Sermon Video: The Threefold Office of the Messiah: King - Jeremiah 23:5-6

In addition to the unexpected roles of prophet and priest, the long-awaited Messiah would also be what the people hoped for: An heir to David's throne.  At the time this prophecy was given, however, the people of Israel were facing the greatest crisis of their nation's history with the impending doom of God's judgment in the form of Babylon's invading armies close to hand.  Yet even while the prophet Jeremiah was sent to warn them of this coming destruction, God also shared with Jeremiah this promise of hope in the coming of the Messiah.

But, what about the promised kingdom, how can Jesus be the Messiah without ruling on David's throne?  Indeed, Jesus was not concerned during his sojourn among us about establishing a physical kingdom in defiance of Rome, rather he wholly invested his time (and ultimately his very life) in establishing a spiritual kingdom.  However, when Jesus returns it will be to rule, to establish the righteous and just kingdom that Jeremiah promised, those promises stand and will be fulfilled.

Why plans to build a "Christian" Nationalist Retreat Center in Franklin, PA is not a good idea for the local churches or our town.

The view from the Allegheny River Retreat Center

My wife and I moved to Franklin in January of 2012 when I was called to be the new pastor at the First Baptist Church of Franklin (the one next to the Sheetz station, the red brick one, not the other one).  In the years since we've come to know Franklin and Venango County as a place that has a lot of positive things going for it, and as a good place to raise our daughter.  I've worked closely during my twelve years here with my neighboring churches, with charities (including of course Mustard Seed Missions, which I helped to found and serve as the President of), and local government officials.  I think I have a solid understanding of what this community needs moving forward, and what it doesn't.

For example: Franklin (and Venango County) would benefit if the new owners of Joy Plant #1 are able to find good tenants who will hire a significant number of workers at a living wage; that seems like a fairly obvious one.  As a second example, we are blessed in this community to have Emmaus Haven, the Christian charity that runs the men's shelter in Siverly, but our community's people will benefit when Emmaus Haven is also able to open a shelter in our county to house women with children.  Thirdly, we would benefit from an influx of doctors, nurses, dentists, police officers, and all the other professions that we, like most rural communities in this generation, need more of.  The list could go on an on, but let me end it with this, our town and our county need to continue to have churches that preach the Word of God, maintain the faith handed down to us from our ancestors, and work together to help those in need in our community.  At present, this is something we have, a tremendous resource, and something worth every effort that I and thousands like me put into maintaining what we collectively refer to as The Church.

On the flip side, there are numerous things that could change about Franklin and Venango County that would not benefit the people of our community, things that would be a detriment to the efforts of Christians and non-Christians alike.  For example: While some might celebrate the jobs that a casino would bring, or the tax revenue, the dark side of gambling's affects on individuals and families would not benefit our community (that one is unlikely to come here is a blessing).  A second example of the kind of developments that would be unhelpful to the health and vitality of our community would be the opening of a strip club, the closing of one of our libraries, or the loss of another significant employer.

None of the preceding thoughts are all that controversial.  We all want our community to have good jobs and a safety net for those in need.

Which after a long-winded introduction brings us to the topic at hand, which is the proposed "Seven Mountain training center."  Would it benefit Franklin or Venango County if this dream were to become a reality?  It would not.  That may feel like a very definitive statement, even a judgmental one coming as it does from a local pastor, but my belief on this matter comes from a lifetime of experience within the Church, a career of serving local churches, and an understanding of history, both secular and religious.  Given that the future is unknowable, and what is better or worse for a community can be a subjective question (as our recent bruhaha over the Witch Walk demonstrated in spades), I will certainly understand those who don't see this in the same way that I do, but everything that I know about the Church, the Gospel, America, and democracy tells me that "Christian" Nationalism is a bad idea, and that Seven Mountain Dominionism is a particularly dangerous form of "Christian" Nationalism.

Why am I talking about "Christian" Nationalism attempting to come here to Franklin, PA anyway?  When did this happen?  In June of 2023, The Atlantic published an article written by Stephanie McCrummen about the efforts of Tami Barthen and her husband Kevin (the article is almost exclusively about Tami) who moved to Franklin, PA in 2017 looking to buy a retirement cabin, but instead bought the former Vision Quest property where they are in the process of turning it into a retreat center for "Christian" Nationalists under the name Allegheny River Retreat Center.  The website for the planned retreat center doesn't mention anything (that I could find) about the theological and political nature of its purpose, but given the daily social media postings from "prophets" associated with the New Apostolic Reformation that populate both Tami's page and that of the ARRC, and her stated intention to make the property a "Seven Mountains training center," it seems only fitting that the churches and community of Franklin and Venango County take notice of this effort.

{The Watchman Decree: 'Christian' Nationalism's 'name it and claim it' dangerous prayer.  I wrote this on 8/23/22 to explain why Seven Mountain Dominionism is so dangerous to the Church and to America.  For those unfamiliar with the term, Seven Mountain Dominionism is a subset of "Christian" Nationalism, a specific type of effort at turning the country into a "Christian Nation."  Throughout this essay I have continued my habit of putting the "Christian" in "Christian" Nationalism in quotation marks, not because it is a generally accepted grammatical practice, but in deference to my own dislike of the association of this movement, historically and today, with the love and peace of the faith and practice that I hold dear.  There is nothing authentically Christ honoring about Christian Nationalism.}

Some of you may have met Tami and/or Kevin, I have not, and they may indeed be pleasant people to share a meal with, and in their own way be faithful Christians who are seeking to honor God with their lives.  My purpose in writing is not to cast dispersions upon them, as people, I don't have any basis for judgment either way, nor any reason to share it if I did.  Rather, it is the ideas behind Seven Mountain Dominionism (and "Christian" Nationalism) that are dangerous.

I was unaware of this effort to open a retreat center or this article about it until last week.  I contacted Tami via FB instant messaging, after seeing that she has the article pinned to the top of the Retreat Center's FB page and also uses an image of it on her business card, to let her know that I would be writing an article about this proposed retreat center from the perspective of someone who believes strongly in the Separation of Church and State as well as Religious Freedom (two ideals that are anathema to the "Christian" Nationalist movement, as they are to Fundamentalists in every religion). I asked her if she wanted to clarify anything from the article.  In the ensuing conversation with instant messaging, Tami indicated that she had never heard of the New Apostolic Reformation (she shares multiple posts daily from that movement's prominent and nationally known leaders), that in addition, "I don't know what Christian Nationalism is," and stated that you cannot judge someone by a magazine article (which, again, she displays prominently inviting others to read it).  In the end, Tami told me that my "tone" was accusatory, but declined to state anything from the article that she believed was a mischaracterization.  That's the long way of saying, I tried to offer the people behind the Allegheny River Retreat Center the opportunity to disclaim their apparent connection to Dutch Sheets, Lance Wallnau, the New Apostolic Reformation, and/or "Christian" Nationalism, but was rebuffed. 

