dougwilsonsays.com

Contending for the Faith in Moscow, Idaho

Doug Wilson Says ‘The Great Commission’ ‘Means Christian Nationalism Everywhere’

| Opinion by Nathan Wells

The Great Commission Means Christian Nationalism Everywhere

“The direction was set for us in the Great Commission, which requires us to disciple all the nations—which means Christian nationalism everywhere. We are under orders.”1 — Doug Wilson

“Our assigned task, remember, is to disciple all the nations, teaching them obedience to Christ (Matt. 28:18-20). That is the assigned mission, so what shall we call it when the staging platform of that mission is accomplished? I am proposing mere Christendom.”2 — Doug Wilson

“There is no way to preach the gospel clearly to an American without also preaching what America needs. And if you are not preaching what America needs, what you are declaring ain’t gonna save nobody in particular.”3 — Doug Wilson

OPINION: Conflating the Great Commission with Christian Nationalism is biblically indefensible and risks leading people away from Christ and toward a counterfeit Christianity. It stands as yet another example of Doug Wilson’s mishandling of Scripture—distorting the clear commands of God and obscuring the gospel message (see more examples here).

How does Doug get there?4 It begins with an errant interpretation of the Great Commission in Matthew 28:18–20, turning a call to make disciples of all peoples into a mandate to Christianize nation-states.

“And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age’” (Matthew 28:18–20, NASB95).

Doug reads “make disciples of all nations” and concludes that Jesus commissioned us to disciple nation-states5—a move that reframes a call to make disciples of all peoples into a political project of establishing
“mere Christendom.”6 Such an interpretation collapses under the lexical, grammatical, contextual, and historical evidence of Scripture, as well as the witness of the church.7 The Greek phrase for “make disciples of all nations” is μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη with ἔθνη (“nations”) meaning “a body of persons united by kinship, culture, and common traditions, nation, people.”8 The word does not have modern political connotations as we might assume when we read the word “nation” but rather, “There is no emphasis on the particular marks or bases of fellowship or relationship, on political or cultural connections.”9 The emphasis in this context lies in the worldwide reach of the command—to bring the message to all peoples,10 in contrast to Jesus’s earlier prohibition against ministering to the Gentiles in Matthew 10:5. This is further confirmed by the grammar of the passage: The pronouns attached to “baptizing” and “teaching” are masculine personal pronouns (“them”/αὐτοὺς), pointing to individual persons within the nations. If the command had been directed to the nations as collective entities, we would expect neuter plural pronouns (αὐτά) to correspond with the neuter noun ἔθνη used for “nations.” The choice of masculine pronouns makes it clear that Jesus is speaking about discipling individuals from all nations, not nation-states as corporate wholes.11

But you don’t need to know Greek to see that Jesus was not commissioning his disciples to politically Christianize nations. The parallel account in Acts makes this plain: “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8, ESV). The mission is outward and expansive—bringing the gospel to all peoples—but never framed in terms of baptizing governments or establishing Christian nation-states. The authority of Christ and the power of the Spirit work together toward a single goal—Christ followers bearing witness of Jesus among the nations. When Jesus declared, “all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me,” he was not delegating political power to his church or commissioning his disciples to establish Christianized governments.12 Rather, he was affirming his universal lordship as the foundation of their mission and the guarantee of his presence through the Spirit.13 The command to be witnesses reveals the personal and spiritual nature of the task, for you cannot witness to governments or systems because they are impersonal.14 Christ’s kingdom advances through gospel proclamation throughout the whole world, not legislation—through hearts made new, not nations made “Christian.”15

The apostles confirmed this point in their method of carrying out this commission. Their pattern was consistent: city by city, synagogue by synagogue, marketplace by marketplace, house by house, proclaiming Christ to Jews and Gentiles alike, in the power of the Spirit (Acts 4:8, 5:42, 13:9–10, 52). When Philip was sent to the Ethiopian eunuch, his message was centered entirely on the gospel of Jesus Christ, not instructions on forming a Christian regime in Ethiopia (Acts 8:26–40). Even when Paul stood before King Agrippa, he did not maneuver for political power or try to convince his audience they needed a Christianized government structure, but rather, he used his defense to point his audience to Jesus. So persuasively, in fact, that Agrippa exclaimed, “‘In a short time you will persuade me to become a Christian.’ And Paul said, ‘I would wish to God, that whether in a short or long time, not only you, but also all who hear me this day, might become such as I am, except for these chains’” (Acts 26:28–29, NASB95).16 The pattern was to proclaim the message of the gospel, “and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” (Acts 13:48, NASB95). When people came to Christ in a city, the apostles’ concern was the establishment of local church bodies for ongoing discipleship and evangelism—not strategies for cultural reform or political influence (Acts 11:19–26, 14:21–23, 18:9–11, 20:28–32; Titus 1:5).

Peter’s statement that believers are a “chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation” (1 Peter 2:9, ESV) would make absolutely no sense if our Lord commissioned us to disciple nation-states and make the Christianizing of multiple political nations our goal, especially in the context of his exhortation immediately following where he refers to believers as “foreigners and exiles” (1 Peter 2:11, NET). Doug’s interpretation throws out the entire exile motif of Scripture and replaces it with a triumphalist vision of cultural conquest—a project I believe Peter would have recognized as a denial of his own words.17 Our calling is to summon sinners into the existing kingdom of God (Luke 17:21; Acts 19:8; Ephesians 2:19), not to raise up rival earthly kingdoms. The people of God are not marked by political boundaries but by their faith in Christ alone. For “He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son” (Colossians 1:13, ESV).

John’s warning echoes Peter’s theme: “Do not love the world or the things in the world . . . . the world is passing away along with its desires” (1 John 2:15a, 17a, ESV). This includes every human inaugurated nation-state (Daniel 2:44; 1 Corinthians 15:24–25; Revelation 21:1–4). Yet Doug ignores this call and advocates the establishment of what Scripture says cannot stand—an “empire of dirt”18 that the eternal kingdom of God will one day “break in pieces” (Daniel 2:37–45, ESV).

Paul grieves with tears over those who live as “enemies of the cross of Christ” and one of their characteristics is that their minds are set “on earthly things” (Philippians 3:18–19, ESV) as contrasted with the truth: “But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself” (Philippians 3:20–21, ESV).

When the Great Commission finally reaches its fulfillment, Scripture describes the result, not as baptized nation-states,19 but as redeemed individuals from every corner of the globe: “After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb” (Revelation 7:9, NASB95). It is not complete nation-states that appear before the throne, but people—individuals from every nation, tribe, people, and language.20

The biblical witness is confirmed by history, which testifies that whenever Christians seek to meld the gospel with political power or even political goals, the gospel ends up being distorted.21 From Constantine22 to the Crusades,23 from the imprisonment of John Bunyan by a “Christian” king24 to Baptist preachers beaten and jailed in colonial Virginia by the state-established Anglican Church,25 all bear witness of the truth of God’s Word, that our mission is not to seek to create kingdoms here on earth but rather we are to “above all pursue his kingdom and righteousness” (Matthew 6:33, NET).

Scripture never promises political triumph in this age but rather persecution: “Indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Timothy 3:12, NASB95). Jesus warned that his followers would be hated by all nations because of his name (Matthew 24:9) and that “If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you” (John 15:20, ESV). The kingdom of Christ advances by the way of the cross, not by the sword or the grasping of earthly crowns. For as Jesus said, “My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my servants would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish authorities. But as it is, my kingdom is not from here” (John 18:36, NET).26 We are not to build a kingdom that reaches heaven (Genesis 11:4–9). We “await a savior” returning from heaven, “the Lord Jesus Christ” (Philippians 3:20) and we await “the new Jerusalem—descending out of heaven from God” (Revelation 21:2, NET).

When we confuse the spiritual task with a political agenda, we end up serving a different master: “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other” (Matthew 6:24, NASB95). Are we to give in to the temptation that Jesus resisted? “Again, the devil took Him to a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory; and he said to Him, ‘All these things I will give You, if You fall down and worship me.’ Then Jesus said to him, ‘Go, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.’’” (Matthew 4:8–10, NASB95). To seek political dominion, even in the name of Christ, is antithetical to the mission we have been given.

Doug gives lip-service to the gospel—saying things like a Christian culture or society “. . . is only possible when the gospel of Jesus Christ has been proclaimed in power, and men have received it and have been brought into the fellowship of the Father through the blood of Jesus.”27 Yet this apparent confession is undermined by his gospel distortion elsewhere: “There is no way to preach the gospel clearly to an American without also preaching what America needs. And if you are not preaching what America needs, what you are declaring ain’t gonna save nobody in particular.”28 In effect, Doug ties the power of the gospel to a message of national renewal—suggesting that the pure gospel is not enough.

Doug exchanges the message that is “the power of God for salvation” (​​Romans 1:16, NASB95) for a political vision of what he thinks America “needs.”29 And what America needs, apparently, is new tax laws,30 new zoning codes,31 free markets,32 the abolishment of the IRS, EPA, and Department of Education33—and even the repeal of the 19th Amendment.34 But to tie the gospel to the supposed political renewal of a nation is to preach a different gospel altogether. Paul’s warning to the Galatians could not be more direct: “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— not that there is another one . . . . If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:6–9, ESV). Such a redefined gospel—one shaped by national identity—is not found in Scripture. The gospel breaks down the walls of national and ethnic identity, “There is neither Jew nor Greek . . . for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28, NASB95). The message the apostles proclaimed was consistent everywhere: “we preach Christ crucified . . . . For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.” (1 Corinthians 1:23; 2:2 NASB95). The apostles did not call for the establishment of Christian nation-states but for repentance and faith in Christ. Doug’s error leads him to focus not on evangelism and discipleship, but on winning the “cultural war,”35 and a return to what he deems to be “Christian America 2.0.”36 By doing so, I believe he is cast among those Paul warned Timothy about: “holding to a form of godliness . . . they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these” (2 Timothy 3:5, NASB95).

By denying the power of the gospel in practice and focusing on external cultural reform, I believe Doug has actually created a seeker-sensitive movement, based on fear of the world. Fear of the world influencing our children. Fear of government overreach. Fear of losing elections. Fear of public schools. Fear of persecution. Fear of being the minority. What Doug describes as conquest,37 in practice, looks more like retreat—forming self-contained Christian subcultures like his community here in Moscow, Idaho.38 Their “takeover” is not sustainable as it is imported, rather than multiplied. Yes, you can attract a few thousand people to a town and change a blue vote to a red vote.39 You can even seek political influence at the highest level of government in your nation.40 But is that our mission?

No! Jesus did not call us to retreat into enclaves out of fear. We have been commanded by the Lord of Hosts to: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations” (Matthew 28:19–20, NASB95). We are salt and light (Matthew 5:13–16), and faithful discipleship will inevitably impact families, communities, and cultures—both in times where the Spirit moves and many are brought to faith in Christ, but also in times when persecution breaks out on familial, communal, or national levels. Paul wrote to the church in Corinth imploring them not to retreat from the people of this world (1 Corinthians 5:9-10). We have been entrusted with “the ministry of reconciliation,” as “ambassadors for Christ” (2 Corinthians 5:18–21, NET). We are to pray for those in authority (1 Timothy 2:1–2), submit and obey when doing so is not sin (Romans 13:1–7; 1 Peter 2:13–17), and honor those in authority even when persecuted. We are to rejoice and entrust our souls to God as we continue to do good (Matthew 5:11–12; 1 Peter 2:13–17, 4:16–19).

But I do not believe Scripture teaches us to make our end goal some sort of “Christianized” culture or government.41 Jesus said, “the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it” (Matthew 7:13–14, NASB95).

While there are periods of revival, such movements, when genuine, are always the work of God’s Spirit through the preaching of the gospel, not the result of political power or cultural control. In fact, at times the cultural result is backlash, resulting in persecution. This is seen clearly in the gospel impact in Ephesus, when new believers burned their magic books (Acts 19:17–19), resulting in a riot (Acts 19:23–34). But there were no strategy meetings in Ephesus to see how they could “make it a Christian town”42 but rather: “After the disturbance had ended, Paul sent for the disciples, and after encouraging them and saying farewell, he left to go to Macedonia” (Acts 20:1, NET).

In the same way, Christians today may rightly work for justice, integrity, and reform in the public square—but that is the fruit of discipleship, not its goal. If a politician is a believer, their calling is not to legislate faith or to declare the nation “Christian,” any more than a Christian business owner must label their company “Christian” to be faithful to Christ. Such declarations save no one. Yet in every vocation, believers are called to do all things for the glory of God, as unto Christ (Colossians 3:17, 23). Salvation does not come through constitutions, courts, or cultural dominance, but through faith in Christ alone (Romans 10:8–17). Our mission, then, is not to build Christendom, but to bear witness to Christ—to make disciples of all nations through the gospel that alone is “the power of God for salvation” (Romans 1:16, NASB95). The church is never called to create “mere Christendom.” Instead, as Paul writes, “We proclaim him by instructing and teaching all people with all wisdom so that we may present every person mature in Christ” (Colossians 1:28, NET).

My prayer is that Doug would repent of his unbiblical melding of nation-building with the gospel and return to the simplicity and power of Christ crucified. I pray he would lay aside the pursuit of the establishment of political kingdoms that cannot last, and instead devote himself to the eternal kingdom that is not from this world. May he rediscover the mission our Lord entrusted to us—to proclaim Christ, to make disciples of all peoples, baptizing them and teaching them to obey everything he has commanded.

Want More Context?

https://mereorthodoxy.com/the-new-christian-nationalism

https://www.9marks.org/article/say-no-to-christian-nationalism/

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/postmillennialism-a-biblical-critique/

https://theaquilareport.com/postmillennialism-a-reply-to-doug-wilson/

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/reviews/christian-nationalism-wolfe/

https://shenviapologetics.com/of-gods-and-men-a-long-review-of-wolfes-case-for-christian-nationalism-part-i-book-summary/

https://www.9marks.org/article/a-baptist-engagement-with-the-case-for-christian-nationalism/

https://www.9marks.org/article/a-new-christian-authoritarianism/

Footnotes

Footnotes

  1. https://web.archive.org/web/20240225015015/https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/bird-and-owl.html Also From the Federal Vision Statement (https://dougwilsonsays.com/blog/still-affirm-federal-vision/) that Doug signed and affirms: “The fulfillment of the Great Commission . . . requires the establishment of a global Christendom” (https://web.archive.org/web/20110710233937/http://federal-vision.com/resources/joint_FV_Statement.pdf). ↩

  2. https://web.archive.org/web/20250608212539/https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/mere-christendom.html Doug connects his “mere Christendom” with Christian Nationalism in this way: “Mere Christendom is not Christian nationalism. Mere Christendom is the sum total of lots of smaller Christian nationalisms” (Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023, p. 92, Kindle Edition). ↩

  3. Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023, p. 15, Kindle Edition. ↩

  4. Doug has also stated that he’s been influenced by R. J. Rushdoony (Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023, pp. 142, 148–149, 164, Kindle Edition). For an overview of Rushdoony’s theonomy and and Christian Reconstructionism: https://web.archive.org/web/20240517102426/https://ca.thegospelcoalition.org/columns/detrinitate/r-j-rushdoony-a-patriarch-for-modern-theonomy/ and https://www.9marks.org/article/reconstruction-theonomy-vs-general-equity-theonomy/ Doug has also stated he was influenced by Gary North (https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/plodcast-538833/episodes/236-the-influence-of-gary-nort-134761697). For an overview of Gary North’s theology: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1122&context=pretrib_arch and https://web.archive.org/web/20250419142920/https://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=69 ↩

  5. “Jesus tells His apostles to disciple the nations. I have noted that the direct object of that verb is the ethne, plural of ethnos—the people, the tribe, the whole unit . . . . I accept the fact that preaching to, baptizing, and teaching individuals is foundational. No getting away from it, no getting around it. But it is basic to the New Testament approach to this that there are no excepted individuals” (Douglas Wilson, Empires of Dirt: Secularism, Radical Islam, and the Mere Christendom Alternative, Canon Press, 2016, p. 95, Kindle Edition). “There is also the question of what the lordship of Christ means, exactly. In my view, it means discipling the nations, baptizing them, and teaching them to obey everything Jesus commanded” (Ibid. p. 125). “I want to live in a baptized civilization. That is what I mean by mere Christendom” (Ibid. p. 143). “Look at the Great Commission again. We are to disciple the nations” (https://web.archive.org/web/20250608212539/https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/mere-christendom.html). ↩

  6. The title of one of Doug’s books and the name he gave his vision for the world (Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023). ↩

  7. The historical witness of the church is overwhelmingly against Doug Wilson’s interpretation (even among those who advocated for the state to wield the sword against heretics), because a plain reading of the text does not allow one to arrive at this interpretation. Here are a few examples: John Chrysostom (https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240180.htm#:~:text=He%20now%20shows%2C%20that%20what%20belongs%20to%20the%20preaching,He%20shows%20that%20the%20Father%20also%20wills%20this), Augustine of Hippo (https://www.earlychristiancommentary.com/FathersScripIndex/texts.php?id=40028020#:~:text=I%20will%20not%20receive%20sacrifice%20from%20your%20hands%3B%20for%20from%20the%20rising%20sun%20unto%20the%20setting%20my%20Name%20hath%20been%20made%20famous%20among%20all%20the%20nations%2C%20saith%20the%20Lord%20Almighty%3A%20and%20in%20every%20place%20they%20offer%20clean%20sacrifices%20to%20my%20Name.%22%20Again%2C%20in%20the%20Psalms%2C%20David%20says%3A%20%22Bring%20to%20God%2C%20ye%20countries%20of%20the%20nations%22), Jerome (https://www.ecatholic2000.com/catena/untitled-17.shtml#:~:text=JEROME.%20This%20passage%20does%20not%20contradict%20the%20command%20which%20He%20gave%20afterwards,who%20sent%20the%20Apostles%20to%20the%20Gentiles%20and%20Samaritans), John Calvin (https://ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom33/calcom33.ii.li.html#:~:text=Teach%20all%20nations.%20Here%20Christ%2C%20by%20removing%20the%20distinction%2C%20makes%20the%20Gentiles%20equal%20to%20the%20Jews%2C%20and%20admits%20both%2C%20indiscriminately%20to%20a%20participation%20in%20the%20covenant.%20Such%20is%20also%20the%20import%20of%20the%20term%3A%20go%20out%3B%20for%20the%20prophets%20under%20the%20law%20had%20limits%20assigned%20to%20them%2C%20but%20). ↩

  8. William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, University of Chicago Press, 2000, p. 276. ↩

  9. Georg Bertram and Karl Ludwig Schmidt, “Ἔθνος, Ἐθνικός,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, Eerdmans, 1964–, p. 364. Spelling modernized. ↩

  10. Lee, Kukzin, & Viljoen, Francois P.. (2010). The target group of the Ultimate Commission (Matthew 28:19). HTS Theological Studies, 66(1), 1–5. Retrieved October 01, 2025, from http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0259-94222010000100002&lng=en&tlng=en. “The phrase panta ta ethnē, ‘all the nations,’ has occurred already in 24:9, 14; 25:32, to denote the area of the disciples’ future activity, the scope of the proclamation of the ‘good news of the kingdom,’ and the extent of the jurisdiction of the enthroned Son of Man . . . Some have . . . suggested that Matthew has reached the point of giving up on the Jewish mission and urging the church to go instead to ‘all the Gentiles.’ But nothing in the text indicates that . . . The commission is of course to go far beyond Israel, but that does not require that Israel be excluded” (R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007, pp. 1114–1115). ↩

  11. “The reference to ‘all nations’ here, of course, cannot be understood as the collective conversion of national groups (in which case αὐτά, the neuter plural pronoun, would be expected rather than αὐτούς, ‘them’ [masculine], as in our text” (Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 14–28, vol. 33B, Word Biblical Commentary, Word, Incorporated, 1995, p. 887). As Jeremy Sexton notes: “The same construction occurs in Acts 8:40, where the direct object ‘all the cities’ (τὰς πόλεις πάσας) follows the verb ‘he preached the gospel to’ (εὐηγγελίζετο) in the clause ‘he preached the gospel to all the cities.’ Luke does not mean that Philip preached to the majority of citizens in each city during the course of his stay there. ‘Preached the gospel to all the cities’ does not imply citywide comprehensiveness; it simply describes preaching to people in all the cities (AV: ‘he preached in all the cities’). Likewise, ‘disciple all the nations’ does not imply nationwide comprehensiveness; it simply describes discipling people in or from all the nations” (https://web.archive.org/web/20250823194739/https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/postmillennialism-a-biblical-critique/). ↩

  12. (Douglas Wilson, Empires of Dirt: Secularism, Radical Islam, and the Mere Christendom Alternative, Canon Press, 2016, p. 122, Kindle Edition). ↩

  13. As Craig Blomberg notes: “Because of this authority, Jesus has the right to issue his followers their ‘marching orders,’ but he also has the ability to help them carry out those orders” (Craig Blomberg, Matthew, vol. 22, The New American Commentary, Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992, p. 431). ↩

  14. As Hermann Strathmann observes: “But witness cannot be borne to these facts unless their significance is also indicated and an emphatic appeal is made for their recognition in faith” (Hermann Strathmann, “Μάρτυς, Μαρτυρέω, Μαρτυρία, Μαρτύριον, Ἐπιμαρτυρέω, Συμμαρτυρέω, Συνεπιμαρτυρέω, Καταμαρτυρέω, Μαρτύρομαι, Διαμαρτύρομαι, Προμαρτύρομαι, Ψευδόμαρτυς, Ψευδομαρτυρέω, Ψευδομαρτυρία,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, Eerdmans, 1964–, p. 492). ↩

  15. Doug himself asserts this point when he writes “This is incidentally why I believe that Christian republics and commonwealths are formed by preaching, baptizing, and discipleship, and not by campaigning, legislating, pundit-blogging, and so on” (Douglas Wilson, Empires of Dirt: Secularism, Radical Islam, and the Mere Christendom Alternative, Canon Press, 2016, p. 99, Kindle Edition). Yet elsewhere in the same book, Wilson undercuts this claim by turning to explicitly political prescriptions, asserting that “The magistrate is a necessary part of the process” and that a faithful magistrate should “propose an amendment to the Constitution that consists of the text of the Apostles’ Creed” (Douglas Wilson, Empires of Dirt: Secularism, Radical Islam, and the Mere Christendom Alternative, Canon Press, 2016, pp. 99, 190, Kindle Edition). And when Doug advocates for the limiting non-Christian involvement in American politics, such as Hindus (https://x.com/douglaswils/status/1797670545259151785 and https://youtu.be/zgFHMRrnlfg?si=tUo457lSWVXzBOnr&t=1170), this exposes a contradiction in his position: For if by means of the gospel a nation had truly been “Christianized,” there would be no Hindus left to bar from public office (or at least a Christian majority whose convictions would make the election of a non-Christian unlikely). By seeking legal restrictions before evangelistic transformation, Wilson replaces gospel persuasion with political compulsion. Doug also discussed his vision of Christian politics in an interview with The New York Times: https://youtu.be/WAYWbbSeIhE?si=vM12hm4uyqHH23eZ as well as with CNN: https://youtu.be/qFeIO0ZjdF8?si=X7sV-2dQ7VSeO5Zb ↩

  16. Doug takes this to mean: “like Paul before Agrippa, we should desire our rulers to become just as we are, baptized and in submission to the Word of God. We should recognize that all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Jesus, and that He used this as the basis for commanding us to disciple all the nations of men. We should want the establishment of a new and improved Christendom. We should tell the kings of the earth to kiss the Son, lest He be angry” (Douglas Wilson, Empires of Dirt: Secularism, Radical Islam, and the Mere Christendom Alternative, Canon Press, 2016, p. 122, Kindle Edition). However, Wilson commits a non sequitur—his conclusion does not follow from his premise. That Paul desired Agrippa to believe in Christ (Acts 26:28–29) does not mean Paul was advocating the political Christianization of the Roman Empire or the establishment of some sort of Christendom. The apostle’s aim was always spiritual conversion and the establishment of local churches, not cultural conquest (see Acts 14:21–23; 18:8–11; 20:28–32). His appeal to Psalm 2:12 (“Kiss the Son”) further misuses Scripture, for the psalm is a messianic warning written before Christ’s incarnation, and should not be construed as a blueprint for a Christian empire. The New Testament applies that psalm to Christ’s death and resurrection (Acts 4:25–28), not to the civic duties of rulers or the establishment of some sort of Christendom. Even Paul’s appeal to Caesar gives no hint of political ambition; he explains that he was “forced to appeal to Caesar” merely to secure a fair hearing (Acts 25:11; 28:19, NET). Through imprisonment and trial alike, Paul’s focus remained fixed on the gospel, “proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with complete boldness” (Acts 28:14–31). ↩

  17. Leviticus 25:23; John 15:19, 17:14–16; Philippians 3:20; Hebrews 11:13–14; 1 Peter 1:17. ↩

  18. Doug Wilson’s book entitled Empire of Dirt is a play off of a lyric from Nine Inch Nails and Johnny Cash (Douglas Wilson, Empires of Dirt: Secularism, Radical Islam, and the Mere Christendom Alternative, Canon Press, 2016, loc. 5, Kindle Edition), but in my opinion is ironically an apt name for what he is advocating. ↩

  19. As Doug writes: “I want to live in a baptized civilization. That is what I mean by mere Christendom” (Douglas Wilson, Empires of Dirt: Secularism, Radical Islam, and the Mere Christendom Alternative, Canon Press, 2016, p. 141, Kindle Edition). Once again betraying his Federal Vision theology and its confusion over baptism (see articles here). ↩

  20. For a more complete evaluation of Doug Wilson’s Postmillennial/Reconstructionist/Theocratic theology read: https://web.archive.org/web/20250823194739/https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/postmillennialism-a-biblical-critique/ ↩

  21. https://www.modernreformation.org/resources/articles/a-secular-faith-why-christianity-favors-the-separation-of-church-and-state-by-d-g-hart https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/review/onward-engaging-the-culture-without-losing-the-gospel/ https://fee.org/articles/c-s-lewis-on-compelling-people-to-do-good/ Or as C. S. Lewis wrote (an idea Doug takes issue with on page 119 in Mere Christendom): “Theocracy is the worst of all governments. If we must have a tyrant a robber baron is far better than an inquisitor. The baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity at some point be sated; and since he dimly knows he is doing wrong he may possibly repent. But the inquisitor who mistakes his own cruelty and lust of power and fear for the voice of Heaven will torment us infinitely because he torments us with the approval of his own conscience and his better impulses appear to him as temptations. And since Theocracy is the worst, the nearer any government approaches to Theocracy the worse it will be” (C. S. Lewis, Of Other Worlds: Essays and Stories, HarperCollins, 2017, loc. 1526, Kindle Edition). ↩

  22. “But once Christianity became politically-correct and culturally-fashionable — indeed, a means of advancing in the Emperor’s favor — joining the church lost its edge. People embraced Christianity without necessarily understanding its teachings or having true faith in Christ, bringing with them into the church their pagan worldviews” (Gene Edward Veith, https://learn.ligonier.org/articles/good-bad-and-ugly). ↩

  23. “On November 27, 1095, Pope Urban II delivered the speech that launched the Crusades . . . . the case for the Crusades was so well-suited to the culture that almost every major Christian leader of the age fervently endorsed them . . . . The doctrinal errors are obvious: we cannot perform saving acts of penance; Christ does not advance his work by force. But the cultural error is the one we must face. Europe was an armed, allegedly Christian camp in Urban’s day. Instead of questioning this, Urban tried to redirect it. Urban failed; the Crusades were disastrous in every way. Untold numbers died in vain. The ‘Christian knights’ acted like barbarians and fools and killed both Muslims and also fellow believers” (Dan Doriani, https://web.archive.org/web/20250422203026/https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/the-speech-that-launched-the-crusades/). ↩

  24. John Bunyan “spent twelve years in an imprisonment of varying severity and endured a second imprisonment of part of a year. At any time he might have secured his release if he had given a pledge not to conduct illegal prayer meetings (conventicles) and to preach . . . . The background to Bunyan’s free choice of martyrdom was the confused church policy of Charles 11 which after his Restoration ranged from universal toleration to violent persecution of all the Nonconformist sects” (R. Sharrock, Bunyan: The Prisoner and the Pilgrim, Churchman 102.4, 1988, Archived at: https://web.archive.org/web/20251001222829/https://www.churchsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Cman_102_4_Sharrock.pdf). Bunyan’s masterpiece, The Pilgrim’s Progress, was born out of this imprisonment—but we must not miss the lesson: He was jailed by other professing Christians, not for crimes of violence or treason, but for holding prayer meetings and preaching the gospel without a state license. ↩

  25. “. . . by the time of the American Revolution more than 50 percent of the Baptist preachers in Virginia had been imprisoned by their Christian colonial government for preaching the gospel without proper authorization . . .” (https://web.archive.org/web/20241214122659/https://www.bgav.org/blog/voices-the-story-of-baptists-and-religious-liberty).
    Interestingly, Doug claims: “And not only has this Christian nationalism thing been done before, it has been done in America before. If we succeed, this will not be Christian America. If we succeed, this will be Christian America 2.0. This will be Christian America again” (Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023, p. 93, Kindle Edition). The idea that Christian Nationalism 2.0 would just be repeating what already has happened in history should be concerning because of persecutions that have broken out against other Christians historically—so the question rightly is raised, “which Christianity?” Blasphemy laws are easily wielded against “Christians” as they were wielded against Christ. In an interview, Doug said, “If someone says, ‘Do you want to see blasphemy eradicated? Do you want to see limitations on blasphemy and restrictions on blasphemy?’ Yes I do very much, and I do think that should be something that is done constitutionally and via the law” (https://web.archive.org/web/20250209082232/https://christoverall.com/article/concise/transcript-interview-with-doug-wilson-on-christian-nationalism/). As already stated, Doug has advocated the limiting non-Christian involvement in American politics: “. . . I would support measures that would exclude Hindus from holding public office in the United States” (Doug Wilson in response to Pieter Friedrich’s critique about Doug sharing the stage with Ram Madhav: “Pieter, I would support measures that would exclude Hindus from holding public office in the United States. You in?” https://x.com/douglaswils/status/1797670545259151785 Doug also spoke and affirmed his position in an interview: https://youtu.be/zgFHMRrnlfg?si=tUo457lSWVXzBOnr&t=1170). This exposes the contradiction in his position: for if by means of the gospel a nation had truly been “Christianized,” there would be no Hindus left to bar from public office (or at least a Christian majority whose convictions would make the election of a non-Christian unlikely). By seeking legal restrictions before evangelistic transformation, Wilson replaces gospel persuasion with political compulsion. Additional reading: https://mereorthodoxy.com/the-new-christian-nationalism https://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/did-america-have-christian-founding Doug also discussed his vision of Christian politics in an interview with The New York Times: https://youtu.be/WAYWbbSeIhE?si=vM12hm4uyqHH23eZ as well as with CNN: https://youtu.be/qFeIO0ZjdF8?si=X7sV-2dQ7VSeO5Zb ↩

  26. “Divine origin implies divine ownership. ‘Not from this world’ implies no allegiance to this world, but allegiance only to God. Jesus’ kingship is not merely ‘spiritual’ but eschatological, rather like the Holy City in Revelation, always coming down ‘out of heaven from God’ (Rev 3:12; 21:2, 10). It is nothing less than Jesus’ all-encompassing ‘authority over all flesh’ (17:2; also Mt 28:18), and in the end it will supersede all human authority (J. Ramsey Michaels, The Gospel of John, The New International Commentary on the Old and New Testament, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010, p. 923). ↩

  27. Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023, p. 20, Kindle Edition. Doug even includes an Epilogue in his book Mere Christendom where he draws out the meaning of the gospel (which I applaud—it’s the only place in the more than twenty of his books I’ve read where I recall that he actually expounds on the gospel), but he couches it with insults and Confederate sympathies: “So I know that you are a black activist, and a hard-left radical, and so you have no business reading a book like this. The only reason you are reading it now is because you are obliquely acquainted with some sob sister evangelical, one of those reconciliation-mongers. . . . But the reason God arranged for all this is that He wanted you to hear the straight gospel from an admirer of Stonewall Jackson, so that you could repent of your sins, which are many, and trust in Christ, who will forgive them all” (Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023, p. 240, Kindle Edition). ↩

  28. Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023, p. 15, Kindle Edition. ↩

  29. It’s true that Paul sought to meet people where they were—“To the Jews I became like a Jew. . . I have become all things to all people, so that by all means I may save some” (1 Corinthians 9:20–23, NET). But Paul adapted his approach, not his message. He did not reframe the gospel to serve Jewish, Greek, or Roman ambitions; he proclaimed one message everywhere: Jesus Christ and him crucified (1 Corinthians 2:2), not reform to the national tax laws or the advancement of free-market economics. ↩

  30. Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023, p. 38, Kindle Edition. ↩

  31. Ibid. p. 137. ↩

  32. Ibid. p. 21. ↩

  33. Ibid. p. 77. ↩

  34. https://www.christianpost.com/news/pete-hegseth-signals-support-for-christian-nationalist-pastor-doug-wilson.html https://www.peoplefor.org/rightwingwatch/douglas-wilson-continues-gripe-about-women-having-right-vote ↩

  35. Doug writes: “Reformers are concerned to win what have come to be called the “culture wars,” and unless we recover an understanding of these principles, and learn to apply them to the conflicts we are in, then such a win will be impossible” (Douglas Wilson, Rules for Reformers, Canon Press, 2014, p. 16, Kindle Edition). He explicitly targets cultural reform rather than gospel proclamation when he writes: “I first learned these principles from a book my father wrote, entitled Principles of War. I commend that book highly, even though the emphasis there is different. In Principles of War, these principles are applied to thinking strategically about evangelism. Here our concern is the task of cultural reformation, which is of course related to evangelism, but not identical with it” (Douglas Wilson, Rules for Reformers, Canon Press, 2014, p. 15, Kindle Edition). And statements such as: “It is not possible to understand the gospel of free grace intelligently if it does not lead to a love for free markets” (Douglas Wilson, Rules for Reformers, Canon Press, 2014, p. 75, Kindle Edition). Having read many of Doug’s books, he often sprinkles in lip-service to the gospel, but then gives a laundry list of actions to take in order to “win” the cultural war and produce cultural and political change. And even in the books that relate to family life, my assessment is his focus is on outward application rather than heart change. ↩

  36. “And not only has this Christian nationalism thing been done before, it has been done in America before. If we succeed, this will not be Christian America. If we succeed, this will be Christian America 2.0. This will be Christian America again. This will be America as the prodigal son, tired of the pig food, coming home to his father” (https://web.archive.org/web/20250809000402/https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/a-brief-little-primer-on-christian-nationalism.html). ↩

  37. Douglas Wilson, Mere Christendom, Canon Press, 2023, p. 102, Kindle Edition. ↩

  38. “The expansion reflects the rapid growth of Wilson’s Christ Church, which he has led for nearly 50 years. Driven by families with four to six children on average and emigration (‘people were chased here by blue state governors,’ Wilson said), the church has doubled in size since 2019 to about 3,000 people — roughly 10% of the population of this university town in in Idaho’s northern panhandle” (https://web.archive.org/web/20250705232820/https://ministrywatch.com/pastor-doug-wilsons-christian-empire-grows-in-idaho/). See also: https://web.archive.org/web/20250816212435/https://religionnews.com/2019/11/05/douglas-wilsons-spiritual-takeover-plan-roils-idaho-college-town/ ↩

  39. A reference to Doug’s mention of Moscow, Idaho being a blue dot and the insinuation they desire political gains: “‘Basically this is a blue dot in a very, very red state and the blue dotters are pleased,’ he said. ‘Our mission is ‘All of Christ for all of life,’ and if you drill that down, then for all of Moscow’” (https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2019/nov/17/leaders-of-moscows-christ-church-say-theyre-pushin/). Doug also has said: “We are an intentionally dissident sort of community and we will exert our power in the marketplace, in democratic elections, and then we will, on purpose, take over and make it our place” (https://web.archive.org/web/20250816212435/https://religionnews.com/2019/11/05/douglas-wilsons-spiritual-takeover-plan-roils-idaho-college-town/). But ironically, as of October, 2025, I’m not aware of any recent electoral wins in Moscow/Latah County by candidates closely tied to Doug Wilson’s Christ Church. Doug himself ran for Moscow City Council back in 1985 and lost, receiving the least votes of any candidate (https://books.google.com/books?id=TMUSAAAAIBAJ&pg=PA26&dq=Douglas+Wilson+City+Council#v=onepage&q=%22Doug%20Wilson%22&f=false and https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=0LUSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=tvkDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6734%2C1075118). More recently, Christ Church deacon Gabriel Rench lost the 2020 Latah County Commissioner race to incumbent Tom Lamar (https://www.uiargonaut.com/2020/11/04/democrats-dominate-unofficial-latah-county-election-results/). In the 2019 Moscow City Council race, the three progressive candidates (Laflin, Zabala, Kelly) won comfortably, while a conservative slate promoted in Christ Church-adjacent circles—including Kelsey Berends, a New Saint Andrews alum—finished far behind (https://www.uiargonaut.com/2019/11/05/moscow-city-council-election-2019-laflin-zabala-and-kelly-fill-seats/). In 2023, city council and school board seats again went to candidates not identified with Christ Church’s orbit (https://www.uiargonaut.com/2023/11/08/latah-county-announces-unofficial-moscow-city-council-results/). Most recently, on May 18, 2025, Bradley Baas—who listed himself as a student at Doug Wilson’s New Saint Andrews College—was arrested on suspicion of DUI just two days before appearing on the ballot for the Latah County Library Board in Moscow, Idaho. To his credit, Bradley withdrew himself from the race before voting commenced (https://pullmanradio.com/latah-county-library-board-candidate-bradley-baas-arrested-for-allegedly-driving-drunk-in-moscow/ https://www.facebook.com/share/p/17CKFVk7xV/ https://www.facebook.com/ExaminingMoscow/posts/edited-we-mistakenly-posted-yesterday-that-baas-was-a-graduate-of-new-saint-andr/715369804338312/). ↩

  40. https://www.deseret.com/faith/2025/08/16/pastor-doug-wilson-idaho-christian-nationalism/ https://apnews.com/article/pete-hegseth-crec-church-christian-nationalism-wilson-e71c3ea072fa959b5bee09a4d2093f1a https://web.archive.org/web/20250720011020/https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/a-mission-to-babylon.html ↩

  41. Which also begs the question, “Which Christianity?” Would it be Doug Wilson’s Federal Vision version of Christianity (https://dougwilsonsays.com/tags/federal-vision/)? ↩

  42. “. . . our desire is to make Moscow a Christian town . . .” (https://web.archive.org/web/20250805065047/https://christkirk.com/our-church/our-mission/). Doug expands on this idea in his book Rules for Reformers: “Thinking nationally, in our culture wars, New York City is strategic, but not feasible. Moose Breath, Idaho is feasible, but not strategic. We could take Moose Breath for Jesus in about three weeks, but when we had, it wouldn’t matter all that much. The reason our ministries are located here in the Palouse is that there are two major universities located in these two small towns, eight miles apart. Pullman, Washington is the home of Washington State, and Moscow is the home of the University of Idaho. The small towns make it feasible, and the universities make them strategic. To identify and go after a decisive point is the way to have a disproportionate impact” (Douglas Wilson, Rules for Reformers, Canon Press, 2014, p. 20, Kindle Edition). ↩

#Doug Wilson Says #Christendom #Mere Christendom #Theonomy #Politics #Contradiction #Eisegesis #Christian Nationalism

Read Next

Doug Wilson Says ‘The Christians Who Owned Slaves In The South Were On Firm Scriptural Ground’

| Opinion by Nathan Wells
“The radical abolitionists maintained that slave-owning was inherently immoral under any circumstance. But in this matter, the Christians who owned slaves in the South were on firm scriptural ground. May a Christian own slaves, even when this makes him a part of a larger pagan system which is not fully scriptural, or perhaps not scriptural at all? Provided he owns them in conformity to Christ’s laws governing such situations, the Bible is clear that under such conditions Christians may own slaves...” — Doug Wilson

Subscribe for Updates

Get all the latest posts directly in your inbox.