I’ve gotten some questions about a few things that, to me, are related, so maybe I can answer them all at once.
Radix Fidem assumes a thoroughly different concept of what “Christian” means. The word itself refers to those who follow Christ. The problem is the vast majority of people have a perverted idea of what that means.
Jesus was a Hebrew man. His primary initial mission was to restore His nation to their Hebrew heritage. Judaism was not then, and even less so now, Hebraic. It has always clung to the trappings of Hebrew cultural identity, but had completely replaced the intellectual and moral assumptions behind those trappings. Most of what Jesus said to His nation and her leaders was aimed at drawing them back into the Hebrew Mysticism at the heart of the Covenant. It was that Covenant of Moses that provided the entirety of their national identity, and thus, their acceptance by God as His Chosen People. In essence, the whole meaning of “chosen” was tied up in the Covenant, and they had been moving away from it for a long time.
So the ministry of Jesus within the Judean nation was aimed at calling them back. Nobody is surprised that the national leadership rejected His call. It would have meant those leaders surrendering all their power and material advantages. It was precious few of them who even comprehended for themselves the real philosophical issue at stake.
I’ve expended uncounted electrons on this blog explaining the difference between their assumptions and those of the Hebrew Covenant. It’s a very substantial difference in philosophical orientation. Fortunately, it’s one we can study academically and, to some degree, explain for a Westernized audience. I’ve done my best to build a bridge for people with a Western heritage to cross back over to the place where Jesus stands. To be “Christian” — one who follows Christ — means a complete shift in philosophical assumptions. It means being Hebrew at heart with or without the trappings of the culture.
So the reason I give mainstream churches such a hard time is because they are Western, not Christian. They are firmly fixed in the Western traditions, and fiercely guard that legacy. They refuse to see when you show them the evidence of the early Church consciously and intentionally leaving that Hebrew orientation. Within a couple of centuries, the church leaders completely abandoned the very thing for which their Savior died.
Lord knows, I’ve tried to raise the issue in every church where I served. The closer I got to the truth of the matter, the more vehement was the rejection. I gave up some 15 years ago; I shook the dust from my feet and have served here online since then. And you shouldn’t imagine I haven’t tried to warn the folks in their online forums about this. The rejection was the same.
So if I reject the mainstream church definition of “Christian”, it’s only natural I would reject Christian Nationalism. This is nothing more than the new disguise for Dominion Theology. (Wikipedia happens to be mostly accurate on both of these.) Both of them agree that Christians should seek to take over secular government, at the very least in lands historically regarded as “Christian” by the perverted definition of the Western churches. In other words, this is nothing more than a particular brand of Western Civilization, and clearly not what Jesus died for.
If Jesus had intended to take over human government, He could have done so. The Devil tried to get Him to do it during the Temptations. That very idea kept haunting Him, in part because the Twelve lived under the assumption that such was what the Messiah was supposed to do. Yet Jesus pointedly rejected it every time someone tried to get Him to go through that gate. His is a kingdom of hearts, not of bodies and institutions. When He Returns, such things will be consumed in the same fire with which all the other works of men are destroyed.
Get that? Every manifestation of “church” you can find today is a human institution. None of them adhere to the pattern established in the Bible: at tribal feudal covenant community, not to mention one with an otherworldly focus. We don’t get involved in secular politics. We are wary of the schemes of men serving Satan’s agenda, but we don’t get involved. So in case you don’t get it: A church that isn’t a tribal feudal covenant community is organized in service of Satan.
One of the primary definitions of sin is when God says, “this” and the flesh says “anything but that.” Any departure from that divine revelation is the work of the Devil. When it comes to what Christ intended for His church to look like, I have yet to see a single one that matches the pattern in His Word. Obviously they weren’t chartered by Christ; they are mere human institutions.
The path of truth is rough, steep and narrow; it’s not for everyone. I’m not leading anyone on this path, just pointing it out. You’ll have to find your own way with Christ.