Is The Charge of “Christian Dominionism” a Foil of The Left?

We have seen the charge of Christian Dominionism raised against Christians and Conservative political groups. No doubt there are some Christian leaders who promote the idea of an immediate man-made dominion theology over all the earth. Some would call that a “Theocracy.” I have written about some of them — they are the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR), Emergent Church, Word of Faith movement and many more. In a previous article, our visitor/commenter Glenn brought out that Dominionists are usually post-millennial Christians — or those who believe in a “Kingdom Now” on earth teaching — which is counter to good Bible doctrine.

My point in this short article is this: I believe honest people have falsely accused sincere Conservative Christians and Christian candidates of “Dominionism.” In my research I have also found that Liberal blogs, Liberal “Christians” and politicians are using the Dominionism charge as a “foil” against honest people (Christians and others) — to make them fall back and hesitate to take a position on political candidates for fear of the charge of being or supporting a “Christian Dominionist.” This was the argument against GW Bush’s second term, especially by Liberal Jewish organizations. Their charge was that Bush would install a Christian Theocracy. A Jewish atheist friend wrote and asked me about that. I assured her that the composition of the Bush administration did not resemble any idea of Biblical Theocracy — his friends and appointees came from every religion one can imagine. No chance of a Christian Theocracy from Bush.

I use the verb “Foil” which means to  thwart; impede, hamper, to defeat; check or repulse. That is the purpose of liberals opposing Christian candidates who are pro-life, who stand against abortion, same sex marriage, homosexual indoctrination in schools, etc. In other words these Liberals (posing as Conservatives) oppose Values Candidates with the false charge of “Dominionism”.

Some charge that the Tea Party is an arm of the Christian Dominionist movement. I see that charge on the liberal blogs on the Internet (Huffington Post, Daily Beast, et al) — but I find no indication of that in reality. We see Catholics, Baptists, atheists, Mormons and all shades of “Christians” and non-Christians participating in the Tea Party movement. Tea Party means, “Taxed Enough Already.” Its original purpose was to organize against big government tax-and-spend liberal candidates and support those who believe in true limited Constitutional government and sound values.

In Liberal minds, the charge against a candidate is sufficient to smear, whether or not the facts support the charge. The problem for Christian Conservatives is discerning the truth and then finding and supporting candidates who most closely reflect their own Christian values. There’s nothing wrong with that. Such is NOT “Christian Dominionism.” Don’t be intimidated.

True Bible believing Christians are not looking for a Christian Theocracy/Dominion on this earth but simply a continuing and peaceable environment enabling us to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the lost without restraint — until He returns for His Believers at the Rapture.

We will appreciate your kind comments and opinions.

The Truth of Eternal Life

22 responses to “Is The Charge of “Christian Dominionism” a Foil of The Left?

  1. *** McFFly,

    Thanks for your quotes.. Thomas Friedman, NYT, is a screaming Liberal — and his statement, “WWIII is the war against monotheism.” and then your comment, “Later in the month we learned from him why monotheists in general were so dangerous: our exclusivity translates so easily to violence.”

    That is a trick of the left.. take it one of two ways. Monotheism to American Leftists means Christianity.. while Islamists call Islam monotheistic. They hate Christians as multi-theists (Father, Son and Holy Spirit). Friedman is probably right but while he was thinking of violence from Christians, it is and will probably be Islam soon, as he blindly rants about Christian Conservatives.

    **** Marcee,

    You said, “I pray for our current president, and even though I don’t agree with everything that he is doing, prayer does make a difference.”

    I must say I can find absolutely nothing our current President is doing with which I can agree. His direction is godless Marxism.

    And yes, prayer can make a difference. I do pray that that the Lord will restrain Obama from completely destroying America — that we will continue to have the freedom to share our faith. And I pray daily that someone could get to talk to him about our Savior — with the clear, plain Gospel of salvation in Jesus Christ alone. And after that he would decide to trust Christ as his Savior – and then go on to study God’s Word and be obedient to it. He would then have lots of enemies within his own friends — but lots of friends among Christians.

