If you haven't heard the term “Christian Nationalism” then you’ve probably been living under a rock. It is everywhere. The media parrots it with alarming tones. They intend for you to fear it. Many politicians decry it from the podiums. They intend to defeat it. There is a book about it by a Christian author still sitting on the bestsellers list (The Case for Christian Nationalism). He intends to defend it. There are some politicians supporting it from their podiums. They intend to enact it.
One thing is very clear about Christian nationalism. The subject has exploded into the public square and there is much disagreement about it. This is all complicated by the part of it that lacks clarity. Its definition. As far as I can tell, there hasn't been any concrete definition established for the term. Everyone who uses it assumes their own meaning and defines it in the way that best suits their narrative. Of course, it’s hard to have any meaningful discussion in the midst of that kind of ambiguity (more on that later).
We are now living in a nation of rapid spiritual decline and mass cultural confusion. Therefore, we are being faced with questions our parents and grandparents never had to consider. This subject is one of them. It is not going away. American Christians are going to have to give it some thought if we want to know the way forward. Having said that, here are a few initial thoughts I have as I am developing my own view in this area.
The media and liberal politicians are not credible
That may sound harsh, but it’s true. They neither know nor care about properly defining the term. They only care about scaring you with it. Any serious person can easily detect the agenda behind their uses of the term. Their goal is to remove all potential influence Christianity may have because it opposes the wickedness they want to advance. The tactic is simple. “Christian Nationalist” is the new “Unvaccinated.” “Fear the evil evangelicals who actually want God’s Word to guide our nation’s policies. What monsters, right?”
They don’t care if there is a clear definition. In fact, they would rather it be unclear. Then, in place of a definition, they can fill your mind with images and concepts to trigger you every time you hear the term. Once that is done, you are like putty in their hands. They convinced people that the unvaccinated were going around killing people’s grandmas. Then, all they had to do was to mention “the unvaccinated” and people became angry with images of raging murderers in their heads.
In the same way, they want to be able to say, “Christian Nationalism”, and incite fears of a white mob trying to reinstate the KKK. They are not serious thinkers. They are trying to incite hatred toward any Christian trying to live out the implications of their faith. So, in the midst of the debate over Christian nationalism, they do not deserve our attention.
What is the alternative to Christian Nationalism?
If the nation is not ruled by Christian principles, then what will it be ruled by?
All societies are theocracies. The only thing that separates one society from another is, “Who is Theo?”
- Doug Wilson
I can't endorse everything Wilson says, but this is good. When he’s right, he’s right, and he's right about this. Every society is guided by a particular worldview and belief system. If it's not Christianity, we have to ask what it is. There is no such thing as a neutral government. It may sound good in theory, but it’s not as simple as “you be you and I’ll be me.” One person's free expression is another person's perceived oppression. What then?
The idea of Christian nationalism ruffles liberal feathers because they don’t want Christians making the rules. They don't want Scripture determining the law of the land. They want to be free to be their “true selves.” That narrative tugs on many heartstrings, but it’s not that innocent. They don't want the Christians making the rules because they themselves want to be the ones making the rules.
The secular culture doesn't care if a Christian is oppressed. In fact, they often celebrate it. They realize an important truth. In an organized and governed society there is no “complete” freedom. This is undeniable. It is the reason you cannot break the window of a store and take what you want. There are laws and they cannot be neutral. And those who get to define the source of morality and ethics also get to define the law.
You see, the law is not the final authority of a nation. It can be, and often is, changed. Therefore, the law is a servant to a greater authority. Our current cultural crisis is over that very concept. Who or what gets to be that greater authority? Who will be “Theo?”
We are in chaos right now because, as a society, we have rejected God as our greater authority. That means we think the position is open and it is a race to see who will fill it. Of course, we don’t get to make that call. Christ is King whether or not we recognize Him as such. That may need to be another post, though.
The point is that if Christ is not in that chair, someone else will be. Neutrality is a lie.
Eschatology matters
There are three major historical views of eschatology (Historic Premil, Amil, and Postmil). They don’t always get along, but they’re still brothers. In the last couple centuries, they have had a strange cousin come to visit. His name is Dispensationalism. His father, John Nelson Darby, dropped him off in the 19th century and he has since taken over the house.
Dispensationalism is responsible for the Left Behind books and movies. It is responsible for the idea of a pretribulation rapture followed by a 7-year tribulation, and the separation of Israel and the church. All of those waiting on pins and needles for the rebuilding of the third temple and the reinstitution of the sacrificial system are dispensational in their eschatology.
I blame a lot of things on dispensationalism. This is one of them. It is no coincidence that the rise of dispensational belief coincided with the gradual fall of American culture. The more dispensational evangelicals became, the less assertive they were in the cultural and political sphere.
It makes sense. Mainline dispensationalism sees the church disappearing, in the twinkling of an eye, somewhere into the heavenlies. Then the world descends into sudden chaos, followed by seven horrible years, leaving people singing “I Wish We’d All Been Ready.” Then Christ returns to the Earth with His people. Satan is thrown in the pit and they reign for a thousand years. Then Satan is let back out, he amasses an army, and they surround the people of God. At this point, Christ defeats Satan. But this time, it’s final. Like, really final. He and the wicked go to Hell. The world burns. The Christians spend eternity in an otherworldly place called Heaven. It would make an amazing rollercoaster.
I admit, that was a little bit tongue-in-cheek, but it was nonetheless accurate. It sounds a lot like sci-fi fiction, but not much like biblical theology. It certainly doesn’t inspire any attempt to engage with the culture or politics. Because of the implications of this view, modern Christians have been eerily silent in the public square as compared to historical Christians. The focus for most recent churches has been to stay out of politics and give no care for anything material. It’s all going to burn anyway so just go out and win souls.
Cautiously, I propose the eschatological tides may now be turning. There has been a recent wave of renewed interest in Reformed eschatology. There is quite the uprising of Christians who have returned to covenantal theology, leaving dispensationalism behind. This is especially happening in the younger generations.
This partly explains the uptick in the debate about Christian nationalism. Our generation has been handed no framework of how to handle politics and culture. We have only been told, “We are just passing through. Stay out of politics and just worry about Heaven.” But now we have seen from Scripture that Christ’s return will be the kingdom come down to us, not us whisked away to the kingdom. And suddenly the way we handle the politics of the day has become relevant again.
Of course, the way this debate is handled will vary amongst the three historic eschatological views. However, I think they all will lead to the conclusion that the Church is to engage in the public square in some way. Exactly how that needs to look is what the Christian nationalism debate is all about. I think it is a healthy debate and I’m glad we are having it.
Conclusion
Like I said, these are just some initial thoughts concerning Christian nationalism. I am just starting Wolfe’s book so I’m sure I will have a more developed stance once I have finished it.
Average Christians may be asking what their role is in all of this. I address that in this podcast episode: Theology and Culture - Episode 4.
Subscribe for free. You can also consider supporting The Verse and receiving extra content with a paid subscription.