Tucker 🔥 interview of Doug Wilson on Christian nationalism - Must listen!
(open.spotify.com)
🫡 THE GREAT AWAKENING 🔆
Comments (10)
sorted by:
Douglas Wilson is probably the most attacked Christian preacher and has become the face of Christian nationalism. What is Christian nationalism exactly and why does the left and the MSM hate it? This episode answers those questions and more.
Honestly I've never seen another interview from Tucker where he was more engaged and profoundly and pleasantly shocked.
Note that Tucker, either being uninformed by his researchers or disingenuously because of a narrative agenda, excludes all the other categories of people that are also opposed to Christian Nationalism: anarcho capitalists, libertarians, Natural Law advocates, classic liberals, constitutionalists, the list goes on.
Define "Christian nationalism" first.
Sure.
The belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity, and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way. While Wolfe and his circle do not outright reject the First Amendment and do not advocate for theocracy, they want Christianity to hold a privileged position in the public square. A consequence of this belief is that enterprises in the political community become exclusionary in ways they are not designed.
Wolfe and others of course have much more to say. Eventually that privileged position of Christianity excludes a functional ability for pluralism or a secular sphere to exist. This is not a negative for Christian nationalism or those efforts compatible with CN, since they have predefined negative connotations for pluralism and a secular sphere. To be specific, they deliberately conflate secularism with the secular (in order to justify a program to sanctify a nation, not just work to preserve it), and they connotate pluralism as "anything goes" with no ultimate restraints.
And you watched the interview and you believe that's what Douglas Wilson is lobbying for?
Do you understand the presuppositional limitations of other worldviews when it comes to morality or even truth?
I would define it more like Cultural Christendom. The term Christian nationalist is just a scare term that cultural Christianity advocates started getting called so I just went ahead and embraced it, making it their own.
Cultural christendom refers to a societal condition where Christian beliefs, values, and traditions heavily influence or dominate the culture, even if not everyone in the society practices Christianity. It encompasses the historical and cultural legacy of Christianity within a particular region or community, shaping everything from language and art to social norms and institutions. In Cultural Christendom, Christian themes and symbols are often prevalent in public life, and Christian morality may inform laws and customs, reflecting the enduring impact of Christianity on a society's identity and worldview.
Ok...
I have been familiar with Wilson, his ministry, his writings, his ideas for over 20 years.
This first point may not mean much to most here, that he's been condemned by every major Reformed confessional denomination (for claiming to be Reformed but being deliberately confusing about faith and works). But it is also notable he was criticized by his own denomination (which he started) for his problematic behavior: https://moscowid.net/communion-of-reformed-evangelical-churches-presiding-ministers-report-on-the-sitler-and-wight-sex-abuse-cases/
Here are 3 posts on Wilson that thoroughly cover the good, bad, and ugly:
https://bredenhof.ca/2023/06/26/doug-wilson-the-good/ (mostly docrtinal and may not mean much to most reading this)
https://bredenhof.ca/2023/07/03/doug-wilson-the-bad/ (again, mostly doctrinal and may not mean much)
https://bredenhof.ca/2023/07/10/doug-wilson-the-ugly/ (this is where the various documented abuse cases are addressed, and unfortunately the abuses, subsequent cover ups, and gaslighting of victims and critics are not uncommon with many patriarchy and authoritarian type ministries, no matter the denomination)
Now, many will and have watched the Tucker interview and respond with "What's all the controversy about him? He is a based pastor, making good points we have been making, and he is very relaxed and calm in his explanations."
Yes, this is by design. It is called the fallacy of Motte and Bailey. Wilson and his ilk deploy this strategy over and over and over again with every contentious controversy. Motte and Baliey is when someone advances a controversial claim—one that's difficult to defend—and when challenged retreats to an uncontroversial claim. The bold claim is the Bailey, the safe claim the Motte.
When these Christian Nationalists get mainstream coverage, including when Wilson is here interviewed by Tucker, they immediately jump into the Motte.
Wilson has explicitly written on the virtue of deception, as a holy "battle" strategy. Make no mistake that Christian Nationalists have an end goal of Christian authoritarianism to replace what they conceive as secular authoritarianism. The 1st amendment stands in their way, since they advocate for eventual, literal punishment of false teachings & beliefs (define that as you will, or whoever ideologist runs the state). This is all stemmed from a fundamental distortion of biblical notions of law and civil society.
They present their CN vision as the only alternative to the woke secular nightmare we are currently in (as if the longstanding tradition of Natural Law never existed or operated in society). This is a false dilemma, and their particular vision has roots in various theological aberrations, that in many ways are mirror reflections of Zionist Israeli political fanatical party beliefs about the sanctifying of a geopolitical state.
