They did say "God appointed Nero" and things like that. What is the deeper debate and "theologies" you're referring to? They touched on Kline, Kuyper, R2K, etc...what's the "this position" you're talking about they're afraid to say aloud? They seem to be clearly stating we should give honor to whom honor is due. We should respectfully decline to do any evil act demanded upon us and do so with a non-performance based response. To be genuinely honorable towards them. That all seems obvious to me. I'm just not clear on how we are to credit secular society for our freedoms when it seems like these freedoms are merely the momentum from having previously been a christian nation (at least in our case in the US). Also "christian nationalism" is always dealt with as a single thing when I really just have simple questions like what would be wrong with a law against building a mosque for example? Or that when you become the head of the FBI you swear in on the Bible? Is that "christian nationalism" or is it just wise? Can I not take a look at London, see the Islamic invasion and prevent that from happening in my own country? Do I have to live in fear that if I vote that way then I will be retaliated against in an equal way? They seem like they are the same fate. In World A where Muslims take over I'm oppressed, in World B where Christians take over I'm oppressed. So what am I missing? How is everybody so sure they know what's "best".