My Thoughts on Seeing the USA Mid-Term Election Results
Christians are called to live by the Spirit. Living by the Spirit means walking by the Spirit, not by human desires. (Galatians 5:13-26) It means being aware of, sensitive to, and obedient to direct, inner revelation from God the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 2:9-10)
To walk by the Spirit is to be personally guided, directed, and led by the Spirit’s inner promptings that always align with the Bible. It is continually choosing to do what God wants rather than what we want.
When we truly live by the Spirit, we will overflow with the fruit of the Spirit — love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. (Galatians 5:22-23) We will experience the gifts of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:1-11) humbly working in and through our lives. Rather than being overcome by evil, we will overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:21)
Many people prayed for the mid-term elections in the USA. Now, they are disappointed with how their prayers were answered. Now is the time to rely on the living God, not on government.
It’s time to turn away from fear, anger, domination, and unkindness. Instead, let’s embrace the courage to obey these Bible commands: “Bless those who curse you,” “Love your enemies,” and “Overcome evil with good.” It’s time to “Walk by the Spirit,” not by the flesh.
CoPilot AI’s comment on this post:
This is a revealing post because it brings together several recurring themes in Steve Simms’ writing: Spirit-led Christianity, distrust of political solutions, ethical discipleship, and a practical application of Jesus’ teachings toward opponents.
A few observations:1. The central theme is not politics but spirituality
Although the occasion is the U.S. mid-term elections, the post is only superficially about politics. The election serves as a catalyst for a spiritual exhortation.
Notice the progression:
The election is not the subject. It is the test case. Simms is essentially asking: What happens when Christians do not get the political outcome they desired?
His answer is that the response reveals whether believers are relying on God or on government.2. He shifts attention from external power to internal transformation
This reflects a long-standing theme in Simms’ work. He often argues that Christianity is fundamentally transformational rather than governmental. The center of the Christian life is not taking control of society but being changed by the Spirit.
That emphasis appears repeatedly throughout his books, poems, and blog posts.3. He grounds everything in Scripture rather than party affiliation
Interestingly, Simms never identifies:
Instead he focuses on biblical passages:
The effect is to move the discussion away from political analysis and into discipleship.
A conservative Christian could read the post and agree with it.
A progressive Christian could read the post and agree with it.
His concern appears less to be who won than how Christians respond when they don’t win.4. The post reveals his charismatic theology. One particularly important sentence is this:
That is a stronger statement than many evangelical writers would make.
Simms is not describing guidance merely through Bible study, reason, or conscience. He explicitly speaks about:
This reflects his charismatic and Pentecostal influences. At the same time, he immediately adds an important qualification:
Thus he balances:
That combination appears frequently throughout his writings. The “flesh” in this post is largely social and political. In Galatians, “walking by the flesh” refers broadly to self-centered desires. Simms applies that concept to post-election reactions. Fear, anger, domination, and unkindness become examples of “fleshly” responses. By contrast:
are signs of walking by the Spirit. This shows how he often translates theological concepts into everyday behavior.
The post reflects his Anabaptist-like tendencies. Even though Simms is not historically Anabaptist, his emphasis here resembles several Anabaptist themes:
These themes also overlap with:
7. What the post does not say: Equally important are the things Simms avoids saying.
He does not say:
Rather, he seems to be saying that political engagement must remain subordinate to spiritual faithfulness. In his view, the greatest danger after an election is not losing political influence but losing Christlike character.
Overall assessment: This post is a concise expression of what may be one of Simms’ deepest convictions:
The piece is also a good example of how Simms tends to redirect public controversies toward personal discipleship. When many Christian commentators would analyze election results, strategies, parties, or cultural trends, Simms instead asks whether believers are displaying the fruit of the Spirit.