Several weeks ago, I did a Skype interview with Steve Hassan on dominionism for an upcoming book he is working on. Today, he brought it out as a blog post on his Freedom of Mind website.
Steve is an internationally known expert on mind control groups. He was formerly in the Unification Church. I use his BITE Model when teaching persuasion in social psychology. It was a pleasure being interviewed and spending some time with Steve.
This was an interesting dialogue. Hearing the name “Doug Burleigh “ sent me to Google. I found yes, that was the guy I knew back in my Young Life days back in the late 60s early 70s. But we pronounced his last name like “Burly”.
Dominionism is antithetical to our constitutional republic.
It’s antithetical to the Bible as well.
Right-wing, fundamentalist Christians and left-wing, liberal Christians have something in common here, as both would oppose this teaching.
Dominionism, or at least parts of it, appeal quite strongly to many right wing fundamentalists.
You are confusing social conservatives and religious conservatives.
When you take a close look at Dominuism, you’ll find it has a lot in common with Mormonism (modern prophet’s declarations superseding scripture, beliefs at odds with historic Christinanity), a socially conservative religion that is hardly “Christian fundamentalist”.
Christian fundamentalist are as appalled by Dominionism’s deviations from scripture and the historic Christian faith as they are by Mormonism.
List any fundamentalist leaders who have openly opposed Dominionism. Would need to include quotes and sources. The elements of Dominionist thinking, and their goals for society have been the agenda of fundamentalists for decades (at least since the 80’s). Just look at the sermons of Jerry Falwell Sr. and Jr. , and the sermons of D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge. You might want to look into Kenneth Copeland and James Robison.
Neither Kennith Copeland or James Robison are theological conservatives. Both are Pentecostals who are now NAR/Dominionist.
Fallwell Jr. is a good example of someone who is drifting from the faith and falling into Dominionism. Evangelicals, particularly the mega-church variety, have done a terrible job of holding to the faith and tolerating bad doctrine.
As to Fallwell St. and Kennedy, while both endorsed Christians being active in politics, neither endorsed Dominionism (as far as I know). And no, Dominionism and being involved in politics are not the same thing.
The “Seven Mountains Prophecy” is the core domionism belief, and involes much more than just being involved in politics. For one, it requires you to believe modern apostles (on par with Peter and John) are walking the Earth today giving out prophetic orders that Christians must obey.
You can be a Christian that believes in being involved in politics without buying into the NAR/Dominionism heresy (and yes, I do believe their teachings cross the line into outright heresy).
John MacArthur is an example of a conservative who has taken a stand against Dominionism. His “Strange Fire” conference (on YouTube) did a good job of taking apart the NAR.
Chris Rosebrough, a conservative pastor who runs “Fighting For The Faith”, routinly critisizes both the New Apostolic Reformation and Dominionism.
So the problem here is you’re attempting to redefine the generally accepted definition of right-wing fundamentalist Christian, which encompasses all conservative “Bible-believing” Christians whether or not they agree with Dominionist principles.
It would be much clearer just to state that within the right-wing fundamentalist Christianity, there are those who agree with Dominionism and those who oppose it. Frankly, it’s probably even more accurate to state that there is a wide spectrum of believe on how much Christianity should be enshrined in a nation’s government. After all, there are plenty of American Christians who would prefer Christianity be given favored status (as in the UK and other countries) without imposing the full Dominionist theology.
So the problem here is you’re attempting to redefine the generally accepted definition of right-wing fundamentalist Christian, which encompasses all conservative “Bible-believing” Christians whether or not they agree with Dominionist principles.
It would be much clearer just to state that within the right-wing fundamentalist Christianity, there are those who agree with Dominionism and those who oppose it. Frankly, it’s probably even more accurate to state that there is a wide spectrum of belief on how much Christianity should be enshrined in a nation’s government. After all, there are plenty of American Christians who would prefer Christianity be given favored status (as in the UK and other countries) without imposing the full Dominionist theology.
“…right-wing fundamentalist Christian, which encompasses all conservative “Bible-believing” Christians whether or not they agree with Dominionist principles.”
Dominionist are not (theologically) fundamentalist, conservative Bible-believing Christians. They are, in fact, theologically “liberal” in the sense that they are willing ignore the historic Christianity and the traditional interpretation of the text and create new ones. They aren’t conserving anything, nor are they sticking to the fundamentals of the faith.
