Faithful Witness in a Culture War Era
A theological critique of Culture War Christianity and a proposal for a better way forward.
The American church finds itself at a crossroads. In recent decades, particularly within white evangelical circles, an increasing number of Christians have embraced a culture war posture—one that conflates spiritual faithfulness with political power and moral dominance in the public square. This posture is not merely a strategy or emphasis; it has become a theological lens, shaping how Christians view the world, engage with neighbors, and understand the mission of the church. In pulpits, pews, and public witness, this culture war Christianity often prioritizes cultural influence over Christlike faithfulness.
This white paper is an attempt to articulate a theological critique of that posture. It is written in hope that the church can recover its identity as a Spirit-formed people shaped by the cross rather than by combat. The goal is fivefold: (1) to examine the current shape of culture war Christianity within white, politically conservative, evangelicalism in America, (2) to trace its historical development, (3) to identify and assess its core theological errors, (4) to name the potential harm it causes to ecclesiology, public theology, and evangelism, and (5) to propose a better way forward for the church, especially in its preaching ministry. What follows is both an indictment and an invitation—to lay down the sword of cultural dominance and take up the cross of Christ.
Understanding the Present Moment
A growing number of white American evangelicals are being shaped not primarily by Scripture, but by the stories and scripts of a culture war. In this framework, the world is divided between moral insiders and immoral outsiders. Christian identity becomes conflated with political identity. Cultural decline is blamed on those outside the faith, while Christian faithfulness is equated with reclaiming influence, fighting ideological enemies, and protecting the nation from moral decay (Du Mez, 4–8; Whitehead & Perry, 3–7)
What was once a fringe posture has now been mainstreamed by powerful media voices, political figures, and even some pulpits. In many churches, cultural commentary now overshadows biblical interpretation. Preaching assumes the political alignment of the congregation and implies that faithfulness to God requires loyalty to certain political outcomes (Wear, 26–30. Christianity is no longer presented as a call to radical discipleship in the way of Jesus, but as a means to preserve a particular vision of American life (Jones, 91–93).
This mindset operates with a set of tacit assumptions:
Moral consensus should reflect Christian values. Culture war Christianity assumes that American society should reflect Christian ethics—not simply in the church, but in law and cultural norms.
Christians should hold cultural power. It expects a return to, or maintenance of, Christian influence over public institutions.
Resistance to Christian dominance is demonic or persecutory. Any critique of this dominance is often framed not as pluralism or secularism, but as spiritual warfare.
Non-Christians should act like Christians. There is a deep (but often unexamined) expectation that non-believers should desire, discern, and do the will of God.
Empirical data supports this perception. According to a 2023 PRRI study, 50% of white evangelicals agreed that "God intended America to be a new promised land for European Christians" and 57% agreed that “being Christian is important to being truly American.” White evangelicals were also the group most likely to agree that the U.S. government should declare America a Christian nation (PRRI 2023, 8–9; Whitehead & Perry, 23–29).
While not all white evangelicals embrace these views, the logic of cultural dominance remains persuasive in many congregations. This posture has been described by scholars as a form of Christian nationalism (Whitehead & Perry, 3), but its influence goes beyond overt political allegiance. It is also a pastoral problem. Pastors are under pressure to be culture warriors, to take public stances on political issues that may have little to do with core gospel commitments (Wear, 68–71). In this atmosphere, the pulpit becomes a platform for resistance, not repentance; for preserving cultural norms, not proclaiming new creation (Keller, 135–138).
To preach faithfully in this environment requires us to name the false gospel embedded in culture war Christianity. It requires us to recover a theology of exile, of cruciform power, and of Spirit-empowered holiness—not state-enforced morality. Only then can we begin to see clearly what faithfulness looks like when the church no longer imagines itself at the center, but at the margins, where it has always borne the most faithful witness (Hauerwas & Willimon, 16–18; Rutledge, 475–477).
The Origins and Development of Culture War Christianity
The roots of culture war Christianity run deep, stretching back to the fourth century when Christianity transitioned from a persecuted movement to the official religion of the Roman Empire under Constantine. This alliance between the church and political power introduced a new temptation: to confuse the mission of the church with the preservation of empire. What began as a community of marginalized disciples became a pillar of political identity, with rulers advancing the faith through coercion rather than conversion (Wilken, 171–175).
That Constantinian impulse—Christianity as cultural dominance—has reemerged in different forms throughout Western history, particularly in colonial and nationalist projects. In the American context, it was baptized early into the myth of manifest destiny, the belief that the United States had a divine mandate to spread both democracy and Christianity. White Protestantism became woven into national identity, especially through institutions like the public school system, civil religion, and political rhetoric (Jones, 33–37).