    **** Pearl,

    I pray y’all will get some of that rain.

    You said: “on the Tea Parties, ’cause I know I’ve seen that dominionist connection, but can’t recall where exactly”

    As I said above, the only place I have found it is through the very Liberal Blogs or mainstream Liberal media (no one I could trust) — hence my postulation that, because it is despicable and unBiblical, Dominionism is being used as a foil to scare some folks from “Christian” candidates.. These folks would probably never accuse the moderate/liberal Romney of Dominionism yet his Mormon religion teaching is the closest to it.

    We love all of your discussions.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  2. But left-vs-right politics, even though there are issues (supposedly) on both sides, is kind of a scam, anyway, because the parties most interested in the outcomes play both sides, infiltrating both sides to bring about their desired end. This is not even new, but it is definitely going on now, so it just is not wise to put confidence in politics.”

    I suspect Firefly and I have read some of the same sources (not to mention his/her inside knowledge), as this has come to be my belief as well. I feel like my purpose in voting is basically an effort to get into office ones that will take the more “liesurely” drive off that eventual cliff.

    McFly 😉 , I hope you are able to find that info on the Tea Parties, ’cause I know I’ve seen that dominionist connection, but can’t recall where exactly (it may have been the Leslies…but I’m not 100% certain).

  3. Thanks, Jack. I see you were talking about Martin Luther KING, not Martin Luther.

    I think it would be difficult to be a Christian politician. Could you imagine the pressure to agree with the masses to pass this and that law or to make a decision that you consciously knew went against what the Bible says?

    I work for a large corporation, which is antiChristian, and they are aligning with the one world order. My workplace is so oppressive. It’s a struggle to get through eight hours of work every day, but God helps me. I’m so exhausted by the end of every week.

    I would think that being president would be very stressful. It would take someone strong and determined, and if we did get a Christian president, I would support him in prayer. I pray for our current president, and even though I don’t agree with everything that he is doing, prayer does make a difference.

  4. I do not have a great grasp of it myself. One candidate this year was someone I used to know and I know that he was a candidate under not-so-good circumstances. I know I have read of connections, but frankly I will have to dig them up, again. The main thing I was trying to say (in the post) is, let’s realize that, no matter how idealistic we want to be about our country, it has been taken over by people with an agenda that is very antichrist. Things are much worse than people realize, and while it is probably not good or even worthwhile to try to alert the people–even if forming a resistance was otherwise good, it has gone too far. Too many Americans have signed on, and besides, the surveillance capabilities today make a resistance impossible to plan in secret. Well, God would have to be with you in that, wouldn’t He? but I don’t think He is. After all, as people always say, yet we keep getting dragged back into it (I know I do), our job is not making this world a better place to go to hell in. Politics, many times, is an outlet for our flesh, and I have sad experience that satan is sitting in wait for an opportunity to use our flesh to discredit the Lord Jesus Christ. In fact, I need to face up to it much more than I have. I just wanted to say that, especially since we have nothing really to gain, we need to back off from politics. You know, ten years ago, Thomas Friedman of the NYT had already told the world that “WWIII is the war against monotheism.” Later in the month we learned from him why monotheists in general were so dangerous: our exclusivity translates so easily to violence. We just seem to be such a slippery slope, so dangerously intolerant by virtue of our exclusivity that we might do just about anything so the world must not tolerate us any longer. Soon, in editorials, and in opinions by government-sponsored academics, we were told that anyone who believed in something enough to be willing to die for it was a potential suicide bomber; the willingness to die (even rather than be forced to give up our Lord) was equated with the willingness to kill. And this may have quieted a little, but it really hadn’t gotten better. Right now there are similar propaganda efforts in various places, from various elites. We need to be realistic, because to be drawn into some political action may be lending ourselves and the name of Jesus to a smear that “proves” how much we need to be suppressed and how right they are to hate Him. For instance, the Constitution guarantees the right to form a militia to protect our freedoms, but if you join one today, is it going to even be effective? It will be most effective at proving that Christians are dangerous enemies of everything good, that we and our intolerable message of salvation (and the judgment of God that everyone must face that makes the gospel good news) must be put to an end–“this violent ethos” as Karen Armstrong put it. I really didn’t come here to talk about politics; I am just saying that we need to be wise about them and the time and freedom we have, and not use them unwisely or play into the hands of agent provocateurs who will use our involvement unwisely to vilify Jesus. I will try to dig up the particulars about the TEA Party that I read, though.

