According to a recent article from the Washington Post, “AUSTIN — Texas lawmakers had been scheduled to vote Tuesday on whether to require that the Ten Commandments be posted in every classroom in the state, part of a newly energized national effort to insert religion into public life.” While this may sound like good news to some Christians, there remain other Christians who have their reservations. Firstly, the type of Christianity that is being represented by many of the politicians pushing for things like this happens to be worlds away from the Christianity of the New Testament. For one thing, the New Testament is founded on the Old Testament, and the Old Testament has very harsh words for any nation that prides itself in military might. Ancient Egypt is rebuked for her trust in her military and throughout her complex history, ancient Israel also begins the unholy practice of placing its trust in its military (“chariots and horses”) instead of in God.

A word must also be said about the nature of Christianity itself. In general, Christianity does poorly when it is imposed on others. The conviction of the early church seemed to be that “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church” (a saying attributed to Tertullian). The early church would have a hard time coming to grips with the idea of militant Christianity or the Christianity of the medieval age which was imposed on many. To impose Christianity on others is as unnatural as rainbow flags or confederate flags hung in or around church buildings.

 To impose Christianity on others is as unnatural as rainbow flags or confederate flags hung in or around church buildings.

Photo by Karolina Grabowska: https://www.pexels.com/photo/ten-dollars-with-inscription-and-building-4386156/

In 2021, Texas pushed for public schools to hang “In God We Trust” signs in public schools. I fear this would send mixed signals to our children especially since (as noted above) the God of the Hebrew Bible was constantly critiquing Israel for her blatant trust in her own military might. I would love for children in America to fall in love with the God of the Bible, but they will have a hard time doing so when the education system presents the god of American dream (or American self-sufficiency) rather than the God of Christianity proper.

The God of the Old Testament is the God Jesus comes to reveal and showcase: the God of the oppressed, foreigner and alien, a help to the needy. This is not the God of the Republican Party who tends to tell the poor man to pick himself up by his bootstraps, a saying made famous by author and minister Horatio Alger (Alger happened to be kicked out of ministry for sexually abusing boys[1]). As Martin Luther King Jr. would point out in response to Alger’s famous line, “it’s a cruel jest to say to a bootless man that he ought to lift himself by his own bootstraps.”[2]

The god of the American Prosperity gospel borrows heavily from American self-improvement and the idea of the self-made man, telling the one with cancer or a depleted bank account to simply have more faith. While an easy quick fix to the complex issue of suffering, it’s blatant heresy and a slander of God’s good character. If there are “In God We Trust” signs strewn across our public school buildings, which God are we referring to? Is it the god of Prosperity gospel, the god of the American dream, the god which prizes America over the other nations, the god who sees slaughtered Native Americans as collateral damage for the greater good? This is not the God of the Bible.

Weren’t the Founding Fathers Christians?

While many hold that America began as a Christian nation, it would be helpful to define “Christian.” Many of the founding founders (and those who influenced the documents which would define America) did have some religion. However, to call them all Christian is reaching. For example, Thomas Jefferson famously took a blade to the Gospels to cut out the miracles Christ performed. Jefferson did not believe Jesus was divine but that he was simply a good teacher. Muslims have a higher view of Christ than Jefferson did, and Jefferson was not alone in his views.

In a recent social media post, Old Testament professor Dan Hawk explains, “The Founders spoke about God and Providence, but they were careful not to mention Jesus. Why? Because they believed that religion is an indispensable component of a civilized democracy and that tolerance is necessary to promote it. They therefore established a nation that honors religious convictions, while not privileging any one religion – including Christianity. The Founders’ references to God and Providence don’t refer specifically to Christianity but to a civil religion they believed all religiously-minded citizens could subscribe to.”*

Militant “Christianity” is Not Christianity

While Christians are to be cautious when invoking God’s name, militant Christianity and Christian nationalists do so often and carelessly. The fourth commandment (“You Shall Not Take God’s Name in Vain”) isn’t directed at people who say “Oh my God” but is rather a warning to God’s people to not needlessly invoke God’s name and potentially misrepresent him. When Trump was elected and there was outrage over what was happening at the border, Jeff Sessions invoked God and his Word by misusing Romans 13 to say that Christians could not oppose the government’s decision on tighter borders. Many politicians in power (both on the Left and Right) tend to invoke God’s name, assuming that God fits into their personal politics, but the true God does not agree with us on all things. To think he does is to mold God into our image and worship a God made in our own very likeness. As A.J. Swoboda insist in After Doubt, Christ-followers are not required to like Jesus: but we are required to follow him. I believe Christianity to be true and a force of good in our dark world. But I also believe that when Christianity is used as a weapon, it ceases to be Christianity.

