In The Religion of America’s Greatness: What’s Wrong with Christian Nationalism, Paul Miller said nationalism was often a fig leaf for authoritarian governments to hide behind. It is a form of cultural determinism, trivializing the ideals for which our founding fathers fought, sacrificed and died. “Independence was hardly necessary to preserve a Christian culture, which was not threatened by the Christian monarch of Protestant Britain.” They sought to gain independence for one Christian people (Americans) from another Christian nation (England) because they valued political liberty enough to fight and die for it. “Christian nationalism has the perverse implication of insulting the founders by minimizing the importance of the ideals for which they fought.”

Not only does it trivialize the ideals our founding fathers fought for, it is a false religion that places the nation in the place of the church and the authoritarian leader in the place of God. It misdirects the attention of Christians from where we should focus our attention—the kingdom of God—onto an idolatrous, false religion (See “What’s Wrong with Christian Nationalism?”). We are residents of the kingdom of God and should seek first that kingdom (Matthew 6:33), which is not of this world (John 18:36). This kingdom is associated with the church; not any particular nation—even modern-day Israel. The universal church alone contains citizens of the kingdom of God.

The kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven is the central theme of Jesus’ preaching in the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. The terms are interchangeable. Matthew alone speaks of the ‘kingdom of heaven’ because he was writing to a Jewish audience, who tended to avoid direct reference to God. Even in modern Judaism, the name of G-d is handled with caution and respect. Mark and Luke speak of the ‘kingdom of God’ because it was more intelligible to non-Jews. Neither phrase is found in the Old Testament and only the ‘kingdom of God’ is found in the New Testament outside of the gospel of Matthew.

Although the phrase ‘kingdom of God’ is not in the OT, the ideas of God as king and his kingly rule are inescapable. He is “the great king over all the earth” (Psalm 47:2)  and “his kingdom rules over all” (Psalm 103:19). It is an everlasting kingdom, ruling over past, present and future: “Your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and your dominion endures throughout all generations” (Psalm 145:13). This great future reign will be realized through the ministry of the Messiah (Isaiah 11, 49), and will mean salvation and blessing for Israel and all the nations (Isaiah 2:1-4; Micah 4:1-5). It is the fulfillment of the covenantal promise made to Abraham in Genesis 12:3, where all people on earth will be blessed through him.

Herman Ridderbos said the coming of the kingdom was ardently expected by the Jews, “to restore his people’s fortunes and liberate them from the power of their enemies.” The coming of the Messiah was to pave the way for the kingdom of God. By the time of Jesus, this hope had a prominent cosmic and apocalyptic sense concerning both the restoration of David’s throne and the coming of God to renew the world. “Although the OT has nothing to say of the eschatological kingdom of heaven in so many words, yet in the Psalms and prophets the future manifestation of God’s royal sovereignty belongs to the most central concepts of OT faith and hope.”

The misinterpretation of God’s redemptive purpose, expressed in the Old Testament Scriptures, was a stumbling block to Jesus’ disciples, to John the Baptist, Nicodemus and other Jews at the time of Jesus’ ministry. Richard Gaffin captured this succinctly in his article on “The Kingdom of God” for the New Dictionary of Theology:

This covenantal kingship, in turn, gives rise to the hope which is at the heart of the prophetic expectation of the entire Old Testament. In the midst of national decline and even exile, the prophets announce the time when God will manifest himself as king, when in a climactic and unprecedented fashion, ‘the Sovereign  Lord comes with power, and his arm rules for him’ (Isaiah 40:10), and when for Zion the proclamation at last holds true in the eschatological sense: ‘Your God reigns’ (Isaiah 52:7; cf. Deuteronomy 2:44; 7:14, 27). This great future, realized through the ministry of the Messiah (e.g. Isaiah 11, 49), will mean salvation and blessing, not only for Israel but for all the nations (e.g. Isaiah 2:1–4; 49:7; Micah 4.1–5); it is the fulfilment of the primal covenantal promise made to Abraham: ‘and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you’ (Genesis 12:3).

In the New Testament, John the Baptist announced the kingdom of heaven was at hand (Matthew 3:2) and Jesus began his preaching with the same message (Matthew 4:17). But they both gave it a sense that was at odds with the legalistic and nationalistic concerns in the apocalyptic and rabbinic materials of their time. In John’s preaching, the announcement of divine judgment was prominent. The axe was already laid to the root of the trees. Every tree that didn’t bear good fruit would be torn down and thrown into the fire.

