This blog serves as an outreach for Pastor Randy Powell of the First Baptist Church of Franklin, PA. Feel free to ask questions or send me an e-mail at pastorpowell@hotmail.com
This week saw an example well beyond even the sadly normal low bar of political ads that ought to remind us that such speech is NOT exempt from the judgment of God respecting sin.
That ad was in Ohio where the Republican candidate for governor Vivek Ramaswamy admitted to having created an ad featuring the estranged mother of his opponent. That fact alone would constitute normal politics, estranged family members have been used before, but this one is both spectacularly gross and exceedingly vile: Why was Amy Acton (his opponent) estranged from her mother since the 1970's? The answer is simple, her mother remained married to the man charged with repeatedly raping her as a minor child (he fled justice and was never tried) until the day he died. The state of Ohio removed both Amy and her brother from their mother's care after her stepfather was arrested. If we cannot, as people who claim to follow Jesus Christ, agree that child sexual abuse is out-of-bounds even in political contests, God help us.
This is perhaps the worst political attack ad in this cycle, if not several cycles, but it is far from an isolated example. This year's contests have also been flooded with AI generated fake videos featuring opponents saying and doing things that they most certainly did not in reality. These ads are lies, period. AI generated lies still count as lies. They will fool some people into thinking that they are true in spite of the uncanny video and audio, but effectiveness or lack thereof is not the point, is it? The ads are lies. Doesn't that matter to us as Christians? Shouldn't we be LESS likely to vote for the candidate who would use such ads in order to try to gain power? Shouldn't these ads have the opposite of their intended effect upon us, upon people who a trying to walk by the Fruit of the Spirit?
The harsh reality is that many self-professed followers of Jesus are willing to suspend the ethics they themselves seek to live by when it comes to politics. I would not do such a thing, the thinking goes, but it is ok for the team I root for to do it because winning matters too much. To put it bluntly, this is a lie from Satan. There are no exceptions to the conduct that is required of those who would claim to be disciples of Jesus, no exceptions for the pursuit of money, no exceptions to satisfy lust, and no exceptions to gain power in this world.
Our witness, our ability to share the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is harmed each and every time we make a deal with the devil for the sake of this world. Shame on us who go along with the flow, shame on us who make excuses, and even more shame on us who cheer this sin on because it benefits "us" and hurts "them". Chose this day whom you will serve.
Galatians 5:19-25 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit.
"The public will be able to watch the execution of a former US Army major by firing squad, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has said.
A Defence Department official told the BBC the execution of Nidal Hasan, who fatally shot 13 unarmed US soldiers at the Fort Hood military base in 2009, would be livestreamed.
In 2025, only two nations carried out public executions: Iran and Afghanistan, now America is set to join that list at the express direction of the Defense Secretary, and very outspoken 'Christian' Nationalist, Pete Hegseth.
Which brings us to yesterday's news that the Pentagon plans to livestream the execution by firing squad of an Islamic militant, and member of the U.S. military at the time, who murdered 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009. If you oppose the death penalty on the grounds of religious principles, this execution will be doubly troubling, but for those who support the death penalty for heinous crimes, this still ought to be a Bridge Too Far.
Why livestream the execution to the public? What is the purpose in doing this, and what will the consequences be?
Beyond the cynical, and sadly often true, political answers to these questions, we also have the profound moral truth about America that this points toward: We are NOT a Christian nation. On the one hand, we can't be because there is no such thing, a deeply profound book by Pastor Gregory Boyd lays out the case from the scriptures that there never has been, nor can ever be, a Christian Nation. {See: The Myth of a Christian Nation - by Gregory Boyd: a summary and response}. The kingdom established by Jesus in this era has no borders, boundaries, cultural or ethnic barriers. It supersedes them all, and has different goals, and different methods to achieve them. No nation, no matter how moral, can be a Christian Nation. Many have laid claim to the title, including the historical disaster that was the Papal States, but all have brought ill repute to the name of Jesus Christ by elevating realpolitik (to borrow Rochau's term) above the timeless character of Christ-likeness demanded by our discipleship.
We could start with the moral reasons why this public execution is indeed immoral, but in this Culture War-infused generation many will simply ignore them as they've already committed themselves to a "might makes right" and "win at all cost" lack of ethics. When you decide that morality is a luxury you cannot afford, nor really need, because politics is a fight to the death against "evil" fellow Americans (many of whom are also self-professing Christians), an appeal to what is moral will ring hollow.
In practical terms, then, the execution will both (1) make a martyr out of a murderer, the video will be endlessly played in the dark corners of the internet to recruit new would-be terrorists, and (2) serve as a corrupting influence within our own culture and politics in a nation that already deeply devalues human life and dignity whenever it is convenient for the Red side or the Blue side.
In the end, because of our toxic politics, those who warn against both the immorality of this decision, and those who warn against the harmful practical outcomes that will likely result, will not be heard by a large part of our nation because the idea of a public livestreamed execution is coming from "our team" and must therefore be supported lest "they" {That is, the political enemy, fellow Americans} should ever win, even a little.
I'm the author of the Pastoral Letter to the Cornerstone University Board of Trustees. I'll put that right up front. I've learned a lot about the leadership of Dr. Moreno-Riaño, and it saddens and disturbs me greatly. That being said, this interview that he gave paints him as the victim, as someone unjustly opposed because he is doing God's will. It also portrays the God-honoring men and women who opposed him, most of whom were fired or driven out, as "dross" that needed to be "refined" from the University. This is both inaccurate (untrue) and highly dangerous. It is unacceptable.