To read the article from the Atlantic, click here: THE WOMAN WHO BOUGHT A MOUNTAIN FOR GOD, by Stephanie McCrummen, The Atlantic, 6/20/23

To read the article from the  Atlantic, together with my response to it, click here: A response to: "The Woman Who Bought a Mountain for God", a nationally published article (on 6/20/23) about "Christian" Nationalism in Franklin, PA

I have written much over the years about the dangers of "Christian" Nationalism both to the Church and to the government, and especially to the rights of those who don't conform to the particular definition of the Church that would then be backed up by governmental coercion.  In fact, I'm still working on my series: Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism.  I've made it to number 30, Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #30 - John 17:16 & 18:36, but it'll be a while until I can work all the way to #62.

Let me make a few brief distinctions between the type of patriotism that can honor God and the "Christian" Nationalism that endangers the Gospel, the Church, and any nation it attempts to control.

1. There is a key difference between prayer for the government that hopes to make our democracy better for all who live in this land...and "Christian" Nationalism's willingness to overthrow the government and end democracy in order to win.

2. There is a key difference between working with, or conversely protesting against, the government as an exercise in freedom...and "Christian" Nationalism's claim of a God-given right to rule in his name over everyone else.

3. There is a key difference between influencing culture and the government for the better, seeking to make them more moral and righteous...and claiming that only you, and those like you, have the answers as to what that culture and government should be, and that those who disagree are in league with the Devil.

I am fully in favor of the first half of those three statements, and in fact I've done my share of all three.  But that's not what the committed "Christian" Nationalists have in mind when they envision what America would look like under their rule, they have the second half of those statements in mind.  

We have a good community here in Franklin and Venango County, it isn't perfect, we all know that, but it is one of the better places to live in our world today.  Working to maintain it is important to us all.  That being said, this is America, if they can raise the millions the project will need, the Allegheny River Retreat Center may indeed become a beacon of "Christian" Nationalist training that attracts speakers and guests from all over the country.  I'm not proposing that anyone take action to try to stop them from fulfilling their dream, and certainly don't want anyone to harass Tami or Kevin online or in-person, in part because I do believe in everyone's freedom of religion, including those who don't reciprocate.  Maybe this "prophecy" of what this retreat center could become will result in a functioning enterprise here in our town, maybe it won't.

No matter what happens next, the answer to falsehood is truth, the answer to darkness is light, and the answer to hate is love.  I truly believe every bit of that sentence.  So, if the planned "Seven Mountain retreat center" becomes a reality, my response to this militancy will be truth, light, and love, I won't respond with anything else even though I know in my heart, my mind, and in my soul, that this is not a good idea for our local churches or our town.

There certainly isn't time here to make the case that "Christian" Nationalism is the destructive force that I know it to be, I have however written and taught on this subject for years, so anyone seeking to learn more about this movement and how dangerous it is to the Church and America can simply continue reading some of the links below.

Here is a six hour seminar outlining what the Biblical relationship is between the Church and human government: What Every Christian Should Know About: The Church and Politics

Scripture Abuse: 2 Chronicles 7:14, idolatry, nationalism, and antisemitism

The irrefutable rejection of Christian Nationalism by the New Testament

The blasphemous "One Nation Under God" painting by Jon McNaughton

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #30 - John 17:16 & 18:36

 

John 17:16  New International Version

They are not of the world, even as I am not of it.

John 18:36  New International Version

Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

Admittedly, it has been a while since I've posted something in my self-imposed series of 62 scripture passages that refute "Christian" Nationalism.  The last post prior to this one was in January, and those of you who read my blog will understand what I've been writing about since them: The First Fruits of Zion.  To compare the two issues (Nationalism vs. the Hebrew Roots Movement, i.e. FFOZ) is a study in contrasts.  "Christian" Nationalism is a big idea with a long history that poses an existential threat to not only America but Europe as well, whereas the HRM is a much more niche idea that most people are unaware of, and one that despite the grandiose vision of its leaders is very unlikely to affect world history.  On another level, "Christian" Nationalism is more nebulous, its influences and harms in the local church and in our denominations more difficult to pin down as it floats on the jetsam with a host of other dangerous political ideas and movements.  In contrast, the HRM {FFOZ being one example}, when one does encounter it as we have here in Venango County, barges into local congregations, pulls individuals out of fellowship, and causes acute local harm.  All that is a long-winded explanation why I needed to prioritize writing about the dangers of FFOZ (an ongoing process as I continue preparing my seminar for this Fall) when its dangerous activity is front-and-center in our Christian community.  So what brought the idea of "Christian" Nationalism back into focus, at least for now?  The urgency come from a new effort being put forth to legitimize and defend this ideology, primarily in Reformed Baptist circles (not my pond, but adjacent to the one I swim in, and I know it well enough).

The effort in question: The Statement on Christian Nationalism and the Gospel is a very populist/libertarian (they don't mesh well, I know) and isolationist political essay wrapped in the notion that this is the true vision of Jesus Christ for not only his Church, but every nation on the planet as well in this age.

The contradiction between Jesus' words in John's Gospel and the statement linked above could not be more stark.  The authors of the statement envision Jesus Christ reigning and ruling over this world, here and now, when he made no such claim.  In essence, they believe they can establish at least a version of the kingdom that Jesus promised that he would establish when he returns, but of course Jesus did not encourage, let alone command, his followers to be about this task.

If you take the time to read the statement, a number of eye-opening claims may stand out to you.  When I read it, two of the inherent problems of this philosophy, regarding which "Christian" Nationalism does NOT have any moral answers came to the forefront: (1) What about the non-Christians living in the nations that follow this vision?  They will either become second-class citizens who are forced to live against their beliefs, and/or be expelled from the land.  While the authors thankfully denounce ethnic homogeneity, they implicitly are endorsing national religious uniformity.  History has such an example in Spain after the Reconquista where both Muslims and Jews were given the "choice" between fleeing as refugees and converting.  Let me save you the suspense, it was a brutal process that gave the Inquisition a chance to shine.  You may be saying, "Where in the statement is this?"  It isn't, but that is the inevitable conclusion when you state that the civil government should enforce the Ten Commandments (the one on the Sabbath is awkward given that Christians worship on the Lord's Day, that is Sunday).  The key one here is the taking of the Lord's name in vain, i.e. blasphemy.

WE AFFIRM that the Christian Nationalist project entails national recognition of essential Christian Orthodoxy (Article II) as a Christian consensus under Jesus Christ, the supreme Lord and King of all creation, and the establishment of the general equity of the second table of the Ten Commandments (laws 5-10) as the foundational law of the nation, with warnings informing citizens of the consequences of blaspheming the One, True, and Living God often resulting in second table violations, namely, the harming of our neighbors’ lives and property.