Of course, at this point, we’re arguing semantics. Instead of arguing over minutia like the meaning of conservative or liberal, we should be focusing on the bigger picture. And the bigger picture is Dominionist are perverting the faith.
I mentioned Mormonism earlier. It’s a religion that has a veneer of Christianity, but it’s not a Christian faith and its members are not Christian.
The NAR/Domintionist (who are tied at the hip) are headed down the same path. Their apostles/prophets are creating new religious principles out of thin air (or their own heads), such as the Seven Mountains Prophecy. If they keep this up (and I think they will) they will end up in the same state as the Mormons: with a religion that has a veneer of Christianity, but that is not a Christian faith and with members that are not Christian.
During the 2016 primaries, I tried to dissuade people from voting for Ted Cruz based on the fact that his father is NAR and involved with Dominionism. They were convinced that Cruz was not tied up with his father religiously, but if they did believe that Cruz was NAR/Dominionist, they would not have voted for Cruz.
I’m glad WT is tackling this subject. I wish more people would. It’s a growing problem in Christianity that is getting nowhere the attention it deserves. But, if we get stuck on labels instead of addressing the problem, the problem will grow.
This is an area where Christians on the left and those on the right who do not believe in NAR/Dominionist principles (and there are a lot of them) can work together.
“Their apostles and prophets are creating new religious principles out of thin air.” Amen. Big time. Last year in Boston, Chuck Pierce who is acknowledged as having inherited Peter Wagner’s “mantle” falsely declared “the covenant God gave to national/ethnic Israel is the same covenant He gave to all mankind.” Yikes!
Scripture directly teaches Jesus Himself IS our new covenant. ( Isaiah 49:8-9, 42:6-9, 59:21) Jesus redemption blood offered in heaven for our eternal redemption IS new covenant blood. ( Luke 22:20, 1 Cor 11:25)
The bad shepherds are the ones in most trouble with God as they are under a spiritual delusion by unwittingly “ trampling under foot the Son of God, and having regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and have insulted the Holy Spirit of grace.” ( Hebrews 10:29)
This is the bottom line in Gods eyes for the false apostles and prophets in the false apostolic- prophetic movement and its very very subtle.
“Their apostles and prophets are creating new religious principles out of thin air.” Amen. Big time. Last year in Boston, Chuck Pierce who is acknowledged as having inherited Peter Wagner’s “mantle” falsely declared “the covenant God gave to national/ethnic Israel is the same covenant He gave to all mankind.” Yikes!
Scripture directly teaches Jesus Himself IS our new covenant. ( Isaiah 49:8-9, 42:6-9, 59:21) Jesus redemption blood offered in heaven for our eternal redemption IS new covenant blood. ( Luke 22:20, 1 Cor 11:25)
The bad shepherds are the ones in most trouble with God as they are under a spiritual delusion by unwittingly “ trampling under foot the Son of God, and having regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and have insulted the Holy Spirit of grace.” ( Hebrews 10:29)
This is the bottom line in Gods eyes for the false apostles and prophets in the false apostolic- prophetic movement and its very very subtle.
Kennedy used to sermonize about our “divinely inspired” Constitution- and both urged fellow fundamentalists to enter politics to bring our country back from secularism and recreate the godly Christ-centered Bible believing nation it was at the start. the same nation that codified chattel slavery in the 3/5 compromise. I don’t know how long exactly the “Seven Mountains” concept of societal control has been around – at least – in those words- but Falwell and Kennedy would have been right in at the front of the parade. read Jeff Sharlot’s book, The Family. And doesn’t a lot of this thought lead back to Rousas Rushdoony- who has been around almost since there was dirt? Nothing really new about any of that. Take a look at the crowd around the president* when he is being prayed over and I think you can see a goodly number of Dominionists present. Maybe all of them.
Plenty of fundamentalist do not believe the Constitution was divinely inspired, because that would put it on the same footing as the Bible–the word of God. Kennedy, if he said this, was flat out wrong.
“I don’t know how long exactly the “Seven Mountains” concept of societal control has been around…”
Then you should take some time to learn about it, because it’s not what you just said it was.
The idea that Christians (as well as all other citizens) should be involved in and influencing government is as old as the Republic.
