Christian nationalists should stop making the fallacious claim that conservative Christians who reject Christian nationalism do not want Christian nations. Just as people can reject the concept of antiracism while hating racism, Christians can reject the concept of Christian nationalism while wanting Christian nations.

We were all unfamiliar with the term “Christian nationalism” until a couple of years ago. However, some people are demanding that we should agree its ideology.
Most of us had never heard of the term until the media blamed Christian nationalism for the January 6 riot at the United States Capitol Building in 2021. The media attempted to make Christian nationalism synonymous with evangelicalism. That seemingly prompted all sorts of professing Christians to embrace the term.
From what I’ve read, there are 4 or 5 kinds of Christian nationalists. In a sense, this is mostly why I am not a Christian nationalist. I don’t think it’s wise to describe myself as a Christian nationalist when some of the people who embrace that label are completely unbiblical.
If the term was older than 2 years in mainstream culture, I would probably think differently. But I don’t think it’s worth fighting for a relatively new word with so many connotations.
The different kinds of Christian nationalists include: the New Apostolic Reformation movement, some theonomists, Kinists, and according to leftists: all Christians.
The New Apostolic Reformation is generally a more political version of the Word of Faith or prosperity gospel. It’s made up of professing Christians who believe humans lost dominion over the earth to Satan after Adam’s sin. According to them, God has restored the offices of apostles and prophets to lead Christians to take back dominion from Satan that rightfully belongs to humanity. They say there are 7 areas that Christians need to regain dominion over. The government is one of these areas.
However, there’s an entirely different group of Christians who are also calling themselves Christian nationalists: theonomists. Simply, theonomists believe God’s judicial laws for Israel in the Old Covenant are the standard for all nations. Therefore for some theonomists, “Christian Nationalism” seems like a simpler term to describe their beliefs.
I recently wrote an article about a group of professing Christians called Kinists. I said, Kinism is an ideology within some Reformed circles that teaches that a person’s so-called race makes them “kins” or related to people within their racial group. According to Kinists, all white people have a shared ethnicity and culture that should be preserved. Therefore they support racial segregation in communities and families. Meaning, they’re especially opposed to “interracial” marriage.
Kinists have also taken the Christian nationalist label.
Read More
Related Posts:

Sin is sin, on the right or the left. Kinism is just as evil as critical race theory. So Kinists are not our allies. They’re just as opposed to Biblical views on race as critical race theorists. 

Just as leftists use America’s history with white supremacy to justify anti-white racism, some “evangelicals” are using critical race theory to justify racism against non-white people.
Pressure from critical race theorists has convinced many evangelical leaders to become ashamed of the gospel and they’ve embraced anti-white racism. In the same way, through bitterness against critical race theorists, some anti-woke evangelicals have become dissatisfied with Biblical theology and they’ve embraced racism against non-white people.
Like Sadducees and Pharisees, despite their opposing views—these two groups have one major thing in common: they’re refusing to submit to Jesus’ authority.
Worldliness isn’t a leftist trait. It’s not just progressive “Christians” who can be deceived by unbiblical views on race. Satan is cunning. If he’s able to deceive Puritans into embracing white supremacy, he’s able to deceive conservative protestants into embracing Kinism.
Kinism is an ideology within some Reformed circles that teaches that a person’s so-called race makes them “kins” or related to people within their racial group. According to Kinists, all white people have a shared ethnicity and culture that should be preserved. Therefore they support racial segregation in communities and families. Meaning, they’re especially opposed to immigration (not just illegal immigration) and “interracial” marriage.
Just as most Big Eva leaders (mainstream evangelical leaders) do not embrace every facet of critical race theory, not all Kinists embrace every facet of Kinism. However, their soft form of Kinism isn’t any less destructive than a soft form of critical race theory.
These Kinists are significantly smaller in number and influence than professing Christians who’ve embraced critical race theory. However, they’re less uncommon than you might think.
Until recently, all the racist words I’ve received since I started writing on race 8 years ago have come from critical race theorists. However, a few months ago—especially after I called out Stephen Wolfe—I received hundreds of racist words from Kinists on social media, especially since I’m a black man married to a white woman.
Stephen Wolfe is one of the most influentual Kinists in evangelical circles. He’s the author of the popular book, The Case For Christian Nationalism. On Twitter last year, he said:
“while intermarriage is not itself wrong (as an individual matter), groups have a collective duty to be separate and marry among themselves…there is a difference between something being sinful absolutely and something being sinful relatively. Interethnic marriage can be sinful relatively and absolutely.”
He’s since deleted those tweets. But his tweets are consistent with his words in The Case For Christian Nationalism:
Read More
Related Posts:

LGBT ideology cannot co-exist with Christian theology. It cannot compete with the loving, hopeful, freeing gospel of Jesus Christ. Therefore, it suppresses Christianity through persecution. It arrests Christians for preaching the gospel. It criminalises speech against homosexuality and transgenderism. And it charges people like Päivi Räsänen for quoting the Bible on social media. 

Don’t be surprised if one day you are on trial for quoting the Bible on social media.
If that seems unthinkable, you should know it’s already happening to some Christians in other parts of the world. Like tropical storms that devastate Caribbean and South American nations before hitting American soil, there is a coming persecution that is already affecting Christians around the world.
If things do not change, American Christians will suffer the same storms. There are already warning signs.
The Bible says,
Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. (1 Peter 4:12)
Christians have become accustomed to getting banned (or shadowbanned) on social media for our beliefs, but it seems strange to think that one day we could be arrested for quoting the Bible. 
But that’s what happened to Päivi Räsänen, a member of parliament in Finland. 
She has been an elected official since 1995. She was the chair of the Christian Democratic Party from 2004 to 2015, she was minister of the interior from 2011 to 2015, and she is a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland with her husband, who serves as a pastor. 
In June 2019, Päivi tweeted a picture of Bible verses and questioned her denomination’s partnership with an LGBT Pride event. 
The prosecutor general in Finland opened an investigation against her. In April 2021, the prosecutor announced three charges of hate speech against Päivi—one charge for the tweet, a second charge for a 2004 pamphlet on sexuality for her church, and a third charge for a 2019 radio debate on sexuality.
Alliance Defending Freedom International supported her defence at a district court, and in a unanimous ruling in March 2022, the court dismissed all charges against her.
Read More
Related Posts:

If you’re detrans, you won’t be healed unless you believe in Christ and repent. Regret isn’t repentance. Regret won’t give you hope, repentance will. When the Bible says Jesus’ wounds have healed Christians, it’s talking about spiritual healing. It means our souls have been born again or made spiritually alive.

Some people have been celebrating their LGBT sins for an entire month. Others, however, will regret their LGBT sins for their entire lives.
One of these regretful LGBT people is a detrans girl named Clyde Fallon. In a Reddit group for detrans people, she said:
“I’m a 17 year old girl with a flat chest, a deep voice, a visible Adam’s apple and some facial hair … I’m angry, I’m sad, I’m mad, I’m depressed, I’m hurt. I am grieving I feel remorse. I can’t deal with all this pain. I lost my breasts … There’s no reason for me to continue to live … Will I ever [b]e happy again? Please tell me it is possible … I can’t deal with all this. I want a Time Machine so badly … I want my body back so badly. Pls give me hope.”
There are over 48,000 members in that Reddit group, and they all have similar stories of shame and despair.
The Bible says pride leads to destruction. That is true for all LGBT people, especially transgender youth, whose bodies have been destroyed by puberty blockers, and breast and genital mutilations. LGBT pride leads to destruction.
However, if you’re detrans, I want you to know there’s hope. You’ve destroyed parts of your body, but you haven’t destroyed who you are. Doctors can change your body and voice, but they haven’t changed the most important thing about you.
Your doctor changed your appearance, but they didn’t change your identity. You’re the same person your mother held in her hands the day you were born. And you’re the same person your creator knitted together in your mother’s womb.
In Psalm 139:13-16, King David said:
“For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.”
You are fearfully and wonderfully made by God. You are God’s idea. You are God’s design. You are God’s wonderful work.
Read More
Related Posts:

Robin DiAngelo writes like a white supremacist, and according to her concept of white fragility, it would be racist for her to reject my accusation—according to her own silly standards, she would have to agree with me that she’s indeed a white supremacist.

