A Three-Part Series
Part 2 of 3 in the series “Christian Nationalism: Definition, Debate, and A Biblical Way Forward”
A persistent challenge underlying the Christian nationalism debate is that the various sides have different conceptions of what authentic Christian public engagement should look like. There is, in my view, a distorted presumption by those on the left/liberal side of the spectrum about what faithful Christian witness is—one that effectively neuters traditional Christian influence by turning biblical faithfulness into a cultural faux-pas.
[If you missed Part 1, we examined different views of Christian nationalism and some key points and players in this heated debate. Read it here.]
Misconceptions About Christian Witness:
The “Jimmy Carter” Caricature
Cramer, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
One of the most persistent misconceptions about Christian public engagement is what might be called the “Jimmy Carter model”—the idea that authentic Christian witness must be politically passive, socially accommodating, and culturally deferential. This view insists that Christians should:
- Never “judge” sin or speak prophetically to cultural issues
- Focus exclusively on charity work while avoiding political engagement
- Accept all cultural developments as inevitable progress
- Maintain strict separation between religious conviction and public policy (a self-beneficial mischaracterization of the concept of “separation of church and state”)
This rather patronizing view assumes that love requires acceptance of all behaviors and that Christian conviction should never challenge prevailing cultural assumptions. In this way, the traditional evangelical voice in the public square is being assailed. If the evangelical dares to step out of line (by proclaiming traditional Christian values or understanding of truth), they’re accused of not being a loving “Christian”!
Former President Jimmy Carter, a genial man known for teaching Sunday School and building houses with Habitat for Humanity, is often held up as the “good Christian” example by those on the liberal side of the spectrum. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with being charitable, kind, polite, or soft-spoken. But Christianity is more than good deeds and being a nice guy. Sometimes Christian love necessitates bluntly speaking hard truths, truths that even risk offending, for the sake of something greater. Jesus was not the kindhearted, gentle hippie some imagine. He spoke with love, mercy, and grace, but also spoke the truth. He was never afraid to call out sin and evil, knowing that these are the things that weigh down souls to their eternal destruction.
The Gospel’s Inherent Challenge
“And blessed is the one who is not offended by me.”
(Matthew 11:6)
“The message of the cross is foolish to those who are headed for destruction! But we who are being saved know it is the very power of God. As the Scriptures say, ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and discard the intelligence of the intelligent.’ So where does this leave the philosophers, the scholars, and the world’s brilliant debaters? God has made the wisdom of this world look foolish. Since God in his wisdom saw to it that the world would never know him through human wisdom, he has used our foolish preaching to save those who believe.”
(1 Corinthians 1:18-21, New Living Translation)
We must consider why human beings are offended by the gospel. No matter how nicely the Christian message may be delivered, the true gospel is inherently offensive to fallen human nature (1 Corinthians 1:18, 23). It tells us that we are not good enough to stand before God on our own merits, that our “good works” are insufficient to earn salvation (Isaiah 64:6; Ephesians 2:8-9). It’s NOT telling us to just try harder and perform better and you’ll be accepted by God. The message is: Turn to the loving and merciful Savior who died for sinners even when they were still sinning (Romans 5:8, Ephesians 2:4-5)! Therefore our part is to repent (admit and turn away from our sins), believe, and receive the good news that Christ died for the sins which separate every one of us from God (Mark 1:15, John 1: 12, 10:15, Romans 6:6-8, 1 Peter 3:18). The marvelous part of the good news is that those who receive Christ are not only forgiven, but also spiritually transformed into saints who can do good things for the right reasons (2 Cor 5:17, Ephesians 2:10).
Therefore to love our neighbors genuinely means offering them the only cure for humanity’s deepest problem—the true gospel of Jesus Christ described above—rather than false gospels that keep us all on a performance treadmill and don’t address our deadly sin disease. This wonderful gospel is good news with vital implications for all areas of life, including even culture and politics. As the Spirit changes Christians into a holy people, it calls them to powerfully witness to the world around them (2 Cor 3:18, Romans 8:29). Believers, like Christ, are to model what it means to be truly human. This cannot help but change the world!
The America Question: Christian Nation or Not? The Case for America’s Christian Foundation
This brings us to a fundamental question that lies beneath much of the Christian Nationalism debate: Was America founded as a Christian nation, and if yes, should Christians work to restore that foundation?
The cultural conversation often presents a false choice: either embrace a robust Christian nationalism that seeks to “take over” society, or retreat into privatized faith that never challenges cultural trends. I believe biblical Christianity rejects both extremes. Francis Schaeffer, pastor and founder of L’Abri fellowship, spoke prophetically to our generation. He understood the connection between ideas and outcomes and warned America of what was to come if it discarded its Christian framework:
“This country was founded on a Christian base with all its freedom for everybody. Let me stress that. This country was founded on a Christian base with all its freedom for everybody, not just Christians, but all its freedom for everyone.”
—Francis Schaeffer, A Christian Manifesto
Schaeffer argued that America’s unprecedented freedoms emerged precisely because the founders operated from a Christian framework that acknowledged “there was a Creator and that this Creator gave the inalienable rights—this upon which our country was founded and which has given us the freedoms which we still have.” This perspective notes that Christian principles shaped America’s founding documents and legal structures. The founders, even those who weren’t personally committed Christians, operated within a Judeo-Christian worldview that provided the philosophical foundation for limited government, individual rights, and ordered liberty. As Schaeffer observed, “We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism.”