Did you listen to the entire interview yet? Because some of what you're saying completely conflicts with it.
I'm a member of apologia Church And we consider Christ Church a sister church. We wrote at the amicus brief that overturned Roe v Wade. We did that on the basis of a faithful and concise Christian worldview and frequently get called Christian nationalists.
The point of this interview is to define and discuss what Christian nationalism is. Tucker could have just as easily had Dr Joseph Boot or a number of others to explain it. You seem to be hung up on who delivered the message, not the message itself.
You do realize the more faithful someone is to God in the society, the more controversial they will be. It's when you're not being called controversial that you can almost guarantee that you're not having a radical impact on culture.
Yes, I could go through point by point but just off the bat, Wilson is wrong about a Christian consensus regarding the founding of the American republic. The consensus was based on universal Natural Law, something bigger and greater than autonomous ambitions and passions. So that Christians, Deists (functional atheists), secular Enlightenment thinkers, etc could assemble and agree on common governance that upholds basic human dignity, freedom, justice, general welfare, goodness, beauty and truth. Also, most don't know how much the American experiment had global reach at that time, not just in so called Christian Europe but among certain Muslim nation states and Russia as well. This is how a robust application of Natural Law can function. No "Mere Christendom" necessary.
The reason why political communities can function this way is because such institutions are outworkings of God's covenant with all mankind for the simple reason that they are human beings, not just Christians. The mandate of just laws that flow out of the covenant made through Noah extends equally to all groups functioning in pluralistic enterprises, such as governance and justice. We can operate in a common basic moral framework, irrespective of race, creed, or color, and can identify what is in violation to what God has revealed in nature. There are responsibilities simply being human, and consequences for violating that natural order. This is not a New testament Christian distinctive body of law, this is Natural Law. So "Christian nationalism" the term itself is problematic and self defeating.Christianity is not the kind of religion meant to unite a nation, any more than it was meant to establish and sustain ethnic bonds.
The message itself is built on a flawed foundation, because Wilson like all theonomists, reconstructionists, CNs, i.e. all dominion theology, miscontrues the categories of law in order to lift and shift bodies of law out of certain parts of scripture, with certain interpretive methods to justify certain applications of it, and simply brand it as "Christian worldview". It doesn't work, and I can unpack that more as time permits.
Yes I am familiar with this retort. Wilson tends to position himself as the righteous suffering victim in relation to his critics. He's done it for decades. And of course, he tends to lump his critics together as being liberals, weak, leftist, secularist compatible, or whatever.
Controversy itself is in fact neutral, its existence does not determine faithfulness or lack thereof. I would be wary of wearing that as a badge of honor. Paul exhorts the Roman church to live peacably with their neighbors as best they can. The Israelites during the time of the Mosaic covenant, had distinct commands of conduct as soon as they ventured outside of their boundaries that were opposite of their conduct within their boundaries: if they confronted enemies outside the land that they would work to establish peace treaties and so forth.
On the flip side, Abraham was a controversial figure in the context of societies he was in, during several instances in his life, because of his sin and unbelief.
Just some things to consider. Blessings to you, regardless our differences.
Well we'll have to agree to disagree.
I will point out the fact that the enlightenment followed the translation of the Bible into common tongues and the distribution of it to the masses thanks to the invention of the printing press... By a Christian.
The concept of natural law being dependent upon Scripture and the Christian worldview finds its origins in the understanding that God, as the creator of the universe, has imbued it with inherent order and purpose. In the Christian worldview, this belief is rooted in the biblical account of creation, where God establishes order and design in the world.
According to Christian thought, natural law is seen as a reflection of God's eternal law, which governs the universe and is revealed through the created order. This perspective asserts that moral principles are not merely arbitrary commands from God but are rooted in the very nature of reality as designed by Him.
In the Christian tradition, the understanding of natural law has been influenced by thinkers such as St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. Augustine emphasized the idea that natural law is inscribed on the hearts of humanity, providing a universal moral compass that guides human conduct. Aquinas built upon this notion, arguing that natural law is derived from both human reason and divine revelation, with Scripture serving as a primary source of moral insight.
Therefore, in the Christian worldview, Scripture is considered essential for understanding and interpreting natural law because it provides divine revelation that illuminates the moral order inherent in creation. Through the lens of Scripture, Christians believe they can discern God's intentions for humanity and align their actions with His will, thus upholding the principles of natural law.
Everything ultimately points back to God. The law of God is written on every man's heart. Without that as a basis You are left with nothing but subjectivism.