Historically and biblically debunking the NAR argument of a Christian nation...

::::::::

Click Here

I recently was reviewing some material on the NAR where critics only focused on the apostolic abuses within the movement. While I agree the false authority paradigm is malignant, you could make the argument that the core feature of NAR beliefs today are dominionism as well as Charismania. This worshipping of country and nationalism, the last idol of the church age, is propped up by false teachers such as Eddie Hyatt. Eddie's latest Charisma News article is linked above where he wonders aloud if America could become a Christian nation once again, as if it already once was. It was not. This bad theology hinges on an absolute butchering of America history and the bible. As a former AG preacher and a former America History teacher, I feel compelled to weigh in on all sides. So let us reason once more together as this poison is running through the body of Christ every single day.

"They were called Dissenting Protestants, Nonconformists and Radical Reformers, and they were the ones who provided the philosophical and theological principles on which America was founded. They emphasized religious liberty and freedom of conscience and insisted that governmental force should never be used in matters of faith. In this, they differed from the Catholics, Anglicans and Lutherans of that era who held to the Constantinian merger of the church with the state. This merger had led to an imperial church that used the power of the state to enforce its doctrines and advance its cause. This use of political power in matters of faith became characteristic of the medieval Roman Catholic Church. The reforms of Martin Luther were very important, but in the area of church-state relations, he miserably failed, for he retained this Constantinian idea of a state-sanctioned church. These state-churches became oppressive and persecuted those Christians who refused to conform. Laws were passed in England and other European nations outlawing so-called "clandestine" religious gatherings." - Eddie Hyatt

Eddie Hyatt is the master of historical sleight of hand. He engages in parlor tricks as he rewrites history and the bible to pretend his cause is the same as the founders of this country. It is not. The first sleight of hand he tries to pull off is in conflating groups of people that existed hundreds of years apart. Pilgrims did seek to break from the church, but the Puritans sought to reform it. They are not the same people just because history remembers them both as religious. The trick Hyatt plays is in pretending the colonists, who revolted over 150 years later were the same people with the same religious convictions. They were not. The colonists revolted for economic reasons, not religious ones. They felt oppressed by the unfair taxes levied against them. The Boston Tea party for example was actually about tea and the taxes levied upon it. The second sleight of hand we see here is out of one side of his mouth Hyatt correctly asserts the problems with the state sanctioned church system and how it negatively affected those that would establish America but out of the other side of his mouth he will argue that these same men demanded state sanctioned government! This is of course absurd. The failure of the state sanctioned church is exactly why the founders insisted in the separation of church and state, which Hyatt pretends was never desired. They wanted everyone to worship freely, without the involvement of the government, which is hardly a match for the movement Hyatt leads today, which demands the opposite.

"These clandestine religious groups included the Pilgrims and Separatist Puritans who settled New England, Quakers who settled Pennsylvania, Baptists who settled Rhode Island and other freedom-minded groups scattered throughout the Colonies. Back in the Old World, they had been hounded and oppressed by the state churches. The Separatists were hounded, bullied, forced to pay assessments to the Church of England, clapped into prison on trumped-up charges and driven underground. They met in private homes, to which they came at staggered intervals and by different routes, because they were constantly being spied upon. According to Benjamin Franklin, his father was a Dissenting Protestant who fled England in 1685 to escape persecution from the state-sanctioned Church of England, also known as the Anglican Church. Although influenced by deism in his teenage years, Franklin's mature thinking was primarily shaped by his Dissenting Protestant upbringing and his friendship with George Whitefield, the most famous preacher of the Great Awakening." - Eddie Hyatt

Eddie is a poor historian because he does not care to actually understand the false positions he takes. The Quakers for example disagreed with the Declaration of Independence. Hyatt lumps everyone into the one basket he prefers because he thinks people will logically think of all of these folks as being religious, which is true, but there were vast differences between their views and the entire point of tying them to the events of the Revolution is futile since they were 150 years removed by that point. Eddie goes to great lengths here to detail persecution that may have occurred back in the 1600s but remember the sleight of hand is designed to assume it simply carried into 1776. Now, Hyatt knows full well he was not in the Franklin household growing up and has zero idea of what influenced Franklin to what extent. He spins this yarn because in Franklin's own autobiography he describes himself as a deist. This crushes the narrative Hyatt tells of all the founding fathers being born again Pentecostals as a deist believes in the concept of a higher being but not necessarily the God of the bible. Oops.

"Not the Catholic Church, nor the Anglican Church nor the Lutheran Church could provide the philosophical and theological constructs for the founding of America, for their approach to faith and church was based on power, not faith and freedom. This is why the historian Benjamin Hart wrote: "It was Protestants of the most radical stripe, most zealous in their religious convictions (those whom the American Civil Liberties Union would like to see outlawed from the public discourse) who were in fact the greatest proponents of religious liberty as codified in America's governing charter." (Hyatt, "1726: The Year that Defined America," 42)." - Eddie Hyatt

Let me start by pointing out the obvious. Quoting yourself is not an academic virtue. It means literally nothing. Hyatt does this all the time. He has written books on his pet subjects, butchering US History, Dominionism, and butchering the bible to allow female pastors. Then he pretends to write academic articles, but his sources are himself! At least this time, he sort of cites someone else before referring to his own book. Yet, who is Benjamin Hart? Just another radical right-wing zealot, which you can tell from his defaming of the ACLU. So, it is of little surprise or value, that Hart magically agrees with the dominionist position of Hyatt. The codification in our governing documents however ensures a separation of church state, not a white Christian theocracy as Hyatt always dreams of.

"Understanding this historical context gives understanding to the first clause of the First Amendment, which reads, "Congress shall make no law concerning the establishment of religion nor hindering the free exercise thereof." This was not an embrace of secularism; this was a rejection of the use of governmental force in matters of conscience and faith. The First Amendment was written to keep the government out of the church, not the other way around. This becomes even more obvious when we consider that the day after ratifying this amendment, those same founders proclaimed a National Day of Prayer and Thanksgiving. America was Christian in its origins, but not by political, legislative action or judicial decree. America was Christian in its origins because the nonconforming, Dissenting Protestants stood strong for individual and religious liberty by rejecting the Constantinian concept of a politicized church and insisting on a free church that changes hearts and minds by the preaching of the gospel." - Eddie Hyatt

Bzzt. Thanks for playing Eddie. It is laughable for someone like Eddie Hyatt, a rabid dominionist, to say that he rejects a politicized church. Of course, he does not. He demands a politicized church! It is conducted under the guise of culture wars but Eddie is in the business of picking winners and losers. To the dominionist, there is one political party that must be voted for, always. I was listening to a radio program from Dr. Brown this morning and a caller was pontificating that when he stands before Jesus, he will answer for who he voted for, based on what policies they were advocating for. This is the end result of the false theology of dominionism and the radical NAR. If you honestly think this then you have lost all biblical perspective. If you think Jesus cares one whit about who you voted for then you need to shut off Fox news and leave whatever church is feeding you this nonsense. There is no more righteousness in the Republican Party than in the Democratic Party. People like Greg Locke and Mario Murillo are false teachers leading people to a false Jesus. When Jesus walked the earth, He was completely apolitical. Do not confuse His involvement with the false teachers of His day as political involvement. It was not. Jesus did nothing to even alleviate the oppression Rome was visiting upon His people. His kingdom is NOT of this world.

I will give you a historical example of the sheer lunacy of this theology. In the late 1990's we had the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, and all the same false teachers were lining up to decry the moral bankruptcy of Bill Clinton. All we heard was character counts. The three big politico-religious icons driving this narrative at the time were Newt Gingrich, Bob Livingston and Dennis Hastert. Gingrich was the Speaker of the House and Hastert was the lead prosecutor of the Clinton impeachment. These three could be heard rallying the church against the moral turpitude of the time. And rally did the church. Fast forward ten years and we now know that at that exact time when they were lecturing us on morals, Gingrich as having an affair on his wife with a women half his age, whom he would leave his wife for. Livingston had so many affairs he was forced to resign and Dennis Hastert was a serial child molester of little boys for decades. So, if you think Jesus is going to give you an attaboy for voting for these three, or anyone else for that matter, you simply are reinventing God to suit your own carnal desires. The caller to Dr. Brown was advocating for Trump, the least moral man to ever run for president. He is facing 91 counts across four indictments, not including the fraud case in NY and the conviction for sexual assault. He openly bragged about grabbing women by their genitalia and is married three times, divorced twice and committed infidelity on all of them. The last time, with a porno star. Before you get twisted, this is not an endorsement of the other or any side. It is highlighting the biblical stupidity it takes to adopt the dominionist position.

So, no one is making the argument that freedom of religion was somehow embracing secularism but this absurd talking point dominionists have about it not being meant to keep the church out of government is quite silly and shows how disconnected from reality Hyatt and his ilk are. Sure, you could point to some zealots like John Adams but on the flip side you could point to people vehemently opposed to even state sanctioned days of prayer, such as James Madison. Thomas Jefferson likewise would not have been on Eddie Hyatt's side here and Jefferson embodies why Eddie remains so wildly off. Jefferson was a deist who literally rewrote the bible to remove any reference to the deity of Christ as well as all of His miracles. C'mon. Were there a lot of Christians in the time America was being birthed? Of course. It was the dominant religion of the time, albeit in different factions. But there were plenty of deists like Jefferson and a few atheists sprinkled in for good measure. These folks were not the Pilgrims or the Puritans. Their beef was not religious but rather economic. To claim they wanted the church to run the government is asinine.

"America was Christian in its origins because a Great Awakening (1726-70) had turned the masses to faith in Jesus Christ and impacted every Founding Father, as I document in my book, "1726: The Year that Defined America." This is why John Marshall, America's second Supreme Court chief justice, who served in that capacity for 34 years, from 1801 to 1835, could say,

"No person, I believe, questions the importance of religion in the happiness of man, even during his existence in this world. The American population is entirely Christian, and with us Christianity and religion are identified. It would be strange, indeed, if with such a people, our institutions did not presuppose Christianity, and did not refer to it, and exhibit relations with it" (Hyatt, 169). The Christianity of America's founding generation was organic, rising up from the people who influenced every area of American life. Yes, it is of utmost importance that Christians are socially and politically active and take seriously their responsibility to vote." - Eddie Hyatt

The utmost importance to whom? God? Hardly. One could argue that if God seriously is going to judge a wrong vote as sin, that abstaining from voting would be the best choice since every election is a choice between two sinners, neither of which is saved. Before you get confused about the false concept of "voting for policies" remember that most of what politicians run on never comes to pass. They lie to get elected. Further remember that the NAR will point to one or two wedge issues as being the only thing that matters to God but that is horribly wrong as well. Further impoverishing poor people is probably held in great contempt by God, who spent most of the bible speaking about taking care of the least in society and not give tax breaks for corporations and millionaires. We can play these semantical political games all day but at the end you have to liars asking for your vote so do not be confused. Jesus is not going to be reviewing your voting record. As for John Marshall, Eddie loves to cherry pick individual men in history who may have been particularly religious and extrapolate that person out to everyone. We have been through this before. John Adams? Zealous. Thomas Jefferson? Did not believe in the deity of Jesus Christ.

"However, the path to America becoming a Christian nation once again will not pass through a politician or political party that imposes "Christian" laws and legislation upon the populace. America's founders knew from experience that real Christians cannot be made by political force. There must be a change of hearts. Therefore, America becoming a Christian nation once again will not be the result of a political agenda or the next election. If America becomes Christian again, it will be because of an awakened church that takes seriously its responsibility to be salt and light to this generation and fulfills the conditions of 2 Chronicles 7:14, which reads, "If My people who are called by My name, will humble themselves and pray, and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." - Eddie Hyatt

That is a favorite verse of the dominionists but it overlooks some key facts. It is not a prescriptive verse, meaning God did not write it as direction for America. He wrote it to His theocracy of Israel. The horrible twist Eddie puts on this is to assert that a sinful backslidden church needs only to properly point their accusing finger at the world in order to be "salt and light" and then God will heal their land? No, no, a thousand times no. The sin of the church today is not solved by properly engaging the world in culture wars but rather to stop preaching false gospels. Stop preaching the prosperity heresy. Stop preaching false signs and lying wonders. Stop preaching word faith. Stop preaching greasy grace. Stop preaching dominionism. Even then though, what we should expect is that many more would be saved OUT from this world. The "land" is not going to be healed! Read Thessalonians! God did not promise us a great end times revival but rather a great end times apostasy and it is well underway. It is comical that Hyatt tries here to correctly say that legislation and politics will not achieve his goals when he believes the polar opposite. The underlying premise however remains deeply flawed. America might very well be the greatest experiment in secular government but that does not mean it was ever a "Christian" nation. We were founded in rebellion. We were one of the last to renounce slavery and the lasting stain of those sins continues in racism today. We once had kids working 20 hours a day in sweatshops. We were imperialistic, taking over other countries to take their natural resources. Did we do a lot of good? Sure, but you cannot pretend that we were once this Shangri-La of Christendom and we just need to somehow return to it. That is as false as dominionism. That is as false as the NAR. That is as false as Eddie Hyatt.

Reverend Anthony Wade - January 19, 204

Authors Bio:
Credentialed Minister of the Gospel for the Assemblies of God. Owner and founder of 828 ministries. Vice President for Goodwill Industries. Always remember that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him and are called according to His purpose.