Do you know anyone that self identifies as a Christian Nationalist? \ stacker news ~meta

Do you know anyone that self identifies as a Christian Nationalist?

1574 sats \ 36 comments \ @kepford 10 Jul meta

In the circles I frequent many people seem very worked up about the "Christian Nationalist" movement. I have some thoughts on this but one is that I've never met anyone that uses that term to describe their political/religious position. I wonder if I'm alone in this.

I know they exist. There are some that have written books and make videos. What I have noticed is that these "Christian Nationalists" are what used to be called conservative Christians. Same politics. Same goals. Same people. Wondering what others have seen.

Yep24.1%

Nope31.0%

They identify as conservative christians17.2%

What the heck is this?27.6%

29 votes \ poll ended

view all related items

89 sats \ 1 reply \ @Mmk 10 Jul

Also, I realized today, I've never seen a MAGA hat irl. Are they embroidering them at home?

68 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 10 Jul

I’ve only seen a couple and they were definitely being worn ironically or to be provocative.

33 sats \ 9 replies \ @Dash_1971 10 Jul

I think the idea is that America was founded as a protestant nation. (At least, the founders were by and large protestant, as were the majority of the population). So then, why is it that we now have a Roman Catholic president? Why is there only one high court judge who is evangelical? What the hell happened?

It's the feeling that America was sort of snatched from protestants and the desire to reset the clock and get power back.

And the fruits of this are plain for all to see: trans kids, STDs running wild, debauchery on TV, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, a nation obsessed with sports, legalized gambling, pot, etc etc.

So a "Christian Nationalist" would be someone who believes America was founded on biblical, evangelical values, and that it would be good for America to get back to that. But I don't think many would actually call themselves "Christian Nationalist"

One of the best covering this kind of topic is Aaron Renn who has a podcast The Aaron Renn show and wrote a book "Negative World" about the place culturally Christians have found themselves in in the US since roughly 2016.

The way forward for Christian relevance is not so clear. I personally think that America has a state religion which is progressive leftism. Curtis Yarvin writes extensively about this. He argues that it is a non theistic Christianity that mutated from Puritanism. I believe that we will see the bible censored in our lifetimes, as the globohomo rainbow religion grows stronger and more bold and as the boomer Christians begin to die off. It probably won't be an outright ban, but rather there will be pressure on Amazon to stop selling the Bible, for example. There will probably also be leftist translations that come out with certain politically incorrect verses "reinterpreted". We have already seen that to some extent with the NIV for example rewriting the bible to be more "gender inclusive".

So for bible believing, evangelical Christians there will increasingly be demands to choose between a pinch of incense to globohomo vs being true to the gospel. There will be increasing social penalties paid for being a faithful Christian. There will be barriers to many jobs, educational facilities, banking, etc. Hence the importance for building out alternative institutions and other means of opting out of the state machinery such as home schooling.

In the sense of me worrying about these things, I think people might brand me a Christian Nationalist. I am not one in the way they think, although I am probably something far worse and far more reactionary from a progressive point of view. I am increasingly thinking a divine rights kind of Monarchy is the best kind of model. I like what Bukele is doing in El sal and my respect for him grew when he spoke about faith and prayer in a recent interview he did. My expressing these kinds of opinions has offended many fellow bitcoiners, actually. They are not woke/progressive but they are die hard libertarians whom I have actually come to think of as essentially leftist.

105 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

Thanks for your thoughtful commentary.
Leftism hates all religions except the Party and its collectivist agenda.
Individuals don't matter, what matters is the group, the collective, etc. Leftist ideas matter more than actual people who are dispensable if they don't embrace the revolutionary spirit.

A couple minor points: *Gorsuch is Anglican or Episcopal. He met his wife in England when he was a Marshall scholar. *Thomas Jefferson was a deist. *Founding Fathers were a diverse religious group, most importantly they believed in religious freedom and tolerance and no state church like the Church of England.

73 sats \ 7 replies \ @freetx 10 Jul

why is it that we now have a Roman Catholic president?

I agree with much of what you said, however this tidbit jumps out at me. I'm not aware of many catholics who consider that Biden is a good representative.

In fact, there is quite alot of effort to publicly distance him from the church. There are several archbishops who have called for Biden to be either refused communion and/or others who have called for him to be actually ex-communicated.

In fact, archbishop Vigano has gone a step further and basically said the entire WEF / trans kids / rainbow religion as directly satanic....but thats a whole different saga....