The 20th century marked a new phase. After World War II, white evangelicals began to reassert themselves as defenders of American moral order. The formation of the Moral Majority in the late 1970s, under the leadership of Jerry Falwell Sr., was a turning point. Evangelical leaders built alliances with conservative politicians, framing battles over abortion, school prayer, and LGBTQ rights as existential threats to the nation’s moral fabric. As Kristin Kobes Du Mez notes in Jesus and John Wayne, these alliances also shaped the evangelical imagination around masculinity, power, and national identity (Du Mez, 107–113).
By the time of the Reagan administration, evangelicalism had become a recognizable political bloc. Faithfulness was increasingly measured not by the fruit of the Spirit but by one’s stance on culture war issues. Through the 1990s and early 2000s, organizations like Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, and later, the Family Research Council, solidified this framework through media, lobbying, and pastoral resources. The line between discipleship and political activism blurred (Du Mez, 135–140; 191–195).
After 9/11, this dynamic intensified. As Robert P. Jones observes in The End of White Christian America, many white evangelicals interpreted national crisis through an apocalyptic lens that reinforced a sense of embattlement. The loss of cultural privilege was framed as persecution. The pulpit became a place not just for forming disciples but for galvanizing political resistance (Jones, 93–97).
Today’s expressions of culture war Christianity, particularly among white evangelicals, are not an aberration but the fruit of decades of formation. They rest on a theological foundation built not on the Sermon on the Mount, but on the assumption that the church’s health is tied to the nation’s greatness (Du Mez, 9–10). Until this historical entanglement is acknowledged and re-examined, it will remain difficult to disentangle cultural Christianity from authentic Christian witness (Hauerwas & Willimon, 18–21).
Potential Errors at the Heart of Culture War Christianity
At the foundation of culture war Christianity lies a series of theological missteps that distort the gospel, misrepresent the mission of the church, and misplace hope. Chief among them is a fundamental confusion between spiritual formation and state-enforced morality (Stassen & Gushee, 111–114).
First, culture war Christianity expects those without the Spirit to desire and do the things of the Spirit. Paul is clear that "the natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God" and cannot understand them (1 Cor 2:14). To mandate Christian moral behavior for a society that has not been spiritually renewed is to expect fruits without roots. It also fails to grasp the Spirit’s essential role in transformation (Rom 8:5–9). Moral conformity is not synonymous with spiritual regeneration (Volf, 76–78).
Second, it misappropriates Old Testament paradigms of theocracy and applies them uncritically to a pluralistic democracy. Israel’s covenantal relationship with Yahweh, which governed its national life, was never intended as a template for Gentile nations. The New Testament does not seek to establish a Christian state but instead envisions a dispersed, pilgrim people living under the lordship of Christ across all nations (1 Pet 2:11–12; Phil 3:20). This misapplication is a recurring theme in American civil religion (Jones, 33–36).
Third, it elevates coercive power over cruciform witness. Jesus rejected Satan’s offer of political control in exchange for worship (Matt 4:8–10). He taught that greatness comes through service, not domination (Mark 10:42–45). His throne was a cross. Culture war Christianity often reverses this, seeking influence through strength rather than love, visibility rather than humility (Rutledge, 442–446).
Fourth, it assumes that God’s purposes are advanced primarily through legislation and litigation. While laws have moral dimensions, Scripture consistently points to the people of God as the primary agents of God’s mission—not the state (Smith, 91–95). The kingdom of God is not advanced by Caesar but by the church embodying the way of Christ (Hauerwas & Willimon, 47–49).
Finally, it misunderstands the nature of persecution. In the New Testament, persecution is what happens when Christians embody the gospel so fully that it disrupts unjust systems and offends worldly powers. It is not the mere loss of privilege. Culture war theology often interprets resistance to Christian dominance as persecution, which insulates the church from legitimate critique and fosters a victim complex (French, 123–125).
These theological errors are not peripheral—they strike at the heart of Christian identity and mission. They replace the call to be a holy nation, a royal priesthood, and a people set apart (1 Pet 2:9) with a desire to be a dominant cultural force. And in doing so, they obscure the beauty of the gospel, which is not about control but about reconciliation, not about winning but about witness (Volf, 93–97).
The Potential Harm of Culture War Christianity
Culture war Christianity doesn’t merely distort doctrine; it damages the church’s capacity to be the church. It reshapes ecclesiology around political identity, undermines public credibility, and undercuts the relational power of evangelism.