In this video I react to the statements of Cornerstone's President, I do so based on both biblical truths about leadership and character, and based upon the testimony of those who have been hurt by the administration.
This video delves into the passion and concern that inspired and shaped the letter, as well as that of my collaborators in the project, Pastor Noah Filipiak and Dr. David Turner (thank you both). This is from the heart and deeply rooted in the valuable education I received from 94-98 and 2000-01 at Cornerstone University.
For whatever reason, I can't share this link directly to Facebook; it was removed as spam. So I'll write a quick block post and encourage anyone who clicks on my post to go to the webpage below and look at this long list of unethical and unacceptable behavior on the part of the current administration.
Why does this topic matter to me? Cornerstone University was deeply influential on my intellectual and spiritual development, it was a major step in the road that led me to where I am today as an ordained minister serving the Church. As such, watching this institution that I love, that once was something that I was proud of, become something that fits snuggly into the politics and culture war tainted world around us is heartbreaking.
Note: I don't know who the anonymous alumnus behind the Voice of CU is, he/she attended the school long after I did, but I understand the desire to remain anonymous given the culture of fear created by a willingness to retaliate against any/all critics.
To read my previous posts connecting to this current unfolding sad drama:
It was entirely predictable that NFL kicker Harrison Butker's commencement address would be condemned in most blue circles and lauded in red ones. The click-bait outrage fueled Culture War industry needs new topics on a daily basis, and this one is a near-perfect Rorschach Test that allows both sides to see what they hope to see in it. For example:
While Harrison Butker said a lot of things in his speech about politics, COVID19, and the Catholic Church (especially the Traditional Latin Mass), some of which was good and true but parts of which were conspiracy-theory driven and dangerous, it was his address directly to the graduating women that caught the attention of most:
For the ladies present today, congratulations on an amazing accomplishment. You should be proud of all that you have achieved to this point in your young lives. I want to speak directly to you briefly because I think it is you, the women, who have had the most diabolical lies told to you. How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.
I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother. I'm on the stage today and able to be the man I am because I have a wife who leans into her vocation. I'm beyond blessed with the many talents God has given me, but it cannot be overstated that all of my success is made possible because a girl I met in band class back in middle school would convert to the faith, become my wife, and embrace one of the most important titles of all: homemaker...
I say all of this to you because I have seen it firsthand how much happier someone can be when they disregard the outside noise and move closer and closer to God's will in their life. Isabelle's dream of having a career might not have come true, but if you asked her today if she has any regrets on her decision, she would laugh out loud, without hesitation, and say, “Heck, No.”
Here is the difficult truth that Butker didn't mention in his speech: For most young women in America today, there is no choice between being a homemaker and having a career. Most won't get to choose because they will have to work throughout the years in which they may or may not be also fulfilling the role of mother. Economic realities are, in fact, realities.
When I was growing up I was blessed to have a mother who was, mostly, able to be at home before we went to school and when we came back home. My mom, Kathy, worked a few odd-jobs during those years, but it was mostly running day-care out of our home that helped to pay the bills. My dad, Walt, worked hard for over 40 years at Amway, working his way up the ladder and teaching himself the math that his high school education didn't include. I'm exceedingly proud of the hard work and dedication of both my dad and my mom during the decades when my brother, sister, and I were growing up. We were blessed to have both of our parents so involved in our daily lives.
That was then, it was tight for us with my dad's income as the primary, supplemented by what my mom could earn, but the economic situation for most of my generation-X, and certainly the generations after, has gotten more difficult.
The reality is, most of the women hearing Harrison Butker's speech will need to work full-time, or close to it, if their future family has any real chance of owning a home and paying the bills. It won't be about choosing the "vocation" of being a homemaker, but the juggling of multiple roles and responsibilities, something women have known about for centuries.
I'll let a story from my own life and marriage to Nicole be the last thought here: When we were first married in 2001, my wife worked full-time as a teacher (first at Saranac High School, then Pewamo-Westphalia, both in MI). That continued for the first 9 years of our marriage. It wasn't because she wanted to work full-time, but because even with my own multiple jobs added to the mix we struggled to pay our modest mortgage each month, and in fact had a significant debt-load to climb out from under when we moved to PA in 2012. We both worked hard, but we were spinning our wheels financially. To make matters worse, from 2010-2012 we didn't have any health insurance. I was working multiple jobs but none of them had benefits. I know that this story will sound familiar to a lot of people.
It may come as no surprise, then, that our daughter Clara wasn't born until 2015, after our financial situation had improved significantly (and when we had health insurance). If God had blessed us sooner with a child, we would have celebrated and praised that blessing, but Nicole would have been forced to return to work as soon as she was physically able after that child was born. I know many women who have done just that, returning full-time to the work force within a few weeks of giving birth. I can't begin to imagine how difficult that must be physically and emotionally, they're amazing.
In the end, it doesn't really matter if the "ideal" family in Harrison Butker's view has a stay-at-home mom to the millions of families for whom that "ideal" can never be a reality.
Let us remember to support and encourage the young mothers and fathers in our own churches and communities who are trying to juggle all of the roles and responsibilities that reality has tossed at them.
As many of you in the Franklin area will have noticed, a post on the St. Patrick Parish Facebook page yesterday has gone viral (800+ shares and 3k plus comments on the original post in the first 24 hours, that's a whole lot for our small town). Here is the yourerie.com news story about the drama that has been unfolding.
While I have no desire to engage in the argumentation about the post's topic (their opposition to the upcoming Franklin Retail & Business Association's sponsored Halloween themed shopping event called the Witch Walk), and will gladly delete those who comment in that direction, this is absolutely a teachable moment with respect to Christian discipleship and engagement in the world.