When I was a boy in Ghana, I once had a massive nail pierce through my foot, and I suffered through a makeshift surgery by my mom without anaesthesia.
And that was significantly more enjoyable than reading this book. It’s astonishingly bad.
White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism is one of the bestselling books right now, and it’s one of the worst books I’ve ever read.
White Fragility was released in 2018 by sociologist and anti-racist Robin DiAngelo. The book became a best-seller immediately after it was released. However, since George Floyd’s murder, it’s become the most recommended anti-racist book in the world.
In White Fragility, Robin DiAngelo attempts to explain why white people, especially “progressive” white people, do not believe they’re racists. In the book, she defines white fragility as any rejections—including sincere rejections—by white people against accusations of racism.
She says: “None of the people whose actions I describe in this book would identify as racist. In fact, they would most likely identify as racially progressive and vehemently deny any complicity with racism. Yet all their responses illustrate white fragility and how it holds racism in place.”
For that reason, she says: “white progressives cause the most daily damage to people of color.”
That’s probably the only thing from the book I agree with. She’s right—except she doesn’t know she’s referring to herself. White “progressives” cause the most daily damage to black people, and this book is a good example of that.
I read White Fragility over four days, and it damaged me in each of the four days. The book is more damaging than any massive nail to my foot.
Robin DiAngelo has managed to accomplish the difficult task of writing a book that is simultaneously anti-white and white supremacist. And yet, it’s the bestselling book on racism today.
What does it say about our culture when one of the most racist books I’ve ever read is considered by many to be the best book on racism?
We’re apparently so distracted and so deceived by false definitions of racism, we’re seemingly no longer able to discern what real racism looks like. And that’s one of the major problems with White Fragility and anti-racism ideology, it redefines racism and sin to predictably destructive and disastrous conclusions.
Anti-racism is synonymous with critical race theory, or more broadly, social justice ideology. Anti-racism is a commitment to eliminating practices and policies, sins and systems that anti-racists declare as racist.
In anti-racism ideology, racism isn’t an enticing sin, it’s an entity—or as DiAngelo references in the book—“an omnipresent phenomenon.”
And by that definition of racism, it’s not difficult to notice the religious overtones of anti-racism. Anti-racism is just pro-racism appearing as an angel of light. Anti-racism is an anti-Christ ideology that uses racism as a means to fight supposed racism. It’s an ideology that labels good as evil and evil as good. And it’s in direct opposition to Christianity.
In White Fragility, Robin DiAngelo says: “a positive white identity is an impossible goal. White identity is inherently racist; white people do not exist outside the system of white supremacy.”
Professing to be wise, Robin DiAngelo became a fool. Professing to be anti-racist, she became a racist. White Fragility is a racist and an anti-white book. And if we really lived in an anti-black culture like DiAngelo claims, her anti-white book wouldn’t be a bestseller.
But anti-racists like Robin DiAngelo do not hate racism, they only hate, supposedly, anti-black racism. And yet, like many “progressives”, her anti-white racism manifests in a condescending form of white supremacy. Anti-racist rhetoric is remarkably similar to white supremacist rhetoric.
Anti-racists and white supremacists agree that a person’s skin colour is the most significant thing about them. They agree that a person’s skin colour shapes who they are. And anti-racists agree with white supremacists that white people are more privileged than black people—except they say so with pity, not pride.
Read More
Related Posts:

Yahaya Sharif-Aminu is a singer-songwriter in his early 20s. He’s a Sufi Muslim, making him a religious minority in northern Nigeria’s mostly Sunni population. He shared some of his songs in a WhatsApp group in 2020. Some of the members in the WhatsApp group, however, accused Yahaya of committing “blasphemy” against the “prophet” Muhammad. Soon a mob surrounded his family’s home and burned it down. Police officers subsequently arrested Yahaya and he was convicted under Sharia court—without legal counsel—to death by hanging. 

