What are "The Five Points of Christian Reconstruction?"

Gary Demar co-authored a book with Gary North in 1991 entitled,

Reconstructionists believe in a "minimal state." The purpose of getting involved in politics, as Reconstructionists see it, is to reduce the power of the State. Reconstructionists are not calling on the State to mandate prayer and Bible reading in the public (government) schools, as most fundamentalists advocate. Neither do we advocate teaching "Creation Science."²⁰ It is the non-Reconstructionists who petition the State for greater influence of the Christian worldview areas over which the Bible gives the state no jurisdiction. Reconstructionists do not believe that the State has the God-given authority to educate our children.

Because of our belief in a minimal State, taxes would be lowered for every citizen. This would encourage savings, reduce interest rates, and spur investment in high-risk technological ventures for the long-term betterment of the citizenry. Caring for the poor, as outlined by a book first published by American Vision in 1985 (Bringing in the Sheaves), is not the domain of the State. In fact, George Grant sees the State as a hindrance when it develops policies designed to "help the poor." Of course, Reconstructionists are not alone in this assessment.²¹

20. Norman L. Geisler, an ardent critic of Christian Reconstruction, supports the teaching of "Creation Science" in government schools. Geisler, ~ Creator in the Courtroom: The Controversial Arkansas Creation-Evolution Trial (Milford, MI: Mott Media, 1982). Isn't this mandating that the State involve itself in religion?

21. See the books by non-Christians such as Charles Murray, Thomas Sowell, Walter E. Williams, and by Christian author E. Calvin Beisner: Prosperity and Poverty: The Compassionate Use of Resources in a World of Scarcity (Crossway Books, 1988).

Reconstructionists believe in the political process. We also believe in gradual, pervasive transformation of human institutions in the wake of worldwide conversion to orthodox Christianity. In the Reconstructionists' worldview, civil government at the top will change when government at the bottom changes: from self-government to civil governments at all levels. I've developed this concept in numerous books and articles. In fact, my first book, God and Government: A Biblical and Historical Study (1982), begins, not with politics and civil government, but with self-government, family government, church government, and various strata of civil government.²² The same emphasis can be found in my Ruler of the Nations (1986). In The Reduction of Christianity I wrote the following:

Politics is the "quick fix" approach to cultural transformation. "The next presidential election will turn the tide. A Change in the Supreme Court will bring our nation back to righteousness. If we could only get more conservatives elected to office." None of this will do it. Only a long-term effort to change all facets of society will bring about significant and lasting transformation. This means changing the hearts and minds of millions of people.²³

R. J. Rushdoony's works express a similar theme.²⁴ The Reconstructionist view of social change, in the words of John Witherspoon, will "result in "dominion by consent."²⁵

Those who accuse Christian Reconstruction as advocating change through political processes are critiqued by me in a number of places. A cursory reading of The Reduction of Christianity will lead any reader to conclude that Reconstructionists believe just the opposite of what these critics assert that we say.

22. The three-volume God and Government series has been republished by Wolgemuth & Hyatt (1990).

23. Gary DeMar and Peter Leithart, The Reduction of Christianity: A Biblical Response to Dave Hunt (Ft. Worth, TX: Dominion Press, 1988), p. 297.

24. Rushdoony, Law and Liberty (Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, [1971] 1986) and Rushdoony, The Politics of Guilt and Pity (Fairfax, VA: Thoburn Press, [1970] 1978).

25. "Dominion, it is plain from all that has been said, can be acquired only one way, viz. by consent. There are two other ways commonly mentioned, both of which are defective, inheritance and conquest." Quoted in The Journal of Presbyterian History: Presbyterian and the American Revolution: A Documentary Account, Vol. 52, No. 4 (Winter 1974), p. 356.

The Pyramid Society is a culture in which a majority of the people spend most of their time transforming the civil sphere of government to the near exclusion of themselves, their families, churches, schools, businesses, and local civil governments. By changing the powers at the top, we are led to believe that there will be a trickle-down effect of cultural transformation that will blossom into a better society. The problems that a nation faces, as this approach sees it, are solely political. Change the State, and all of society will change with it. This has been the vision of pagan empires since the building of the tower of Babel.²⁶

The belief in a centralized political order that critics insist Christian Reconstructionists defend is described by me as "paganism." Instead of a Pyramid Society, Reconstructionists advocate a decentralized social order.

The Bible outlines a decentralized social order where power is diffused and the potential for corruption and tyranny are minimized. Freedom is enhanced because of the diluted strength of the one by the maintenance of the many.²⁷

Gary North emphasizes a similar theme in the following quotation:

The biblical social order is utterly hostile to the pyramid society. The biblical social order is characterized by the following features. First, it is made up of multiple institutional arrangements, each with its own legitimate, limited, and derivative sovereignty under God's universal law. Second, each institution possesses a hierarchical chain of command, but these chains of command are essentially appeals courts " bottom-up" institutions - with the primary duty of responsible action placed on people occupying the lower rungs of authority. Third, no single institution has absolute and final authority in any instance; appeal can be made to other sovereign agents of godly judgment. Since no society can attain perfection, there will be instances of injustice, but the social goal is harmony under biblical law, in terms of an orthodox creed. God will judge all men perfectly. The State need not seek perfect justice, nor should citizens be taxed at the astronomical rates necessary to sustain the quest for perfect justice.²⁸

26. Gary DeMar and Peter Leithart, The Reduction of Christianity: A Biblical Response to Dave Hunt (Ft. Worth, TX: Dominion Press, 1988), p. 305.

27. Ibid., p. 306.

28. Gary North, Moses and Pharaoh: Dominion Religion Versus Power Religion (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1985), pp. 211-12.

So then, the portrayal of Christian Reconstruction as wanting to establish a centralized political order is incorrect. We teach just the opposite. As I've shown, one does not need to search for very long to find these views expressed in our writings. They are prominent emphases.

Years later, these five points were altered to eliminate the "libertarian" leanings. Here is a contemporary "meme":

Recall the Five Points as set forth by Gary DeMar:     Regeneration   Biblical Law   Postmillennialism   Presuppositionalism   Patriarchy - Decentralized Social Order

What is the difference between "Calvinism" and "Covenant Theology?" How do they differ in content from DeMar's "Regeneration" category? Why was "Decentralized Social Order" cut?

For Further Reading:

Vantillianism and Rothbardianism: Compatible?