500+ evangelical pastors and faith leaders: Say 'No' to Christian Nationalism

[98cwitr]

Yes.

But going back to your statement:

In practice, if the government were to prioritize the teachings of Christ over the nation, that would make us a theocracy. Do you want that?

Your question presumes we are to use the power of the government to implement the teachings of Jesus. That isn't what Christ taught.

You are absolutely correct.

 

[Hammster]

Assuming the signers agree with the text of the letter, I would say yes.

".....The word “Christian” means “Christ-like.” As leaders in the Church, we do not agree on everything, but we can agree on this -- Christians should live in a way that honors Jesus, and reminds the world of Him.

As Jesus himself said, "They will know that you are my disciples by the way you love” (John 13:35). No Christian can defend the unChristlike behavior of those who committed the violence on January 6. Not only was it anti-democratic, but it was also anti-Christian. "

I don’t see how that statement defines Christian Nationalism.

 

[Ken-1122]

Evangelical Leaders Statement
Condemning Christian Nationalism's role in the January 6 Insurrection

As leaders in the broad evangelical community, we recognize and condemn the role Christian Nationalism played in the violent, racist, anti-American insurrection at the United States Capitol on January 6.

While we come from varied backgrounds and political stances, we stand together against the perversion of the Christian faith as we saw on January 6, 2021. We also stand against the theology and the conditions that led to the insurrection.

Our faith will not allow us to remain silent at such a time as this. We are also aware that our world needs more than a statement right now… we need action. We will do our best to be faithful to Jesus, and to those Christ called “the least of these.”

read the full letter

What is Christian Nationalism, and what does it have to do with the events of January 6?

 

[98cwitr]

What is Christian Nationalism, and what does it have to do with the events of January 6?

According to CT:

What is Christian nationalism?

Christian nationalism is the belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity, and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way. Popularly, Christian nationalists assert that America is and must remain a “Christian nation”—not merely as an observation about American history, but as a prescriptive program for what America must continue to be in the future. Scholars like Samuel Huntington have made a similar argument: that America is defined by its “Anglo-Protestant” past and that we will lose our identity and our freedom if we do not preserve our cultural inheritance.

Christian nationalists do not reject the First Amendment and do not advocate for theocracy, but they do believe that Christianity should enjoy a privileged position in the public square. The term “Christian nationalism,” is relatively new, and its advocates generally do not use it of themselves, but it accurately describes American nationalists who believe American identity is inextricable from Christianity.

What Is Christian Nationalism?

I disagree with the 2nd paragraph as written; I just want my elected reps to have faith in Christ.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Jerushah Duford, the granddaughter of the late Rev. Billy Graham, and the Rev. Jim Wallis, the founder of Sojourners, a

Thanks. I did not see them.

 

[Pommer]

I don’t see how that statement defines Christian Nationalism.

It doesn’t define it. It assumes the reader is competent to understand just what Christian Nationalism is.

 

[Direct Driver]

The criticism is not aimed at the government, but at Christian nationalists.

That's a tough one to define. One could argue that anyone that supported our constitution being based on Christian values - like individual freedom - would be a "Christian Nationalist". I've never met anyone that called them self a "Christian Nationalist", though. Heck, I'm a white Christian and I'm also a nationalist/patriot. But I'm not a "white nationalist", nor a Christian nationalist.

This reminds me of the "white supremist" label these days. I think that, just like "handicapped" became "disabled" and then "differently abled", it's just a rebranding of an old, outmoded and overused label but means the same thing and is the same sort of ad-hominem attack. That is, it's just replaced the accusation, "Racist".

I've always seen labels as an interesting thing that rarely actually apply, unless they are based on actual facts. i.e. these guys, if it were not a movie, would be genuine Illinois Nazis because they SAY they are:

 

[Hammster]

It doesn’t define it. It assumes the reader is competent to understand just what Christian Nationalism is.

One shouldn’t assume.

 

[Petros2015]

Jesus did in fact say go make disciples of all nations (ethnos).