Yet John said he was not the promised Messiah, who would come after him. The Messiah would hold the winnowing fork in his hand, and would baptize them with the Holy Spirit and fire. Therefore, the people must repent and submit to baptism for the washing away of their sins, in order to escape the coming wrath. God’s coming as King was above all else to purify, sift and judge and no one could evade this judgment. “The coming of the kingdom is the great perspective of the future, prepared by the coming of the Messiah, which paves the way for the kingdom of God.”

In view of his coming the people must repent and submit to baptism for the washing away of sins, so as to escape the coming wrath and participate in the salvation of the kingdom and the baptism with the Holy Spirit which will be poured out when it comes.

It seems from the beginning of his ministry, Jesus wasn’t acting like the Jews expected their Messiah would act. Remember, the kingdom was commonly thought to be the restoration of the Davidic kingdom and the (political?) liberation of the Jewish people from their enemies. After a while, even John the Baptist began question whether Jesus was the Messiah. So, John sent his disciples to ask Jesus if he was the one who is to come. Jesus told John’s disciples to tell John what they have seen and heard: that the blind see, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised and the poor have good news preached to them (Matthew 11:5; Luke 7:22).

With their own eyes they saw that God sent the Messiah. The kingdom of God was present in the words and deeds of Jesus, but the Jews did not believe. In John 10:24-26, the Jews confronted Jesus in the temple and demanded of him to plainly tell them if he was the Christ. “Jesus answered them, ‘I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.’”

This present aspect of the kingdom of God is seen more specifically when Jesus casts out demons. In Matthew 12, Jesus is accused by the Pharisees of casting out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons. He replied if he casts out demons by Beelzebul, then by whom do their sons cast him out? “But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you” (Matthew 12:28). When healing the demon-possessed, it is evident Jesus has entered the house of the ‘strong man’ and bound him fast.

The kingdom of heaven breaks into the domain of the evil one. The power of Satan is broken. Jesus sees him fall like lightning from heaven. He possesses and bestows power to trample on the dominion of the enemy. Nothing can be impossible for those who go forth into the world, invested with Jesus’ power, as witnesses of the kingdom (Luke. 10:18f.). The entirety of Jesus’ miraculous ministry is the proof of the coming of the kingdom.

Herman Ridderbos goes on to say in the Gospels how Jesus’ Messiahship is present in the here and now. Not only is he proclaimed as such on the Mount of Transfiguration, but he is also endowed with the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:16). He came to fulfill what the prophets foretold; to seek and save the lost; to serve others and give his life for a ransom for many (Mark 10:45). “The secret of belonging to the kingdom lies in belonging to him” (Matthew 7:23; 25:41).

At the same time the kingdom of God is in the here and now of the gospel, it is also future. The miracles and healings described above are a foretaste of what is to come. They are tokens of a future order of reality, not the present one.  It is not yet the time when demons will be delivered into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and all his ‘angels’ (Matthew 8:29; 25:41).

In the Olivet Discourse (Mark 13), Jesus told his disciples that before the end, to be aware there will be false christs and false prophets performing signs and wonders to attempt to lead astray the elect. But “in those days,” which was a reference to the last days (Jeremiah 3:16; Joel 3:1; Zechariah 8:23), they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. In the New Dictionary of Theology, Richard Gaffin said these present and future aspects of the kingdom of God are not two kingdoms, but one eschatological kingdom coming in successive stages: “a. the period of Jesus’ earthly ministry, b. the period from his exaltation to his return (the time of the church), and c. the period beyond his return.”  The kingdom of God is thoroughly messianic, “shaped by the unique demands of Christ’s work.” Jesus is therefore autobasileia, the kingdom in person.

Jesus is the Christ, the embodiment of the kingdom of God. He is Immanuel, God with us. His one entrance into space and time is evident in three successive stages: the time of his earthly ministry, the time of the church (between his exaltation and return), and the time after his triumphant return in space and time. We have the privilege of living out and provisionally manifesting the reality of that kingdom as the church, the body of Christ, until the time of his return.

As residents of the kingdom of God in the church age, we should seek first the kingdom of God (Matthew 6:33), which is not of this world (John 18:36). This kingdom has Christ as its head and the church as his body (Ephesians 5:23), and does not align with any particular nation. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said no one can serve two masters. You will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other (Matthew 6:24). If you truly belong to Jesus in the kingdom of God, you can’t be a Christian Nationalist.

The discussion of the kingdom of God here draws from the thought of Herman Ridderbos on “Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven” in the New Bible Dictionary; and the thought of Richard Gaffin on “Kingdom of God” in the New Dictionary of Theology.

For further reflections on nationalism, see the link “Christian Nationalism” on the website.

In a video for The Gospel Coalition—“Why America Is Not a Christian Nation”—Michael Horton said, “The misuse of Scripture for civil religion has plagued churches across the political spectrum for centuries. The problem isn’t new in our generation, but recent events remind us that Christians must speak clearly against the problematic concept of Christian Nationalism.” He was referring to the events of January 6, 2021. Horton referenced seeing a wooden cross “propped up outside the U.S. capitol, surrounded by a mob of people, hoisting up American flags” and not far from a platform and noose seemingly intended for the vice president. “The January 6^th attack on the U.S. capitol, which included insurrectionists praying Christian prayers once they infiltrated the Senate chamber, has prompted a renewed conversation about what’s called ‘Christian Nationalism.’”

Horton is not the only Christian to raise concerns about this sense of Christian Nationalism. In “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Christian Nationalism,” Patrick Schreiner said Christian Nationalism has become a junk box into which everyone piles their own conceptions of what they think it means. Some, like Michael Horton, equate it with rioting at the U.S. capitol. Others see it as attempting to enforce God’s law in our country, while still others see it as advocating for Christian moral values on issues like abortion. “How you view the movement depends almost entirely on your circles.”

Schreiner went on to unpack his understanding of three forms of Christian Nationalism as Good, Bad and Ugly. The good form of Christian Nationalism meant that “Christianity has influenced and should continue to influence the nation.” This sense of Christian Nationalism doesn’t attempt to dictate the political process or make the nation completely Christian by force, “but seeks instead to bring change by persuasion.” The adherents don’t force their opinions, but advocate their views by supporting laws, electing candidates, writing, podcasting, etc. In other words, they seek to make known God’s will providentially (Romans 1:19-20). “But this isn’t what most people mean by Christian Nationalism.”

Like theonomy, the bad form of Christian Nationalism wants a fusion of Christianity with American civil life, meaning the “laws of the United States should be explicitly Christian.” Instead of persuading by the word of our testimony (Revelation 12:11), adherents seek to enact and enforce laws. For them, the kingdom of God is brought about by command and power, not by the Spirit. Failed efforts of bringing about the kingdom of God by power exist throughout history. Christian conversion must occur by the compelling of the Spirit, not by instituting human law.

We conquer not by fighting the culture war but by embodying Jesus’s cross-shaped victory. His blood declares him the King of the universe, and our blood speaks to our solidarity with him. We continue to speak of and demonstrate Jesus’s cross in our own lives and so remain faithful in a pagan society.

While America does have a distinctly Christian past, the bad sense of Christian Nationalism overlooks key features of the American experiment, religious liberty and pluralism. The First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Squashing dissent by law violates human liberty, and the vision of the founding fathers. It coerces those who dissent. In The Religion of American Greatness, Paul Miller said the First Amendment rightly protects religious freedom for all people, “including Muslims, atheists, and even progressives.”

If taken to its logical conclusion, this Nationalism undermines the foundation of a free society. Should such a fusion dominate American civil life, it would divide the nation rather than unify it. Uniformity in some aspects of national life isn’t all bad, but that must always exist beside diversity.

At this time in history, we live between Christ’s resurrection and his second coming. Making explicitly Christian laws perverts this distinction by our human attempts to institute Christ’s rule in the present age. In this age, religious freedom, diversity and pluralism are blessings to God’s people who want to live a peaceful and quiet life (1 Timothy 2:2). But we can’t codify or institute God’s law completely in this age. That is for Christ to do when he returns.  “As citizens of the kingdom of God, we point forward to the [coming] kingdom but never forget the age we inhabit.”

Some will argue that nationality is a biblical idea, and point to the table of nations in Genesis 10, where God separates humanity into distinct groups. They will cite Deuteronomy 32:8, where it says when God gave the nations their inheritance, he divided mankind, “he fixed the borders of the peoples.” But they neglect Genesis 11, where mankind sought to build a city and tower with its top in the heavens to make a name for themselves, not God. When God saw what they had done, he confused their language and dispersed them over the face of the earth.

When Christian Nationalism turns ugly, it becomes a cultural framework that idealizes and advocates for the fusion of Christianity and American civil life and pursues it by dominion—by force or violence when necessary. It is a conflation of God and country—as Michael Horton said—into a civil religion. “The misuse of Scripture for civil religion has plagued churches across the political spectrum for centuries. The problem isn’t new in our generation, but recent events remind us that Christians must speak clearly against the problematic concept of Christian Nationalism.”

Although Christianity played a role in American history, America can never be honestly described as a Christian nation. “No nation-state can be a Christian nation-state, because Christianity doesn’t work that way.” Christianity and nation-states are two very different entities and to claim America is a Christian nation confuses the categories and forms a civil religion. However, there is nothing wrong with Christians getting involved with politics and political advocacy. It’s okay for Christians to participate in nonreligious and nonviolent protests of public policies.

But none of this should be confused with the Christian’s identity in the transnational family of God, and no national political agenda or ideal can take priority over God’s global mandate and mission for his people. . . . The worldwide church is Christ’s Kingdom.

In an article for Christianity Today, “What Is Christian Nationalism?”, Paul Miller explained how Christian Nationalism differed from other forms of nationalism, patriotism, and Christianity. Patriotism is the love of country, where nationalism is an argument about how to define a country. “All of God’s creation is good and patriotism helps us appreciate our particular place in it.” We should love our country and work to improve it by holding it up for critique and work for justice when it errs. Here, Miller seems to echo what Schreiner called “good” Christian Nationalism.

Nationalism begins with a belief that humanity is divisible into mutually distinct, internally coherent cultural groups. These groups are defined by shared traits like language, religion, ethnicity, or culture. Nationalists believe these groups should have their own governments. These governments should then promote and protect the nations’ cultural identity. And sovereign national groups should provide meaning and purpose for human beings.

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.” Miller said this is not just an observation about American history, but an inflexible program for what America must do. They want the government to promote a specific cultural template for the country. This is a reflection of Schreiner’s “bad” Christian Nationalism.

Some have advocated for an amendment to the Constitution to recognize America’s Christian heritage, others to reinstitute prayer in public schools. Some work to enshrine a Christian nationalist interpretation of American history in school curricula, including that America has a special relationship with God or has been “chosen” by him to carry out a special mission on earth. Others advocate for immigration restrictions specifically to prevent a change to American religious and ethnic demographics or a change to American culture. Some want to empower the government to take stronger action to circumscribe immoral behavior.

Miller said this presumption that Christians are heirs of the true heritage of American culture tends to treat other Americans as second-class citizens.  If implemented, it would not respect the full religious freedom of all Americans. Empowering the state through so-called “morals legislation” to regulate conduct carries the risk of overreaching “and creating governing powers that could be used later against Christianity.” Now we reach Schreiner’s “ugly” Christian Nationalism.

Additionally, Christian Nationalism is an ideology held overwhelmingly by white Americans, and it thus tends to exacerbate racial and ethnic cleavages. In recent years, the movement has grown increasingly characterized by fear and by a belief that Christians are victims of persecution. Some are beginning to argue that American Christians need to prepare to fight, physically, to preserve America’s identity, an argument that played into the January 6 riot.

Christian nationalism misappropriates the name of Christ for a worldly political power (nationalism), when Jesus said his kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36). It proclaims that its program is “the political program for every true believer.” In reality, it is a political ideology focused on the national identity of the United States. It includes a distorted understanding of American history and American government that is extrabiblical, while claiming to be biblical. While it generalizes from biblical ideas and principles, at its worst, it is contradictory to them.

In The Religion of America’s Greatness, Paul Miller said you can either be a Christian nationalist or a Christian; you can’t be both. Yes, Christians should be patriots, but true patriotism sometimes means rebuking our country for its sin, as we do when advocating for prolife. And it may mean working against it, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer did against the Nazi government of his German homeland. Perhaps so-called Christian nationalism is better referred to as religious nationalism.

We should not be trying to “Make America Great Again.” We should be striving to “seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness” (Matthew 6:33). Christian Nationalism in the extreme is “a totalistic political religion that is inconsistent with orthodox Christianity, a false religion that places the nation in the place of the church and the leader in the place of God.”

We are called to be residents of the kingdom of God, which is not of this world.

For further reflections on nationalism, see the link “Christian Nationalism” on the website.