Introduction
So we have come to the conclusion of our review of Disarming Leviathan, Caleb Campbell’s call to evangelize Christian nationalists. We have said quite a few things over the course of this review, but please keep in mind that it was only because Caleb Campbell said quite a few things his own self.
This was a good salad. It only remains to pick a few pomegranate seeds out of the bottom of the bowl.
Christians Under Attack?
In this section, Campbell pooh poohs (or is it poo poos?—one never knows) the idea that Christians are being persecuted or marginalized in our country. He begins the section by talking about how Christian nationalists have a “deep anxiety” about “ethnic erasure.” I want you to note the smooth way in which he slid from Christian to “ethnic erasure.” That was a sly way of insinuating that Christian nationalists are actually all about being white nationalists. Now in the interests of honesty, it must be acknowledged that there are some people out there—calling themselves Christian nationalists too—who are attempting to make the same point. They call themselves “race realists,” but the realism part is seen in the fact that the bell curve applies to all human beings when grouped by color. We have our long tail on the left, just like everybody else.
But let us return to Campbell’s appeal to our color anxieties. So not only is whitey deeply concerned about being erased, he is deeply threatened by what Campbell clearly regards as some form of paper cut persecution.
“While religious persecution is certainly a threat (especially in some parts of the world more than others), most of what American Christian nationalists experience is the result of living in a pluralistic culture, such as the clerk using ‘Happy Holidays’ instead of ‘Merry Christmas’ or the ‘Coexist’ bumper sticker composed of icons from various faith traditions.”
No. The concerns have more to do with the kind of thing that happened to Charlie Kirk, not the kind of concerns that don’t arise when driving behind a Volvo with a “well-behaved women rarely make history” bumper sticker. I have never once seen an expression of right wing angst over the latter. “Mother, what ever are we to do? That lady in the check-out line ahead of us has purple hair . . .”
But Campbell then moves seamlessly from “it’s not happening” to “if it is happening, they probably brought down upon themselves.”
“I have seen many Christian public figures use dehumanizing and harmful language to talk about people in the LGBTQ+ community. I wonder if some of the resistance Christians feel is because of a lack of compassion and mercy from these figureheads.”
And here it might be helpful to remind everybody that God wrote a book. He did this so that we might have some kind of guidance when we are sorting through our definitions of “dehumanizing and harmful language.” Tell me, does Scripture refer to male prostitutes as dogs? Well, yeah, it does (Deut. 23:18; Rev. 22:15). I would call that dehumanizing, but it is also true—and the dehumanizing was done by the people engaging in such behavior, and not by the people recognizing it.
As an aside, someone like Campbell might object that I am selective in my denunciations . . . they say that I only punch left. I only draw on pungent biblical language when dealing with commies. But I would draw your attention to the first paragraph of this section, where I draw attention to the fact that advocates of white supremacy usually carry in their person a grand embodiment of the refutation.
Back to persecution. On top of everything else, Jesus tells us directly that the kind of verbal abuse that is directed at Christians counts as persecution. It is not a paper-cut kind of thing at all. Being spitefully maligned is persecution, and is usually preliminary to the bloodier forms of it. So being cursed, hated, and despitefully used is persecution.
“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you”Matthew 5:44 (KJV)
And it also matters what direction it is going. Have you ever wondered why Jesus gets to call the Pharisees a bag of snakes and they don’t get to call Him a glutton and a drunkard? The answer is found in this esoteric concept. What Jesus said was true, and what they were saying was false. Please, tell me more about this odd religion of yours. True? False? These are strange concepts, pilgrim.
Modern liberalized Christians think that polemical debate is like a football game where clipping or pass interference from one team needs to be exactly the same as from the other team. And the refs were all trained in the Enlightenment Academy for Acceptable Public Discourse, and so they will no doubt help to keep all of this “fair.”
Fair? By what standard? I have a friend who wants to know.
Election Denial
Campbell then appeals to what all sensible people agree on, which is that there was no election fraud in the 2020 election. Calm down, everybody. We know this because sensible people are defined as those who know there was no fraud in that election. Try to keep up, man.
“Many Christian nationalists claim that clandestine groups are hiding in the shadows orchestrating massive fraud to elect liberal candidates.”
But in the most recent news drop on this topic, Fulton County, Georgia—ground zero of electoral monkeyshines—just acknowledged (as in, admitted) that they counted 300,000 votes that were not properly signed off, and were hence illegal votes. 300K votes were unlawfully counted, in a state that Biden carried by 11K votes.
“Some have even claimed that a certain election was rigged before the voting process was even over.”
Imagine! If you object during the heist, this is proof that your mind was made up already. You are projecting. If you demonstrate that there was a heist after the fact (300K illegal votes is not exactly a bagatelle, just saying), someone will rise to Hillary heights and say, “At this point, what difference does it make?”
“While thus far there has been little to no evidence of election tampering across America, it will likely do no good to argue the merits of the case. I encourage you to guide the conversation toward shared values . . ..”
There is little to no evidence for your opponent’s position, and this is why it is useless to argue the merits of your case. Your case is too strong for their weak minds! Time to change the subject! As the Buddha might say, “these are not edifying questions, my son.”
Okay, he does acknowledge that people in power will often use all kinds of tricks to remain in power, but he is apparently doing this to leave room for Democrats to deny election results if they ever lose a close one. Not that they need to be left much room—they deny the results of lost elections regardless. Right, Hillary? Right, Albert? Right, Stacey?
Our Lizard Overlords
Campbell also chides the Christian nationalist movement for having an insufficiently lofty view of our rulers and potentates. We tend to think of them as our lizard overlords, or “even sadistic pedophiles” (p. 170). Campbell finds the levels of disrespect here concerning.
“The oft-repeated MAGA rallying cry ‘Drain the Swamp!’ stems from this belief”
But this is another area where he needs to hedge his bets, because he thinks exactly the same thing, only running in the other direction. He believes in the possibility of lizard overlords too, only in his dreams they have a red coloring instead of blue.
“While our conversation partners may misdiagnose these evildoers’ identities and the extent of their guilt, we must not dismiss the reality that people in power often perpetrate evil acts.”
Right. If Christian nationalists come into power, they would be in thrall to Leviathan, the sea monster who must be disarmed. They would unleash all manner of mayhem, and the demons of low tax rates would swarm. They would most certainly perpetrate evil acts, and would oversee the formation of a swamp that would need to be drained by some left wing statesman—a mix of Gandhi, Martin Luther King, St. Francis, and Smokey Bear.
That would usher in, for Campbell at any rate, fun times.
Bibles and Prayers
But enough with the disputing. Let us conclude on a note of agreement. Public schools are the “front line of the culture wars” (p. 172). That is certainly true. Our responses to this truth do vary, but we agree on the facts of the case. The government schools are right at the center of all of this nonsense.
The government school system is the established church of secularism, and that is why it needs to go. So I do not think we can reform anything by getting prayers and Bibles back into the schools. I am against prayer in public school for the same reason that I am against drinking fountains there, and lockers, and hallways, and mostly especially . . . children.