Sam Lowry said:I'm not saying it is. Your typical Democrat isn't a Marxian critical theorist, either. But like anyone else they will vote for their party and find a way to justify it. Ideas have consequences. History teaches that it's a grave mistake to ignore the influence of the passionate minority. Our own revolutionary war was supported by a minority of the colonists. The basic sentiments of a person like Metaxas, for example that evidence doesn't matter when you're on a righteous mission, are shared by many if not most on this board. Whether they share a detailed theological framework doesn't necessarily matter. When ideology resonates with people's grievances, it's more than capable of evolving and spreading even in simplified form.sombear said:Is he really a rock star? I mean, a lot folks thought he got screwed by the FBI. But is he influential? And, if he is, is it b/c he's a Trump supporter who was wrongly indicted? Or is it his extremist views? I say the former, even assuming he has a significant following.Sam Lowry said:Indeed, and it's not as if evangelicals denounced Flynn when he revealed his extremism. On the contrary it's part of what propelled him to rock star status.sombear said:I'd never heard of Metaxas until your post.Sam Lowry said:Metaxas and Flynn are well known and respected among evangelicals. Flynn even served as an advisor to President Trump. They and others played a key role in creating the mythology behind the J6 insurrection. I admire Metaxas in many ways (he's a friend of a friend). I was shocked by some of the things he said. But no one can deny that he's a prominent figure.sombear said:Yeah, that is nutty.Sam Lowry said:Political terms are slippery. I've been called everything from a radical leftist to a Christo-fascist. I'm neither, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.sombear said:But what is your definition? And, you say "it exists." I won't argue that because just about every kind of person one could think of "exists." The question is, how prevalent do you believe it is according to your definition?Sam Lowry said:That's why there's no point in arguing about it. Your mind is already made up. It is true, by the way, that much of what the Left calls Christian nationalism is just part of our political tradition. It's also true that real Christian nationalism helped fuel the J6 riot, but you're not going to acknowledge that regardless of the evidence.TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:
Nope, the "we weren't actually saying that it's a problem" misdirect doesn't work. Trying to reinforce and give the impression that your bogeyman is influential and relevant, you know that's BS, so we're just here to remind you that you and he are full of it.
I've spent a fair amount of time googling the issue as you suggest, and I see everything from "A patriotic Christian" to "Christians who think only Christians should be in government and/or our laws should be based on the Bible."
And the reason many of us are "defensive" about it is that the characterization has become part of the left's and the media's everyday lexicon. I'm a Christian (first and foremost) and conservative (mostly) who loves the U.S. According to many, that alone means I'm a dangerous Christian Nationalist.
In my view, Christian nationalists want to privilege Christianity over other religions (for example Mike Flynn saying that one nation implies one religion). They also tend to privilege private revelation over reason and the law (for example Eric Metaxas saying that when God gives you a vision, you don't need to know anything else).
I found the following article informative:Quote:
What I Saw At The Jericho March
MAGA at prayer event a shocking display of apocalyptic faith and politics -- and religious decadence
by Rod Dreher
Dec. 12, 2020
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/what-i-saw-at-the-jericho-march/
But, I've been a conservative and evangelical most of my life (I'm 55) and had never heard of the Jericho March until this post. I just tried researching it but didn't find much, and it appears to have been sparsely attended.
And I've never met anyone who shares the views described in the article. Literally not one person.
So, yes, that group is nuts, and I don't care what you call them, Christian Nationalist or other. It's a fringe group. We have fringe groups of all kinds.
But the way the label is thrown around, it clearly is meant to cover far more folks than these.
Nobody knew how extreme Flynn was until after he served.
I really believe you're talking a very small % of conservative Christians. And again, call them what you want, but don't pretend that's your typical Republican Christian.
I mostly agree. The only reason I posted was to dispute the widely held view that Christian Nationalism is widespread phenomenon that has taken over the Evangelical church and GOP politics. It is a fringe group just like the numerous other fringe groups of all political stripes. But the media and the left treat CN much differently.
Heck, the most devoted political demographic is Atheism. Over 80% Dem.