58 - Stephen Wolfe on Christian Nationalism and Effeminate Discourse
Рет қаралды 1,420
Күн бұрынIn this episode, I talk with Dr. Stephen Wolfe about this book on Christian nationalism. We dive into the assumptions made by the liberal order and why many view Christian nationalism as a threat. We explore the history of the concepts related Christian nationalism and America as a Christian nation. We also discuss the concept of feminine or effeminate discourse in Christianity. Is Christian culture bad? What if hypocrisy increases? What is a vision of a Christian nation? What are examples of effeminate discourse? Why is it a problem?
Bio: Stephen Wolfe is a postdoctoral fellow in the James Madison Program at Princeton University. He is the cohost of the Ars Politica podcast. He completed his PhD in political philosophy at LSU in 2020. He was born and raised in Napa, California and currently lives in North Carolina with his wife and four children.
Patreon - / chasedavis
Ars Politica Third Way - ars-politica.c...
Twitter - / perfinjust
@yeoberry 2 жыл бұрын
We're in north central NC, just south of Danville, VA. Stephen is welcome to visit us.
@tedkijeski339 Жыл бұрын
So, Pastor John, what do you think of the book and the controversy surrounding it thus far?
@noanapoleon474 Жыл бұрын
I notice that in discussing Christian nationalism with other Christians, that the early Christian nations such Byzantium, and Armenia, are rarely if ever brought to bear on the discussion. This is especially the case with Protestants, and I suspect that this is due to the fact that most of us are not even aware that the Orthodox church existed, not only well before, but along side of and separate from the Roman Catholic church. As a result, we trace our national identity only to the American Colonies and subsequent creation of the United States.
@noxvenit Жыл бұрын
"... I suspect that this is due to the fact that most of us are not even aware that the Orthodox church existed...." No, that's not it.
@josephmatsiko2486 Жыл бұрын
Have you read the letter that the 1st Presbyterian General Assembly wrote to President Washington on his ascension to the first office?! You’d know why this idea is wrong. The irony is being in the James Madison program and not get the philosophical points in Madison’s push for disestablishment.
@FullProofTheology Жыл бұрын
Do you have a link for the letter?
@ThisisPam Жыл бұрын
The idea that Christians should enforce Christian beliefs, principles and laws onto a nation because that’s what Jesus would want is directly opposed to how we are to evangelize and impact the culture, and opposite to how Jesus influenced the culture when He was on earth. It’s not a good thing, but it sounds like a good thing. Similar to how the disciples were expecting Jesus to take down the Roman Empire or at least help the Jewish people and laws to flourish, Christians think we should be able to take over the government, media and culture because Christian values are better than other values. It’s inherently flawed.
@FullProofTheology Жыл бұрын
Thanks for listening Pamela. From a historical and ecclesiological perspective, what you've suggested seems most congruent with anabaptist theological convictions.
@amandahenderson8068 Жыл бұрын
Isn’t your third party in the femininzation argument the exact way you use Christianity or God as a moral trump card?
@FullProofTheology Жыл бұрын
Sorry I don’t think I follow.
@amandahenderson8068 Жыл бұрын
@@FullProofTheology you argue that feminization means that people (often women) making an argument call upon an outside protector (a man or the state) rather than engaging directly in a logical argument. I am saying - the same could be said of those claiming a ‘religion’, ‘god’, ‘Christianity’ as the third party protector who gives authority rather than engaging in a logical argument.
@FullProofTheology Жыл бұрын
Interesting argument. I think it comes down to which audience an individual is aiming to please.
@tedkijeski339 Жыл бұрын
When the author is telling the story about the female officer who upbraided him for giving bibles to the Saudi trainees (ca. 21:30), he says, "Here she's just utterly offended--aghast--that I would hand them a book that's probably, well, I'd say abuse(d) to let her . . . ", what was he saying/not saying? Is he dancing around an interpretation of the Bible as a book that, properly interpreted, would not approve of this woman being in the military?
@FullProofTheology Жыл бұрын
There is a history in Christianity of assuming that husbands would be the one's who defend the home. There's a robust dialogue in Christianity in America regarding women serving in combat. For example, see page 45 here. crechurches.org/documents/governance/CREC_Governance_Comprehensive_2017R.pdf
@tedkijeski339 Жыл бұрын
@@FullProofTheology Yes, I am aware of that. So is that what he's saying--that women have no business being in the military?
@FullProofTheology Жыл бұрын
@@tedkijeski339 I don't think so.
Founders Ministries
Рет қаралды 63 М.
Full Proof Theology
Рет қаралды 3 М.
Forbes Breaking News
Рет қаралды 403 М.
Premier Unbelievable?
Рет қаралды 284 М.
PBS NewsHour
Рет қаралды 16 М.