23 sats \ 6 replies \ @Dash_1971 10 Jul

Maybe but the pope is an "ally" of the rainbow people and my understanding of the Roman church is that he claims theologically to be the infallible head and therefore any dissenting views from his are heretical. I think Biden and Francis see eye to eye on most leftist issues including trans "rights" and climate change. Also, I think Roman Catholicism must be incompatible with any ideas of "Christian Nationalism" since, again, by their own theology, their interests and loyalties are inherently internationalist with their head and center in the Vatican. How any professing Roman Catholic is allowed to be president is a mystery to me. In the UK Catholics were prevented from certain positions, including Prime Minister, for this reason. How can Biden lead America when, in theory, he is supposed to accept any Papal decree ex cathedra as binding? Of course, it's a joke as most Roman Catholics don't take their own theology seriously, and most would just assume (correctly, imo) Biden would just ignore any pope who dissented from globohomo consensus. He is of course "Catholic" in name only. I don't want to turn the thread into a sectarian argument between Roman Catholics and protestants and I am sure there are many good, bible believing Roman Catholics, but I have to say I think Biden is very representative of the Magisterium as it currently sits under Pope Francis. To be fair, protestantism has its own issues and leftist protestants are even worse than Roman Catholics when it comes to corrupting the gospel to fit a leftist agenda. (Anyone who wants a wake up call should look up the "sparkle creed" video led by a female "pastor" Lutheran.)

60 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

I don’t think Jill and Joe attend church ⛪️ on Sundays.

Hunter should be excommunicated

53 sats \ 4 replies \ @freetx 10 Jul

I generally agree with many of your points + I also have no desire to descend into sectarian arguments, but I think the concept of "papal infallibility" is widely misunderstood and often a red-herring argument.

Not everything a pope says is 'infallible'
"Papal Infallibility" is a very narrowly defined concept, that extends only to rulings of doctrinal nature formally ruled ex cathedra (as you said).
These doctrinal issues are just that....things like nature of Trinity, Immaculate Conception, etc.
Such infallible doctrinal issues only extend to "Divine Knowledge" (ie. The church recognizes 3 types of knowledge (a) Divine Knowledge, (b) Definite Knowledge, and (c) Ordinary Knowledge. The pope can only infallibly rule on Divine Knowledge, which are things expressly mentioned in the Bible).
The pope is not considered "inerrant" (ie. the pope cannot claim "the sky is green" - moreover this would fall into Ordinary Knowledge that the pope cannot even infallibly rule on).

All social systems require a final authority that make doctrinal decisions (ie. SCOTUS, CEOs , etc) - and in the end "papal infallibility" is just a formalized name of that within Catholicism. I mean the Southern Baptist Convention could itself be designated as exactly such an authority.

Would you consider the SBC to be "infallible"?

Would you consider a Baptist President to be incapable of holding office because he is beholden to SBC?

34 sats \ 3 replies \ @Dash_1971 10 Jul

Fair points on the Papel infallibility. I don't suppose Francis is going to issue anything of national strategic significance to America "from the chair" anytime soon.

With the SBC, I don't think they have a claim to exclusive truth to quite the same extent. My understanding is their claim is limited to speaking on behalf of the denomination, not for Christendom in totality. So a hypothetical Baptist president who took issue with a doctrinal position of the SBC could choose, for example, to leave the SBC and join some other baptist group, and still have a credible claim to be orthodox while also having confidence in his own individual salvation. The Roman church won't say it clearly these days, but my understanding is that orthodox Roman doctrine is essentially ex ecclesiam nulla salus, with the Roman church as the only "true church".

Also, at least the SBC is American. Someone being a faithful Roman Catholic is, in my mind, similar to someone who has a foreign nationality and a loyalty to a foreign government. Which is also an issue with the Biden administration, I believe, with Israeli-American dual nationals. That's a rabbit hole for another day.

60 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

Rabbit or Rabbi hole? You can shoot me now

63 sats \ 1 reply \ @freetx 10 Jul

Yep, as I said I pretty much agree with you....including that SBC is not quite exactly the same thing as "papal infallibility". But generally these arguments just become semantics at a certain point.

Moreover I do fully agree with your main point, that the founding fathers specifically wanted to craft a political system that expressly excluded Catholic / Anglican / any other external religious body from any official involvement in governance.

115 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

2 Presidents have been Catholic:

JFK Biden

133 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 10 Jul

I don't know anyone who self identifies as a "Christian Nationalist", but I know many conservative Christians (I am one myself, though the "conservative" part is more theological than political)

Politically I lean libertarian, with the understanding that modern secular leftism is as religious in character as Christianity or any other major religion. Maybe moreso, when considering tolerance for other value systems and cultural dominance. I'm talking about the climate agenda, the DEI agenda, and the trans agenda and how intolerant their followers are to alternative viewpoints.

