Written by David T. Crum |
Thursday, April 25, 2024
The Scriptures are clear that governments act per the will of God (Romans 13:1, Colossians 1:16). The U.S. prides itself on democracy, independence, and freedom for all. America is not perfect; it fought its own battle with slavery and civil rights. However, the founding ideals and principles have maintained prominence in American culture and have become the standard for many people worldwide. It is not a coincidence that people seek to migrate to America from all over the globe.

Foreign policy positions have always divided Americans. Division exists even within the Democratic and Republican parties.
Isolationism is the belief that a country should avoid involvement in other nations’ military, economic, and political policies.
Studying the early history of the United States, it is safe to say that “isolationism” was the preferred foreign policy of the Founding Fathers. Times were different, and the colonists strongly opposed monarchies and empires. The Founders shared the belief that the government should focus on freedom and independence from Europe and European affairs. The colonists wanted to be completely independent and free.
The Founders opposed imperialism, but some past presidents, such as Thomas Jefferson, wanted to expand America’s land. The Louisiana Purchase was a significant achievement for Jefferson, as he acquired much of present-day America from the French.
President James Polk secured several western U.S. states from Mexico as a result of the victory in the Mexican-American War. A short time later, the U.S. Civil War broke out in which Abraham Lincoln refused to allow secession, seeking to preserve the Union. A common theme slowly appeared: American expansion and a showcase of military might.
A few decades later, President William McKinley gained control of Hawaii and multiple Caribbean Islands. The latter resulted from the victory over Spain in the Spanish-American War.
Despite isolationism’s popularity, the U.S. expanded its global influence through annexation and military power. It is vital to note the island acquisitions, as most territories became a key asset and played an integral role during World War II.
With all the foreign policy changes, we must ask: could the U.S. maintain its isolationist reputation?
The first significant test came during World War I, when U.S. forces agreed to enter the conflict, inarguably pushing the Allied powers to victory. American forces eventually left Europe, confirming its isolationist reputation.
With the destruction in Europe and Asia during World War II, the U.S. officially entered the war after the attack at Pearl Harbor. During WWII, foreign policy procedures changed within the U.S., a notable shift that still exists today. After sending U.S. troops to Europe in two world wars and losing thousands of American lives in battle, politicians knew isolationism was a thing of the past. Winston Churchill foresaw that the U.S. joining WWII would make it the leading world power, surpassing Great Britain, and his assessment was correct.
While isolationism always represented early Americans—from maintaining the Union during the Lincoln administration to positioning itself in island territories and entering both world wars, Americans were no longer isolationists.
This is clear today. The U.S. maintains foreign military bases worldwide and supplies billions of dollars in aid to countries around the globe.
The post world-war years have been dictated by wars opposing communism (Korean War, Vietnam) and terrorism. Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Ronald Reagan are some American leaders who pushed democracy and defended it at all costs. No longer was the goal to protect American democracy; the U.S. had changed to begin pushing its political belief (democracy) to keep the world safe from tyranny.
Perhaps Reagan’s peace-through-strength policies best embodied modern-day America. The lesson is that America would not sit idly by and allow tyranny and autocracy to bring America into another world war. The mindset maintains that Americans must forcefully address such opposition before it spirals out of control. Leaders from both political parties typically accept the political position. Regardless of differences in military capacity and level of engagement in modern conflicts, presidents have consistently wielded global influence.
While the U.S. may be seen as the “world’s police,” the reader needs to know history to grasp the change in foreign policy and engagement in global affairs.
From a Christian worldview, is the new foreign policy position biblical?
First, the Scriptures are clear that governments act per the will of God (Romans 13:1, Colossians 1:16).
The U.S. prides itself on democracy, independence, and freedom for all. America is not perfect; it fought its own battle with slavery and civil rights. However, the founding ideals and principles have maintained prominence in American culture and have become the standard for many people worldwide. It is not a coincidence that people seek to migrate to America from all over the globe.
Whether it be individualism or religious liberty, America’s founding and current posture embody freedom. Here, a political divide might arise in how large and involved the government should be with its citizens. Nevertheless, the nation’s distinct reputation sets it apart from other global powers.
Christians can freely worship in the United States. In other parts of the globe, authorities can imprison and even kill individuals for being Christians and practicing their faith.
While the nation (U.S.) has seemingly abandoned several Christian ideals, democracy is at the heart of foreign policy decisions. Those who stand with democratic tenets are the strongest allies of the U.S., while nations who embrace tyranny typically oppose the U.S. and view the nation as a threat.
Does living in a democratic government promote religious freedom and liberty? This question lies at the core of the Christian worldview. Socialism and communism are and have historically been an enemy of Christians and religious liberty.
Likewise, a theistic government cannot work, as we cannot force souls to embrace one specific religion. This is especially true within the Christian worldview, as conversion must be personal and sincere, focused on Jesus Christ. Several Middle Eastern countries are theistic and remain some of the most hostile nations in the world to Christians.
A democratic government still allows one to become a believer and disciple of Jesus Christ.
Sadly, people in the U.S. and other democratic nations often mock Christian ideals and beliefs. But the mere right to practice the belief system and voice one’s support is distinct. The freedom of religion and freedom of speech gives Christians hope they can proclaim Jesus Christ to all ears.
Make no mistake: the U.S. is home to the majority of the largest Protestant denominations in the world and has constantly made a global impact on souls worldwide. From natural disasters to wars and famines, Christians are always ready to serve and make a difference for the kingdom. And this we can credit to American liberty and democracy.
David Crumholds a Ph.D. in Historical Theology. He serves as an Assistant Professor of History and Dissertation Chair. His research interests include the history of warfare and Christianity. He and his family are members of Christ the King Church, in Easton, Maine.