WE DENY that laws against public blasphemy coerce conversion or hinder religious liberty in private.

Once non-Christians in America (or Europe, this movement is more advanced there in Russia and Hungary) are muzzled with blasphemy laws {i.e. the 1st Amendment is neutered}, the second moral quandary of "Christian" Nationalism will rear its ugly head: (2) The government will be in the business of defining orthodoxy within Christianity and punishing those who run afoul of that judgment.  Throughout the statement there are references to promoting and defending historic Christian orthodoxy, and while I have great confidence that we can come to a working definition of such for ecumenical purposes within the Church {that is freely chosen associations}, as a Baptist (in the historic sense) I have zero confidence in having that definition interpreted and enforced by a politician or judge.

So, first the blasphemy laws will silence or expel the non-Christians, then they will come for the not-sufficiently orthodox people who claim to be Christians {Again, the government would be making these judgment calls through arrests and trials of those who violate the law against blasphemy}.

Can this really be what Jesus wanted his Church to become?  Is this in any way a part of the Kingdom of God that he proclaimed would be marked by love and self-sacrificial servanthood?  

Lastly, and this should not be missed when you read the statement: the authors admit they're not willing to prioritize democracy or the republic.  They think that "Christian" Nationalism will work just fine under dictators {See: Putin and the wanna-be dictator Viktor Orban}.

WE DENY that the separation of authority between the Church and the State means there must be a separation of God and the state. We further deny that there can ever be a separation between religion and state., as everyone possesses views about ultimate reality, purpose, and cause, which inform their morality and preferred policies. We deny the idea that a nation’s laws do not impose morality and religion.

Read the statement, and read John 17:16 and 18:36, the disconnect is powerful.

Sermon Video: The Children Praise Jesus as King - Matthew 21:14-16

And now, the rest of the story.  We know about the Triumphal Entry, and the clearing of the Temple that take place soon after, but don't forget about the healing of the blind and the lame accompanied by the joyous shouts of children that followed.

On the day of his triumph, Jesus took the time to heal those who came to him in faith.  While the common people celebrated him as a savior, the religious leaders of the day scorned him as a threat.  While adults looked at miracles and scoffed, children showered Jesus in praises.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #28: John 12:31

 

John 12:31 Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out. 

When you think about it, a blind squirrel would be able to smell where the acorns are, so I'm not sure that this idiom is all that useful.  Nevertheless, it came to mind when thinking about this verse.  How's that you ask?  A valid question.  When thinking about the need to remember that Satan has power within this present age, that the kingdoms of this world cannot be sanctified or holy because of that power (and human nature), it made me think of those groups who view government with a jaundiced eye because of that evil influence, which led my mind to the Jehovah's Witnesses.  Now, the Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to participate in government because they believe that we are already living in the End Times and thus the world's governments, even your local school board, are controlled by Satan.  This belief makes them unlikely candidates to support a 'Christian' Nationalist movement, {That they're a cult and not a part of Christianity being another reason} just for the wrong reasons, hence the blind squirrel.  That may have been a long journey for a short reward, but hopefully it has you thinking about the connection between human governments and institutions and Satan.  While it is not Christian orthodoxy that they are controlled by Satan, which would necessitate the sort of withdrawal enacted by the JW, it is in keeping with a proper Christian worldview to remember that both corrupted human nature and the influence of spiritually evil powers exists within all human created institutions including governments.

The tie in with 'Christian' Nationalism is thus a fundamental one.  It goes to the heart of the question of whether or not a "Christian Nation" is even possible in any generation with any form of government.  The answer, when considering these limitations (not to mention Jesus' lack of endorsement of any such project) is a definitive, "No".  Thus 'Christian' Nationalism is working against reality, trying to complete a project and erect a system that is impossible given the prevailing conditions.  It isn't about hope, it isn't about effort, it isn't about zeal or sacrifice, it just won't work, period.  When Christ returns, when he sets up his kingdom here on earth, everything will change, until then we've been given a more a more important mission than trying to build a house of cards.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #27: Luke 22:24-27

 

Luke 22:24-27     New International Version

24 A dispute also arose among them as to which of them was considered to be greatest. 25 Jesus said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. 26 But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. 27 For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves.

Six months before he won the World Heavyweight boxing champion title, Cassius Clay, soon to be known as Muhammad Ali, released an album of poetic verse (a generation before this type of thing would evolve to become rap and hip hop).  The album, was entitled I am the Greatest.  Ali co-wrote the lyrics with comedy writer Gary Belkin, it sold 500,000 copies and was nominated for a Grammy.  In 1977, NBC aired a cartoon entitled, I Am the Greatest: The Adventures of Muhammad Ali that featured the boxer as a global adventurer with a tag-along niece and nephew; it was cancelled after 13 episodes.  When you try to think of ego run amok, any number of politicians, athletes, actors, and billionaires may come to mind, the list of famous people with a reputation for self-absorption is sadly long and diverse, but few of them could compete with the persona that Muhammad Ali portrayed to the world during his boxing career.

Here's the thing, setting aside a few mega-church pastors whose popularity and private jets might convince the unwary to think otherwise, the path to effective and God-honoring leadership in the Church of Jesus Christ has always been, and will always be, through humble service.  Have there been those in positions of power within the Church, like Cardinal Richelieu (made famous by Dumas' portrayal of him in The Three Musketeers), for whom Church 'service' was a means-to-an-end, a path to self-aggrandizement?  Of course there have been, we'd be shocked if a Church made up of people, some redeemed but still flawed, and others only pretending to be true believers, didn't have within its ranks any number of scoundrels.  But, and this is key, every such person seeking their own benefit and not the will of God, everyone covered in pride, has been working AGAINST what Jesus created his Church to be.

Which brings us once again to 'Christian' Nationalism.  This movement is predicated on the belief that there is only one solution, only one possible path, to cure whatever malady 'Christian' Nationalism decides to wage war upon (sometimes literally), and that one path, or worse yet one and only one leader, just happens to be themselves.  Power must be gained, it must be acquired, even through unethical or illegal means, because they alone can bring about the Golden Age that God must bless them with if/when power is fully in their hands to order society to their liking.  This egotism run amok neither respects the ways in which power has corrupted the Church in the past, nor does it consider in humility that God is at work all over the world, in every generation, and not just this generation in this land.

The greatest?  'Christian' Nationalism may be willing to hoist someone onto everyone else's shoulders confident that he/she must be a savior, but this cannot be an extension of the Church, or even a partnership of convenience, for it ignores one of the fundamental defining characteristics of the Church: humility and service. 

