Define What You Mean By "Biblical Principles"

One of the most common phrases in American politics today is also one of the least understood and defined.

“Biblical principles” “Christian values” “Judeo-Christian values” “Godly principles”

Have a conversation with any Christian nationalist and almost as if on cue, one of these phrases will come spewing out of their mouths as a cudgel to end the conversation. All these phrases are interchangeable.

Moreover, Christian nationalists rely on these phrases to generate authority, credibility, and historical veracity. By claiming the mantle of “Christian principles,” it is as if all conversation, reason, or critical thinking must come to an end.

Christian nationalist politicians promise to “restore biblical principles.” Certain advocacy groups insist that America was founded on “Christian values.” Mom’s for Liberty-controlled school boards invoke “godly principles” when debating curriculum or banning books. Christian nationalists frequently argue that our nation’s problems stem from abandoning “Judeo-Christian principles.”

The phrase carries enormous rhetorical power. It sounds authoritative, reassuring, and familiar to millions of Americans. But there is an obvious follow-up question that is rarely asked and should be asked every time.

Which biblical principles are you talking about? Can you define what this means? What are those principles? Why do you choose those principles at the expense of others?

I encourage readers to ask these questions every time a good Christian nationalist utters this phrase. They are obliged to explain themselves and what they mean.

The question isn’t whether the Bible contains moral principles. Nearly every Christian, and even many non-Christians, believe it does. The essential question is which of those principles are being elevated into political priorities, and which are quietly scuttled, ignored, and left behind.

That question deserves an honest answer.

The Bible is not a collection of a dozen talking points. It contains hundreds of commands, teachings, stories, and moral themes. Any movement claiming to represent “biblical principles” must inevitably choose which ones receive the greatest emphasis.

One would assume that the principles Christians choose to elevate would be those most prominent in the Bible. Upon close inspection, however, that isn’t necessarily the case. Those choices reveal more about the movement than the Bible itself.

Today, Christian nationalism tends to emphasize a fairly consistent set of conservative issues under the banner of Christian principles: opposition to abortion, traditional one-man, one-woman marriage, opposition to LGBTQ rights, male leadership in the family, public displays of Christianity, religious expression in schools, strong national borders, and the belief that America has a unique covenantal relationship with God.

Whether one agrees with those positions or not, they are familiar. They dominate political speeches, campaign advertisements, church conferences, and legislative priorities associated with the movement. In fact, these so-called biblical principles are the backbone of Project 2025, written and financed by the Christian nationalist Heritage Foundation, and adopted by the Trump administration.

But what if we compare that conservative list with the subjects Jesus discussed most often? The contrast is striking. It turns out that Jesus spoke very little, or in some cases not at all, about some of those priorities.

Read through the four Gospels, and one discovers that Jesus spends remarkably little time discussing national identity or sexual ethics compared with the attention he gives to poverty, wealth, humility, forgiveness, mercy, justice, hypocrisy, and care for society’s most vulnerable people.

Consider Matthew 25, where Jesus describes the final judgment. The separating line is not whether nations displayed the Ten Commandments in public buildings or required prayer in schools. Instead, He asks whether people fed the hungry, welcomed strangers, clothed the naked, cared for the sick, and visited prisoners.

That should give every Christian nationalist pause. Yet, the typical Christian nationalist retort is that, “sure, Jesus talked about these things but within the confines of private practice and piety. He never demanded nations to provide these for people.”

Well, that just isn’t so.

The Hebrew prophets repeatedly define national righteousness in ways that sound surprisingly modern.

Isaiah urges God’s people to “seek justice,” “defend the oppressed,” and “plead the cause of the widow.”

Amos declares, “Let justice roll down like waters.”

Micah famously summarizes God’s expectations in three phrases: “Do justice. Love mercy. Walk humbly.”

Jeremiah praises national leaders who defend “the cause of the poor and needy.”

These prophets certainly addressed idolatry and personal morality. But again and again, they measured a nation’s faithfulness by how it treated vulnerable people.

The New Testament continues this emphasis.

James defines “pure religion” in remarkably practical terms: caring for orphans and widows in their distress while remaining personally faithful to God.

Notice what is missing: nothing about national greatness, nothing about political dominance, and nothing about preserving cultural power.

Instead, the focus falls squarely on compassion and justice, and national leaders are held to account for these. These are true Biblical principles.

This is where the phrase “biblical principles” deserves closer examination.

Imagine Congress announced tomorrow that because the United States is a “Christian nation,” every law would be based on the teachings Jesus emphasized most frequently in the Bible.

Whether one supports those specific policies is almost beside the point. The broader observation is that these themes recur throughout Scripture repeatedly, yet they rarely occupy the center of Christian nationalist political messaging.

This does not mean Christian nationalists reject these biblical teachings. Many devote themselves to charitable work, disaster relief, foster care, food banks, prison ministries, and overseas missions. Those efforts should be recognized and respected.

But the real question is different:

Why do some biblical principles become defining political priorities while others remain largely matters of private charity?

That distinction is vitally important. Christian nationalists should be required to provide a rationale. They must answer this question.

Then there is another issue that often goes unnoticed.

Jesus consistently warns against the pursuit of power itself. His disciples repeatedly argued over who would become greatest. Jesus’ response was always the same.

“The greatest among you must become the servant.”

The kingdoms of the world seek domination; the Kingdom of God seeks service.

Throughout the Gospels, Jesus resists political power, refuses attempts to make Him king by force, rejects Satan’s offer of worldly authority, and tells Pilate that His kingdom is “not of this world.”

Those passages raise an uncomfortable question for any movement, left or right, that seeks to fuse religious identity with governmental power.

Is Christianity at its strongest when it governs? Or when it serves?

History offers a sobering lesson.

Whenever Christians have gained significant political power, the temptation has often been to confuse defending Christianity with defending the interests of those already in authority. Abuse and authoritarian governments always arise when fused with religious zeal.

That temptation is hardly unique to Christians. Every religion and every political ideology wrestles with the seduction of power.

Perhaps that is precisely why Jesus spoke so frequently about humility and the rejection of human power.

The phrase “biblical principles” should therefore invite curiosity and questioning rather than applause.

Ask which principles.

Ask why these principles rather than others.

Ask why sexual morality receives sustained political attention while economic justice receives comparatively little.

Ask why public displays of faith often generate more legislative energy than caring for prisoners, welcoming strangers, or confronting corruption.

These are not hostile questions. They are biblical questions.

They arise from taking Scripture seriously enough to examine the whole witness of the Bible rather than selecting only those passages that reinforce certain existing political preferences.

In a pluralistic constitutional republic, Christians will naturally disagree about public policy. Good people can reach different conclusions about immigration, taxation, education, healthcare, or criminal justice while remaining faithful believers.

But no Christian movement should be allowed to invoke “biblical principles” without explaining what it means.

Because the Bible speaks about far more than sexuality. Far more than public prayer. Far more than national identity.

It speaks continuously and relentlessly about justice…

…About mercy.

…About humility.

…About truthfulness.

…About generosity.

…About the dangers of wealth and the abuse of power.

…About caring for the least among us.

If we are going to invoke “biblical principles” in our politics, then intellectual honesty requires that we ask a simple question every time the phrase appears.

Which biblical principles? And why did you choose those over others?

Only after answering that question can we begin an honest conversation about whether our politics truly reflects the breadth of Scripture, or merely the portions that happen to support our preferred political ideology.

Share

Share Things We Don't Talk About Like Politics & Religion

Leave a comment

Refer a friend

Give a gift subscription