Related Posts:

Today many of us know the work of the Synod as the Canons of Dort under the acrostic “TULIP.” Total depravity; Unconditional election; Limited atonement; Irresistible grace; and Perseverance of the saints. If you have not read the Canons, they are worth working through. 

The Canons of Dort were approved at the Synod of Dort 405 years ago today (May 29, 1619). The Synod was a multi-national synod of reformed churches that was called to answer objections to the teaching of Prof. Jacob Arminius of Leiden University and his remonstrators. The Remonstrance taught election based on foreseen faith; Christ’s death was universally meritorious; partial human depravity; and resistible and fallible states of grace.
Pastors, elders, professors, and statesmen from the established churches of the Netherlands, England, Scotland, Wales, Switzerland, and modern-day Germany came together to condemn what is today called “Arminianism” as a heresy against the Word of God. In 34 “rejections of errors” the heresy of Arminianism was condemned by the synod.
Read More
Related Posts:

God’s solution to the universal problem of evil doesn’t change, from place to place or culture to culture. Prayer is the standard. In fact, part of the transformation that Christianity brings to each culture is how it seeks supernatural intervention. Philippi was also the place where Paul met a slave girl with a spirit of divination. Through that spirit she “brought her owners much gain by fortune-telling” (Acts 16:16). Other spiritual forces and religious practices existed in Philippi. They even appear to possess a degree of power and ‘success.’ Yet Paul says to the people living there: pray about everything. The Christian faith doesn’t deny supernatural intervention. Instead God redirects us away from the traditions, things, places, and people to himself. Thus we pray: “deliver us from evil.”

The problem of evil is one that all humans face. We might debate the details of its origin or how to resolve it, but we generally agree on its existence. In this article I will be reflecting on how the Bible exhorts Christians to seek deliverance from evil, in relation to the temptation to combine African traditional religions with the Christian faith. 
In traditional African religions, as Adamo says, evil is both moral and physical; it “concerns any misfortune that befalls an individual or community or any voluntary antisocial behaviour or any infringement of the decrees of God, the deity or the ancestors.” This is why “propitiatory sacrifices become one of the major ways by which Africans deliver themselves from the effects of evil in the world.” Because the need for sacrifices are embedded both in many Africans’ religious outlook as well as culture, it’s a very difficult practice to abandon.
In this article I reflect on the biblical solution for seeking deliverance from evil, and how this speaks into our traditional practices. Can Africans be in Christ and continue with sacrifices? Should African Christians consult the ancestors or the local sangoma for deliverance? How does the Bible exhort Africans to seek deliverance from the problem of evil? Will we find salvation through a blend of the Christian faith and traditional practices?
The Lord’s Prayer: “Deliver Us from Evil”
The Bible gives one solution for seeking deliverance from evil: prayer (Matthew 6:13). Now, this can be difficult for us to hear, especially considering that our worldview provides us with various alternatives that promise to resolve our problems. Practices handed down by our forefathers, which we’ve implemented and seen fruits from. When we ask our neighbours or family, they recommend one thing when we’re suffering. But Jesus teaches that prayer is foundational. It is the greatest tool at our disposal, when seeking deliverance from evil. 
Read More
Related Posts: