The Scarecrow's Brain

The Strawman

When confronted about the fact that there are more than a few bad intentioned actors who share the same title, self-professed “Christian Nationalists” in putatively Reformed evangelical circles will often reply by saying “We’re not those kinds of Christian Nationalists!” The response is meant to communicate that their opponents are misrepresenting their doctrine by pointing to dubious theologians, pastors, teachers, and political figures. Those Christian Nationalists are thinking about the subject incorrectly, and are not on the same page.

Yet, Christian Nationalists are admittedly ecumenical in their understanding of who is or is not a Christian, accepting not only Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox as Christian brothers and sisters (which itself is a violation of God’s Law¹) but other transorthodox² groups who believe and teach a false gospel. This means that they embrace those very people from whom they wish to distance themselves. What does it matter, then, if the Reformed Evangelical Christian Nationalists are not in full agreement with the Dominionist Pentecostal Christian Nationalists³?

Logically, in terms one’s argument against Christian Nationalism, I understand why identifying strawman representations of one’s position is significant. You don’t want to be held accountable for believing something you don’t actually believe. You also don’t want people to think your doctrine has been refuted when the truth is that it hasn’t even been touched.

Practically, however, what is the significance of this?
What purpose does it serve?

Well, it implicitly recognizes that those kinds of Christian Nationalists exist, and hold to views that are problematic on a number of different levels. It also reveals that the Reformed Evangelical Christian Nationalists understand that being associated with those kinds of Christian Nationalists will be hindrance to their movement. This helps the Reformed Evangelical Christian Nationalists distance themselves from the strawman that seemingly tarnishes their “Reformed” version of the Christian Nationalist movement.

Apart from giving them some breathing room, and getting the progressivists off of their case, though, how significant is the distinction between those other “Christian Nationalists” and the “Reformed” “Evangelical” “Christian Nationalists”?

Practically speaking, the distinction isn’t worth much.

The Brain

You see, the Reformed Evangelical Christian Nationalists believe that each Christian state in the nation will operate as Christian Nationalists in accordance with their distinct theological traditions. So while they may be accurately identifying a strawman raised against their own position, they are intent on being that strawman’s brain. Put another way, the fact that the Reformed Evangelical Christian Nationalists don’t hold the same doctrine as those other guys is irrelevant, since those other guys will be used in the service of the Reformed Evangelical version of Christian Nationalism.

So those other guys are not irrelevant. Their beliefs about CN that Christians would find objectionable, immoral, unscriptural — those beliefs, under CN, will have a place within their version of Big Tent Christianity. CN articulated by the main thinkers — Wolfe, Wilson, Torba, Isker — is the brain being transplanted into the strawman they want you think is a mere scarecrow. Don’t fall for it.

1. cf. Gal 1:8-9 & 1st John 1.

2. See —

3. For more on Dominionism, see “What is Christian dominionism?”, Got Questions, https://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-dominionism.html.