More Than Medicine
More Than Medicine
Christian Nationalism Unveiled: Theonomy, Evangelism, and Modern Governance with Arthur Hampton Part Two
What does it mean to be a Christian nationalist in today's world? Join us on "More Than Medicine" as we unpack this complex and often controversial term with our distinguished guest, Arthur Hampton. Arthur sheds light on the nuances between theonomic and non-theonomic Christian nationalism, offering a detailed explanation of theonomy and its distinction from theocracy. We also delve into how Old Testament civil laws fit into modern governance, drawing insights from influential thinkers like Stephen Wolfe and Doug Wilson. Wolfe's book "A Case for Christian Nationalism" and Wilson's "Mere Christendom" present differing visions of what a Christian nation could look like, providing a rich discussion on the topic.
Our conversation takes a historical turn as we contrast the roles of preachers in the face of societal pressures, inspired by the lives of Martin Niemöller and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. We critique Stephen Wolfe's two kingdoms theology, exploring its inconsistencies with Christian nationalism and the challenges of applying biblical laws within civil governance. Lastly, we dive into Doug Wilson's vision, emphasizing the transformative power of evangelism and the importance of public acknowledgment of Christ's lordship. This episode is packed with thought-provoking insights on balancing secularism with religious commitment and the role of Christians in shaping society. Don't miss this enlightening discussion that's both timely and deeply relevant.
https://www.jacksonfamilyministry.com
https://bobslone.com/home/podcast-production/
Welcome to More Than Medicine, where Jesus is more than enough for the ills that plague our culture and our country. Hosted by author and physician, dr Robert Jackson, and his wife Carlotta and daughter Hannah Miller. So listen up, because the doctor is in.
Speaker 2:Welcome to More Than Medicine. I'm your host, dr Robert Jackson, bringing to you biblical insights and stories from the country doctor's rusty, dusty scrapbook. This week, I still have with me my guest, arthur Hampton, and we're finishing up what we started last week, which is a discussion about Christian nationalism. Arthur, welcome back to More Than Medicine. Thanks for having me back. Well, last week, we started talking a little bit about the origins of this whole concept of Christian nationalism and how that term is bandied about as a pejorative term with the liberal media and academia, and this week, though, I want us to talk a little bit about a proper perspective on that term, christian nationalism and I want us to discuss a few authors who claim gladly to be Christian nationalists and their proper perspective on the term. So I'm going to throw it to you, arthur, and let you discuss what these authors are saying about that term.
Speaker 3:Absolutely. Now, what is Christian nationalism? Now I have to preface this question with some other terminology, and I need to define this other terminology because you have complex systems that you can't just define shortly.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 3:So you have two different types of Christian nationalism. You have a theonomic type of Christian nationalism and a non-theonomic Christian nationalism.
Speaker 2:You've got to explain that term now. That's new to me.
Speaker 3:That is a new term. Okay, so what is theonomy? Is the question. So theonomy, first of all, is not to be confused with theocracy.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 3:You know the Roman Catholic Church and the early. You know burning people at the stake and stuff like that, which was wrong anyway. But don't confuse theonomy with theocracy. So the theonomist would say that the general equity of the Old Testament civil laws given to Israel then are still applicable today in principle. Applicable today in principle, now, where you can apply them one for one, do that, but the application may be different in some cases, and that includes crime and punishment or the penal code. That includes the first table of law with the second table of the law, because you can't split the Ten Commandments, and also it includes the civil law of God. Now I always ask the question to Christians are you for or against capital punishment for a murderer? Well, most conservative Christians would say yes. Now why? Where do you get that from? You don't get it from the New Testament. You get it from the Old Testament, which is the foundation of the New Testament.
Speaker 2:That's correct.
Speaker 3:Now most people would say, well, you know. Or a lot of people would say, well, christ, he said, you know, you've heard it said. But I say to you, he overturned the law. But if you look at the preface of what he said, he prefaced all that in Matthew 5. He said do not think that I have come to abrogate the law. I have not come to abrogate the law. Now, whatever you interpret fulfilled to mean, do not let it mean abrogate. Do not have Christ contradict himself. In the very same sentence, in the very same verse, he come to fulfill it. That's right. So whatever you interpret fulfill to mean, it didn't mean abrogate.
Speaker 2:That's correct.
Speaker 3:What he was doing is. He was giving us more revelation on laws. That was already there. Oh and, by the way, not to mention, he says not one jot or tittle of the law of God will pass away.
Speaker 2:Will pass away, okay.
Speaker 3:And people use that very passage to overturn the law of God. And so you have the theonomic side and the non-theonomic side. And so let's go to. This is Stephen Wolfe's book. Now he is a Presbyterian, um non-theonomist. Now, as a Presbyterian, he holds to the Westminster Confession of Faith which says the general equity of the Old Testament laws apply today, interestingly enough. So it's kind of interesting how he would not be a theonomist, or how you could hold to the Westminster Confession of Faith and not hold to that. But anyway, that's the way he does and that's why I would critique him.
Speaker 3:Anyway he says Christian nationalism and this is in his book A Case for Christian Nationalism.
Speaker 2:That's the title of his book.
Speaker 3:That's the title of the book and if you're going to define a term, define it by somebody that identifies with it. Don't read primary sources. This is just good scholarship. Read primary sources, don't read secondary sources. That's correct. Here's a primary source and he says, and I quote Christian nationalism is a totality of national action consisting of civil laws and social customs conducted by a Christian nation as a Christian nation, mm-hmm.
Speaker 2:Read that again now. All right, I want my listeners to hear that again.
Speaker 3:All right. Quote Christian nationalism is a totality of national action consisting of civil laws and social customs conducted by a Christian nation as a Christian nation, in order to procure for itself both earthly and heavenly. Good in Christ, Okay. Good in Christ, Okay. So they're pushing for Christian civil laws and Christian social customs, Okay, got you Now. Where the two books differ is and I agree with most of his book, but where the two positions differ is one.
Speaker 2:Who's the other position? The?
Speaker 3:other position is the theonomic position of Christian nationalism. The book is entitled Mere Christendom and it's Doug Wilson who wrote this one. It's an easier read if you're wanting to read something, and much smaller than Wolfe's book. Yeah, it's about a two if you're wanting to read something and much smaller than Wolf's book.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it's about a two-third smaller book, yeah.
Speaker 3:Yeah, and so, as someone off the street, what do you think about that statement? Do you agree with that statement about Christian nationalism or not?
Speaker 2:And the questions that come to my mind as I'm reading is how does he propose to make that come true? I understand what he's trying to say there, but immediately the question that comes to my mind is if that's the definition, then how does he propose for a Christian nation to enact civil laws and social culture?
Speaker 3:And that's my critique of him as well. How do you enact civil laws without the foundation, that is, the Old Testament laws?
Speaker 2:You can't.
Speaker 2:And see, in my mind, the only way for something like that to happen is when the majority of elected officials are, in fact, Christian men and women who enact legislation that is biblical in origin, biblical in nature.
Speaker 2:And the only way you do that is when we, the people people, elect people who think like we think, when we, the people, are Christian in our orientation and we elect people that resemble us. You see what I'm saying. And so if sufficient numbers of Christian people, God-fearing, right-thinking people, involve themselves in the political process and we vote for and elect God-fearing, right-thinking, Christian legislators, then they enact legislation that is biblical in orientation. Then the end result is a Christian nation that is Christian in its civil affairs and it's social culture. But if Christian people are pietist, as we talked about last week, and they stay home and all of their activity is within the four walls of a church and all the salt stays in the salt shaker, then the culture is corrupt and there's no salt to purify and preserve the culture, there's no salt to preserve and purify the political process, and then we're all pietists and the culture and the political arena is polluted. You see, and that's why Christian nationalism in my book is appropriate.
Speaker 3:Well, we see that a lot of times. If the pietist is correct, then John the Baptist lost his life for nothing.
Speaker 2:That's right.
Speaker 3:Because he went to a pagan king and said unlawful, you can't take your brother's wife.
Speaker 2:That's right.
Speaker 3:And that upset him.
Speaker 2:That's right.
Speaker 3:And so much so that he got his head chopped off.
Speaker 2:And Nathan was incorrect. Nathan the prophet was inappropriate in going to King David and saying you are the man. Nathan should have kept his mouth shut. If the pietists are correct and Christians should not be involved in the political process, then John the Baptist was wrong, nathan was wrong and Micaiah in the Old Testament was wrong. There's plenty of prophets who should have kept. They should have stayed in their lane and I've heard preachers say that over and over that they just stay in their lane.
Speaker 3:Well, one notably preacher that said, that is Joel Olsteen.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 3:Well, what I do is I think he said it on, was it Larry King? I just stay in my lane. That's what made me so successful. I just stay in my lane. Well, your lane is to preach the whole counsel of God. And have you read the first five books of the Bible? I mean, there's quite a few civil laws in there that you skip.
Speaker 2:Martin E Moeller and Bonhoeffer both, you know they got the axe because they did not stay in their lane, but that's why they're heralded as Christian martyrs.
Speaker 3:Right. Well, it's interesting because Christ, he said, I send you out to the 70s, I send you out as a lamb in a wolf pack.
Speaker 2:That's right.
Speaker 3:And he said you know, they're going to deliver you up to the courts, they're going to do this, they're going to do this, they're going to do that. Why? Because they hate me. They hate my authority. That's right, because look at what Christ said at the end of Matthew All authority has been given to me on heaven and earth.