I'm all for religious freedom and a minimalist government. In fact, I think there's a biblical case for it, as did many Christian thinkers throughout history. I just wish more people would stop seeing Christianity as such a threat and wake up to the threat of the religion of modern leftism.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Hamstr 10 Jul

ever notice the U.s gov't stays away from god's law? Because they want to enforce man's law.

65 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

Are we talking about Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell?

13 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford OP 10 Jul

I've never heard any of them use the term. Maybe they have. I don't follow them closely.

I'm mostly curious if people hear other SELF IDENTIFYING as this term. I'm not interesting in categorizations or definitions. Those guys might fit in with the ideas but isn't my curiosity.

55 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

I have not heard them describe themselves as a Christian Nationalist

68 sats \ 0 replies \ @Taft 10 Jul

This is the first time I have heard this name. In addition to conservative Christians, there are also neo-conservative Christians, but I never heard about "Christian Nationalist"

68 sats \ 0 replies \ @lv99slacker 10 Jul

I've never met one IRL, but I've definitely seen them online.

68 sats \ 0 replies \ @jgbtc 10 Jul

Another bogey man.

68 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinAbhi 10 Jul

I don't know.

68 sats \ 7 replies \ @grayruby 10 Jul

Unfamiliar with the term.

105 sats \ 6 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

A Canadian 🇨🇦 perspective! Good to know!

Is Calgary or Alberta religious? I know they love the rodeo or stampede!

https://www.calgarystampede.com/stampede/value-days

68 sats \ 5 replies \ @grayruby 10 Jul

Prairie provinces are probably a bit more religious but we don’t have anything like the Bible Belt.

75 sats \ 4 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

Interesting fact about the Bible Belt: Most are Christian Zionists who are a big component of the Israeli lobby

50 million strong

63 sats \ 3 replies \ @kepford OP 10 Jul

That's a very common thread and honestly more of an issue.

Its really coming from dispensationalism and this fairly new idea of rapture theology. These ideas were not taught by the Protestant reformers.

75 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

Besides AIPAC, the main reason the West, especially the Anglosphere, is so interested in supporting Israel is Christian Zionism, a weird heresy based on some unorthodox interpretation of the Bible. Just goes to show how fringe ideas can cause genuine suffering.

33 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford OP 10 Jul

They don't call themselves Christian Zionists. That's what makes these things hard to talk about. It is mostly what I said. Theologically novel interpretations that do not conform to most Christian orthodoxy. On top of that they aren't even logical.

Christians that at home despise progressive polices support a foreign government that looks more progressive than their own conservative politicians in the US.

Much of the issue is the "Theory of Stupidly" all over again. Its all so tiresome.

75 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

About 50 million Americans

Rapture theology is a good way of describing the movement

reply on another page

68 sats \ 1 reply \ @SatsMate 10 Jul

I have no idea what this is to be honest!

13 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 10 Jul

I will probably write more about it in the near future.

13 sats \ 4 replies \ @Hamstr 10 Jul

I think this goes into sovereignty, because it semi relates to god's/nature law. Not too sure, but if I am correct these individuals are Christians and nationals and not U.S. citizens. Don't quote me on this, but I think that what it's meant.

23 sats \ 3 replies \ @kepford OP 10 Jul

You're way off. When people use the term "Christian Nationalists" they are referring to conservative mostly evangelical American Christians that support voting for politicians that will "lead" the nation back to more traditional Christian values and laws that encourage or force this.

The nationalist part is the very common idea through history of national identity. A people group based on citizenship vs. race or religion. Its not an inaccurate term but it is meant in my view to associate them with other forms of nationalist movements like that of Nazi Germany.

While I disagree with the conservative political movement in general there are a long way from warranting this comparison. I believe this term is yet another tool to divide people.

13 sats \ 2 replies \ @Hamstr 10 Jul

Umm if u look at 8 USC 1401 the people are already divided clearly as stated, "Nationals" and "Citizens" of the U.S." born as both but the true conferring happens when you register to drive, vote etc by contract.

And your first definition was what I meant. People want the dejure, and are sick of the de facto

55 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Jul

Different topic

Christian nationalist is a pejorative, a loaded term by the left wing media to denigrate Christians and conservatives

I am not Christian but have conservative political beliefs. I am guilty by association with Christian nationalism and the Tea Party.

20 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 10 Jul

Ok, this doesn't sounds relevant to the discussion to me. I misunderstood what you were saying at first. These people likely have driver's licenses and also vote. They are both nationals and citizens.

Point is, this isn't something most are aware of and isn't really even considered when people from a different political position are categorizing them.

The point of those using the term is describing their goals and methods to achieve them.