Many conservatives see America’s current cultural confusion as the fruit of abandoning this Christian framework. “If there are no absolutes by which to judge society, the society is absolute,” Schaeffer warned in his 1968 treatise, “The God Who Is There.” From this viewpoint, some ideology will inevitably dominate culture, and Christianity—with Christ declared as Lord of all—represents the best choice. Yet, should Christian views be imposed by means of political structures, cultural influencing, and legislation, or will such changes happen organically when a people arise who are truly converted to the kingdom of God by the power of the gospel?
Should Christian views be imposed by means of political structures, cultural influencing, and legislation, or will such changes happen organically when a people arise who are truly converted to the kingdom of God by the power of the gospel?
—Alexander M. Jordan, Beyond ‘Jimmy Carter’ Christianity: Reclaiming Prophetic Witness
The Tension: Christ’s Different Kingdom
The perspective that declares that Christians are charged to assume primacy over all of culture must grapple with Christ’s own approach to earthly power. Jesus explicitly rejected political dominance as His primary strategy (John 18:36). He called His followers to pursue holiness and focus on the eternal, spiritual kingdom that He inaugurated, rather than be distracted by temporary earthly kingdoms. His warnings about watching our hearts and not making idols of earthly achievements—wealth, influence, power, fame—should make thoughtful Christians pause—are we prioritizing political gains over spiritual faithfulness and in so doing losing sight of our most urgent mission—gospel proclamation?
The gospel’s call to “seek first the kingdom of God and its righteousness” (Matthew 6:33) suggests a different ordering of priorities than cultural dominance. Christ’s strategy was transformation from within through changed hearts, not reformation from above through political control.
In Part 3, we’ll also closely examine what Christ’s example as ‘King of Truth’ over a spiritual kingdom means for how (temporarily) earthbound Christians are to engage culture today.”
The Political Engagement Dilemma
This tension between realms—earthly and spiritual—creates a genuine dilemma for Christians called to political engagement. Consider Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, who explicitly engages the political arena while naming Christ as the source of his values. Such engagement isn’t inherently wrong—Christians with gifts of communication should engage the political sphere when called to do so.
However, the danger for sincere Christians who want to properly fulfill their role in society can come from the conflation of politically-focused activities with the promotion of God’s kingdom. While I believe political conservatism is properly derived from biblical truth, the foundation of our ministry is that Christians are called to a kingdom not of this world. This kingdom is spiritual, eternal reality, yet Christians live out a heavenly calling with feet planted in a world of flawed human government, laws, and policy. We may influence all of that towards Christ’s truth, yet if we blur too much the distinction between heavenly calling and earthly responsibilities, we will inevitably make the gospel less primary while political concerns rise to the top of our focus and energy. The challenge is to maintain the gospel’s centrality and primacy even as one engages politically and culturally.
NOTE: Some critics of Mr. Kirk allege that his organizations TP-USA and TPUSA-Faith are driven by a “Seven Mountains Mandate” and/or Dominion Eschatology. It’s beyond the scope of this series to examine the many eschatological views that certainly can play an influential role in how Christians may choose to interact with society. But in future articles I intend to write more on eschatological views and their impact on how Christians engage this world.
Heavenly Calling vs Earthly Duties: A Balanced Perspective
A healthy approach will bridge the tension between heavenly calling and earthly duties:
- Affirming the Historical Reality: America did providentially benefit from Christian influence in its founding principles, and the erosion of that influence has contributed to cultural confusion. Christians can and should legitimately work to restore biblical wisdom to public discourse (Matthew 5:13-16; 1 Peter 2:9-12; Colossians 4:5-6).
- Maintaining Kingdom Priorities: Yet Christians must remember that our primary identity is as citizens of heaven, not America (Philippians 3:20; 1 Peter 2:11). Our ultimate hope rests in Christ’s eternal kingdom, not political restoration (Hebrews 11:13-16; 13:14). Political engagement should serve the gospel while the gospel informs political engagement.
- Guarding Against Idolatry: Whether Christians pursue political engagement or allow themselves to be absorbed by worldly culture, both can turn idolatrous if they displace Christ as supreme good (1 John 5:21; Exodus 20:3-6). Since Christians are “in” the world but not of the “world,” they are called neither to retreat from culture nor to be conformed to it, but to engage faithfully without compromise (John 17:16, Romans 12:2; John 17:15-18). The heart’s motives matter as much as external activities (1 Samuel 16:7; Matthew 6:1-6).
- Preserving Gospel Witness: Our methods of engagement must align with gospel principles (2 Corinthians 4:2; 1 Peter 3:15-16). Winning political battles while losing our Christian character damages our witness more than cultural defeats (1 Corinthians 9:19-23; Titus 2:7-8).
- Jesus said, “For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?” Political victories can enhance temporary human flourishing, but do they save eternal souls? Christian nationalism should never become an idol, the pursuit of something the Lord has not promised before His return—a perfect Christian nation. At the same time, Christians are not to retreat from the world to either monasterial life or inward gazing Christian subcultures. As those called by God, we do have an indispensable role to play in nations and cultures.
Coming in Part 3: “Salt, Light, and Kingdom Priorities: A Biblical Path Forward” – We’ll further explore what faithful Christian cultural engagement looks like when it’s grounded in eternal, biblical priorities rather than shortsighted political strategies.
Read the Complete Series:
- Part 1: What Does Christian Nationalism Really Mean? Cutting Through the Confusion
- Part 2: Beyond ‘Jimmy Carter’ Christianity: Reclaiming Prophetic Witness (You are here)
- Part 3: Salt, Light, and Kingdom Priorities: A Biblical Path Forward
Follow @TrueTruthToday for more Reformed cultural commentary