Speaker 2:If you stay in the church. That's a safe place. Jesus didn't send his 70 out to stay in a church. He sent them out to be amongst the wolves.
Speaker 3:Absolutely. And I heard one pastor say if you're not being persecuted, you're not doing something right.
Speaker 2:That's right, paul told Timothy.
Speaker 3:He said all who live godly in Christ Jesus shall be persecuted. And so that leads me to the one place that we differ with Wolfe. He is a two kingdoms theologian, and I don't know if y'all are familiar with that terminology, but the two kingdoms theology is basically, when Herod asked Christ, I forgot what he asked him. But Christ said you know, my kingdom is not of this world.
Speaker 2:That was Pilate, Pilate.
Speaker 3:Pilate. Okay, I'm losing my brain, I'm getting old, and so if you look at the Greek of what he said, it can be better translated my kingdom is not from this world, because I have a heavenly kingdom. It is from heaven, and I believe that is a type of the. In Daniel, there was the statue and that last bit was not from this world. That kingdom was not from this world. That kingdom was not from this world. That's the kingdom that Christ is talking about. This is my kingdom. It's from heaven, it's a heavenly kingdom, but keep in mind, christ is the king of kings.
Speaker 2:His reign is not limited to just heaven. He's the true king over all kingdoms.
Speaker 3:Right. And so if he is the king of kings, then the king of kings can tell the little kings what they can and can't do. That's Psalm 2. Kiss the son or honor the son, lest he be angry and you perish in the way. And so that's kind of the gist of it and I think that's the problem that he has holding to this two kingdoms theology and it doesn't match up with Christian nationalism at all. If the two kingdoms theology is true, why even try to establish a Christian nation? Because the authority, you know, christ doesn't have authority here. Because the authority, you know, christ, doesn't have authority here. But he says that in 194 of his book, and I'll quote him I affirm with the modern two kingdoms advocates that the principle, scope and purpose of the redemptive kingdom concern eternal life and not temporal life, and that the instituted church administrators the sacred things of that kingdom. There again it's stay in your lane. But he wrote the book and I don't think his two kingdoms theology is consistent with Christian nationalism. I'd say that's an inconsistency there. I'd say that's an inconsistency there.
Speaker 3:The second thing is he creates this false dichotomy stating that the government should not pursue crimes against God. So there you have it a splitting or a I'm going to use a philosophical term arbitrary dichotomy between the first part of the Ten Commandments and the second part of the Ten Commandments. He says on page 360 of his book, quote I will grant here that civil authorities should not persecute crimes solely against God. Now he goes on to say they should persecute crimes against man. The last part, but not the first part. But he does not give any reason why we should split the Ten Commandments. And I would say that is the logical fallacy of arbitrariness. Just cause there's no reason to believe it, no reason to hold to it. Just cause. That's a logical fallacy and he quotes Jonathan Lehman in his book who holds to the same position of that. But if God gives the civil government its authority to prosecute crimes against others, why can't the civil government prosecute crimes against himself? It's God that is where the civil government gets its authority and most people don't believe that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you're right, you're right. And if it's a Christian nation and we, the people give, believe that, yeah, you're right, you're right. And if it's a Christian nation and we, the people, give that government its authority, then why would you not prosecute crimes against God?
Speaker 3:Yeah, if the people give the civil government its authority, then what Hitler did wasn't wrong, because he broke no law. He changed the law before he did it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, he did.
Speaker 3:I mean, that's the fallacy there and you don't want to go down that road. And so I think that's the crux of his inconsistency is this false dichotomy of splitting the Ten Commandments. The other part is he has a problem with certain penal codes crime and punishment. So this is a crime, but we don't need to punish it. Well, if it is a crime, then what is the punishment?
Speaker 2:Because what were some of the crimes that he was suggesting we not punish?
Speaker 3:Homosexuals, witches, just things like that that are un.
Speaker 2:Biblically, God recommends punishment Right and he's splitting hairs and saying, no, we shouldn't. Just because it's a modern time.
Speaker 3:Right and you can't? There's no. And there's another false dichotomy, another arbitrary dichotomy Nowhere in the Bible do you have a law and say it's wrong, and then there's no penal code from that. Here's the crime, here's the just punishment for the crime, and if you don't give them justice, then you're unjust. That's the very reason why Christ had to come and die is because God is indeed a just God and requires a payment for sin. And so that's some of the things that I would differ with Wolf on. Overall, I'd say it's a really good book.
Speaker 2:Well now, how is his different from this other book that you recommend that we read, about Christian nationalism?
Speaker 3:So I mentioned the three things. Wolf is a two kingdoms guy. He says the government should not prosecute crimes against god and he splits not only uh the the first part of the decalogue, or ten commandments, from the second part, but he also splits certain things of the penal code away from the uh the law I understand so there's four distinctly different things in here.