Today's Wednesday AM Bible Study had come to 1 Corinthians 5:12-13: 12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”
Bible Study video, 1 Corinthians 5:12-13{We talked about this topic during the first 30 minutes of Bible Study, if you want to engage more deeply on the topic, watching it is a good place to start.}
This text leads us to an important question: When should Christians, in a free society like ours (we are indeed blessed with Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion), engage in the culture at-large by either supporting or opposing what is happening around them? In other words, when is what happens outside of the Church our business?
Some important context:
(1) The mandate to protect the innocent from violence/exploitation/oppression supersedes this. If/when that is what is happening, it is not a question of choice but an obligation, Christians must intervene, to the best of their ability, to protect those in need. This then explains why Christians ought to speak out and fight against racism, injustice, homelessness, sexual abuse, violence, fraudulent practices, cults, and the like. Real people are being hurt and even if that action is taking place outside of the Church (God forbid it is happening inside the Church, in that case our mandate is even stronger), we ought to act. {Example: The Abolitionist and Civil Rights Movements, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Confessing Church, etc.}
(2) When the topic is illegality, it isn't an option for the Church to handle it "in house." This was one of the great sins of the clergy sex abuse scandal, to think that such illegal and evil acts could be dealt with through counseling and church discipline while at the same time hiding the truth from the proper legal authorities. As Paul makes clear in Romans 13, we have human governments for a reason, when behavior is criminal (assuming the law itself is not immoral) the justice system is the primary remedy.
(3) Our house will always be made at least partly of glass. The obvious and expected response to any negative cultural engagement on the part of the Church (officially through leadership or on the individual member level) is to point out the hypocrisy of all of the ways in which the Church, past and present, has failed to live up to the high standard of Christ-likeness. That this objection is valid, those sins truly do stain the Bride of Christ, means that this will always be an impediment if/when the Church decides to take a side in a cultural issue. If the response is to downplay or deny the evil that has been done by those who claim the name of Christian, it will only make matters worse.
(4) Hyperbole doesn't help matters. I've often seen Christians take an issue that has some objectionable content in it and make it out to be something that Satan himself created. The sky isn't falling, the Devil doesn't lurk behind every corner, and not everything is wholly evil that we take issue with. Before we start yelling, "Burn the witches!" we'd better know if there are actual witches involved, actual pagan worship, and not just play acting. By the way, even if there are real-life witches involved, the answer is never "burn them!", it is always pray for them and love them, for only Good can overcome Evil, utilizing different kinds of evil as a weapon is always counter-productive.
To sum up: I know well-meaning and God honoring Christians who are worried and want to do something about a whole range of issues, including the Witch Walk, and I know well-meaning and God honoring Christians who look at those same issues, including the Witch Walk, and come to a different conclusion. Where one sees evil, the other seems harmless fun, where one sees a cause to champion, the other says, "Live and let live." Because I believe so strongly in the breadth and depth of the Church in our world, I both expect and celebrate this diversity of viewpoint. God has called so many people out of the darkness and into the light, from so many different backgrounds and experiences, that it would be folly to expect us all to look out at the complex world we live in and see it in exactly the same ways. We are indeed one body, but designed to be many parts, and that's a good thing.
In the end, what we need is compassion, dialogue, patience, hope, and the willingness to agree to disagree. These aren't the qualities that make good "click bait", but they are the ones that help us develop the Fruit of the Spirit and make a true positive impact upon the world that we live in.
* Note * This is not a pagan religious event, those wanting to share opinions about freedom of religion or the separation of Church and State are barking up the wrong tree, it is a business venture, and attempt to encourage shopping in the downtown district.
* Final note * In a deep irony that was expected, the local Torah Club leaders have praised the efforts of St. Patrick's social media account to "combat evil" and "stand for the Gospel", even going so far as to praise the Catholic Church (For context on why that is unusual, First Fruits of Zion, their parent organization, is strongly Anti-Catholic to its core). This support from the Torah Clubs is deeply ironic for two reasons: (1) the Gospel itself is not at stake in this question, the Witch Walk is not an event where a version of the Gospel is being proclaimed in any way shape or form, thus whether or not a pastor or church supports, opposes, or says nothing about it, it is not matter of "standing for the Gospel." (2) The Torah Clubs are 100% committed to overturning and replacing the Gospel as it has been preached for the past 2,000 years (replacing it with Torah observance as the true measure of devotion to Jesus), and the Franklin Christian Ministerium has spent the last year fighting against their malign influence and proselytizing of church members.
Update 9/20/23: The News-Herald/Derrick, our joint Franklin-Oil City newspaper, wrote about all this in Friday's paper, below are photos of the story for those who don't live in the area.
Update 9/20/23: Erie News Now was in town yesterday, doing interviews about the story. Their reporting doesn't add much except it is in the video format: Erie News Now story on the Witch Walk controversy
Update 9/22/23: Things went off without any controversy or contention yesterday, both at St. Patrick's and downtown. My thanks to all who worked to make sure that was the case, if you dissuaded someone from doing something fueled by fear or anger you did the work of the Lord whether or not you knew it at the time.
Full disclosure: I haven't seen the Barbie movie. If my 8 year old daughter hadn't been out of town with my wife Nicole since it came out, no doubt we would have taken her to see it (although with respect to Oppenheimer, I'm on my own).
When it comes to the culture that we live in, whatever nation or era that might be, Christians have four primary options when it comes to how they will interact with it: Promotion, Animosity, Withdrawal, and Engagement. Let me illustrate what these might look like with respect to the summer blockbuster that is The Barbie Movie.