Sermon Video: The Messiah and his Kingdom - Isaiah 11:1-10

A stump has all sorts of depressing metaphorical implications about life cut short and hope dashed, but the prophet Isaiah chose the stump because life can return to it once more.  The long-awaited Messiah is Isaiah's topic, speaking of his righteousness, justice, and faithfulness alongside his power and might.  While Jesus embodied these qualities during his time among us on earth, the kingdom he will establish when he returns will transform that localized impact into a global phenomenon.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #22: Luke 4:5-8

Luke 4:5-8     New International Version

5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours.”

8 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’”

How many Lord of the Rings references have I made over the years?  Too many to count, and with that in mind, here's one more:

Toward the end of The Fellowship of the Ring, Frodo offers the Ring of Power to Galadriel, and elven Lord who has taken a leading part in the war against evil (first Morgoth, now Sauron) for thousands of years.  What will she do if given the chance to end the fight, to take in her own hand sufficient power to put aside all doubt and fear that Evil might triumph over Good?

 “And now at last it comes. You will give me the Ring freely! In place of the Dark Lord you will set up a Queen. And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!”

She lifted up her hand and from the ring that she wore there issued a great light that illuminated her alone and left all else dark. She stood before Frodo seeming now tall beyond measurement, and beautiful beyond enduring, terrible and worshipful. Then she let her hand fall, and the light faded, and suddenly she laughed again, and lo! she was shrunken: a slender elf-woman, clad in simple white, whose gentle voice was soft and sad.

“I pass the test”, she said. “I will diminish, and go into the West and remain Galadriel.”

Galadriel passed the test.  She chose to reject the power of domination and subjugation in favor of trusting in the hope that Frodo can somehow destroy the Ring, "a fool's hope" as Gandalf describes it, but better than the folly of embracing evil to fight evil.

Jesus, of course, does the same thing.  He resists the easy path, the one without sacrifice, the one that has a deal-breaker of a caveat (worshiping the Devil), choosing instead to continue on the pre-ordained path of the Suffering Servant until the brutal end. 

How then does this apply to 'Christian' Nationalism?  A straightforward application, indeed.  'Christian' Nationalism's premise is that it can serve the purpose of God by dominating the kingdoms of this world, to do so it chooses to utilize the tools and methods of this world, crushing and subjugating all opposition, and somehow in the end hoping to create a nation that honors God.  It would be laughable if it were not so deadly dangerous.  It won't work, it cannot work.  Galadriel was wise enough to see the folly of trying to overcome evil with evil, Jesus wasn't about to entertain it, let alone try it, so why have so many self-professed Christians today decided that they can get the better out of a deal with the Devil?

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #18: Matthew 25:34-40

Matthew 25:34-40     New International Version

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

The 1984 movie, Red Dawn, starring Patrick Swayze, C. Thomas Howell, Charlie Sheen, Lea Thompson, and Jennifer Grey came out when I was 10.  Although I didn't see it in the theater (it was PG-13), at some point I watched it on VHS tape (young people, ask your parents what those were), and it blew me away.  It became one of my favorite movies, watched over and over against despite the annoying use of "Wolverines!" as the rebel battle cry {being a Spartan fan, you can see how that rankles}.  As a kid, I loved the gutsy chest thumping bravado of its message, it fit nicely with the tough guy message that came to me through the movies of Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Van Damme, and the rest.

The thing is, 'Christian' Nationalism tends to treat the mission and methods of the Church like combat.  In war, the rules are often bent, if not ignored, victory is the only thing that matters, and the only real concern about the enemy is how to defeat them more quickly.  {See for example: the use of torture post 9/11 by American operatives} I can't count how many times those leading this movement have described what they are doing as a 'war' {For which they should apologize to every combat veteran and those whose nation has been invaded; real war is hell}.  In fact, we call it a Culture War, and those who fight it on both sides Culture Warriors.   And while whatever is happening in America is far short of warfare, thank God, this no-holds barred, anything goes, mentality is not only growing in how many claim it to be necessary, but even in how many champion such methodology is a good in their own right, all in the name of defending God, His Church, and/or Western Civilization.  

When we listen to Jesus, however, it becomes clear that they have things upside-down.  Far from being called into combat to smash and destroy God's enemies, the Church is called to serve in ways both diverse and humble.  The Church is commanded, this is no suggestion, and warned accordingly, that the true measure of its success will be how it responds to, "the least of these."

How about a real-world example involving one of the most contentious political issues of our day (yikes).

What do you see when the news shows a picture of would-be immigrants wading across the Rio Grande?  An invading army?  An infestation?  A threat?  Or do you see men, women, and children made in the image of God, desperate and in need, an opportunity to show the love of Christ (most of those coming here are indeed fellow Christians, an additional question of obligation)?

'Christian' Nationalism is telling you to see things on this issue, and many others, through the lens of warfare, Jesus Christ is ordering you to see them with grace and compassion.  Choose you this day whom you will serve.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #16: Matthew 22:20-21

 

Matthew 22:20-21     New International Version

20 and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”

21 “Caesar’s,” they replied.

Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”

It has been a long time since I was a math nerd.  The A that I earned in Calculus in high school was the last math class that I ever needed, or wanted, to take.  But I still enjoy a well laid out Venn Diagram's ability to explain the relationship between things that otherwise are confusing to people.  In my World Religions seminar I created a three circle Veen Diagram to illustrate the overlap and differences between the terms: Jew, Judaism, and Israelite because people can belong to one, two, or all three of those categories.

When the Pharisees tried to trap Jesus between the power of the Roman Empire and man's higher obligation to God, Jesus could have given an answer that would have resoundingly supported both Jewish Nationalism in the 1st Century, and Christian Nationalism in the last two thousand years.  But he didn't.  Not at all, not a bit.  Instead of ranking the obligations that we owe to God and earthly powers, Jesus differentiated between them.

The Pharisees were expecting Jesus to argue that "B is proper subset of A" (the circle within the circle in the chart above), either that God's rule is supreme, or Rome's, but they're all one circle.  In a sense, that's true, God is indeed supreme over all, the entirety of the created universe belongs in a circle contained within the all-encompassing circle of God.  But, and this is key, that's an ontological answer (i.e. the nature of reality), not a functional one.  God chose to allow humanity a degree of freedom and autonomy, to let the governments of humanity exist without being theocracies directly under his immediate rule {Israel prior to their requests for a king come closest to that model}.

In the end, 'Christian' Nationalists want the two circles of human government and God's rule to perfectly overlap, to make them one in the same (i.e. one circle, not two).  Jesus rejected this idea, he wasn't interested in conquering human governments, his Kingdom would be founded on different principles and pursue different goals.  The Church of Jesus Christ must follow his lead.  We are not called to triumph over Caesar, or even to be Caesar, but to continue to give to God what is God's. 

What belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God?  That's an important question, and one God-honoring men and women in the Church might not always agree upon, but one thing is certain, there is a distinction between them.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #15: Matthew 21:31

 

Matthew 21:31     New International Version

“Which of the two did what his father wanted?”

“The first,” they answered.

Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you.

When asked in episode 3 of the new Disney + series Andor how he acquired a highly secret piece of Imperial hardware, the show's title character Casssian Andor (played by Diego Luna) responds with scorn that because the Empire is so full of itself the only thing you need to do is put on a uniform and walk in like you belong there.

An age old question for both Judaism and Christianity has been how to differentiate between those who properly belong to the religion and those who do not.  The question is complicated by the realization that our methods or criteria for inclusion or exclusion may not properly align with God's such that we may be welcoming those whom God has not, and scorning those whom God has chosen.  Jesus himself makes much of this dissonance, repeatedly rejecting self-righteous Pharisees and others with power and authority within 1st century Judaism, while welcoming fishermen, women, tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers, and various others that had been labeled by society as outcast 'sinners', but who were willing to come to him in faith.

The Church, for its part, has struggled throughout its history to require genuine discipleship from all its adherents, while at the same time keeping its doors wide open to anyone and everyone whom God may call to repentance.  The more power and influence the Church has wielded in society, the more it has been likely to welcome the rich and well connected with no questions asked and turn up its nose at the poor and forgotten despite Jesus' example to the contrary.  Jesus called us to be better than that.

'Christian' Nationalism is especially vulnerable because of its pursuit of worldly power to the charge of accepting false devotion (i.e. that which is based upon selfish motives and not grounded in repentance and faith) among those who can help it achieve its goals {Including the related topic of ignoring heretical beliefs, even clear apostasy when coming from a political leader or ally}, while at the same time rejecting as unworthy those who demonstrate faith and righteous living, but happen to not share the same politics/ethnicity/nationality.  In other words, 'Christian' Nationalism is defining 'us' and 'them' by superficial criteria that mock Jesus' willingness to speak hard truths to the powerful and hold out hope to the weak.

Why?  Because 'Christian' Nationalism is trying to 'win' in this world, the consequences to the next are secondary at best.  The true Church is willing to lose everything in this world for the sake of the Kingdom of God.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #14: Matthew 18:3-4

 

Matthew 18:3-4     New International Version

3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

One of the things that made George Lucas' fictional Force interesting as a story plot device was how counter-intuitive it was for most of the characters.  Luke's first interaction with the Force is a training exercise where Obi-Wan Kenobi asks him to try to defend himself against a drone with the 'blast shield' on the helmet lowered, i.e. to fight blind.  After initially failing, he eventually starts to get the hang of it.  At the end of the movie, Luke demonstrates that he learned something about the Force in the brief interim by destroying the Death Star by 'using the Force' to aim his proton torpedoes rather than his targeting computer.  The Force, in Lucas' imagining, is not like anything we know from our own experience here on Earth.

As Jesus explains the Kingdom of God to his disciples, he time and time emphasizes that the methods and goals of the kingdom he is founding are not those of this world.  It won't operate according to this world's rules, and it won't chase after what this world covets.  The Kingdom of God will be different.

The Church, therefore, must follow this series of commands and teachings by Jesus when considering how we are to fulfill our obligations as encapsulated in the Great Commission.  If we attempt to achieve the correct goals, but do so using the methodology and tactics of this world, we will fail.  If we attempt to achieve goals other than the ones that Jesus told us to pursue, we will fail.  It is that simple.  

Unfortunately, Church History is full of examples of men and women, some of whom were acting in sincere faith and devotion, others not so much, who either abandoned Jesus' methodology, or eschewed his goals.  The results were, entirely predictably, disastrous.

Here is where 'Christian' Nationalism comes in.  As a movement, it is BOTH utilizing strategies and tactics that are in direct contradiction to Jesus' example of servanthood and righteousness by placing morality as a lower priority than winning, AND doing so in the service of the pursuit of worldly power (and the wealth and fame that go with it) that Jesus never, not once, told his disciples to pursue.  Knowing that either immoral methodology, or faulty goals, will doom any human endeavor that is supposedly undertaken on God's behalf, it is certain that 'Christian' Nationalism will fail, as it has always done throughout Church History, no matter how much power it manages to scrape together in this world.  Make sure you understand this: Even if 'Christian' Nationalists "take back America for God" they will fail.  Even if they control the entire government, in perpetuity, wielding all of its power in pursuit of their politics, they will fail.  It may not look like it from the heights of world power, but it will most assuredly be true when looking at the effect upon the Kingdom of God.

Failure is inevitable because the Kingdom of God doesn't work this way, and the Kingdom of God isn't interested in what Nationalists so badly want. 

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #10: Matthew 6:33

 

Matthew 6:33     New International Version

But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

When Peter Jackson adapted one of my favorite books, the LOTR, he and his screenwriters kept a line from Tolkien's The Fellowship of the Ring uttered by Frodo Baggins when he chooses to accept the burden of seeking the ring's destruction in the fires of Mt. Doom: “I will take the Ring", he said, "though I do not know the way.”  Frodo was willing to attempt the quest, but he admitted up front that he would need guidance if he had any chance of getting there.  The movie version adds a comical note when Frodo leads the Fellowship out of Rivendell asking at the very first fork in the road, "Mordor, Gandalf, is it left or right?"

What has this to do with 'Christian' Nationalism?  Everything.  As Christians, we already know our destination AND unlike Frodo we know the way to get there.  When God established the New Covenant, appointing the Church to be its steward and sending his Spirit to empower it, he also explained in more than sufficient detail how the journey from Dark to Light, Death to Life, Wickedness to Holiness, Fallen Humanity to Christ-likeness, had to be conducted.  God's kingdom has to come first, and it has to be pursued with righteousness.

'Christian' Nationalism has this wrong on both fronts.  It offers the siren's call of earthly power, of 'winning' here and now, instead of the far more impactful, and difficult, commitment to the Kingdom of God.  In fantasy terms, 'Christian' Nationalism is distracted by a side quest, not the true hero's journey, they've embraced Boromir's suggestion to go to Minas Tirith instead of Mordor.  In addition, 'Christian' Nationalism subsumes methods beneath goals, embracing such lies of the Devil as, "might makes right", "the ends justify the means", and "fight fire with fire."  In nerd terms, they think they can master the Ring and use it for good.  Tolkien new better than such nonsense, and so should we.

In the end, the focus of Christians, and the Church MUST be first and foremost the Kingdom of God, the kingdoms of this earth will come and go, but God's kingdom is forever.  The means of advancing and supporting that Kingdom MUST be righteous, or they will fail.  Any other goal, and any other method is a fool's errand.  