The deadliest country in the world for Christians isn’t Afghanistan or North Korea, it’s Nigeria.
Last year, 5,621 Christians were killed worldwide because of their faith—90% of them were northern Nigerians.
Mission organizations are reporting that Christian persecution is at its highest in 30 years. And that’s primarily because of what’s been happening in northern Nigeria over the last 24 years.
Approximately half of Nigeria’s population are professing Christians, and most of them live in the south. However the other half are Muslims, and most of them live in the north.
Northern Nigeria is where Boko Haram, an Islamic terrorist group, have kidnapped thousands of young girls and killed tens of thousands of people over the last decade. But Boko Haram is enabled by northern Nigeria’s Sharia laws. There’s a direct relationship between terrorism and Sharia law in Nigeria.
Boko Haram was founded in northern Nigeria in 2002, shortly after 12 northern states reintroduced Sharia law between 1999 and 2001—despite Nigerians’ constitutional right to religious freedom. Since then, at least 50,000 Christians in northern Nigeria have been murdered.
And it’s actually getting worse. Last year was the deadliest year for Christians in Nigeria. Sharia blasphemy laws, terrorist attacks, and mob violence killed at least 5,000 Christians last year.
One of these Christians was Deborah Samuel. She was a student at a university in Sokoto State, northern Nigeria. She was killed at her school because she praised Jesus for her academic success.
On May 12, 2022, a classmate asked Deborah in a WhatsApp group for their class how she passed a recent exam. She answered, “Jesus.” According to some of her classmates, that answer is a crime worthy of death.
Some of her classmates replied with Islamic statements and demanded that she should retract her words about Jesus. But she refused. Instead, she defended her Christian beliefs.
Immediately the Muslim students said she was guilty of blasphemy under Sokoto State’s Sharia law, which is punishable by death. So they called on others in the community to execute mob justice.
School security tried to protect Deborah, but they were overpowered by the mob. Police officers were called, but they were supposedly intimidated by the large crowd. The mob threatened to kill anyone who tried to help her, so the rest of the Christian students fled the scene and returned home for their own safety.
Deborah, however, didn’t get the opportunity to return home to her parents.
Read More
Related Posts:

This is what charismatic Christians fail to consider: every revelation from God is just as authoritative as the Bible. Every prophecy and every vision or supernatural dream from God is just as inerrant, inspired, infallible, and authoritative as the Bible. All revelation from God is equally authoritative, and God cannot contradict himself. Therefore every revelation from God demands obedience—including, apparently, the dream about my wife. For that reason, the dream almost destroyed my soul… My dream isn’t inerrant, inspired, infallible, and authoritative—the Bible is.

My wife isn’t the woman of my dreams. She isn’t black. She isn’t Ghanaian-Canadian. She isn’t the woman I dreamed about in my youth.
When I said “I do” to Annie 10 months ago, I knew I wasn’t marrying the woman of my dreams.
It all started when I became friends with a beautiful, Ghanaian girl soon after I became a Christian at 19. We were raised in the same Pentecostal church and we became believers together at a young adults retreat.
We had a lot in common, especially common interest in each other. So one Saturday night, we agreed to do what many Charismatic Christians do before they enter into a relationship: we asked God to reveal the identity of our spouses in a dream that night.
We were raised in the Word of Faith, prosperity gospel movement. Our church regularly held “healing” crusades and suggested that miraculous and supernatural events were normal experiences for Christians. So we prayed and went to sleep that night believing God would answer our prayers.
But what happened next isn’t what either of us expected.
I had a dream that I stepped out of a limo at our Pentecostal church wearing a black tuxedo. I was several feet away from a bride waiting for me.
Halfway towards her, I was shocked when I saw the woman of my dreams. She was a beautiful, Ghanaian girl smiling at me. But it wasn’t whom I was expecting. It wasn’t my friend—it was her cousin.
But the biggest shock happened the following morning at church.
I couldn’t pay attention to anything that morning. I was amazed by that supernatural answer to prayer. But I was also disappointed that my friend wasn’t destined to be my wife. I knew her cousin. She was great. She was also a member of our church. But I didn’t like her at the time, I liked my friend instead.
Nevertheless, I was eager to talk to my friend that morning. So as soon as I saw her, I said: “I know who my wife is.” And she replied, “I know. It’s my cousin.”
In shock, I stepped back and almost fell to the floor. I couldn’t believe it.
She said she had a dream that I married her cousin: she and I had the same dream. It’s the most unexplainable thing to ever happen to me. I hadn’t said anything about the dream to anyone. She gave me details about the dream that no one else could possibly know.
Read More
Related Posts:

Woke Christianity is an attempt to reconcile Christianity with Black Lives Matter. It is a theology developed from Calvinism with an awareness for social justice. It makes liberation from perceived racial injustice a central message of the gospel. It suggests that a gospel that doesn’t address racial injustice is an unbalanced gospel. Woke Christianity is essentially a Calvinistic social gospel.

