Listen to the Article Powered by Both Barrels Media
America’s Civil Religion Has Changed
You’ve seen a lot of changes recently. Big things. You’ve heard a lot too—and you know you aren’t imagining it. Let’s explore it. Because a new civil religion has emerged in America. For me, it has been the unsettling changes coming out of the White House. I never forgot studying Robert Bellah and his paper on Civil Religion. So I started there.
If one claims that the United States of America was not founded as a Christian nation, they would be inaccurate. But we’ll see that the development of a “civil religion” was necessary even from the start.
Yes, the original thirteen colonies were heavily influenced—and often divided—by Christian denominations seeking freedom from religious persecution or attempting to build strict communities of faith. While some, like Virginia, were founded for economic gain, others, like Massachusetts (Puritans) and Maryland (Catholics), were established as religious refuges.
Yet persecution still existed within the colonies. While many came to escape it, some groups—like the Puritans—persecuted others, such as Quakers and Baptists, who challenged their established beliefs.
So early on, a generic, non-intrusive God emerged to help keep the states united. This has led some academics to claim that many of the founders were deists or even gnostics. But in many cases, the aim was far more practical: to preserve unity and keep peace. At times, that even meant leaving God out altogether.
This is how George Washington handled it:
“I now make it my earnest prayer, that God would have you, and the State over which you preside, in his holy protection, that he would incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government, to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another… and finally, that he would most graciously be pleased to dispose us all, to do Justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility and pacific temper of mind, which were the Characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things, we can never hope to be a happy Nation.”
A Civil Religion Develops
So a civil religion developed—a generic God invoked into the public sphere. In Robert Bellah’s Civil Religion, he used Kennedy’s inauguration speech as an example. Kennedy invoked this generic God several times—an effort, perhaps, to not ruffle any feathers. At the same time, evidence of Christian faith remains carved into public buildings and monuments.
It must be noted that it is normal to have pride in family, community, church, sports teams, city, state, or nation. America is no exception. Like most nations, it has believed in God’s providence—God’s hand—and throughout history has invoked God in times of war.
So it is normal to use the word God, or prayer, or heaven—moments of silence, heads bowed. You get it. Anything that won’t ruffle feathers.
This led presidents and public figures to maintain both a personal belief and a public persona—even while promoting a shared vision of morality in the public sphere.
Leaders will obviously make decisions based, in part, on personal beliefs. Yet throughout history, there has not been as apparent a shift in moral direction—perhaps with the exception of Lincoln.
“There exists alongside of and rather clearly differentiated from the churches an elaborate and well-institutionalized civil religion in America.”
What is dispensationalism, and why does it matter?
There were Church Fathers who discussed dispensations, but not in the same light. Their discussions still held to a Covenantal structure—the idea that covenants are the central way God has unfolded His redemptive plan. For more than 1,800 years, Covenantal theology was the dominant framework for understanding redemptive history.
Scripture teaches that God has one people, and that the Israel–Church relationship should be viewed Christologically. The Church is not directly the new Israel or its replacement. Rather, in Christ, the Church is God’s new-covenant people, because Jesus is the fulfillment of Adam and Israel—the true seed of Abraham who inherits the promises by His work (Galatians 3:16).
The basic difference is this: Covenantalism and Dispensationalism are two distinct—often opposing—frameworks for interpreting the Bible.
Covenantalism emphasizes continuity: one overarching covenant of grace throughout Scripture, with the Church as the continuation of Israel.
Dispensationalism emphasizes discontinuity: a strict distinction between Israel and the Church as two separate groups, each with distinct plans and promises from God.
John Darby.
About 150 years ago, John Darby developed this framework. Dispensationalist pastors often emphasize the construction of a Third Temple in Jerusalem as a key end-times event—essential for fulfilling prophecy before Christ’s return.
Covenantalism holds that the Church inherits the promises in Christ. Dispensationalism maintains that God will still fulfill specific national promises to Israel.
Covenantalism organizes Scripture around covenants. Dispensationalism organizes history into distinct “dispensations” in which God deals with humanity in different ways.
Covenantalism often reads prophecy through fulfillment in Christ. Dispensationalism emphasizes a more literal interpretation, especially concerning land and a future kingdom.
Covenantalism generally holds to a present reign of Christ. Dispensationalism holds to a future, literal thousand-year reign on earth.
Christian Zionism is often connected to this theological framework, bringing with it a wide range of interpretations and claims. This post is not intended to debate those meanings.
Why is this important?
Over the last couple of decades, dispensationalism has been in decline in its acceptance. Two things are true at the same time. As a Christianity Today article (2023) put it: as a school of theology, it is in decline; as a cultural and political force, it is more influential than ever.
At the same time, the popular “Left Behind” style of thinking remains in the form of what critics call eschatological sensationalism—the tendency to map current events directly onto prophecy.
It has largely remained within certain Baptist and Evangelical circles. Today, more young people are moving away from dispensationalism and toward more traditional views.
And yet— A new civil religion is emerging.
Rather than a generic God of the old civil religion, America’s new civil religion has become increasingly theological. A distinct religious ideology has permeated all aspects of federal governance, especially in foreign policy.
That ideology is dispensationalism.
It’s Troubling
Even though it has never gained widespread acceptance within Christianity worldwide—or even within America—it has moved into the public square. More importantly, it has moved into the White House.
And recently, that has become troubling. I began to pay closer attention on Easter morning.
There was a profanity-laced tirade on social media, demanding that Iran open the Strait of Hormuz by Tuesday, followed by “or you’ll be living in Hell — JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah.”
That was followed by a series of posts—defending unusual positions, claiming “Israel didn’t talk me into bombing Iran,” and making statements about destroying a civilization. There were also sacrilegious images—now deleted—depicting Trump as Jesus healing people, and others showing Jesus embracing him with the American flag.
Watching administration officials on television, I began to hear familiar language—phrases and assumptions I recognized from a prior life. A dispensationalist pastor, serving as ambassador to Israel, claimed that Israel had the right to much of the Middle East based on Genesis 15. Numerous politicians echoed similar claims—that America was biblically required to defend Israel. Calls for a “Third Temple” began to rise. Even the head of the Department of Defense spoke publicly about its necessity.
As I looked deeper, I saw the same pattern repeated—photos, events, even the inauguration—where the same well-known dispensationalist preachers were consistently present.
Why? Seriously, I cannot understand why he'd post this. Is he looking for a response? Does he actually think this?
— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) April 13, 2026
Either way, two things are true.
1) a little humility would serve him well
2) God shall not be mocked https://t.co/GViHqWeDEr
That’s when it became clear.
The tone. The language. The framework.
At that point, I had my answer. And it was a familiar one. Familiar because my wife and I lived in that world for many years. I recognized the language, the assumptions, and the framework. Everything made sense.
The Trump White House is filled with dispensationalists, and from the outside looking in, it appears that this theology is shaping many of its decisions. Dispensationalism is not the majority theology—worldwide or in America.
But it is no longer on the margins. It has moved into the public square, into the highest levels of power. Bellah’s generic God is gone.
In its place is something far more defined.
Coming In May 2026
Stay In The Story
“New essays, short videos, and early access—no noise.”
We don’t spam. Our Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy apply. The site is protected by reCAPTCHA.
Calm the Seas
Silence the Noise
Question the Headlines
Hunt the Truth
We’ll be here for you.