For a recent essay on this twisting of both goals and methods see: Christian Political Ethics Are Upside Down We’re adamant about politics and flexible about virtue. - by David French in The Dispatch

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #8: Matthew 5:13

 

Matthew 5:13     New International Version

“You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.

How cozy with the Kingdoms of this World (human governments) can the Church be before it loses its saltiness?  In other words, if the Church wields dominion in this age, determining military policy, tax provisions, environmental regulations, food and drug safety, and the whole host of decisions over peoples lives that a modern government must make {choosing not to regulate an area is of course a decision too}, will such a Church retain any of its required saltiness?

The context leading up to verse 13 of the Sermon on the Mount is the Beatitudes.  Just prior to telling his followers to be salt, an element essential for life in the Ancient World, Jesus proclaims that the Kingdom of God is counter-intuitive by declaring those whom society normally looks upon as 'losers' to be "blessed".  You see, the Kingdom of God is not business as usual, it isn't a slightly better version of this world's cultures and governments, it isn't a tweak of the old; the Kingdom of God is a radical change of human behavior and interactions on a fundamental level from top to bottom.

For far too much of Church History the Church has been content to nibble at the margins, to strive for a better world without putting the Word of God to the test by living in accordance with ALL that it teaches.  The Church has lived by faith, but only so far.  And yet, 'Christian' Nationalism would ask us to lean into this hesitancy, to go all-in on ruling here and now by using the very methods and tactics that this world has devised to grasp and maintain power.  "Be Christ-like and trust God with the results?  You naïve fool, we'd lose if we did that!", there actions (and at times words) proclaim. 

Can you honestly say, when listening to politicians, that any of them (save perhaps some on the local level) are acting in their role as public leaders according to the vision of the Sermon on the Mount?  Are any of them striving to establish the Kingdom of God?  So, why are they, politicians and pundits, being treated as leaders of Christianity?  What training, calling, and experience do they have in Christian discipleship, in leading with a servant's heart?

On of the great tragedies here is that God has called his people to far more.  To a more abundant and purposeful life here and now through radical self-denial and service.  Take back the country for God, the culture?  Why would God want them, he's already spelled out his plans for a far greater prize.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #4: Psalm 47:7-8

Psalm 47:7-8     New International Version

7 For God is the King of all the earth;

    sing to him a psalm of praise.

8 God reigns over the nations;

    God is seated on his holy throne.

God as "King of all the earth" is a foundational aspect of the Judeo-Christian worldview.  God has no rivals and certainly no equals.  The position and dominion of God is secure, always has been, always will be.  And yet, 'Christian' Nationalism brings the Kingdom of God down into the trenches, pitting nation against nation, viewing the rise of America (or England, the Holy Roman Empire, Rome, etc. before us) as the flowering of God's purposes, and the potential fall of the favored nation as the withering of God's will.  How can this be?  Does God not rule the whole earth?  Is his purpose not accomplished in every nation?

One of the reasons why 'Christian' Nationalism fails to see the big picture is egocentrism, the belief that God's will must revolve around us and our nation because we're just that important (as compared to other peoples and nations of the world, whom God evidently cares much less about).  This was, at times, a flaw of ancient Israel as well, one that Holy Scripture punctures in the story of the prophet Jonah.  The entire book of Jonah is a withering rebuke of Israelite nationalists whose concern about humanity stopped at the boundary of their own ethnicity.  God's concern did not end there, however.  As the prophet Jonah throws a tantrum while watching God's mercy against Nineveh unfold, the book ends with this line:

Jonah 4:11     New International Version

And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?”

The view of Jonah was far too narrow for God, spending three nights in the belly of the great beast of the sea didn't cure him of his folly, so the book ends with us wondering if he hardened his heart following God's rebuke, or repented.

Likewise, the Gospels contain numerous examples in the actions and words of Jesus that refute the notion that God's focus on one nation means that others fall through the cracks.  Two prime examples being Jesus' discussion with the Woman at the Well and the Parable of the Good Samaritan.  

Lastly, there is one caveat to this discussion, one that will be dealt with numerous times in the texts yet to come in this series: Israel had a covenant with God.  Abraham's descendants did have a relationship with God that held promises of great favor AND a stricter level of scrutiny regarding their actions.  Israel is the exception to the rule, but as Jonah learned the hard way, the special status of Israel did not remove the other nations of the world from God's concern.

In the end, the Church is NOT Israel, and America is NOT Israel.  Whatever promises God made to Israel remain with them, they are not transferable.  'Christian' Nationalism fails, in part, because it seeks to focus God's concern on one nation (the one we happen to live in, imagine that), viewing the world in terms of power politics and national rivalries as they impact that one nation.  God's concern is higher, deeper, and much broader.

Scripture Abuse: 2 Chronicles 7:14, idolatry, nationalism, and antisemitism

Note: I know a number of committed Christians, people whom I love and respect, who have been known to use 2 Chronicles 7:14 as a promise to America.  While I feel that a proper grammatical/contextual/historical interpretation of this passage precludes such an interpretation and application (see below), I am not questioning their faith, only offering them a warning about the danger of misplaced/misunderstood patriotism.

I saw this image shared on Facebook this week.  As someone who has previously highlighted various verses in my Bible, I don't take issue with the desire to make it easier to find a passage in the future, or to remember what one thought about a passage with a note in the margin.  This is not that.  To draw an American Flag on top of the words of Scripture raises serious questions, to put it here at 2 Chronicles 7:14 points us in the direction of why someone might do this.

2 Chronicles 7:14  New International Version

if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

Why is this interpretation/application of 2 Chronicles 7:14 both erroneous and dangerous?

1. It ignores the context

1 & 2 Chronicles are, as the name suggest, a chronicle of the of the Kingdom of Israel (after the schism, Judah), from the reign of King Saul to the Exile to Babylon.  It was written after the Exile as a history for the people who had returned to the Promised Land, offering them understanding as to why things had happened in their past, and hope for the future.  The specific context of 7:14 is that the LORD is speaking to King Solomon after the dedication of the Temple in Jerusalem.  In that conversation, God promises to Solomon that when the Israelites fail to obey the Covenant, there will be a chance for them to return to God through repentance.  Why?  Because God has promised them in his Covenant both blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience, and God is faithful to his word, if they repent he will heal them.

2 Chronicles 7:14 is a promise from God to Israel.  It is a promise derived from, and inherently connected to, the Covenant that began with Abraham and was expounded further upon to Moses, David, and now Solomon.  It was not a promise for any surrounding tribe or nation at that time, nor any other nation later in history.  In fact, as Genesis unfolds Abraham learns that Isaac, and Isaac alone, is the Child of Promise.  In the next generation, God specifically chooses Jacob over Esau, once against showing that it is God's sovereign will that matters.

