From RationalWiki

The Christian Flag, a symbol used by many Protestant denominations.

“ ” must base our laws on faith, not reason. We must base our laws on faith, not reason. —Mark Rushdoony, son of R.J. Rushdoony[1]

Dominionism or Christian sharia ("Charia") (and sometimes used interchangeably with Christian Reconstructionism and theonomy, see below) is the desire to bring "order" to the Alpha Quadrant an ideology of Totalitarian theocracy. It holds that Christians should not withdraw from the earthly world to avoid becoming corrupted by involvement in earthly politics and patiently await the second coming of Christ, as old-school Christian fundamentalists do. Rather, it asserts that Christians should seize earthly power and use it to forcibly fulfill biblical prophecies and bring him back. Where in the Catholic world these debates about withdrawal/domination are played out behind closed doors, in the Protestant world it manifests as an open split between Fundamentalists and Dominionists. The United States is the Dominionists' stronghold and seizing control of the US is the movement's first major objective. Note that almost no Dominionists actually call themselves such.

Dominionists believe that the civil laws laid down by the Old Testament (as distinct from the moral laws such as the Ten Commandments) should be enforced by reforming the U.S. legal system along theocratic lines, which would entail a substantial increase in the use of capital punishment. They also believe that biblical injunctions regarding slavery should be followed.[2][3] Dominionists are the direct, Christian equivalent of Islamists demanding Sharia law.

Its ideology is promoted by authors such as Gary North[note 1] and David Barton[4].

Origin of the term [ edit ]

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

The term "Dominionism" comes from Genesis 1:26 and :28 of the King James Version of the Bible In every other verse of the King James Version where the word "dominion" occurs, the word either refers to God's dominion over the world and all of its people, or to the dominion of a king over his kingdom, as in Psalms 72 ("The reign of a righteous king"). This is the only time when the word is applied to all men.

Unfortunately, this misinterpretation of the original text may have altered world history for the worse. The original word is more accurately translated as "stewardship".

One explanation for this dodgy translation is that King James I — a Scottish monarch who was trying to solidify his royal power after being crowned England's new king in 1603 — wanted his translation of the Bible (published in 1611) to reinforce his divine right to rule as he saw fit.

Types of dominionism [ edit ]

The term "dominionism" has become a catch-all for a number of conservative Christian movements with theocratic tendencies. In its original sense, the word "dominionism" is not interchangeable with other terms like "Christian Reconstructionism".

The weakest form of dominionism is often referred to as "soft dominionism" or "Christian nationalism" — it advocates writing certain Biblical mores into law (e.g., bans on gay marriage) but does not advocate a full-fledged theocracy.

"Hard dominionism" encompasses openly theocratic ideologies. "Theonomy" is a subset of hard dominionism — it entails a separation of church and state powers, but with an official state religion and legal system that must conform to Biblical moral codes. Theonomy is influenced by legalistic Calvinist theology and often advocates for a devolution of power to more local levels of government. [5] [6] "Christian Reconstructionism" — launched in large part by R.J. Rushdoony (1916-2001) and his Chalcedon Foundation (founded 1965) — is the most well-known modern incarnation of theonomy (these terms are also sometimes used interchangeably). Christian Reconstructionism is also largely hyper-Calvinist and incorporates neo-Confederate ideology. [7]

Another branch of this belief system which became more prominent shortly after the Christian Reconstructionist movement is called "Kingdom Now theology"[8] or simply "Kingdom theology". Kingdom Now draws more on the Pentecostal/Charismatic tradition.[9][10][11]

Conspiracy theory? [ edit ]

Critics of the term "dominionism" have characterized it as a conspiracy theory[12] or the "paranoid mot du jour".[13] Critics tend to attack a straw man by asserting that there is no actual movement calling itself "dominionism".[14] However, proponents of the term have acknowledged paranoid and conspiratorial overtones in popular usage and criticized the characterization of dominionism as a unified, monolithic movement angling for world domination. Sara Diamond writes:

“ ” Conspiracy theorizing about the Christian Right's supposedly "secret" agenda involves highlighting the hate-mongering and bizarre ideas of a handful of Christian Right players while neglecting the broad popularity of dominion theology. There are a variety of ideological tendencies within the Christian Right. At the truly extreme end of the spectrum is a set of ideas proponents call reconstructionism, associated with only a small number of think tanks and book publishers. Many Christian Right activists have never even heard of reconstructionism, whose advocates call for the imposition of an Old Testament style theocracy, complete with capital punishment for offenses including adultery, homosexuality, and blasphemy.[15] Conspiracy theorizing about the Christian Right's supposedly "secret" agenda involves highlighting the hate-mongering and bizarre ideas of a handful of Christian Right players while neglecting the broad popularity of dominion theology. There are a variety of ideological tendencies within the Christian Right. At the truly extreme end of the spectrum is a set of ideas proponents call reconstructionism, associated with only a small number of think tanks and book publishers. Many Christian Right activists have never even heard of reconstructionism, whose advocates call for the imposition of an Old Testament style theocracy, complete with capital punishment for offenses including adultery, homosexuality, and blasphemy.