Ecclesiological Harm
At the congregational level, culture war Christianity reorients the church’s mission away from spiritual formation and toward political alignment. Faithfulness becomes synonymous with voting patterns or cultural resistance, rather than discipleship and Christlikeness (Wear, 102–104). Pastors feel pressure to deliver political commentary rather than biblical teaching, and members are catechized more by partisan media than by Scripture (Keller, 135–138). The church becomes a tribe rather than a body—a place to reinforce ideology rather than to confess sin, receive grace, and grow in love.
This tribalism fractures unity. Disagreement is not viewed as an opportunity for mutual sharpening but as betrayal. People who share one Lord, one faith, one baptism are divided by party allegiance. The gospel becomes secondary to the preservation of cultural norms (Whitehead & Perry, 144–147).
Public Theology Harm
Culture war Christianity hollows out public theology. When Christian identity is reduced to moral posturing in the public square, the deeper theological witness of incarnation, cross, and resurrection is lost (Volf, 96–98). The church is no longer known as the community of the forgiven and forgiving, but as the enforcers of a moral regime.
Moreover, this approach often sacrifices integrity for political gain. When moral compromise is excused for the sake of influence—when power is prioritized over character—the church loses its prophetic voice. The salt loses its saltiness (Matt 5:13). The result is a cynical and disenchanted public that rightly questions whether the church believes its own message (Jones, 93–96).
Evangelistic Harm
The effects on evangelism are perhaps the most tragic. Culture war Christianity teaches people to associate the gospel with judgment, exclusion, and domination. The good news of grace becomes tangled in a web of political baggage (Barna Group, 14–15). For many outside the church—especially younger generations and those from marginalized communities—evangelicalism is not a path to hope but a symbol of intolerance.
This perception is not merely a public relations problem—it is a spiritual crisis. It reveals that we have lost sight of the scandalous, welcoming grace of Jesus. In the Gospels, Jesus was magnetic to sinners and threatening to the religious elite. Culture war Christianity reverses this, making the church more comfortable for the self-righteous and alienating to those who need mercy most (Keller, 115–118).
If we want to reclaim a vibrant, faithful witness, we must disentangle the church from the identity and tactics of culture war. We must return to a vision of the church as a cruciform community—marked by humility, compassion, and deep fidelity to Christ. Only then will we rediscover the power of the gospel to transform lives, not through coercion or control, but through loving service and sacrifice (Rutledge, 471–475).
A Better Way Forward — Theology and Practice for Exilic Faithfulness
The path forward is not a return to cultural dominance, but a rediscovery of the church’s identity as a Spirit-empowered, cruciform community. If the problem with culture war Christianity is that it weds the gospel to coercive power and public influence, then the solution is a renewed commitment to our identity as exiles—resident aliens shaped by the cross and animated by the Spirit (Hauerwas & Willimon, 47–49).
Recovering a Theology of Exile
From Abraham’s journey to a foreign land, to Israel’s time in Babylon, to the early church scattered throughout the Roman world, God’s people live as faithful exiles in empire. Peter addresses the early Christians as “exiles scattered” (1 Pet 1:1), calling them to live holy lives among the nations (1 Pet 2:11–12).
Jeremiah’s surprising command to the exiles in Babylon (Jer 29:7) was not to revolt or assimilate, but to build houses, plant gardens, raise families, and seek the shalom of the city—even as they remained faithful to Yahweh. Daniel and his friends modeled this “third way.” They worked for the good of Babylon (Dan 1:3–5), adopted Babylonian names and roles (Dan 1:7), and yet drew firm boundaries when allegiance to the empire meant betraying God (Dan 1:8; 3:16–18). They submitted to civil authority where they could, but they resisted idolatry, injustice, and pride through nonviolent faithfulness—even when it cost them their lives (Dan 3:14–25).
Jesus continued this way of exile under Roman rule. He called for love of enemy (Matt 5:44), paid taxes without granting divine allegiance to Caesar (Matt 22:21), and denounced injustice at the cost of his life (Matt 26:3–4; Luke 23:44–46). His resurrection (Acts 2:22–36) vindicated this path—not of domination, but of faithful presence.
Babylon becomes a symbolic pattern in Scripture (Rev 18:1–3), representing any human institution demanding ultimate allegiance. Christians today still live in Babylon. Like Israel in exile, like Daniel in the court, and like Jesus under Caesar, we are called to a posture of “subversive loyalty”—to seek the good of our neighbors while reserving ultimate loyalty for God alone.