“The seven mountain mandate or the seven mountain prophecy is an anti-biblical and damaging movement that has gained a following in some Charismatic and Pentecostal churches. Those who follow the seven mountain mandate believe that, in order for Christ to return to earth, the church must take control of the seven major spheres of influence in society for the glory of Christ. Once the world has been made subject to the kingdom of God, Jesus will return and rule the world.”
https://www.gotquestions.org/seven-mountain-mandate.html
It’s worth reading the entire article at the link. Please read it. The main point though, is the mandate is the result of extra-Biblical revelation. Those that hold to it, believe the vision carries just as much weight and authority as the Bible. From the same article:
“The theology associated with the seven mountain mandate is dangerous, and it sheds a terribly negative light on Christians everywhere. The 7-M teaching puts a tremendous burden on believers to perform, make progress in their relative spheres of influence, and set the stage for Jesus’ return to earth—all without a definite end point. Little emphasis is placed on the gospel message of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ; the movement is more about staking claims and taking control. The seven mountain mandate is a movement led by false prophets, and it should be avoided and exposed whenever Bible-believing Christians encounter it.”
I’m glad WT is writing about this; I hope he does more to expose and explain this false theology.
It’s clear to me that you are having a difficult time (for whatever reason) differentiating between conservative Christians who advocate that Christians become politically active and the Seven-Moutains/Dominionist crowd. Stop painting with a broad brush. Just because the 7M group advocates political activism doesn’t mean all fundamentalist are going to jump into their heretical bed. Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope.
Unfortunately, it does mean some will. Franklin Graham is losing his way by associating with 7M. He should be called out on it.
And yes, I worry too that these people seem to have influence on the president.
Yes, the 7 mountain mandate is driven by the spirit of anti Christ and a part of the God mandated end time delusion where even the elect could be deceived. Cultish, religious and legalistic “things” are profoundly and subtlety taking many away from abiding in Christ and His teachings. The lust for political power and money is apparent. The great commandment, the great commission and Gods great prophetic purpose for His new covenant blood bought body to be one with the Trinity and each other are being cast aside by the false apostles and prophets of the false apostolic- prophetic movement. And Jesus weeps.
I’ve read allegations of Michael L. Brown being involved in the NAR, although he has denied its existence.
It is much more helpful in discussions with those in the NAR to use the more precise term which they readily accept, being the “apostolic-prophetic” movement. NAR carries negative connotations in their mind these past few years so those like Dr. Brown will reject that label in public now. He is however their main apologist to the mainline Evangelical world. The International Coalition of Apostolic Leaders (ICAL) and United States Coalition of Apostolic Leaders, (USACL) are the outgrowth of what they themselves use to term: NAR. From NAR of 20 years ago, to ICAL & USACL as the name today, there were one or two other marketing name changes in the past decade. But they are all the same people just using different names for the apostolic prophetic movements prime organization of ICAL and USACL. (These two are basically the same just different “spheres.”)
It is much more helpful in discussions with those in the NAR to use the more precise term which they readily accept, being the “apostolic-prophetic” movement. NAR carries negative connotations in their mind these past few years so those like Dr. Brown will reject that label in public now. He is however their main apologist to the mainline Evangelical world. The International Coalition of Apostolic Leaders (ICAL) and United States Coalition of Apostolic Leaders, (USACL) are the outgrowth of what they themselves use to term: NAR. From NAR of 20 years ago, to ICAL & USACL as the name today, there were one or two other marketing name changes in the past decade. But they are all the same people just using different names for the apostolic prophetic movements prime organization of ICAL and USACL. (These two are basically the same just different “spheres.”)
Dominionism is antithetical to our continued existence as a species. “Why worry about global warming or nuclear war when Jesus’ second coming is imminent?”
Dominionism is antithetical to our continued existence as a species. “Why worry about global warming or nuclear war when Jesus’ second coming is imminent?”
“IT’S ALL GONNA BURN! SCRIPTURE! SCRIPTURE SCRIPTURE!”
From your reference, I see you are another survivor of The Gospel According to Hal Lindsay and Christians For Nuclear War.
Not to be confused with its parent group, Christians Against World Peace.
Warren, you omitted the word “ago” in the first sentence. 🙂
Doh! Thanks, fixed.