Speaker 3:Now he is the non-theonomist Christian nationalist and my question to him would be how do you establish, like you asked, how do you establish, civil laws without the foundation, that is, the civil laws given in the Bible? Now we understand that those laws were given to Israel and the application may be different, but the underlying principle of those laws still are there, because not one jot or tittle will go away, and I'll give you an example of that. So the general equity. There's an Old Testament law, god's law, civil law, that says you should have a railing around the roof of your house. Right Now you don't have a railing around the roof of your house.
Speaker 2:Right Now you don't have a railing around the roof of your house. I don't have a flat roof.
Speaker 3:You don't have a flat roof either, no, but you do have a railing around your porch out here on the second floor. I do, and that railing is there for the very same reason that they had a railing around the roof of their house. That's correct. Now, that is the general equity of the law of God being applied today. In principle the application is different, but the principle is the same. I have a railing around my deck, but for that same reason and in South Carolina I think it's two feet, if you have a deck above two feet, you have to have a railing around it. That is that law being applied today to protect the image of God, to protect human life.
Speaker 2:That's correct.
Speaker 3:So the principle stays the same, the general equity is there or the weight of the law is there, but the application may be different.
Speaker 2:Now, we've got five minutes.
Speaker 3:Five minutes. Let's run through it real quick. Here we go. This is his definition, doug Wilson's definition in Mere Christendom I'm on page 69. And I quote. So what do I mean by Mere Christendom exactly? I mean a network of nations bound together by a formal, public, civil acknowledgement of the lordship of Christ and the fundamental truth of the Apostles' Creed. I mean a public and formal recognition of the authority of Jesus Christ that repudiates the principles of secularism and that avoids both hard secularism and easy latinarianism both that's a big word.
Speaker 2:What is latinarinarianism?
Speaker 3:that's a good question. You'll have to ask him. But basically I don't think I disagree with either uh definition of christian nationalism. But I do tread lightly when someone asks me are you a Christian nationalist? I always ask the question what do you mean by that? Because it means different things to different people. And he goes into the Great Commission. The authority, all authority on heaven and earth has been given to Christ, and so we need to kiss the sun, honor the sun. You kiss his ring, you kiss the Pope's ring that's to honor him.
Speaker 3:You honor a civil leader by kissing the ring, unless he be angry, unless you perished in the way. And that's what we need to be doing to our civil leaders. It's bottom up. Share the gospel and then teach them to observe all that Christ commanded. Don't cut out the civil laws and say, no, we're not going to do that anymore. All that Christ commanded. And then what will happen is you get enough people saved, or if God saves enough people, then they're going to elect godly men. It all begins with evangelism, doesn't it?
Speaker 2:Absolutely. It always goes back to the power of the gospel to transform people's lives. But you and I are responsible to be ambassadors for Christ, and America will never be a Christian nation, germany will never be a Christian nation, australia will never be a Christian continent. No place will be Christian until individual believers like you and me undertake our responsibility to be an ambassador of the Lord Jesus Christ and are willing to share the gospel, which has the power to transform individual lives.
Speaker 3:Absolutely. Don't forget. We are soldiers in a war. That's right Now. We're fighting against evil. It's a battle between good and evil, and don't retreat. We need to be on the front line fighting. We got all the tools we need, and those pietists that run for the hills well, you're not very good soldiers, that's right. And I just want to mention my podcast. It's a gentleman's review. You can find me on Spotify and YouTube for more.
Speaker 2:What kind of topics do you discuss on your podcast?
Speaker 3:Well, it's various ones. I mainly stay political or religious. The two best topics religion and politics. Everything else is boring, that's right. Best topics religion and politics, Everything else is boring. That's right, this last one. I did a deep dive into who JD Vance really is and I was very surprised at some of the stuff I uncovered.
Speaker 2:Okay, he's not as good as you think he is. It's called A Gentleman's Review A.
Speaker 3:Gentleman's Review. Look me up on Spotify.
Speaker 2:Okay, all right. Well, listen, you're listening to More Than Medicine. My guest today has been Arthur Hampton, and it's been a very interesting discussion of Christian nationalism. We started last week with part one, today we finished part two and, arthur, I hope you'll come back another time and we'll discuss other topics. Would that be okay?
Speaker 3:Absolutely Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2:All right, if you like what you hear, we hope that you will follow, like or share or even download. We'll be back again next week and between now and then may the Lord bless you real good.
Speaker 1:Thank you for listening to this edition of More Than Medicine. For more information about the Jackson Family Ministry, dr Jackson's books, or to schedule a speaking engagement, go to their Facebook page, instagram or their webpage at jacksonfamilyministrycom. This podcast is produced by Bob Sloan Audio Production at bobsloancom.