    See, if we decide all moral and spiritual issues by the word of God, looking to be in the center of God’s will, we cannot go wrong. But left-vs-right politics, even though there are issues (supposedly) on both sides, is kind of a scam, anyway, because the parties most interested in the outcomes play both sides, infiltrating both sides to bring about their desired end. This is not even new, but it is definitely going on now, so it just is not wise to put confidence in politics. Sorry.

  5. Dear McFF:

    I largely agree with much of your assessment regarding Christians and the political realm. But I’m still not giving up on the few isolated Christian voices out there, like Mike Huckabee. I believe that Christians should be involved in almost every profession, even the entertainment industry. How else will those fields be influenced by the “salt” of the Christian faith. But I do agree with you and Jack that in certain professions it would be very very difficult to remain steadfast for the Lord. Still, I hope that some good people try . . .

  6. McFFly.

    Leslie’s article was interesting and probably a reasonably fair catalog on Dominionism.. But she never mentions the Tea Party.. And the Discernment-Ministry web site’s statements on salvation, etc are less than accurate.. So I would beware.

    I am not sure where the ad hominem attacks against the Tea Party originate, except in the Liberal media and blogs mentioned above. I am no Tea Party member but I see no Christian dominionism exhibited therein. But since I really don’t follow the Tea Party, I may not have your grasp of where they stand.

    McFFly, please itemize for us those Tea Party folks or organizations who advocate Christian Dominionism.

    I would suppose some folks would accuse me of Christian Dominionism for my 9/11 graphic on the side-bar and for writing about the “religions” of various candidates, etc.

    I agree with you that Christian Constitutionalists are rare in DC but I still pray that some would emerge. However, that would not make me or them Christian Dominionists.

    I know that to be a true Christian and a politician is nigh impossible.. because I trusted Christ as my Savior in the middle of a political career (1964) and then went on to run for State Legislature (1966) (lost) but was appointed by the Republican Governor to a 5 man commission regulating one industry statewide. That experience was miserable.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  7. Marcee,

    I don’t think I’ve written extensively about Luther.. I may have made comments here and there but no articles.. that I know of.

    You could go to the search bar and type in Luther — and that may help as you scan the articles.. but you will also run across “Martin LUTHER King.”

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  8. Rush Limbaugh openly speaks out against the Tea Party movement, and today, he was in a huff because the Tea Partiers are trying to pressure him to join their ranks. He refuses.

    McFirefly, thanks for that link to Sarah Leslie’s website. I used to be involved in dominionism through the Latter Rain cult. I had no idea that I was in a cult or that the things they did in that cult were unbiblical. It wasn’t until after I got out that I realized what was really going on and that these things were dangerous to be involved with. The people in the group did spiritual warfare and were very in tuned to what the devil was doing. I finally recognized that they were serving the devil and that they were trying to fight against him with this so called “spiritual warfare.” There were intercessors, who wore themselves out physically and emotionally doing the warfare. How can you serve the devil and fight against him? It makes no sense to me! That’s just how deceptive cults are. People claim to be Christians and teach you unbiblical things.

    Jack, I’d like to read what you wrote about Martin Luther. As an exLutheran, who recently realized the heresy in Luther’s Small Cathecism, I’d be interested to see what you had to say. I’ll search for it, or would you please provide a link to it? Thanks!