This way of exile offers a theological lens for a post-Christendom church. It does not despair over marginalization. It embraces it as an opportunity to recover the beauty of holy difference. It is not triumphal, but hopeful—grounded in the promise that Christ’s kingdom will prevail (Rev 11:15).
A Spirit-Empowered Ethic
The Christian life is not a moral checklist enforced by legislation, but a life empowered by the Holy Spirit. Paul is unambiguous: “If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ” (Rom 8:9). Moral transformation is the fruit of the Spirit’s indwelling, not coercion. The Spirit produces love, joy, peace, patience, and kindness—not outrage, fear, and dominance (Gal 5:22–23).
Pastors and churches must resist the temptation to preach behavior modification for non-Christians that is impossible apart from the power of the gospel. To call for virtue without new birth is to return to law without grace and negate the necessity of the cross. Instead, we proclaim the crucified and risen Christ, who invites people to die to self and live by the Spirit.
Reimagining Homiletics
Preaching in an age shaped by culture war requires courage and clarity. It must be both prophetic and pastoral—resisting the idols of our age while healing the wounds they cause. This kind of preaching does not rally people to political battle, but calls them to spiritual transformation into the likeness of Christ. It does not frame opponents as enemies to defeat, but as neighbors to love. It does not exacerbate fear and outrage toward secularism but fosters compassion and gracious evangelism to those who are lost.
Effective homiletics must:
Refuse to baptize political ideology in Christian language.
Expose the false gospels of political partisanship, nationalism, fear, and power.
Center the cross as the pattern of Christian life and leadership.
Invite hearers to a kingdom ethic shaped by the character of Christ not culture—whether conservative, progressive, or any other.
Such preaching forms disciples who are resilient in hope, generous in disagreement, and distinctively Christlike in how they think, feel, desire, believe and live together.
Conclusion
Culture war Christianity is not the inevitable result of cultural change; it is the product of theological drift. It arises when fear supplants faith, when power is preferred over presence, and when political identity overrides our baptismal identity in Christ. It promises victory but delivers division. It seeks moral order but undermines spiritual formation. It defends truth but abandons grace.
In contrast, the gospel offers a better way. It calls the church not to conquest, but to cruciformity—not to dominate, but to disciple. In every age, God’s people are most powerful not when they grasp for control, but when they embody a kingdom ethic that confounds the wisdom of the world. We are called to be a peculiar people—salt and light in a world hungry for hope.
This calling requires courage. It will mean losing some battles that once seemed urgent. It may mean giving up platforms and privileges. But it will also mean gaining clarity, rediscovering our witness, and becoming the kind of church the world cannot ignore—not because we are loud, but because we are holy.
The future of Christian witness in America will not be secured by winning the culture war. It will be secured by walking the way of Jesus—the narrow way, the cross-shaped way, the way that leads to life.
Bibliography
Barna Group. The Open Generation: How Teens Around the World View the Bible, Jesus, and Justice. Ventura, CA: Barna Group, 2022.
Du Mez, Kristin Kobes. Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation. New York: Liveright, 2020.
French, David. Divided We Fall: America's Secession Threat and How to Restore Our Nation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2020.
Hauerwas, Stanley, and William H. Willimon. Resident Aliens: Life in the Christian Colony. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1989.
Jones, Robert P. The End of White Christian America. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2016.
Keller, Timothy. Preaching: Communicating Faith in an Age of Skepticism. New York: Viking, 2015.
Peterson, Eugene H. Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places: A Conversation in Spiritual Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005.
Pew Research Center. Religion and Public Life Project. Various reports, 2020–2024. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/
PRRI (Public Religion Research Institute). A Christian Nation? Understanding the Threat of Christian Nationalism to American Democracy and Culture. Washington, DC: PRRI, February 2023. https://www.prri.org/research/christian-nationalism-american-democracy-2023/
Rutledge, Fleming. The Crucifixion: Understanding the Death of Jesus Christ. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015.
Smith, James K. A. Awaiting the King: Reforming Public Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2017.
Stassen, Glen H., and David P. Gushee. Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016.
Volf, Miroslav. A Public Faith: How Followers of Christ Should Serve the Common Good. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2011.
Wear, Michael. The Spirit of Our Politics: Spiritual Formation and the Renovation of Public Life. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Reflective, 2023.
Whitehead, Andrew L., and Samuel L. Perry. Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020.
Wilken, Robert Louis. The Spirit of Early Christian Thought: Seeking the Face of God. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003.
Wright, N. T. How God Became King: The Forgotten Story of the Gospels. New York: HarperOne, 2012.
