A thought-provoking answer

" Is it better to call ourselves a Christian country and not act like one, or not label ourselves as such but act with Christian morals and ethics? "
I posed that question yesterday and received an insightful answer from a Facebook friend of mine. He is an academic, but didn't present this as an academic "response-to-end-all-responses". Nevertheless, it is challenging and thought-provoking and I wanted to share it with you because all too often we are unaware of the history of our faith and therefore aren't informed enough to judge what we are being taught.

"The idea of the United States as a "Christian nation" is a product of the Second Great Awakening of the 1830-40s. Such a concept would not have made sense to the writers of the Constitution. Their religious understanding was shaped by their independence from State-dictated religion and Enlightenment philosophy which postulated a world controlled by inherent laws rather than divine fiat. The current resurgence of religious sentiment in U.S. politics is due to the radical growth of American evangelical anabaptist churches which has accompanied the emigration of rural Southern culture into the middle of the continent. Leaders of these communities realized that, unlike the previous generation, they now commanded a potential political power and could use that power to push their agendas through governmental policy. In this way, American Evangelical denominations resemble the Roman Catholic Church, which views itself as much an arbiter of public as private behavior.
To call the United States a "Christian nation" is to assert that the majority of citizens are Christian and therefore have the right and obligation to assert Christian morals and ethics through the political process. The writers of the Constitution were deeply concerned that the will of the majority not overwhelm and silence the rights of the minority and created a number of specific mechanisms in the legislative and judiciary branches of government to counter the tendency of the majority to exploit their numbers in achieving their goals. Historically, the protestant and Roman Catholic Christian churches asserted their influence on public policy through influence, protest and lobbying. The innovation of the American Evangelical churches is to use their numbers to attempt to directly control policy through the legislative process.
It is misleading to regard American Evangelicals as a majority. Although 80%+ of Americans define themselves as Christian, if this is defined as membership to a specific church, regular attendance and tithing, the numbers shrink significantly. If American Evangelical churches are taken separately from mainline Protestant denominations (with whom the share Nicene orthodoxy but differ on social issues) and Roman Catholics (with whom there are differences on Apostolic Succession and sacramental issues), they represent significantly less than a majority.
The significant factor is money. Historically, itinerant Evangelical preachers had to provide for themselves and this created an entrepreneurial aspect to their ministries. Prosperity Theology takes this idea a step further, insisting the disproportionate tithing will produce not only spiritual, but temporal gain. Financial success is equated with spiritual virtue. Increasingly, money given to the Evangelical churches has been funneled not into edification of church property or direct relief to communities in distress, but to the church's prophetic ministry. This has included the use of modern publishing and broadcasting tools, tools which generate significant profits. These profits are reinvested into the ministry which has claimed an increasing share of the market share, which in turn creates the appearance of increasing membership in those ministries. It should come as no surprise that these ministries seek to defend the U.S. capitalist system as part of the divine order.

Regarding the American Evangelical churches, there are also strong theological contradictions to orthodox Christian thought. There are some who believe that it's tenets vary so far from the Christian traditions as to constitute a separate religion or, to some, heresy, much in the same way of Catharism, Bogolism, Waldensianism and Mormonism.

Here are some points of discussion:

Adherence to Old Testament law and customs. According to Paul and the epistles of John and Peter and further elaborated by Augustine and Luther, Christians are sanctified by grace through the death and resurrection of Jesus. Therefore we are not judged by the Law rather redeemed through grace and the Law does not apply to us.

The obsession with supernatural evil. The biblical God differs from many other religions by being a single First Principle. Evil is not a First Principle and Satan is not co-equal with God in a cosmic struggle between Good and Evil. He is cast as the Tempter, the voice of despair, but his power is nullified by God's primacy. Jesus, as 2nd person in the Trinity cannot by definition be involved in a spiritual battle with Satan for men's souls. Nor can mankind be understood to be in the midst of a cosmic battle between good and evil. Huxley points out that obsession with supernatural Evil actually encourages greater natural Evil to exist.

A literal interpretation of the Biblical canon. For the 4th century Christian fathers, such a concept didn't exist. A scientific world view had yet to be postulated and so there was no thought of interpreting myth literally. The Church fathers were extremely well-read in Greek philosophy and understood that Truth, as an inherent principle of a beneficial divine creation, manifests in many guises as a natural law. It could be found in Biblical texts and in Greek philosophy. The books of the Bible were understood as a testament to Truth not as Truth itself. This view remained paramount in Christian theology until a scientific world view emerged in the 18th century. Even then, fundamentalism as such only existed in certain Pietist and American Evangelical traditions and never entered into orthodox Protestant or Catholic thought.

Christian triumphalism. Christians are freed from sin and death through the sacrifice and resurrection of Jesus. We are called to the imitation of Christ, to bear joyously the trails of that calling regardless of our worldly status. In worldly terms, Jesus' ministry was a disaster: three short years in Galilee culminating in a week in Jerusalem during which he was arrested and executed, deserted by all but a few women and one disciple. To equate those events with the type of worldly success seen in the American Evangelical movement today is to stand its meaning on its head. The major point of Jesus' narrative is that having utterly failed at worldly leadership, God raised Jesus triumphantly from the dead to give us hope that in all things, it is God who will ultimately be the judge and reconciler.

Apocalyptic determinism. The belief that there are clues to the exact playing out of the end times encoded in the Bible is neither orthodox theology or good Biblical exegesis. The latter first. Jesus' statements in all 4 gospels indicate that God alone knows the course of history. To interpolate various passages of the Pauline epistles with passages from the book of Daniel and the Revelation of St. John into a single literal narrative is a type of amalgamation that is outside traditional orthodox Biblical study. It is cabalisim and gnosticism. The concept that there is a definite course for history laid out by God both denies the free will of God and the Biblical understanding that man is in control of his own destiny.

What is personally most disturbing to me is that all this emphasis on “Christian values” seems to contradict everything I was taught and believe about God’s love and human nature. We are all sinners, redeemed by grace to equal degree. Even the just are scarcely saved and I count myself as no less or greater a sinner than anyone else. When I look at my fellow human being, I am taught not to see the Law but to see the redeemed sinner. That means I don’t look for that which is failing, but for the light of God’s presence in their lives. Everything else is chaff and the log in my own eye.