Romans 9:10-15  New International Version

Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

2. It ignores the grammar

America is not 'my people', they are not 'called by my name'.  I know that millions of Christians believe that we are, but there is no legitimate way that how these terms are used by God when he spoke to Solomon could be stretched to now include the United States.  Why?  The descendants of Abraham were specifically called by God, set apart by God, and made into a tribe and nation by God.  They were 'my people' in every possible way.  Where is the parallel to America?  At what point, and in what way, were the people who inhabit this land called by God to be here?  The Israelites bore the name of God, wherever they went they represented God to the world around them, their distinctive practices in the Law of Moses setting them apart.  Where is the parallel to America?  In what way, historically or in the present, are the American people distinctive culturally in a way that marks us out as God's people?  When considering American distinctives, are ANY of them marks of a people who belong to God?

Numbers 6:27  New International Version

“So they will put my name on the Israelites, and I will bless them.”

In addition, 'their land' is a reference to the Promised Land.  It can be no other land in the context of God's conversation with Solomon.  It didn't mean any other geographic place on earth.  To say that God's promise also applies to England, Spain, Australia, South Korea, or America is to ignore what the text originally intended and decide, on our own, that it can be extended globally.  

For a longer treatment of this issue steeped in scriptural analysis see: The Myth of a Christian Nation - by Gregory Boyd: a summary and response

3. It replaces the Church with America in the hearts and minds of Christians

The promise of 2 Chronicles 7:14 is an Old Covenant promise, not a New Covenant promise.  That alone should give us pause as to why it would be applied by Christians to their own circumstances.  Beyond that, the promise is made to God's people, not to a nation state.  When American Christians (or Christians in any other nation) utilize this verse to talk about their country, they're blurring the line of belonging between the Kingdom of God / Family of God to which they belong as followers of Jesus Christ, and the Kingdom of this World to which they belong as earthly citizens.  

Even if the promise of 2 Chronicles 7:14 were applicable to the New Covenant people, it would apply to the Church not any nation.  Why?  When God instituted the New Covenant through the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels and the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost he did so with peoples called out from every tribe, language, and nation.  The wonder at Pentecost of hearing the Gospel in their own languages by Jerusalem's diverse pilgrim crowd illustrated this new emphasis.  

Galatians 3:26-28  New International Version

So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Revelation 7:9  New International Version

After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.

It is unfortunate that after the favor placed upon Christianity by Constantine that the idea of Christendom developed.  Many of the evils that Christians were involved in from that point on involved protecting Christendom, a 'Christian nation' or collection of Christian nations, from worldly threats.  Christendom as a concept opened up Christians to the embrace of the idea of winning converts with the sword, of utilizing evil 'that good may result' because of supposed political necessity, of conquering 'in Jesus' name' and shouting 'God wills it!' as they slaughtered infidels.

Whether one loves America or not, America is NOT the Church.  It never was, it cannot be.  We blur the lines of allegiance, obligations, and fidelity at our peril.

4. It raises America in our hearts and minds toward a place of idolatry. 

I love this country, and count it a great blessing to have been born in this land and have its citizenship, but that blessing cannot compare to having been called by the Spirit of God to become of follower of Jesus Christ, joining the Family of God and becoming a citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven.  In every way, our faith requires that our allegiance to God come first.  If my nation, tribe, community, family choose to abandon God, sin against God, or ignore his call to live righteously in this world, I must choose what faith require over those bonds.  Have Christians done this consistently and properly throughout history?  Sadly no.  They have too often thought of themselves as Dutchmen, Englishmen, Russians, or Americans first, and only secondarily as Christians.  This is, to not mince words, idolatry.  Whenever devotion to any other unit (family, community, tribe, nation) rises in importance and obligation above the total commitment to the Cross and the Gospel that God demands of those whom he has redeemed, it is sinful idolatry.  We may not want to hear this, but we must.

I hope that America has a long and glorious future, but I have no idea if this will be.  God has made no such promises to this nation or any other outside of ancient Israel.  I have no idea if America will be a force for good in our world, if it will embrace its potential and reject its flaws.  I do know, with certainty, that the Church will endure until the Day of Judgment.  I do know that God's Spirit will continue to work in its people, globally, because he has indeed promised that he will do so, that his Church will triumph and bring glory to his name.  As flawed as it can be, and as often as its people have failed to live up to their calling, the Church's future is secure.

Matthew 16:18New International Version

And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

5. Reading America into Old Covenant texts is a form of antisemitism.

Antisemitism is the darkest stain on the dress of the Bride of Christ.  That it is an inexcusable evil goes without saying.  There is a long standing tendency for Christians to disregard the Covenantal promises made by God to Abraham's descendants and to appropriate them as their own.  Does this fly in the face of Paul's impassioned argumentation in Romans?  Yes, but it has happened anyway.  

To read America into 2 Chronicles 7:14 is to lessen the uniqueness of God's call to Israel.  It downplays God's choice of this people, and decides to replace it with another people of our choosing.  We, the Church, cannot replace Israel in God's plans, to go beyond that false theology and think that America can stand beside Israel and claim the same promises (conveniently ignoring the curses), or worse yet replace Israel as the sole recipient of those promises, is folly, arrogance, and antisemitism. 

Conclusion

Patriotism can be a good thing, but it also potentially very dangerous, especially to Christians.  Love of country can be a good thing, but it is also potentially very dangerous when it skews our thinking.  America is not the Church and America is not Israel, and 2 Chronicles 7:14 does not belong to either of one of them.  

Would God 'heal this land' if repentance swept the nation?  Yes, but not in the same way that 2 Chronicles 7:14 promises (good harvests, freedom from illnesses, rest from enemies), and not because we are 'his people' or 'called by his name'.  Repentance would lead to a form of healing because the very nature of existence reflects the nature of God, thus always making evil a dead end path and righteousness a blessing.  This dynamic is true for every individual and every grouping of people, whether they know God or not.  To invoke 2 Chronicles 7:14, and claim its promise as our own, goes beyond this, leading to both false hope in promises God has not made to us, and distortions of the necessary boundaries between our Heavenly and Earthly citizenships.

2 Chronicles 7:14 Isn’t About American Politics - by Russell Moore

Further writings from me on related topics:

Mark Meadows, Ginni Thomas, and the blasphemy of thinking God is on your side.

The irrefutable rejection of Christian Nationalism by the New Testament

Ronald Reagan was wrong, America is not a "city on a hill", it never could be.

The blasphemous "One Nation Under God" painting by Jon McNaughton

Rejecting Idolatry: No, Mike Pence, we will not, "Fix our eyes on Old Glory"

Sermon Video: "Hosanna!" - Mark 11:1-11

 As Jesus' journey to the Cross reaches Jerusalem, on the Sunday before Passover begins, Jesus chooses to ride the last two miles into the city, on a donkey. Why? His humble entrance fulfills the prophecy of Zechariah (9:9), contrasting with the vainglory of kings among men. Additionally, Jesus control over the details of his entrance (knowing where the colt will be, what his disciples need to say) demonstrate that his upcoming Passion is a choice, he is a willing participant, not a victim.

