Is Hillary Clinton Qualified for the United States Presidency?


Hillary Clinton

Is Hillary Clinton Qualified for the United States Presidency?

Richard Hollerman

I have no interest in discussing the pros and cons of either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump at this time. There is a vast amount of information that I don’t know about and it is available online, in the newspaper, in the news magazines, on the radio, and on the TV.

There is only one issue that I wish to discuss presently. It is this: From God’s perspective is Hillary Clinton Qualified for the United States Presidency?

What I discuss here will only mean something to you if you accept the fact that the Bible is the revealed Word of the living God. It is the infallible, inerrant and Spirit-inspired Word of Almighty God. Based on this fact, I believe that I have some information that will be of interest to you. To use Paul’s question, “What does the Scripture say?” (Romans 4:3a). If you reject this premise, most of what I say below will mean very little to you.

Many will bring in points like Clinton’s background, her experience, her knowledge, and even her husband’s past presidency. I’ll not deal with these considerations and soon you will see why.

Further, we want to emphasize that our comments have nothing to do with our view of woman’s worth in general. The role of the woman in God’s plan is honorable, worthy, and admirable (Genesis 1:26-27; 2:18, 24; 1 Corinthians 11:7-9, 11-12). God’s Word reveals that women have an important place in God our Creator’s world, one that men are not qualified to fill (cf. Titus 2:1-5; Ephesians 5:22-33; Proverbs 31:10-31; Romans 16:1-2). We are mainly dealing with the office of United States president and like positions.

There are at least ten different points that would rule out Mrs. Clinton’s qualifications for the United States presidency, so please notice them carefully:

  1. God’s Word says that a woman is not the “head” of a man. As Scripture says, “Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman” (1 Corinthians 11:3). Notice this carefully: The man (the male) is the head of a woman, thus the woman is not the head of a man. Question: How could Mrs. Clinton be head over some 165 million men in the United States when she is forbidden to be the “head” of anyone, including her husband?
  1. The woman is to be subject or submissive to her husband. As I mentioned earlier, this will only mean something to a reader who respects the inspiration of Scripture. All other feminists will consider this Biblical teaching to be outdated and irrelevant. God’s Word says, “Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything” (Ephesians 5:22-24). (See also Colossians 3:18; Titus 2:4-5; 1 Peter 3:1.) If a woman is to be submissive to her husband, how could someone like Mrs. Clinton govern some 165 million men while being under the authority of Mr. Clinton? It would be impossible!
  1. A woman is to live a “quiet” life and not be in “authority” over a man. Notice Scripture: “A woman must quietly receive instruction [not give instruction] with entire submissiveness [not authority]. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet” (1 Timothy 2:11-12). If a woman is to be “quiet” and receive, not give, instruction to others, and if God forbids a woman to exercise “authority” over a man, how could a woman be a president of an entire country in which half of the citizens are male?
  1. Jesus Christ only chose men (males) to be His chosen apostles, those who were sent out to take His message to the world (Matthew 10:1-5). If the Lord placed men in such a position, how is it possible for citizens to choose a woman to rule over men and take the lead over them? Wouldn’t Christ’s example here be decisive in this matter?
  1. Leaders in the early communities of Christians were always men (males). For instance, we read these instructions: “If any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do. An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife. . .” (1 Timothy 3:1-2; see also Titus 1:5-6). The word “husband” here is clearly a “male” in the Greek, and this is also plain when it says that an overseer in the assembly of saints must be the husband of one wife. If the leaders in God’s household or assembly must be males, how could a woman dare to take the place of leadership over an entire country!
  1. Similarly, the “deacons” in the assembly must be “husbands” of one wife (1 Timothy 3:12). If those who fill this responsible position in the body of Christ must be males, we ask how a woman can presume to take any kind of leadership over a nation!
  1. Political leadership was given to males, not females, in the Old Testament and the New Testament. Think of the kings of Israel as well as the leaders in the first century. Doesn’t this lead to the conclusion that it is entirely unfitting for a woman to have authority over a nation?
  1. Women are to “keep silent” in the gathered body of Christ. Scripture says, “The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. . . . It is improper for a woman to speak in church” (1 Corinthians 14:34-35). Paul says that this prohibition of a woman’s vocal participation is “the Lord’s commandment” (v. 37). Wouldn’t you say that this makes the command very important? If a woman is to be “silent” in the gathered body of Christ and is not to “speak” at all, how could a woman be president?
  1. All of the Biblical writers were men. None were women. This would include over 40 different writers. If God chose only men—40 of them—to write His inspired Word, would it not be entirely out of place for a woman to assume leadership in a country?
  1. The woman’s chief place is in the home. We know that there are exceptions to this and that not every woman is blessed with many children, but it is true that a woman’s highest position in life is to be a wife and mother (see Titus 2:4-5; 1 Timothy 2:15; 5:14-15). It isn’t God’s will that a woman assume leadership or authority over men, but to fill the position that God has given to her.

Hillary Clinton

Although more could be written, these ten points should be enough to convince every open and Biblically-oriented woman that she is not prepared to occupy the presidency of the United States. Further, every man should also recognize the male leadership that God wants. While humanistic, secularistic, and rebellious men and women will surely object to our conclusion, we believe that every humble, submissive, godly, and honest woman of God will clearly see the role that God has given—a wonderful role in God’s program for our stay on earth! Every man who is submissive to God’s Word will also readily see what we have seen above.

We conclude, therefore, that it is entirely unscriptural and wicked for Hillary Clinton to seen the office of the presidency of the United States of America. Yes, she may be voted on by humanistic and secularistic people and actually be the next occupant of the White House—but it is really rebellion against God and His will! If Hillary becomes president, this radically feminist woman would be in opposition to the plan of God, the American men who voted for her would show that they are in rebellion against the Lord’s ways, and Mr. Clinton would be shown to be less than a man.

Whatever is the future of Mrs. Hillary Clinton, it is good to know the will of God beforehand. Keep in mind that we are not at all recommending Donald Trump as president either since he is a prideful, vulgar, lustful, adulterous, and ungodly man. Let’s remember that God’s thoughts and God’s ways are not our thoughts and ways (Isaiah 55:8-9). Out ultimate desire is for God’s will to prevail!








Comments are closed.