I believe what he was going for was disciples IN all nations
(no nation or ethnicity to be excluded)
Not to turn 'nations' themselves into disciples

"27 My sheep listen to My voice; I know them, and they follow Me"

Makes the politics of the nation they are sheep within largely irrelevant imho.
Sheep can (and should) act independent of politics in most cases
Christian policies are nice to have, but not necessary

In fact, a light on a lampstand
Shines brighter in the darkness
Than it does when surrounded
by little plug in artificals

 

[cow451]

One shouldn’t assume.

Is a poster being coy?

 

[Hammster]

Is a poster being coy?

No. The article assumes that everyone knows and agrees what is meant by Christian Nationalism. I don’t know what they mean by that phrase.

 

[Pommer]

No. The article assumes that everyone knows and agrees what is meant by Christian Nationalism. I don’t know what they mean by that phrase.

Art thou a pastor looking to maybe sign onto this pledge?

 

[Hammster]

Art thou a pastor looking to maybe sign onto this pledge?

No.

 

[cow451]

No. The article assumes that everyone knows and agrees what is meant by Christian Nationalism. I don’t know what they mean by that phrase.

Then define it as you would see it.

 

[Hammster]

Then define it as you would see it.

That’s not how language is supposed to work.

 

[Direct Driver]

Then define it as you would see it.

I remember, about 20 years ago, someone called me a homophobe. I told them that was preposterous because a phobia is a fear of something, and I'm certainly not afraid of homosexuals - unless they are pointing a gun at me and threatening to shoot me.

Then I read the definition one day and realized that this particular word had a LOT of other meaning. Turns out that just thinking it's a bad thing can make you a "homophobe". Since then, I've told people that yes, I am a homophobe, and consider that to be a good thing.

As the late Rush Limbaugh used to say, Words have meaning. Communication can not take place until all parties wishing to join the discussion agree on the meaning of the words used.

I read a legal document a couple of decades ago that kept talking about "firearms". And in the definitions in the document, it included in the definition of firearms, "knives". This is exactly how we get some really weird legislation.

 

[Sophrosyne]

This reminds me of the "white supremist" label these days. I think that, just like "handicapped" became "disabled" and then "differently abled", it's just a rebranding of an old, outmoded and overused label but means the same thing and is the same sort of ad-hominem attack. That is, it's just replaced the accusation, "Racist".

I've always seen labels as an interesting thing that rarely actually apply, unless they are based on actual facts. i.e.

Nothing like creating a strawman and sticking a fancy label on it. The left has an infinite supply of scarecrows that they dream of new ways to attack night and day. What the right need to do is come up with tons of labels to put on the left and attack them equally and make them more popular and stick. This is why the left hated Trump he was good at labeling those on the left and at times had them on the defense when the labels became popular.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Nothing like creating a strawman and sticking a fancy label on it. The left has an infinite supply of scarecrows that they dream of new ways to attack night and day. What the right need to do is come up with tons of labels to put on the left and attack them equally and make them more popular and stick. This is why the left hated Trump he was good at labeling those on the left and at times had them on the defense when the labels became popular.

So there really are no white supremists or racists? No Christian nationalists?

 

[Petros2015]

This is why the left hated Trump he was good at labeling those on the left and at times had them on the defense when the labels became popular.

When you see Christians
Behind the Christian banner
Brandishing the sword of Truth
Humbly enduring
Steadfastly following
Rejoice
For the Kingdom of God is at hand

When you see Christians
Behind the Christian banner
Promoting conspiracy theories
Flinging the fiery darts of the enemy
Run.
Wrong Kingdom.

 

[Direct Driver]

When you see Christians
Behind the Christian banner
Brandishing the sword of Truth
Humbly enduring
Steadfastly following
Rejoice
For the Kingdom of God is at hand

When you see Christians
Behind the Christian banner
Promoting conspiracy theories
Flinging the fiery darts of the enemy
Run.
Wrong Kingdom.

Well, to non-Christians, probably the biggest conspiracy theory is Satan roaming like a lion looking for who he can devour. Frankly, most of the people I know of that are conspiracy theorists are anything BUT Christian.

That being said, it is true that if you say it on 700 club, etc., a lot of viewers are tempted to believe it because they trust that network. And that's a problem.