Chip Berlet defends the use of the term while acknowledging its abuse: "Just because some critics of the Christian Right have stretched the term dominionism past its breaking point does not mean we should abandon the term."[16]

Dominionist theology [ edit ]

See the main article on this topic: Millennialism

Dominionism is often connected with the theological position known as postmillennialism, which envisions a period of one thousand years prior to the eventual Second Coming of Christ during which the "Kingdom of God" will gradually gain ground against the forces that oppose it. For that reason, these "hard dominionists" usually work towards a general Christianization of society in the belief that this will help bring about the "Kingdom of God" and (after a thousand more years) the Second Coming.

In this, they differ from the premillennialists, who believe that the Second Coming itself will mark the beginning of the millennium and that Jesus will do (or at least direct) the dirty work; thus, they tend to focus more on the conversion of individuals than of society as such.

Dominionists believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. As such, they believe that God "gave man dominion over the earth."

Orthodoxy [ edit ]

Dominionism cannot be regarded merely as a hyper-literal take on Christianity; its main tenet has been opposed by Christians from the earliest days of the Church.

The precepts of the Mosaic Law have traditionally been divided into three categories by Christian theologians: the moral law (e.g., the Ten Commandments), the civil law (the "constitution" of ancient Israel), and the ceremonial law (e.g., the proscriptions against eating pork).

Also traditionally, it has been held that both the ceremonial and civil laws were nullified with the coming of Jesus. At the Council of Jerusalem, described in Acts 15, it was determined that only certain moral precepts of the law applied to gentile Christians; Paul of Tarsus wrote extensively against "legalism," or the idea that Christians had to follow the whole Mosaic Law, saying that the whole point of the law was to lead the Jews to Jesus, and this purpose being fulfilled, the law was not in effect any longer. This position was later hammered out in detail, with the position being taken that the ceremonial law was "deadly" (could not be practiced at all) and the civil law "dead" (did not need to be practiced). St. Thomas Aquinas said:

“ ” For if a sovereign were to order these judicial precepts to be observed in his kingdom, he would not sin: unless perchance they were observed, or ordered to be observed, as though they derived their binding force through being institutions of the Old Law: for it would be a deadly sin to intend to observe them thus.[17] For if a sovereign were to order these judicial precepts to be observed in his kingdom, he would not sin: unless perchance they were observed, or ordered to be observed, as though they derived their binding force through being institutions of the Old Law: for it would be a deadly sin to intend to observe them thus.

In 1442, the Roman Catholic Council of Florence stated:

“ ” Whoever, after the passion, places his hope in the legal prescriptions [of the Law of Moses] and submits himself to them as necessary for salvation and as if faith in Christ without them could not save, sins mortally. It does not deny that from Christ's passion until the promulgation of the gospel they could have been retained, provided they were in no way believed to be necessary for salvation. But it asserts that after the promulgation of the gospel they cannot be observed without loss of eternal salvation. Therefore it denounces all who after that time observe circumcision, the sabbath and other legal prescriptions as strangers to the faith of Christ and unable to share in eternal salvation, unless they recoil at some time from these errors. Therefore it strictly orders all who glory in the name of Christian, not to practise circumcision either before or after baptism, since whether or not they place their hope in it, it cannot possibly be observed without loss of eternal salvation.[18] Whoever, after the passion, places his hope in the legal prescriptions [of the Law of Moses] and submits himself to them as necessary for salvation and as if faith in Christ without them could not save, sins mortally. It does not deny that from Christ's passion until the promulgation of the gospel they could have been retained, provided they were in no way believed to be necessary for salvation. But it asserts that after the promulgation of the gospel they cannot be observed without loss of eternal salvation. Therefore it denounces all who after that time observe circumcision, the sabbath and other legal prescriptions as strangers to the faith of Christ and unable to share in eternal salvation, unless they recoil at some time from these errors. Therefore it strictly orders all who glory in the name of Christian, not to practise circumcision either before or after baptism, since whether or not they place their hope in it, it cannot possibly be observed without loss of eternal salvation.

Most Dominionists pretend that they are followers of John Calvin, if not the only true followers of that Protestant Reformer. But Calvin had even stronger views than Thomas Aquinas on that subject:

“ ” There are some who deny that any commonwealth is rightly framed which neglects the law of Moses, and is ruled by the common law of nations. How perilous and seditious these views are, let others see: for me it is enough to demonstrate that they are stupid and false.[19] There are some who deny that any commonwealth is rightly framed which neglects the law of Moses, and is ruled by the common law of nations. How perilous and seditious these views are, let others see: for me it is enough to demonstrate that they are stupid and false.

However, as might be observed, the Dominionists have little argument for reinstituting the Mosaic civil law besides, "It's in the Bible!"

Dominionism in fiction [ edit ]

The "Republic of Gilead" in Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale represented one scenario of a Dominionist takeover in the United States after an environmental disaster drastically reduced the reproductive capacity of the population. Everyone thought the book was just some ultra-feminist overreaction to American society until 2009.

Another example of Dominionism is If this goes on... by Robert A. Heinlein, where an evangelical preacher named Nehemiah Scudder takes control of the Executive Branch of the United States Government, and imposes fundamentalist law over the country.

Speaking of Heinlein, Joe Haldeman's The Accidental Time Machine dedicates a large portion towards a dominionist takeover of the Eastern seaboard, all run by a crazed religious robotic overlord with killsats!

Stephen Baxter's 'Titan' presents a heavily isolated United States under the rule of a Fundie president, in which among other things any kind of abortion is illegal, a large wall has been built along the Mexican border, the old Ptolemaic model is seen valid and the sky, following the Biblical interpretation, is considered a solid dome beyond Low Earth Orbit except for people as pilots of military space planes.[note 2]

Victoria by William S. Lind, an ultraconservative writer and a retired Army officer, follows the takeover of the north-eastern states by self-described 'Christian Marines'. They, along with a bunch of other similarly-minded factions, establish the Northern Confederation, prohibit religions other than Christianity and equate the Ten Commandments with the Constitution as a source of law. In addition, these good ol' guys effectively (as in 'not de jure') ban most electronics, (again effectively) push African-Americans from cities to the countryside, reassign all women to household positions, eliminate the Cultural Marxist academics and discontinue the sloth-encouraging, spoiling practice of free money and foodstamp distribution. Oh, and they help their fellows to rise to power in other parts of the former USA -- most notably, the New Confederacy in the South -- and in the end join the global New Crusade™ against Islam. Notably, the regime of Victoria is portrayed as mostly sympathetic to the point of utopian, in contrast to the dystopia that any other sane authors would paint.

A threat to freedom? [ edit ]

Many people argue about the subject of personal freedom in a theocracy, but the dominionists themselves see no lack of freedom as they believe following the bible is freedom. (After all, the sorts of things they want to do wouldn't be restricted by a theocracy, would they?) As a result, a group of teachers and intellectuals from Cornell University created Theocracy Watch to combat the dominionism movement.[20]

Connections to the United States Government [ edit ]

Youth With a Mission, a small but highly influential organization within Dominionist circles, owns the building which houses The Fellowship in Washington D.C..[21] "The Word of Faith" theology, an ideology practiced in many pentecostal and charismatic churches which maintain allegiance to dominionist theology, has been reported to have ties to the Central Intelligence Agency which has been spreading the ideology to oppose communist regimes in South American countries.[22] Talk about destroying the village in order to save it!

American Taliban [ edit ]

Two sides of the same coin

The American Taliban is a derogatory but often accurate term for American dominionists. It was coined after the invasion of Afghanistan, when the term Taliban became a household word. It is used to draw parallels between the militant tendencies of Islamic fundamentalism and those of dominionism.

The point of the phrase is to compare those who would make the United States into a country with a state religion, or inflict their religious views on others through government decree, to the Taliban government in Afghanistan, which was also a repressive theocracy.

Essentially, the American Taliban wants to transform the United States into a theocratic regime enforcing fundamentalist Christian law.

Quotes [ edit ]

A website dedicated to this phenomenon[23] has many illustrative quotes. Here are some examples:

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war." — Ann Coulter

"With all due respect to those dear people, my friend, God Almighty does not hear the prayer of a Jew." — Bailey Smith

"Don't use the word 'gay' unless it's an acronym for 'Got AIDS yet?'" — Bob Dornan

"Sodomy is a graver sin than murder. – Unless there is life there can be no murder." — David Trosch

"American Veterans are to blame for the fag takeover of this nation. They have the power in their political lobby to influence the zeitgeist, get the fags out of the military, and back in the closet where they belong!" — Fred Phelps

"The Islamic people, the Arabs, were the ones who captured Africans, put them in slavery, and sent them to America as slaves. Why would the people in America want to embrace the religion of slavers?" — Pat Robertson

"AIDS is a racial disease of Jews and Niggers, and fortunately it is wiping out the queers. I guess God hates queers for several reasons. There is one big reason to be against queers and that is because every time some white boy is seduced by a queer into becoming a queer, means his white bloodline has run out." — J. B. Stoner

"Public officials are ministers of God assigned the duty of punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous. You cannot serve two masters: you must pick — God or Satan." — Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore[24]

Anything out of Theodore Shoebat's mouth.

Or you could just go to the video [ edit ]

While introducing the Frothster during a 2012 campaign appearance, Pastor Dennis Terry says (among other dog whistle bullshit statements) that libruls and other Americans who think differently from him should "get out":

The Newsroom did it better [ edit ]

Similarly, the bombastic HBO series The Newsroom (written by Aaron Sorkin, no less) did an excellent summation of what they think of as the American Taliban.

See also [ edit ]

Notes [ edit ]

↑ Gary North, however, represents a distinct view from many other dominionists. He believes Christians are to supplant the government, not take it over. Call this "anarcho-theocracy" if you need a good descriptor. ↑ For sake of completeness, NASA has merged with the Air Force and for PR purposes has basically become Disney meeting pseudoscience and (Fundie) Christianism