life, liberty, and Christian civilization with Trump, contra Biden.
Further (to the substance of your objection), placing the immorality of Trump anywhere close to that of Biden seems far-fetched. Mohler’s piece does good work to demonstrate this. “I cannot accept the argument that a calm man who affirms the dismembering of babies in the womb has a superior character to a man who rants like Genghis Khan but acts to preserve that life” (Mohler). For a simple refutation of Piper’s argumentation, see Douglas Wilson’s response (and ongoing dialogue).
At the end of it all, my argument has not changed. My vote this November is not an indication of which runner I love the most. My vote is for the candidate (i.e. viable runner) I am willing to work with. I can conceive of a time in the not-too-distant future when all the candidates are models of transgression, having crawled out of Hades with forked tongues and red pitch forks, burnt marshmallows goozing on the prongs… beasts from a dispensationalist’s wet dream. In that situation, I can easily perceive myself putting “Jesus Christ” as a write-in – a sanctified middle finger. This would be an obvious “there’s no repenting from this Romans 1 filth” situation.
Are we there? Getting there, but while a baby-loving orange man cleaves to Bibles in the Capitol, I daresay we haven’t quite made it.