You probably don’t know its name, but you’re familiar with it. Barack Obama’s pastor preached about it. Chance The Rapper raps about it. Cornel West writes about it. And evangelicals are becoming sympathetic about it. You are familiar with Black Liberation Theology, and you didn’t know it.
Black Liberation Theology was developed by James Cone in the 1960s during the Black Power movement as a reaction to evangelical apathy on racial injustice. In his book, Black Theology and Black Power, James Cone explains how he formed his theology:
“For me, the burning theological question was, how can I reconcile Christianity and Black Power, Martin Luther King, Jr.’s idea of nonviolence and Malcom X’s by any means necessary philosophy? The writing of Black Theology and Black Power was the beginning of my search for a resolution of that dilemma.”
Anyone who makes a prophet out of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X is sure to teach another gospel, and that is what James Cone’s Black Liberation Theology is: another gospel. Black Liberation Theology is Martin Luther King Jr,’s social gospel and Malcolm X’s Black Nationalism in one. Black Liberation Theology exchanges the power of God for Black power. It exchanges the supremacy of Christ for Black supremacy. Black Liberation Theology is built on a foundation of bitterness and victimhood, with social justice as its chief cornerstone.
In James Cone’s theology, Black liberation from White oppression is the gospel. In his book, Speaking the Truth: Ecumenism, Liberation, and Black Theology, James Cone said:
“What else can the crucifixion mean except that God, the Holy One of Israel, became identified with the victims of oppression?  What else can the resurrection mean except that God’s victory in Christ is the poor person’s victory over poverty? If theology does not take this seriously, how can it be worthy of the name Christian?  If the church, the community out of which theology arises, does not make God’s liberation of the oppressed central in its mission and proclamation, how can it rest easy with a condemned criminal as the dominant symbol of its message?”
James Cone died last week, but his Black Liberation Theology is more alive than ever, more woke than ever in the reformed community.
You only need to read some reformed leaders’ words on James Cone’s death last week to recognize that many reformed Christians are adopting a form of Black Liberation Theology, a theology that borrows from James Cone and John Calvin, Martin Luther King Jr. and Martin Luther, a theology called woke Christianity.
Woke Christianity is an attempt to reconcile Christianity with Black Lives Matter. It is a theology developed from Calvinism with an awareness for social justice. It makes liberation from perceived racial injustice a central message of the gospel. It suggests that a gospel that doesn’t address racial injustice is an unbalanced gospel. Woke Christianity is essentially a Calvinistic social gospel.
Read More
Related Posts:

The difference between gay people and black people is homosexual behaviour is a sin, dark skin isn’t a sin. Therefore, although interracial marriage was illegal in some states decades ago, it’s never been immoral. Gay “marriage,” however, has always been immoral.

The Respect for Marriage Act doesn’t respect marriage at all. A more accurate name for the bill is the “Disrespect for Marriage Act.”
Alliance Defending Freedom described the bill as not merely a law that codifies the Supreme Court’s ruling on Obergefell (gay marriage) as federal law, but a “misnamed bill that expands not only what marriage means, but also who can be sued for disagreeing with the new meaning of marriage.”
They also said, “The Respect for Marriage Act threatens religious freedom and the institution of marriage in multiple ways:

It further embeds a false definition of marriage in the American legal fabric.
It opens the door to federal recognition of polygamous relationships.
It jeopardizes the tax-exempt status of nonprofits that exercise their belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
It endangers faith-based social-service organizations by threatening litigation and liability risk if they follow their views on marriage when working with the government.

The truth is the Respect for Marriage Act does nothing to change the status of same-sex marriage or the benefits afforded to same-sex couples following Obergefell. It does much, however, to endanger religious freedom.”
As always, Alliance Defending Freedom’s explanation of the legal and cultural ramifications of the law are helpful. But the Respect for Marriage Act disrespects the institution of marriage in another way.
Read More
Related Posts: