Christian Nationalism: A Reply to Jonathan Leeman | Jared Longshore
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 авг 2024
- In this episode of Reformation & Revival, Pastor Jared Longshore discusses a recent article by Jonathan Leeman critiquing Christian Nationalism.
"What do you do when the kings heed your preaching? What do you call such civil authorities and their jurisdictions after they kiss the Son? Can you not call that nation a Christian Nation?"
As an outsider (non-US citizen) I can say with confidence that the outside world already sees the US as a Christian nation, and look at where we are. You may as well own that title and reform it.
So true. All of my Muslim friends call America a Christian country. We already have the name. Let’s embrace it and make it true in practice.
I wish that were not true. Not because I don’t want America to be a shining witness of Christ, but because America, in its current state, is a poor witness. We merely bear the name in vanity. This nation has a form of godliness but deny His power. I pray for regeneration upon this land. I have currently been reading Jeremiah again, and I see many parallels between us and Judah. My hear laments for these people as Jeremiah’s did for Judah. This is why we need Christian nationalism as Pastor Jared Longshore said, because he is in agreement with the Bible so this thing he says really is what God commands. We must make disciples of all nations.
@@AstroMonkey88 See America in Jeremiah 50 & 51 and Revelation 17 & 18. America is a Nation that once knew God but has now rejected Him. America is now an antichrist Nation that is already on fire. Russia and friends will soon deliver the fatal blow. She will by no means escape.
Problem is, America as a nation doesn't know what real Christianity looks like. It's idea of Christianity doesn't go any further than acknowledging that Jesus exists, and even then there are at least 30k different versions of that Jesus in the Catholic and Protestant religions.
@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Problem is: America is not a Nation. The focus needs to be on Christ (the Answer) and not on "christianity."
I want my country to be Christian! Yes a Christian Nation God bless the Philippines.
Too bad
Religion is gross
its not your country
America is not even a country
your government is a satanic cult
Chrsitianity is DISGUSTING
WE ARE NOT FOLLOWING YOUR RELIGION
Supreme Court of New York 1811, in the case of the People v. Ruggles, 8 Johns 545-547, Chief Justice Chancellor Kent stated: "...we are a Christian people, and the morality of the country is deeply engrafted upon Christianity, and not upon the doctrines or worship of those impostors [other religions]..." In this same decision, Justice Kent also stated: "This [constitutional] declaration (noble and magnanimous as it is, when duly understood) never meant to withdraw religion in general, and with it the best sanctions of moral and social obligation from all consideration and notice of the law... To construe it as breaking down the common law barriers against licentious, wanton, and impious attacks against Christianity itself, would be an enormous perversion of its meaning..." It is very clear from this Supreme Court case in New York and others near the Founding of this Nation that our Constitution and all Law in this Land is (was) based on Christianity. This is not the case at present!
If God commands us to pray for His kingdom to come, why would it be offensive to anyone who claims the name of Christ to have any country identified as a Christian nation!
Lovely take. My dislike of the term Christian Nationalism is the association of nationalism with nation-states, rather than nations in the biblical sense (which nation-states could possibly be included in). I'd love to hear your take on that.
Also, you made me google "john macarthur fresca".
Leeman's piece is stronger than Longshore's response here for numerous reasons, chiefly that Longshore fails to appreciate the distinction between a nation (i.e. a people and land) influenced by Christianity and a nation/government under the jurisdiction of an established Church. The former was a reality that America's founders recognized and encouraged and that the majority of Christians throughout all ages in all lands have sought. The latter notion is never once countenanced in any of the New Testament Scriptures, and was fastidiously opposed by America's founders. Christians thinking through these issues should first consider whether Jesus and the Apostles were even peripherally considered with establishing "Christian" governments. An honest consultation of the New Testament reveals a people negligibly concerned with the ephemeral kingdoms of this world or their lot in them. What is a Christian Nation to those who are aliens and sojourners in this world?