I believe Christianity to be true and a force of good in our dark world. But I also believe that when Christianity is used as a weapon, it ceases to be Christianity.

If we want religion in public schools, why choose one particular version of a rather broad religion? Why choose a modern brand of Christianity that the New Testament itself is at odds with? What this inevitably does is make people more hostile and more resistant to the gospel.

I personally would fear if America were a place where one certain religion remained dominant, even if it were Christianity–and it’s not because I think Christianity isn’t true. It’s because Christianity was never meant to be enforced or pressured on others. When we force our way onto others is when the very soul of Christianity is forfeited.

When we force our way onto others is when the very soul of Christianity is forfeited.

While one of the primary reasons that Islam spread throughout the world because of military conquest (=the threat of the sword), Christianity initially spread despite the threat of the sword. During the medieval era the Church lost her identity as a suffering servant and became a militant warrior. I’m afraid many in the American Church is more drawn to this image rather than the image of a suffering Church following a suffering Christ who conquers by suffering.

I resonate with Michael F. Bird who writes in Religious Freedom in a Secular Age,

“I worry about many things when it comes to religion and society. I routinely fret that many conservative Christians no longer know the differences between historical Christian orthodoxy and nationalistic civil religion. I am alarmed that some Christians falsely equate cultural privileges with religious freedom” (Introduction, xxx).

Again Bird writes, “Christians do not have to sit out politics or sit above politics. But they cannot afford to be seduced by the trappings of power, wealth, and influence in the highest offices of the land in exchange for pledging their absolute fealty to any political demagogue” (p. 84).

Dan Hawk insists that “Dominion Theology is…anti-gospel. Jesus never directed his followers to take over the nation of Israel or the Roman Empire. Instead, he announced the coming of God’s reign on earth, which stands over against the oppressive systems of human nations. Under God’s reign, Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not. The right-sizing of human relationships under God’s reign practices love instead of hatred, justice instead of oppression, serving instead of dominating, and giving up power rather than gaining it. Jesus emphatically rejected the politicization of the gospel message. When his disciples asked when he was going to make Israel great again, he told them it was none of their business.”*

A Word on “Us Vs Them” Christianity

1 Peter 3:15-16 reads, “But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to answer anyone who asks you to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.”

We’re told to be able to defend our faith respectfully and with a spirit of gentleness. Michael Bird says about these verses, “the command assumes that Christians are not living in their own bubbles but are genuinely out and about among other people in the marketplace and in public squares.”3 Paul Achtemier writes about how “Cultural isolation is not to be the route taken by the Christian community. It is to live its life openly in the midst of the unbelieving world, and just as openly to be prepared to explain the reasons for it.”4

For those wishing to push Christianity into public life, please ask the following questions:

Which version of Christianity?

Did Jesus enforce his ways on his society?

Did the apostles enforce their beliefs on society?

What do we make of Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 which marks a clear distinction between God’s people and those outside of Christianity?

For those who wish the Ten Commandments to be placed in our secular schools, why these specific commandments that Christians themselves cannot agree on how to interpret? Why not more clear-cut texts like John 3:16?

Recommended Resources:

For a readable and thoughtful book on religious freedom from the perspective of a respected New Testament scholar, check out Religious Freedom in a Secular Age by Michael F. Bird which is rooted in the New Testament while also providing some surprising solutions.

For those interested in knowing how we got where we’re at, check out The Evangelical Imagination: How Stories, Images, & Metaphors Created a Culture in Crisis by Karen Swallow Prior.

For those who want to understand the Ten Commandments and its implications for today (for individuals and communities), check out the excellent and simple The Ten Commandments: A Guide to the Perfect Law of LIberty by Peter J. Leithart, a profound resource full of stunning visuals.

[1] Karen Swallow Prior, The Evangelical Imagination: How Stories, Images & Metaphors Created a Culture in Crisis (Grand Rapids, BrazosPress, 2023), 107 [unpublished manuscript].

[2] Ibid.

* Hawk, Dan, Post against American dominion theology, Facebook, May 21, 2023, 6:12 am, https://www.facebook.com/dan.hawk4, accessed May 28, 2023.

[3] Michael Bird, Religious Freedom in a Secular Age: A Christian Case for Liberty, Equality, & Secular Government (Grand Rapids, Zondervan Reflective, 2022), 153.

[4] Borrowed from Bird’s Religious Freedom, p. 153.