The people shout "Hosanna!", a Hebrew imperative meaning "Save us!" that can be turned around in a moment of joy to mean, "Savior!" Truly, Jesus has come to Jerusalem to become the Savior, not just of the children of Abraham, but of humanity: past, present, and future. The Savior of the World. Hosanna, indeed.

Sermon Video: Greatness in God's kingdom: service & sacrifice - Mark 10:35-45

 After his third and final prediction of his upcoming death, while journeying to Jerusalem for that purpose, Jesus is asked by the brothers James and John to elevate them to the 2nd and 3rd place of honor in his upcoming kingdom. Aside from the incredible chutzpah this request demonstrates, it also shows that the disciples still haven't internalized that the spiritual kingdom that Jesus intends to establish will not be run by this world's rules. So, once again, Jesus enlightens them, once more emphasizing that greatness in his kingdom is a matter of service and sacrifice. Indeed, Jesus himself is the prime example of humilty, service, and sacrifice when necessary. That his sacrifice will have the power to be a 'ransom for many', i.e. the basis of our salvation, ought to encourage his Church to transform our world through the same means of acting as servants rather than the fool's errand of trying to bring about the will of God through politics, power, or violence.

Sermon Video: Receive God like a child - Mark 10:13-16

 In the familiar episode where Jesus rebukes his disciples for trying to prevent parents from presenting their children to him to be blessed, Jesus offers one lesson by his action/attitude, and another by his words. By being indignant with his disciples and allowing the children to receive a blessing, Jesus warns us against the all too familiar folly of presuming to know the will of God (and acting, wrong, accordingly). By comparing entrance into the Kingdom of God to the something to be received 'like a little child', Jesus also warns against things such as pride, self-reliance, and closed mindedness. The attitude of children is the path toward acceptance of salvation by grace through faith because children have (1) a low position (humility), (2) accept authority (obedience), (3) open hears/minds, and (4) a willingness to belief beyond what their own senses tell them. For reasons such as these, Jesus holds the attitude/mindset of childen up as something to be emulated, not scorned.

The blasphemous "One Nation Under God" painting by Jon McNaughton

 

"One Nation Under God" is a painting by contemporary artist Jon McNaughton, his own interpretation of the piece, and why he chose the figures in it that he did is explained on his website: McNaughton fine art company.  And while McNaughton's view of American history and contemporary culture is a decidedly partisan one, that isn't the reason why his painting is blasphemous, but rather his insistence, as the painting makes abundantly clear, that the U.S. Constitution was given to the Founding Fathers by God.  While the U.S. Constitution, and very necessary subsequent Bill of Rights, are collectively the most profound political documents since the Magna Carta, and are indeed a significant step forward in the realms of human governance and freedom, to call them God-inspired, or divinely given in some fashion is to take an imperfect document created by fallible men, and coat it with a false veneer of holiness.  It is as if McNaughton is saying that the concept of limited federalism is God's preferred form of governance.  Except that God has never said any such thing, for although democracy was known in the ancient world as a cautionary tale about mob-rule (given the way in which the Athenian Empire collapsed), the only forms of government mentioned in the Bible at all are tribalism, theocracies, monarchies, and empires.  As such, the Bible neither recommends nor condemns democracies or republics.  Inspired by Christian thinkers and/or the Bible is NOT the same thing as given by God.  The Church was founded by Jesus and established by the Holy Spirit, no human nation, including the United States of America, can make a similar claim {Future fulfillment of Abrahmic promies in a Messianic Kingdom notwithstanding}.

"The fact that Christ holds the Constitution is very significant. I believe it was a divinely inspired document." - Jon McNaughton

Aside from this false impression that the U.S. Consitution has some sort of seal of approval from God is the blatant and horrendous association of Jesus Christ with the Constitution's declaration that Black Americans are only 3/5 of a person (for census purposes: The 3/5th Compromise) with no rights whatsoever, a status shared to a lesser exent in our nation's founding documents by women and Indians.  To associate Jesus Christ with the racial and sexist views of the past is to portray the Gospel as the White Man's Gospel, once again a blasphemous thought that flies in the face of the declaration by the Apostle Paul that, "there is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28).

As important a step forward as the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights have proven to be, they remain an example of human sin-nature, of the embrace of a political compromise at the expense of the fundamental human rights that the Declaration of Independence declared, but failed to deliver.  It would take more than 600,000 deaths in the U.S. Civil War one hundred years later to rectify that error, and another century to begin to unravel the further injustices heaped upon the newly freed slaves.  The point is simply this: there is both praise and criticism that justly belongs to the Founding Fathers and the documents they produced, to pretend that Jesus Christ would hold up their work as a shining example is nothing short of blasphemous.

Christian Nationalism has been gaining steam in America, seeking to fuse duty to God with duty to country and make patriotism a Christian virtue.  Unfortunately, this idea has been tried before, with disastrous results, and to the extent that the Church in America follows this path, it will once again sow the seeds of its own failure and shame.

For historical context, read the amazing speech by American hero Frederick Douglass, delivered before the Civil War: "The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro"

"Fellow-citizens, pardon me, allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here to-day? What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice, embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us? and am I, therefore, called upon to bring our humble offering to the national altar, and to confess the benefits and express devout gratitude for the blessings resulting from your independence to us?...But such is not the state of the case. I say it with a sad sense of the disparity between us. I am not included within the pale of glorious anniversary! Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us. The blessings in which you, this day, rejoice, are not enjoyed in common.ÑThe rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared by you, not by me. The sunlight that brought light and healing to you, has brought stripes and death to me. This Fourth July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me, by asking me to speak to-day? If so, there is a parallel to your conduct. And let me warn you that it is dangerous to copy the example of a nation whose crimes, towering up to heaven, were thrown down by the breath of the Almighty, burying that nation in irrevocable ruin! I can to-day take up the plaintive lament of a peeled and woe-smitten people!

'By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down. Yea! we wept when we remembered Zion.'

What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are, to Him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy -- a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages.There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of the United States, at this very hour." - Frederick Douglass, born in America, 1817, a slave.

Rejecting Idolatry: No, Mike Pence, we will not, "Fix our eyes on Old Glory"

White Nationalism and White Supremacy are an abomination to the Church

The Myth of a Christian Nation - by Gregory Boyd: a summary and response

An unhealthy overemphasis on politics

A Moral Hierarchy: A refutation of William Barr's, "Other than slavery, which was a different kind of restraint, this is the greatest intrusion on civil liberties in American history."

The value of perspective: The American Church is a minority