@@Charles.Wright Presumably not by revolutionizing the government systems they find themselves living under.
I don’t trust anything Lehman says since he wanted to shut down the church because it might offend outsiders. Therefore, his ecclesiastical views aren’t sound.
Helpful and succinct, Jared. Thank you.
The Great Commission includes making disciples of all nations. As we have yet to put ONE nation into that column all of this is extremely premature.
"Big Rob shaking his tail feathers" LOL
Thanks so much, Jared, for sharing your thoughts here. I do appreciate that but have some follow up questions just for my own clarification:
1) You mention, “If Christianity does influence a nation….what do you have after that influence? You have one nation under the triune God."
• I guess you would have to define ‘influence’ here first. One outcome is certainly that all the leaders may bow down to Christ.
• But influence can also trigger rejection by some/many other leaders and people of the nations (also mentioned in Ps. 2). Does one possible outcome in the ‘after’ scenario you mention also include much suffering and persecution of Christian leaders and citizens who do bow to Christ? It seems that is sometimes (often?) the case as well.
2) You mention believers seeing in our day that there is “always a God of the system.”
• Would you agree or disagree that this was true in Jesus’ day and the days of the early church as well? It would seem at least certainly that early Christians recognized there were gods behind the systems of their day as well. Is it different in our day, do you think? Curious your thoughts on that.
3) What does early Christian witness point us to when it comes to the ‘drag queen story hour’ of their day?
Certainly early Rome had its issues and its gov’t certainly allowed great evils to occur. Is there a straight, singular response we see in the NT for Christians to have towards these kinds of situations in society or is the response more varied and nuanced (also curious your thoughts on that).
4) To your thoughts on Big Rob. Great example btw 😊. Big Rob’s was shaking his tailfeather in Rome, and has been for many generations and in many places, long before he was doing it in the U.S. My thought is, how do we see Christ and his disciples:
a. Engaging with Big Rob back then?
b. Engaging with the overall system/gov’t in places in their day that allows Big Rob to….do whatever he’s doing?
That was well said.
Thanks 👍
...Who are called by my name...
Hold my Fresca! Perfect!
Ah - a few more:
5) To this statement, “If you have a whole nation of Muslim men, you have no right to call that nation a Christian one.”
• You then go on to say that our nation is led by representatives that God Himself has called his ministers (Rom. 13). “God calls his civil authorities His servant, why should we object?”
• How does that reconcile with the Muslim example you mentioned just previous to this? Aren’t leaders of say Saudi Arabia also the ministers of the Christian God, willingly and knowingly, or not??
• God naming a nations leaders his servants doesn’t equate anywhere I see in the Bible to that nation being considered a Christian nation (but definitely point me in the direction of the Scriptures).
6) Teach all nations, baptizing them…
• In the Book of Acts and following NT books, it certainly seems we see people from all different nations being baptized, but never what is considered the nation itself being baptized. Help me to see though. Are there any references to whole nations actually being baptized in the NT. It seems to me its always people belonging to those nations, in different quantities and amounts of people as God sees fit, but never whole nations in which the nation then takes on the name ‘Christian nation,’ or ‘baptized nation’.
• What nations do you see being identified with the triune name as a whole in the NT after the said nation is baptized, besides the holy, multi-tribal nation that is the church of course :)?
7) Ps. 2:2: A civil authority who kisses the Son does not 1 to 1 equate to then a nation being called a Christian nation. I would love though if you can point that out in the NT. The Ps. 2:2 reference seems more linked to the king/ruler himself becoming a Christian, serving and rejoicing himself, but there’s no promise or mention in that Psalm (or in the Bible?) that thus the nation under him will follow suit and or should or can be called a Christian nation. (For those interested, an example of this happening though would be Gregory the Illuminator leading King Tiridates III of Armenia to Christ through a miraculous healing, and then Tiridates declaring Armenia a Christian nation in the 300's A.D.. You can google the rest to see how history unfolds :).
• I’m confused though. In your example, if the leaders kiss the Christ, we then call it the ‘kiss the Christ’ nation. Out of curiosity, when does that happen? When 3 out of 10 do it, 6 out of 10, do all have to do it before it gets that name?
Haha, if you've read 1 or any of these questions, Jared, thanks for your time. Just trying to understand more and these questions are what popped into my head as I watched the video. Many blessings to you and your work.
Jared, if this was a Christian nation why did Christians try to amend the Constitution so many times to make this a Christian nation?
"In February 1863, during the American Civil War, a coalition of eleven Protestant denominations from seven northern states gathered to discuss the state of the nation. Seeing the Civil War as God's punishment for the omission of God from the Constitution, they discussed a proposed amendment to alter the wording of the Preamble to acknowledge God. The idea that civil governments derive their legitimacy from God, and Jesus in particular, was alleged to be based on Biblical passages such as Psalm 2 and Romans 13. The original draft of the amendment, by Pennsylvania attorney John Alexander, read:[
We, the people of the United States recognizing the being and attributes of Almighty God, the Divine Authority of the Holy Scriptures, the law of God as the paramount rule, and Jesus, the Messiah, the Savior and Lord of all, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. (insertions and deletions noted) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_amendment
Jared, if it's ever going to be a Christian nation, you and your ilk need too tell the truth about it never being a Christian nation and past efforts to change..
Jared, when you see women in the church buildings covering their heads and calling their husbands, my lord, like Sarah did, you will know that feminism and its Jezebel spirit has left those women and that place. Until then, Jezebel spirit is ruling the males in the church building and its pastors. This will never be a Christian nation as long as Jezebel rules.
That was a powerful sermon, sir. But, I fear that ears, such as that of Mr. Leeman, will be utterly deaf to your sermon's meaning, implications, and exhortations for so they have been to previous attempts to convict such hearts and minds.
🔥
The Romans 13 point about the government being the Christian God's servant was game, set, match re Christian Nationalism.
That's a very poor argument, because you would then have to argue that Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, and 1st century Rome were also Christian nations.
This was my thought - so based off his Romans 13 argument … modern day North Korea, China, Iran, Afghanistan are all considered Christian Nations because God appointed their leaders? And they are servants of the Triune God?
But you're not plainly reading the text. Romans 13:3 "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil..." America's leaders are clearly a terror to good works and are openly promoting unspeakable wickedness. America would not be a Nation, let alone a Christian Nation if Christians didn't reject the ruler King George III. We also must not take the Mark of the Beast which is already being rolled out by these same "rulers." Shalom.
There is one Christian Nation, the church. Anything else is a poor forgery no matter what story you tell. Untenable. 1 Peter.
I find it very difficult to understand what exactly Jared would do if he was allowed to determine America's laws in a way that would satisfy him. When we talk about "Christians", do we include Catholics, Orthodox, Seventh Day Adventists, Oneness Pentecostals? To what extent do we include or forbid believers of different confessions, or unbelievers, from certain public activities? Who will be the civil authorities empowered to make such decisions, what will be their qualifications, and to what will they be held accountable? What is his position on censorship or blasphemy? How, and to whom, does an individual prove he is a "Christian" before being allowed to take public office? Until he speaks more plainly on what he would like to see happen and stops talking in platitudes, this discussion will go nowhere. In other words, clearly state your positions on key issues before I will decide whether I can support you or not.
I would assume he is talking about the true, gospel centered Christianity. So that would exclude sects that aren't teaching and preaching the biblical gospel. Such as roman Catholicism, 7th day, and it would of course not include cults like Mormonism and Jehovah's witnesses.
And since a Christian nation wouldn't meddle in small denomination details and separations, and by this I mean the federal government is Christian but not saying when a baptism should occur, then it would actually be quite easy. Base the laws and morality off the Bible and Gods commands, and leave the rest to the people.
On the one hand Christian Nationalists are commonly identified and vilified as people who believe the bizarre notion that America was founded as a Christian nation. On the other hand Christian Nationalists are dogged by questions about how they would treat non-Christians and heterodox denominations. Am I the only one who sees the schizophrenia between these two lines of attack?
If Christian Nationalists want to see American culture and American government restored to something approaching its founding, don’t we already have a pretty good idea what their religious toleration would look like?
You will never get a reply. The folks peddling this Christian Nationalism nonsense only stay to chat long enough to drop badly referenced bible quotes. Anyone who thinks nationalism is a key part of their faith is just waiting for the right cult to come by and snatch them up.
We do not call the nation Christian
its not real
There is no such thing as a Christian
Jesus was not a person
No legitimate historian denies the existence of Jesus. Deny his deity if you wish but denying his existence makes you look stupid to most atheists.
@@dwighttheowl4309 There are no historians that agree with you. No scientists either. Religious freaks and your selfishiness are pathetic. You're scum sucking losers
@@je-freenorman7787 Bart Ehrman, Robert Price, and Michael Grant (all non-Christian scholars) agree with my statement.
Go ahead, call it a CN, but wait until every leader therein has actually kissed the Son. Oh and you’ve got to have a bullet proof way to ensure every leader going forward has kissed him too; and none like Judas.
By the time you’ve created that mess, you’ll be several hundred years into being well off the mission Christ gave us. Congrats.
Do you attend a Church? Is it Christian? By your standard it couldn’t be. Go ahead and call it a Christian Church but only after you are sure that every single member is truly regenerate and kissed the Son.
Ding ding ding! You figured it out.
Longshore is saying it’s not a big deal if we call if a CN without it actually being one, because better to name it and thereby claim it. Better to aspire to being one, than get it right. To which I say, ‘yeah we’ve been doing that for nearly 100years already. Why is your idea so ouch better?’
That dumb idea is only what every other CN state has done since Christ and somehow having leaders who can hide behind the Name while bearing it ‘in vain’ seems to always result in further darkness and evil perpetrated with Christ’s name on it.
Better to pay attention to the mission as given (discipling and baptizing individuals from the nations) than to try to set up, or worse reform, an earthly nation state with Christs name on it, that would require the sort of ridiculous idea I pitched.
I’m merely demanding that Longshore be consistent (it’d be sinful but at least consistent), first in having a framework to ensure leadership of a state has genuinely kissed the Son, and second in doing this before you slap our Lord’s name on it.
@@interestedmeow I figured what out? Being a Christian nation or a Christian Church doesn’t mean 100% regenerate true Christian members. It’s even stated in the 39 Articles.
The United Kingdom was truly a Christian Nation when the Church of England was really a great Protestant Church. They even exported missionaries all over the world spreading the gospel.
America truly really was a Christian nation not that long ago. Even in public schools Protestant Christianity was taught.
I don’t understand the aversion to Christian principles for behavior in society to be a problem. Because right now the LGBT trans and mutilate the kids religion is the way things are going.
@@interestedmeow I don’t understand your argument.
@@interestedmeow CN is a Christian political theory. Essentially, people vote for politicians who publicly acknowledge Christ as Lord. I think that means they would kiss the Son. Otherwise, I don’t understand you.
Still waiting for an explanation on how a nation is to be baptized. Until then, your interpretation of Matt 28 is massively suspect. It’s incredibly rich that you call others out on poor exegesis while engaging in a far more erroneous version of it.
All you did was hand wave at it like ‘yes we ARE to baptize nations’ as if that would have been a coherent idea to the 12 who first heard it.
I shudder to know what you do with passages that are more complicated than something this simple.
@@Charles.Wright do you have an answer for how to baptize a nation in a manner coherent to the first hearers of the GC?