1. Promotion
"The Barbie movie illustrates what God intended gender roles to be." Admittedly, I haven't seen anything like this in the many online commentaries and comments swirling around. Aside from a TV show like The Chosen, you don't often see commentary written from a Christian perspective that explicitly endorses cultural artistic expressions, but on the somewhat rare occasion that a particular song, play, show, movie, etc. does indeed reflect the Judeo-Christian worldview, it would be appropriate to point that out. {FYI, just because the content in question is produced by a "Christian" studio/writer/director, etc. doesn't mean it will properly reflect a Biblical mindset, such creations ought to still be held up to God's Word for evaluation on their own merits.}
2. Animosity
"Demonic plot of Barbie movie revealed!" "Liberals are trying to indoctrinate your kids through the Barbie Movie!" "Feminist Crap!" I have actually seen each of those headlines in recent weeks, in all cases the message is clear, "Don't watch this movie because it is liberal/feminist/demonic." An entire cottage industry has evolved, and is making a lot of money, creating just this sort of antagonistic response to most everything produced by the entertainment industry today.
A brief note on the problem with the "all animosity all the time" approach: (1) It has the tendency to convince both fellow Christians and non-believers that we have nothing to offer each other, that in fact we are enemies and should treat each other as such. (2) It quickly becomes a "boy who cried wolf" phenomenon. When everything produced by Disney, for example, is labeled as demonic by online pundits and cable news talking heads, whatever values such warnings may have ever had becomes diluted (and non-believers look even more skeptically at Christianity wondering what on earth we're thinking). (3) The end result of this type of response is that it becomes an exercise in preaching to the choir, those who shout "amen" are with you, but everyone else decides to keep their distance.
3. Withdrawal
"Haven't seen it, don't really care." Now, the Barbie movie is the example, and that won't be on everyone's must-see list no matter how much money it makes (after two weeks the answer is a whole lot of money), and certainly not every Christian thinker needs to weigh in on every cultural moment of import. The withdrawal impulse is reflected in the "moat mentality," as I like to call it. By that I mean the tendency of many Christians to view their neighbors and country as a lost cause and respond by digging a proverbial moat around themselves and ceasing to engage altogether.
This is, in the end, a self-defeating option, retreating to the modern equivalent of monasteries is not a viable option. No need to have an informed opinion on everything, but walking away entirely is not going to help anyone.
4. Engagement
"Our culture is struggling with questions about power, gender, purpose, and death. Barbie raises these questions brilliantly, but believers can point to the One who ultimately answers them: the Triune God who created all humans with purpose and for partnership." You probably noticed that the engagement option wasn't very headline worthy, that's part of the point. Rather than click-bait, true engagement seeks to look at something produced by human beings, flawed as we all are, and evaluate it through the lens of the Judeo-Christian worldview. In doing so, we hope to highlight that which is in keeping with the Word of God, point out that which is contradictory to it, and offer insight that illustrates how the Gospel would fill in the gaps or correct the shortcomings of the what is being evaluated.
The above quote was taken from the review of the Barbie movie by Professor Amy Peeler, professor of New Testament studies at Wheaton College. Having already written a book entitled, Women and the Gender of God, she was well positioned to offer insight into the issues about gender roles raised in the movie.
Note: I have seen numerous people respond with animosity toward the director of the Barbie movie, and/or the movie itself, by attacking Professor Peeler as if writing a review of a movie (or book, song, show, etc.) automatically means that you somehow endorse everything in it. That is nonsense and immoral, but far too commonplace in the social media realm. For example, I mentioned the death of Jon Snow from Game of Thrones in my sermon on Sunday as an example of how characters with a moral code suffer when those around them live by a survival of the fittest mentality. It would be unfair to then smear me (so please don't) by pointing out non-Christian ideas that exist in Game of Thrones (of which there are plenty to choose from) simply because I used that as an example. To engage with the culture thoughtfully does not make you responsible for the entirety of that cultural expression.
That's the danger of participating in engagement. When one puts commentary out there, slings and arrows are often the primary response you see, often times from both the right and left of what you've written/spoken, no matter how far to the right or left your position actually may be {online there is always someone more to the margins willing to shoot at you}. Nevertheless, engagement is what true Christian apologetics consists of, it sometimes will be a positive review and interaction with the material created by others, sometimes it will be a negative review, the important connector will be honest and thoughtful responses.
Be honest, you'd rather see more kind dialogue than the endless stream of click-bait anger, wouldn't you?
Call me an optimist, I have to hope you're as sick of the endless invective as I am.
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.
The following 'decree' was written by pastor Dutch Sheets, a member of the New Apostolic Reformation, a loosely affiliated group of Charismatic Christians who believe in Dominionism, which in a nutshell is the belief that God has given the Church the authority to take control of the Earth from Satan and we need only claim it. The following prayer thus contains the expected 'name it and claim it' style of some of the Charismatic movement, combined with a stark American 'Christian' Nationalism that venerates the American Constitution to idolatrous levels. My comments interspersed below will be in bold. To view the decree as a pdf: The Watchman Decree
[What is Dominionism? As explained by self-appointed apostle Peter Wagner, a founder of the NAR movement, before his death in 2016, “Dominion has to do with control. Dominion has to do with rulership. Dominion has to do with authority and subduing. And it relates to society. In other words, what the values are in Heaven need to be made manifest on earth. Dominion means being the head and not the tail. Dominion means ruling as kings.”]
WATCHMAN DECREE
As a Patriot of faith, I attest my allegiance first and foremost to the kingdom of God and the Great
Commission. Secondly, I agree to be a watchman over our nation concerning its people and their
rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness—
From the beginning the decree defines a "patriot of faith" as someone who puts allegiance to the Kingdom of God and the Great Commission first, but in the very next sentence that line is blurred beyond recognition. The "Watchman" analogy is taken from Ezekiel 33 where the prophet is told that he must warm his countrymen of impending danger lest their fate be on his head if he keep silent. While it would be an acceptable interpretation of the principle behind this text to say that Christians have a responsibility to warn the Church of impending danger, it is NOT in keeping with Ezekiel's prophecy to say that Christians bear this responsibility for America. Why? Israel was a covenant people, a theocracy, where God had a specific and detailed set of blessings and curses that were derived from the commands the people had agreed to obey. Ezekiel's responsibility flows out of this context. Israel knew what God required of them, their ancestors had committed themselves to obeying it. In the Church Age, God has made no such relationship with ANY nation/country/people. It is clear that the members of the NAR, as 'Christian' Nationalists, have assumed God has indeed made a promise to America akin to that which he made with Israel, unfortunately for them (and the Church, the Gospel, and our nation) scripture makes no such promise...Which leads us to a question that has no answer: When, where, how, and with whom did God make a covenant with America? What are its stipulations, what is demanded of us and what is promised by God? A covenant can't simply be implied, it has to be spelled out and agreed upon by each party to it.
In addition, the responsibilities of the Watchman are linked in the decree to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness", things that Ezekiel was most certainly not focused upon nor would they have made any sense to him, for where in this list is righteousness or faith? Already the Declaration of Independence has replaced the Bible as the guide by which we are called to act, an ominous sign of what is to come.
WHEREAS
• we, the Church, are God’s governing Body on the earth
This is the foundational assertion of the text, but it is in no way made in scripture. Jesus calls his disciples to be "salt and light", to sacrifice and to serve, in no way does he, or any other apostolic source, command the Church to govern the earth. Search in vain for the source of this claim in scripture, it isn't there. This is 'Christian' Nationalism's bold lust for power, power we are not commanded to seek, and power we are not capable of wielding morally. {See: Tolkien's LOTR and what the Ring does to those who think they can wield it for good. Tolkien was a Christian with an orthodox Christian worldview, and it shows.}
• we have been given legal power from heaven and now exercise our authority
Legal power? This seems to be setting the groundwork to place 'Christian' Nationalism above the law in America, ironic given all of the veneration here about the Constitution.
• we are God’s ambassadors and spokespeople over the earth
Even a phrase at first glance like this that seems orthodox has a flaw. The Church is Christ's steward/ambassador on the earth, not over it. Subtle, but it fits the pattern of seeking dominion and power over others.
• through the power of God, we are the world influencers
World influencers? Does God need extra social media likes and clicks? What a strange phrase. The Church is called to do justice and love mercy, what this has to do with being a 'world influencer' is a mystery.
• because of our covenant with God, we are equipped and delegated by Him to destroy every
attempted advance of the enemy,
Again we have a dangerous bit of bravado here. Is the Church capable of overcoming the Gates of Hell? Absolutely, Jesus promised it, but that ultimate victory and this bold claim are far apart. The Church (and Christians) will also suffer defeat, persecution, and loss in this world.
Who is the "our" that has a covenant with God? The Christians in America, or America itself? As the text later in the declaration shows, they mean the latter.
WE MAKE OUR DECLARATIONS:
1. We decree that America’s executive branch of government will honor God and defend the
2. We decree that our legislative branch (Congress) will write only laws that are righteous and
constitutional.
Again, righteous laws do NOT equal constitutional laws, although that link is implied strongly here. One can write a constitutional law that falls far short of being righteous, believe me America's history has plenty of examples, it can in fact be immoral in every way and pass constitutional muster.
3. We decree that our judicial system will issue rulings that are biblical and constitutional.
The not subtle linkage continues, now biblical and constitutional are together.
4. We declare that we stand against wokeness, the occult and every evil attempt against our
5. We declare and we now take back our God-given freedoms, according to our Constitution.
Which begs the question: Which God-given freedoms found in the Constitution do they not now have?
6. We declare that we take back influence at the local level in our communities.
7. We decree that we take back and permanently control positions of influence and leadership in
each of the *Seven Mountains.
There is a vast difference in a pluralistic society between influence, which all individuals and groups have a right to aspire to, and control that precludes the rights of others. 'Christian' Nationalism isn't the only movement/philosophy seeking such domination over others, but it very clearly is on the list.
8. We decree that the blood of Jesus covers and protects our nation. It protects and separates us
for God.
Where in any orthodox and historic understanding of the work of Christ upon the Cross, of the efficacy of his shed blood, does the idea that Jesus' blood protects our nation, specifically, come from? Are they claiming that Jesus shed his blood for America? For a kingdom of this world? Again, blasphemy is not too strong a term for this. The shed blood of Jesus separates America for God's purposes? Why this nation and not another? Why only this nation? There is a massive prideful exceptionalism at work here.
9. We declare that our nation is energy independent.
Ezekiel is scratching his head at this one. What does being a Watchman on behalf of your people have to do with energy policy? Nothing. Best to move on than ponder why this made the cut.
10. We declare that America is strong spiritually, financially, militarily and technologically.
There are questions about all four of them being true, at times, but especially the first one. America is spiritually strong? By what metric? Declining church attendance and membership? The rampant sexual immorality and materialism among those who call themselves Christians? The willingness of self-professed Christians to violate any and all of God's commands in order to gain the power to 'take back America for God'?... In addition, proclaiming that America's military is part of the equation harkens back to some of the worst parts of Church History: The Crusades and the Thirty Years War.
11. We decree that evil carries no power, authority or rights in our land nor over our people.
And yet it most clearly does. America is a far more violent nation that fellow Western democracies, to name one way in which evil is more than comfortable in this land.
12. We decree that we will operate in unity, going beyond denominational lines in order to
accomplish the purposes of God for our nation.
I can actually get behind this one. I'm all for ecumenical efforts to do Kingdom work, if only they meant this about things other than 'winning' the Culture War and crushing their enemies.
13. And we decree that AMERICA SHALL BE SAVED!
Again, in what portion of scripture is this folly grounded? America doesn't need to be saved because America is a nation not a person. Millions of its people need to be saved because they are not in a relationship with God through Christ, but that is not what they're talking about here at all. If the preamble declaring loyalty to the Kingdom of God first meant anything at all, #13 would never have been written. If you watch the video, this line is shrieked with fierce intensity. This is the sad truth of 'Christian' Nationalism, the nation's success is the only thing that truly calls forth passion and sacrifice (or violence, the sacrifice is often asked of others).
America, in fact, cannot be saved. Not a single kingdom of this world will continue after the return of Christ. When Jesus establishes his kingdom each and every nation on the planet will be obsolete. In reality, we have no idea when that day will come, and the United States of America may be just as much a distant memory as the Byzantine Empire by that point. It may sound like a broken record, but God's purpose in this world is NOT to elevate America, if the Kingdom of God advances while America teeters and falls, so be it. The prayer is 'thy kingdom come, thy will be done,' not 'our kingdom win, no matter what it costs.'
We know this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles.
We know the truth; therefore, we stand for truth and will NEVER be deceived!
The endless debate about how much of America's founding is connected to Judeo-Christian principles, as opposed to the also influential Enlightenment, for example, is a red herring that nevertheless invokes strong passions and anger.
We will NEVER stop fighting!
We will NEVER, EVER, EVER give up or give in!
And if this isn't God's will, what then? Is the only path forward for the Kingdom to fight?? What if this never ending fight is ruining the witness of the Gospel (hint: it already is), must the fight continue no matter the cost?
We WILL take our country back.
Who has the country now? How will we know when 'we' have it back? If our team controls the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court, is the war over? FYI, this happened between 2016-2018, and yet the Culture War continued to rage, the warning that 'they' were coming to get 'us' and destroy America didn't slack one bit. 'We' won elections, and yet the war continues unabated, how can this be when political power is the end to which immoral means are being excused?
We WILL honor the ONE TRUE GOD, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob!
Good, please do. While you're at it, read his book and see how he wants to be honored.
AMERICA SHALL BE SAVED!
Aside from the general overuse of caps in this decree, which matches up well with the way in which this prayer is shouted in the video, this once more underscores the way in which 'Christian' Nationalism is a diversion from what God actually told his people to do, the Great Commission, to what he never told them to do, seize geopolitical power, for themselves.
“Working together with Him, we strongly urge you not to receive God’s grace in vain [by turning
away from sound doctrine and His merciful kindness]. For He says, ‘At the acceptable time (the
time of grace) I listened to you, and I helped you on the day of salvation.’ Behold, now is ‘the
acceptable time,’ behold, now is ‘the day of salvation.’” 2 Corinthians 6:1-2 (AMP)
*Seven Mountains of Influence include media, business/finance,
family, education, politics, arts/entertainment and religion
In the end, this decree, despite being a frightening display of non-biblical theology that ignores the warnings of Church History, serves as a clear example of what 'Christian' Nationalism is, what it aims for, and why Christians should not only have no part in it, but also oppose it.
We have seen a shift in the past several years, now members of Congress and their allies who claim to represent Christianity, are willing to call themselves Christian Nationalists. They're willing to say, "what's so bad about wanting Judeo-Christian values to prevail?" without dealing with the reality that the prevailing in question is a matter of domination not persuasion, of coercion not repentance. As a Baptist I shudder to see so many fellow Christians, people whose service to others over the years demonstrates that their faith is genuine, being deceived by this path, and I shudder to see that history's lessons are being ignored once again. "Power tends to corrupt, absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely." - Lord Acton. The Church is not an exception to this rule.
So he said to me, “This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says the LORD Almighty.
Speaking to the generation that returned to Jerusalem from Exile, the prophet Zechariah rebukes the timidity of the people, encouraging them to finish the work on rebuilding the Temple. From a practical standpoint, the Israelites were a shell of their former might and glory. No longer an independent kingdom, no longer the possessors of a beautiful city with mighty walls and a magnificent temple. And yet, and this is the key, the LORD Almighty sees no reason why the Temple cannot be rebuilt.
God does NOT calculate possibilities based upon human power; period. Why? Because he's God!!
The advancement of the Kingdom of God is likewise NOT based upon the availability and use of human power. Laws, armies, wealth, privilege, status, none of them are necessary for God to fulfill his purpose in this world. Why? Because his purpose is a spiritual purpose, first and foremost, the saving of the Lost by the effective sharing of the Gospel and the transformation of the redeemed into Christ-likeness. In the end, human power is not only unnecessary to advance this agenda, history has demonstrated time and time again that it is often counter-productive. In other words, a Church with power, by this world's way of defining it, is typically less effective at its spiritual mission than a Church without power in this world. The classic example of this is the Early Church. Prior to Constantine, the Church was a minority in its culture, without status, without wealth or coercive power. And yet, growth was explosive, and importantly, when martyrs were made it was being done to the Church not by the Church.
'Christian' Nationalism, in a sharp contrast that ought to be a massive warning sign, is focused primarily upon earthly power, as if this is a path toward achieving God's will. To that end, a slogan like, "Take America Back for God" employed by politicians for political ends, is not only disingenuous {Are they actually planning on giving America to God should they win power? Really??}, but also blasphemous. The power they seek is not God's power but their own, the purpose to which they will put power when they achieve it are not God's purposes but their own, and an America wholly under their control would NOT be more honoring and pleasing to God simply because politicians who claim to represent God wield earthly authority. As Han Solo frustrating says in The Force Awakens, "That's not how the Force works!"
Recognizing this dangerous contrast, between the power Christians are called by God to wield (spiritual: serving and sacrificing) and the power that 'Christian' Nationalism grasps after (earthly: dominating and self-advancing), Calvin College historian Kristin Kobes Du Mez wrote, Jesus and John Wayne How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation. Her premise in a nutshell is that Evangelical (and also Fundamentalist) Christians prefer John Wayne to Jesus. Rather than a humble servant willing to forgive his enemies, they prefer a hard charging tough guy ready to destroy them. Unfortunately, her analysis is all too accurate. Just this past week the YouTube channel, When We Understand The Text, whose content is written and narrated by a pastor, fully embraced 'Christian' Nationalism, mocking the weakness of those who warn against its dangers (i.e. wimps like me).
In the end, "thy Kingdom come, thy will be done" is our daily prayer, and as the prophet Zechariah made clear to those willing to listen, it won't be by might or power, but by God's Spirit.
Having been singled out in the original petition that started off the "Grove City College is going 'woke'" scare, I thought it worthwhile to read for myself what is contained in Reading While Black by Anglican Priest and Wheaton College professor, Esau McCaulley (I've heard him interviewed previously on the HolyPost podcast and been impressed). What dangerous ideas are contained herein, or is it all just Culture War smoke? Is there not value in having students at a college that is 94% white with only one Black professor (himself singled out by the resultant committee as part of the problem)??
That being said, let me share the first passage that made me set the book down and think (from page 11, it didn't take long):
In my evangelical seminary almost all the authors we read were white men...It seemed that whatever was going on among Black Christians had little to do with real biblical interpretation. I swam in this disdain, and even when I rejected it vocally, the doubt seeped into my subconscious. Eventually I started to notice a few things. While I was at home with much of the theology in evangelicalism, there were real disconnects. First, there was the portrayal of the Black church in these circles. I was told that the social gospel had corrupted Black Christianity. Rather than placing my hope there, I should look to the golden age of theology, either in the early years of this country, or during the postwar boom of American Protestantism. But the historian in me couldn't help but realize that these apexes of theological faithfulness coincided with nadirs of Black freedom. (p. 11)
As someone who grew up in a county that was 95% white, going to a school that was 99% white and a church that was 100% white, I had no direct knowledge of the state of the Black Church in America, but Esau's observation that much of Evangelicalism has written off the Black Church as hopelessly tainted by the Social Gospel is an accurate reflection of the vibe that I felt as a young person. I can't point to a specific moment or person who advanced that notion, but it was there.
While it is true that the theology of any era of the Church could be tainted by the failures of that era in specific areas of sin, and the failures of a culture do not necessarily infect individuals within it {For example: Bonhoeffer rising above the Nazi-tainted theology of the Germany he grew up in}, that being said, the connection between leading American theologians and the dehumanizing treatment of Blacks should not be papered over. How could it be a Golden Age when so much of the American Church was acquiescent to, or even championing, such injustice? How can Evangelicalism be healthy if we don't reckon with this history, or worse yet, try to dismiss it? {For example: The troubling whitewashing of Jonathan Edwards' ownership of slaves by John Piper}
I learned that too often alongside the four pillars of evangelicalism...were unspoken fifth and sixth pillars. These are a general agreement on a certain reading of American history that downplayed injustice and a gentlemen's agreement to remain largely silent on current issues of racism and systematic injustice. How could I exist comfortably in a tradition that too often valorizes a period of time when my people couldn't buy homes in the neighborhood that they wanted or attend the schools that their skills gave them access to? How could I accept a place in a community if the cost for a seat at the table was silence? (p. 11-12)
And here is where the strong push-back against the idea of racial reconciliation following the murder of George Floyd comes into play. McCaulley's book was published in 2020, since then the amount of conversation and effort poured into being 'anti-woke' and anti-CRT, including official statements from the seminary presidents of the Southern Baptist Convention, speaks to the truth of the 'unspoken pillars' that he refers to. Efforts to speak to some of the true horrors of American history or efforts to understand and combat the racism that still infects our society today, have been condemned as threats against Christianity {thanks, in part, to the merging of Church and State in Christian Nationalism, to be a 'good Christian' one must be a patriotic American}. In his analysis, Esau McCaulley is speaking the truth, but it isn't one that many within Evangelical circles want to hear, hence the drive to purge Christian Colleges of such viewpoints.
{Further reading: When the shameful past of Racism hits close to home, a response to Richard Rothstein's The Color of Law which details the history of Redlining (the practice of keeping minorities out of white neighborhoods)}
I had difficulty with how the Bible functioned in parts of evangelicalism. For many, the Bible had been reduced to the arena on which we fought an endless war about the finer points of Paul's doctrine of justification...But I wondered what the Bible had to say about how we might live as Christians and citizens of God's kingdom...what about the exploitation of my people? What about our suffering, our struggle? (p. 12)
Here too I can relate to his observations about much of Evangelicalism. There is great emphasis on getting theology exactly right, but much less emphasis on the practical implications of that theology in the lives of disciples of Jesus. The social ethic of millions of American Christians {American is put first for a reason, it reflects part of the sickness} has been reduced to Pro-life (narrowly defined), anti-LGBTQ, and whatever Culture War topic is dominating the punditry at the moment. Does not the Bible have things to say to us about far more topics than these? Our call as followers of Jesus is supposed to be all-encompassing, yet only a handful of issues dominate all discussion and passions, and racial injustice is decidedly not one of them.
Rather than being a voice that Christian college students should be sheltered from, Esau McCaulley is sharing hard truth that the Church needs to hear, another indicator that the controversy at Grove City College is far more about politics than theology.
Language changes constantly. Every language does this, words are coined, borrowed, transformed, to fit the need of the moment. Old words take on new meanings, sometimes at odds with how they were once used. Some words fall into disuse and disappear from the cultural consciousness, other words rise into the zeitgeist for their own fifteen minutes of fame.
Woke is having a cultural moment. During the 2022 and 2024 election cycles you will hear the term woke used a lot, a whole lot, by pundits and politicians, usually as an insult, a Scarlet 'A' akin to calling someone a Commie back before the Berlin Wall fell. {Not that smearing one's opponent as a Communist or Socialist has fallen out of favor entirely}. How the word 'woke' is being used now, especially as an insult, goes far beyond what the word meant just a few short years ago.
As Professor Andy Smith taught me back in the day when I was trying (and sort of succeeding) to learn Biblical Greek: "Word usage determines word meaning". 'Woke' doesn't technically mean anymore what the dictionary (in this case Oxford) says, at least not only that, because it isn't be used that way primarily anymore. A 2nd definition now exists after the first, "an insult synonymous with calling someone a 'liberal'".
But what of the question in the post title? Is God 'woke' by the dictionary definition? Is God alert to injustice in society, especially racism? Let us let the Word of God speak, and then we will ask the crucial question: Does God's attitude on these issues matter to us?
Leviticus 19:15 (NIV) “Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly."
Deuteronomy 10:18 (NIV) He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the foreigner residing among you, giving them food and clothing.
Deuteronomy 27:19 (NIV) “Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow.” Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”
Psalm 82:3 (NIV) Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.
Psalm 140:12 (NIV) I know that the Lord secures justice for the poor and upholds the cause of the needy.
Proverbs 21:3 (NIV) To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.
Proverbs 24:24-25 (NIV) Whoever says to the guilty, “You are innocent,” will be cursed by peoples and denounced by nations. 25 But it will go well with those who convict the guilty, and rich blessing will come on them.
Proverbs 29:7 (NIV) The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern.
Isaiah 1:17 (NIV) Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.
Jeremiah 22:3 (NIV) This is what the Lord says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.
Amos 5:10-12 (NIV) There are those who hate the one who upholds justice in court and detest the one who tells the truth. 11 You levy a straw tax on the poor and impose a tax on their grain. Therefore, though you have built stone mansions, you will not live in them; though you have planted lush vineyards, you will not drink their wine. 12 For I know how many are your offenses and how great your sins. There are those who oppress the innocent and take bribes and deprive the poor of justice in the courts.
Micah 6:8 (NIV) He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.
Luke 11:42 (NIV) “Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.
James 1:27 (NIV) Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
James 2:14-17 (NIV) What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
There are more, a lot more, verses and passages of holy scripture that both declare God's concern for the poor, the fatherless, the widow, and the foreigner, AND reprimand God's people, in no uncertain terms, for failing to maintain justice. Of the things that caused God to send Judah into exile (which included idolatry), how the poor and powerless were treated was a primary cause of God's anger. In addition, Jesus himself famously (and controversially at least with the Pharisees and priestly class) sought out those in 1st century Judea who were forgotten, belittled, and oppressed: tax collectors, prostitutes, 'sinners', Samaritans, etc. Few things angered Jesus' critics more than his willingness to point out to them that they were failing to 'do justice' because they had slammed the proverbial door in the face of those in need.
There is no way to read the Word of God, or study the history of Israel or the Church, without concluding that God is very much alert to injustice in society, that God cares a great deal about how society treats the 'least of these', and that God will absolutely judge, indeed he will pour out his wrath, upon those who oppress others and deny justice.
If you think that racism is somehow an exception to this call for Justice, as if its pains and sorrow, injustices and griefs, are somehow lesser in God's sight, I pity you. God is the Creator is all mankind, his Imago Dei is equally stamped upon every person, neither race nor nationality make any single person more or less the image of God than any other person. Racism denies God's role as Creator, it spits in the face of God's common grace, of Jesus' commands to take the Gospel to all nations. Racism is injustice in the eyes of God no less than sexism or classism, all of which immorally place human beings in categories of greater than, less than.
God is not less aware of injustice than we are, God is more aware, perfectly aware. Afterall, God knows the thoughts and attitudes of our hearts, and is not fooled by our pretenses and the lies we tell ourselves. As the Judge of the living and the dead, God will avenge those who have been the victims of injustice.
God knows the flaws (and strengths) of America, American culture, and the system of justice in America, with perfect depth and full clarity.
God is more 'woke' than anyone, he has been from the beginning.
God cares about injustice, therefore lack of care about injustice on our part is a sin, period. On the flip side, putting effort and passion into overcoming injustice is an act of righteousness because it reflects the mind and will of God. God honoring Christians can, and will, disagree about whether or not this particular example is injustice at work. God honoring Christians can, and will, disagree about how to best remedy injustice in a free society. But God honoring Christians cannot disagree about the importance of justice and the sinfulness of injustice, God has taken that option off the table.
Do you still think that 'alert to injustice in society, especially racism' is a fitting insult?
