unpack the Word

Note: this blog is primarily intended for my Christian friends.

Something has been on my mind as of late, and I want to write about it at length. That something has been the growing prominence and visibility of Christian nationalism in American politics and political discussions. While this concept seems to have taken off with a growing chunk of Americans, I firmly believe the very idea of Christian nationalism in no way meshes with the pattern of early Christianity.

First, let’s get some context. According to recent polling, 3 in 10 Americans sympathize or adhere to the idea of Christian nationalism. That’s around 30% of the country. Now, that may not seem like a huge number, but ANYTHING that gets to 30% support on a national level is something worth considering.

Now, let’s define things. Christian nationalism, broadly, is the idea that America is a fundamentally Christian nation and that it should continue to be such a nation and that the government should take steps to make sure that status persists. (More reading here.) This belief in a Christian nation essentially means that the government is an active participant in enforcing the Christian status of the nation and that the government itself is explicitly Christian.

It is worth noting that this concept, the idea of the United States as a Christian nation or even a God-chosen nation has a lot of force behind it in American history. You can find early discussions of this country as a Christian enterprise in the literature of colonizers, from early texts like A model of Christian Charity”.

In more modern times you see Presidents like Ronald Reagan explicitly echoes of early American literature’s identification of America as a “shining city upon a hill," a direct reference to Jesus’s words in the Sermon on the Mount. Regardless of period, American history and politics has no shortage of folks who want to explicitly borrow biblical language to describe our nation and who do not shy away from calling for the United States to be an explicitly Christian nation-state.

There is some comfort, I won’t deny, in the idea of a government that is fundamentally on our side in a religious sense. Generally speaking, most folks I think would rather have a government that supports their faith, their beliefs, etc. As a Christian, you might even be tempted to think that an explicitly Christina nation is the moral and correct way to run a nation, leveraging laws and authorities to theoretically fight sin and corruption. This view of government and its interactions with Christianity, however, run into significant issues when we compare Christian nationalism to the Kingdom of Heaven and early church we see in the New Testament.

The Church and the World

Now, the first reaction some might have to my calling Christian nationalism opposed to the early church is to quote Romans 13. In the Book of Romans, the Apostle Paul specifically typifies the government as ruling according to God’s will. It is worth diving into this for a bit. Here is that section, quoted at length:

“Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience. 6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.”

Taken out of context, this would seem to be a call to see the government as God’s instrument, and taken further, see the government as a way to impose our faith and values on those around us. Context, however, makes that reading difficult.

In the preceding paragraphs, Paul has just finished explaining to Christians that they are fundamentally not to live as troublemakers, revenge seekers, etc. lnstead, Christians are to treat their enemies with kindness, overcoming evil with good. At the same time, Paul admonishes his readers to live quiet lives, staying away from violence as much as it depends on them.

Taken in this context, Romans 13 is a continuation of what Paul is telling Christians in Rome (and from which we can glean more universal truths for our own lives). Paul is writing to encourage Christians to not be rabble-rousers, but to live quiet lives so they can focus on God’s Kingdom as opposed to worldly affairs. Remember, this is shortly before the violent rebellion of the Jews in Israel will lead to the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem. Political violence is not unusual, especially for a faith born out of Israel. Paul wants Christians to focus on more important matters than who is ruling. This isn’t to say that Paul is endorsing all rulers as inherently just—he is simply saying that rulers who enforce laws are allowed by God and that believers should live law-abiding lives that keep them out of trouble so they can focus on the kingdom of God.

Notice, before we move on, that all of the discussions of government that Paul shares in Romans 13 are explicitly God-focused. Government is established and allowed by God. Christians are not mentioned as establishing or running government (though there were many Roman Christians, and several prominent military officials who converted in the New Testament histories).

The Kingdom of Heaven

Having discussed Romans 13, it is worth turning now to the words of Jesus, which I think are fairly plain to follow. At the pivotal moment of Jesus’s life, at the point when He was before Pontius Pilate and life His and death were in the balance, Jesus specifically shunned the idea that the Kingdom of Heaven, His Divine Kingdom, was one that was going to come into the world via the traditional power structures and political systems.

When addressed by Pilate, Jesus states in John 18, "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." Jesus was not interested in coming to the world as a conqueror of nations in the traditional martial sense. He did come to conquer, but that conquest was spiritual and focused not on the world but on the heart.

Now, that’s a lot of work being done by a single interaction, so you might have some questions in pinning so much on a single phrase from Jesus. However, if we look at the historical context of Jesus’s ministry and the history of God’s people, the strong rejection of worldly power that Jesus brings to Pilate will fall into place not as a single rejection but as the culmination of a ministry.

During the time that Jesus was working in Israel, there was no small amount of turmoil and rebellion against Roman rule. The Jewish people were particularly stubborn in their resistance to Rome and part of this resistance was driven by a desire to reclaim, fully, the land that God had given them, from the days of Abraham and Moses through the kingdom of David and beyond. There were numerous Jewish rebellions at this time, culminating of course with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple later in the century. Political and military struggle were not unusual to the people of Israel during Jesus’s ministry. They were, if anything, the expectation for a religious movement among the Jews.

At the same time, there was a focus on belonging, properly, to God’s people, by way of following the Law of Moses. Social structures and hierarchies were built around the Temple as well as those who saw the current status quo as less than adequate, such as the Pharisees. (For more reading on this and the time period of Jesus’s ministry, I strongly recommend NT Wright’s work on Christian origins if you want a detailed academic summary, though there are countless works on the period that are more accessible!)

Jesus’s ministry stands in contrast to the current regimes and dreams of a military conquest that would return Israel to its glory days under Solomon and David. Jesus turned this expectation on its head when He, much like the Prophets before Him, focused not on outward action and ritual and possessions, but instead on the inward state of the heart. It was not a worldly kingdom that Jesus preached, but a Kingdom that was spiritual and that focused not on the worldly outcomes of a nation but the state of God’s peoples’ hearts.

The Beatitudes, often referenced as an ideological core of Jesus’ teachings, give us a stark view of this Kingdom, and the view that Jesus creates is one that stands specifically in contrast to expectations of the society around Him, as we’ll see:

Matthew 5:3-12 NIV "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. [4] Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. [5] Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. [6] Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. [7] Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy. [8] Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. [9] Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God. [10] Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. [11] "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. [12] Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."

Read these verses, this teaching, in Jesus’s historic context of revolutions and rebellion. What do we see? We see a Kingdom, but one fundamentally not concerned with earthly power but instead one that stands in rejection of it. Instead, we see calls to be meek, submissive, peacemakers, to suffer persecution in God’s name, all because of a Heavenly Kingdom we belong to.

Imposing a Christian worldview and nation, enforcing Christian morality via laws and regulations, all of these things stand in contrast to the meek, submissive, and peaceful Kingdom Jesus preaches.

The Apostle Paul builds on this vision beautifully when he explains the role of believers as that of ambassadors. Instead of enforcing God’s will and morality on the world as a government would, we are to be ambassadors of God’s peace and reconciliation with all humankind:

Corinthians 5:16-20 NIV “So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. [17] Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here! [18] All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: [19] that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. [20] We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God.”

Paul provides a framework for our relationship with the world. We aren’t to view others through an earthly lens: our kingdom isn’t an earthly one. Instead, we are concerned with a spiritual mission, the reconciliation of those around us with God. We aren’t here to condemn others, but to offer them good news.

Elsewhere in 1 Corinthians, Paul puts down an even more direct divider between judgement of non-Christians and Christian communities :

1 Corinthians 5:12-13 NIV “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.’”

The church, the people of God, are not to be concerned with arbitrating morality among those around them. They aren’t to concern themselves with browbeating others into submission. They are ambassadors to those away from God and guardians of God’s people.

Fundamentally, the words of Jesus and the letters of Paul give us very little reason to build a national of Christian leadership with Christian laws and morality legally enforced. God brings justice. God seeks to reconcile with His creation. He asks us to be ambassadors, not sheriffs or judges. Christian legal structures are not a method of building God’s kingdom.

Now, I’m not saying that a Christian can’t have a point of view or vote (though I have chosen in the past few years to do just that, to step aside from the worldly power struggles and focus on God’s kingdom due to the undue influence I realized politics was having on my soul and my witness to others and my relationship with my fellow Christians). But, I am very clearly saying that I see no space in the Kingdom of God for an earthly kingdom of Christian laws and rule. It fundamentally runs counter to the unassuming, peaceful, and spiritually-focused model of Jesus and the Apostles.

God's Kingdom doesn't need your nation state

Before I wrap, I’ll make two quick little closing notes just on the risk and futility of Christian nationalism.

How exactly does a national system of Christian justice convert hearts to God? Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 18 that the message of the cross is foolishness to those perishing. Enforcing religious rules on someone’s behavior without first converting them to your faith is not bringing them to salvation, though it may bring them to resent you and your faith.

Finally, a thought on power and prestige. What does the Kingdom of God gain from being aligned with a political party or system? In what way does our explicit implication that a party or country is Christian benefit God’s Kingdom? God does not need our parties nor do they add to His kingdom. However, political parties and nations have much to gain by claiming they are of God and allied with God. They gain a sense of divine right, divine mission, divine justice even. None of those things are added to God for His kingdom benefits in no way from worldly associations.

Instead, I argue, the Kingdom of God is hurt by such associations. The petty political squabbles, the failures of political leaders, the savage attack ads and bumper stickers and social media posts made by political party members, especially those who do so while announcing proudly their faith as Christians, sully the image of the Kingdom of God. They misrepresent the entire enterprise of our faith. We are not here to conquer by sword and rule by law. We are here to make peace and exist in peace as ambassadors of God.

God’s Kingdom has no need for a Christian nationalism, and a Christian nationalism at best is a parasite on the church and the effectiveness of the church in the world. It distracts and destroys the purity of our message, our plea, and our witness.

Instead, I argue, our lives should be plain and plainly focused, patterned according to the words of Christ:

Matthew 6:33 NIV “But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.”