  9. The ironic and troubling thing is that we are supposed to be about truth and not lie, yet there is little point of just getting everyone to see how bad things really are. For one thing, the illusion that this country is still about freedom actually buys freedoms some time. To alarm everyone that freedom is gone would probably mean martial law sooner rather than later. So both truth, when it will do some good, and cautious discretion and wisdom are also necessary.

  10. I believe that sincere voters have been falsely accused, perhaps, but I think that for the people in power for the last several decades, Dominionism is an accurate picture, except that it, too, is subterfuge for bringing religion together as one and under the state. I have had the displeasure of having such people breathing down my neck for the past several decades, and from what I have seen, Sarah Leslie’s article seems likely to be accurate. And it is not “the liberals,” either, because there is barely a true liberal or a true conservative left in any political party and certainly none in office.

    The irony of Christians in politics is that, for some time, if you weren’t willing to be a liar, you wouldn’t have lasted a day in office and probably would have been weeded out of the running before your campaign got off to much of a start. The great religious leaders of the Religious Right declared that “we” were going to elect godly candidates to office and save America. But God must not have been with that program because He never sent any Godly candidates to run! He must not have wanted to waste something as rare as a Godly man on a lost cause. I believe that the RR were false prophets and didn’t speak for God, although they declared at least weekly that their movement was “what God is doing now.” The RR and Teaparty are tied in to Dominionism, as are positive confession people like Crouch/TBN, through Latter Rain, which also connects to the Emergent Church and the New Age! So it is truly left AND right, and very ominous. I truly believe that Constitutional government is on its way out, but this process has been going on a long time before our president took office. Constitutional government was a noble thing but I do not believe that it is reclaimable.
    Here is Leslie’s article,
    [link removed by administration]
    Of course she does not accuse _believing_ Christians of imperialism. Another benefit to satan in identifying the cause of Christ with Dominionism is, the better to “prove” that we are indeed dangerous, since we are all so power-hungry and trying to grab power. This is one more reason to back off from politics, which cannot bring about righteousness, even one person believing the gospel, anyway.

  11. Dear friends,

    Without intending to break the great flow of thoughts on this article (keep them up), but just for our friends who may not be blog subscribers, I have just posted a new article on some disturbing news from the UK about human Eugenics which might disturb you. Visit:
    http://www.expreacherman.wordpress.com/2011/09/08/is-orwells-1984-idea-of-eugenics-just-a-step-away-where-should-christians-stand/

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  12. Jan,

    Some great observations. I likewise appreciate the Tea Party.. yet I would not give them a blanket endorsement because they have sworn off of any social issues — which may be expedient but I think such issues are important. Yet if the Tea Party took up that banner, the Left would have all the more reason to lay the false charge of Dominionism.
    Having been a very active politician before I trusted Christ as my Savior, I know first hand that “Politics is rotten” in all sorts of ways. Conservatives were media targets back in the early 60s – I was a victim. Now, not only is the MSM radically liberal, but the Liberal Blogs get tremendous attention (thus advertising) through the MSM. They have a Mutual Admiration Society that will sink our Republic unless folks wake up..

    Thanks for those thoughts.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  13. I think this kind of thing is especially difficult with politics and politicians. Particularly when it is all happening in real time.

    As for the TEA party, I think it is probably true that there are Dominionists in the group and there have been any number of attempts to co opt it. I even remember seeing a video of Alex Jones disrupting a TEA party once. And the Lyndon Larouche sorts tried that early on too but they were put down fast.

    The TEA party people maintain that they are just a bunch of Americans fed up with the utter incompetence of our government and their tax and spend programs that never do any good. It seems to have started with the now famous Rick Santelli rant, and then someone named Amy Cramer (sp?) picked up on it and organized the first rally, and it turned out there was a lot of dry tinder for that spark to ignite nationwide. And so the movement happened. They are independents, Republicans, and disenfranchised Democrats and have labored to not fit into any particular mold no matter how hard the left tries to cram them into one (and the less appealing the mold the better. There is now a game called “TEA Party Zombies.” Oh brother.) Because the movement is comprised of so many people from so many different backgrounds, they have also had as one of their early views the determination not to get involved in the social issues. They don’t want to be aligned with the Republicans, per se, though in general the Republican platform is supposedly similar, fiscally. Therefore they tend to get Repub speakers (when they have politicians speak) and give their approval to Repub candidates. But they say they would also give approval to a Dem should he/she be about the same things the TEA party is about. Not sure how they could stay a DEM that way, though. Maybe socially, but not fiscally.

    In my state, for 2010 we had a TEA party candidate on the ballot as a Repub for Congress. She didn’t win against the entrenched Dem who will be in Congress until he dies because of the way the districts are divided. He has a hefty number of urban people who strongly tend to vote Dem in our already liberal state. The TEA party candidate did really well and looked like she was going to win until one particular area’s votes were counted. This congressman has that area in his back pocket and will therefore always win. It really stinks as she was so much better grounded. She is the mayor of an area town that does very well for itself. It’s a great town and I think she would have been a good addition to congress. But nope.

    Anyway, I think that’s pretty much what the TEA party is trying to be about. I like the TEA party and have really been liking what Sarah Palin has been saying at their rallies lately. I love that she tells it like it is. She is skewering everybody that needs to be skewered. Not just Obama and the Dems, but the “permanent political class” as a whole and the horrendous media, who more than deserve it.

    JanH

  14. Russ,

    Great point and the more I research the Dominionism phenomena the more I would agree.. Liberals find every way possible to condemn Christians and Conservatives and a mere accusation is to them sufficient.

    Marcella,

    No problem.. you brought the conversation to the forefront and, no doubt, it needed exploring — so we did. I have found over time that it is possible to find an Internet web site to support just about any and every position around so we do need discernment. And as Bruce said, things political will get dirtier and dirtier.. The Left will obfuscate by creating web sites that look on the surface Conservative or Christian but will make sly but unfounded charges against those very people. Good discernment is the answer.

    Pearl,

    Yes, persuasive is not necessarily accuracy. I was fooled earlier in my blogging ministry while writing about the extreme leftward bent of Martin Luther King. My sources were personal knowledge, real sources and quotes about and from him. But my friend Richard wrote and warned me that one of my sources was a white supremacy, skin-head group. Of course I deleted that reference immediately and thanked Richard. But it takes time and reflection yet we can all still make mistakes. That is why I appreciate these discussions..we are all enlightened.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  15. What is most interesting about this is that Christian Dominionism is real, but it doesn’t come from the conservatives. It actually comes from the liberals –I don’t know what else you can call liberal Christians who say the State should take money from person A and give it to person B in order to “fulfill the duties of a Christian nation.” Isn’t that using the government to try and bring about what someone considers to be a “perfect Christian society?” In other words, isn’t this just projection?

    Just a thought… 🙂 Russ

  16. Jack, I read things on the internet and would not begin to know where the source of my statements came from. Forgive me if I stepped on toes, accused people of being something they are not, and wrongfully said things to offend. I do know that reading too much on the internet can cause confusion, anxiety and doubt, so I am cautious what I read, and if anything alarms me or sends up a red flag, I stop reading.

  17. Jack, Jan, Pearl and all:

    Great information all!

    Jan, you got the Biblical position just right when you said,

    “Anyone who looks to politicians to bring about the kind of moral change we want in this country is in for a rude shock. It simply will not happen. Even if said politician wanted to, assuming such a person could get elected in the first place, it would not happen. That is reserved for Christ when He comes in His kingdom to rule over all the earth from David’s throne in Jerusalem, Israel at the crying out of that nation for their Messiah.”

    Tagging onto what Jack said, and I believe that Dick Morris also said something along these lines:

    Look for the 2012 presidential election to go down in history as the nastiest campaign ever run by the Democrats. We’re already getting a taste of this as the liberal media is trying to attack and corner the Republican primary candidates. But expect things to be ratcheted up about a hundred notches when the Republicans finally chose their candidate.

  18. No, I don’t think Perry (or any of the candidates for that matter) is Dominionist, and perhaps not even a true believer. God knows. I think it’s the same ol’ song: conservative politicians aligning themselves with the religious right. They’ll say anything to get elected.

    As for the publications (in my case, ministries), I know they are very persuasive, but accurate? It would take a dedicated fact checker to verify that, and quite honestly, I’m not the one. I’ve often been misled and had to backtrack many times; if that applies here, I just don’t know. I read; I think; I watch and I pray for discernment.

  19. Pearl,

    That is interesting as I have never read a publication that I respect who condemns a Christian Values Candidates as being a “Christian Dominionist.”

    I did post an earlier article on Presidential candidates 2012 in which I was critical of Perry for surrounding himself in his Response prayer meeting with many who profess Dominionism.. But does that make him a Dominionist??? Or his advisers who planned the program? Frankly, I don’t know.

    When the Left finds a foil which they can use to beat up on Christian Values candidates or voters, I am wary of their personal accusations unless it can be proven by reliable real Conservative Christian secondary sources. I never believe anything in the Huffington Post, the NYT or the Daily Beast. They have an Marxist agenda and his name is Barack Hussein Obama.

    In Jesus Christ eternally, Jack

  20. Jan,

    Thanks, that was an interesting article about Johnathan Goforth, Presbyterian evangelist in China, etc. I am always curious why a Presbyterian (Calvinist no doubt) would evangelize anywhere to the multitudes who were already “predestined” (by their doctrine) to either Heaven or hell.. It was answered in Flanders article that “Jonathan Goforth stood firmly as an outright fundamentalist.” I suppose he abandoned the “chosen and elect” doctrine of his church.

    In Jesus Christ eternally,Jack

  21. Sounds like good, common sense to me, Jack & Jan.

    Like Marcella, I have read more than a few articles documenting the dominionist agenda in conservative politics. I also recall reading one on the tea parties as well (can’t recall the source off hand), but it did leave a bad taste in my mouth. I have not been offended enough, however, to ever refrain from voting for the candidates (local, state and national) best suited to keep our constitutional freedoms somewhat intact. For me, it boils down to choosing the lesser evils, and not to expect much – it’s going global, after all.

  22. The last political party I was aware of that has the intention of making America a theocracy is, ironically enough, the Constitution Party. I say “ironically” because they want to replace the Constitution with the Mosaic Law. One step at a time I guess. Not going to happen, though. But one of the major players in that group was Doug Philips, a Dominionist Reconstructionist (I think he is a Reconstructionist. He is definitely a Dominionist of a Reformed variety).

    The NAR seem to like to hook up with candidates they think are going to bring about whatever it is they are prophesying about at the time.

    Anyone who looks to politicians to bring about the kind of moral change we want in this country is in for a rude shock. It simply will not happen. Even if said politician wanted to, assuming such a person could get elected in the first place, it would not happen. That is reserved for Christ when He comes in His kingdom to rule over all the earth from David’s throne in Jerusalem, Israel at the crying out of that nation for their Messiah.

    I read a good article by Rick Flanders on Christian involvement in political/social issues at John Van Gelderen’s site in the 2008 issue of their Revival Magazine on page 16:

    http://0101.nccdn.net/1_5/0bd/30d/1b8/Revival_202008_20Issue_202.pdf

    When Christians are distracted from the work of saving sinners by the lure of a moral crusade or political cause, the revival soon dies.

    A moral and political crusade distracted those involved in the revival cause from the things that produce revival: prayer, holy living, evangelism, and the power of the Holy Spirit.

    I think the reason for this is because this kind of over arching moral improvement is not what God is doing today. He is saving individuals, not bringing the kingdom into societies.

    If we insist on a President who is going to try to “Christianize” this country, we are in deep trouble. We need to insist on a President who will make it his/her business to return our nation to its Constitutional moorings so that we can live in peace and freedom and the gospel can flow freely.

    JanH

We appreciate you. Please leave a reply & subscribe to our Web site and comments using check boxes below,

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s