What do you think?
Rate this book
King of Kings: A Reformed Guide to Christian Government
What if our understanding of Christianity and politics is fundamentally flawed?
King of Kings is the result of needing to rethink political theology in recent years. In it, James Baird presents a bold and compelling case for a radical that government must promote Christianity as the only true religion.
Drawing from Scripture, the Reformed confessions, and the insights of the American Founders, this concise but powerful primer offers a clear and urgent call to Christians. Short enough to read in one sitting, it provides a gateway into a rich tradition that many have forgotten—and a vision for recovering it today.
King of Kings is the result of needing to rethink political theology in recent years. In it, James Baird presents a bold and compelling case for a radical that government must promote Christianity as the only true religion.
Drawing from Scripture, the Reformed confessions, and the insights of the American Founders, this concise but powerful primer offers a clear and urgent call to Christians. Short enough to read in one sitting, it provides a gateway into a rich tradition that many have forgotten—and a vision for recovering it today.
120 pages, Hardcover
Published October 3, 2025
29 people are currently reading
195 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews
October 4, 2025
I had an opportunity to read the manuscript before it was published. This is an excellent introduction to classical Protestant political theory. Recommended.
October 24, 2025
This book has the virtue of brevity and clarity. It is cogent. And it is an excellent on-ramp to the questions many Christians feel quite deeply today. The simple fact of the matter is this: much of evangelical political theology is shallow and entirely ignorant of Christian tradition, be that medieval or Reformed. Baird’s work represents the very opposite of that. It is a work of great scholarship, patience, and sincerity. The chapters on prudence and love were particularly insightful. The whole book is worth reading. It is very good.
More work needs to be done in explaining how Christian political theology, especially in the last 300 years, cashes out “common good” as a category. The minor premise of Baird’s syllogism is the hinge, as he acknowledges. Does the common good include promoting true religion? Or it is about creating and protecting moral order? Baird says it’s the former, but his reading of Scripture is, in my view, inconclusive and, perhaps, a bit selective. It is inconclusive in this way: to cite Nebuchadnezzar as promoting true religion simply proves too much. Nothing in the text indicates, requires, or proves that all governments everywhere must institute true religion. Rulers are accountable God, but the text doesn’t require civil worship. This is true for the other Old Testament examples, too.
Similarly, Baird doesn’t acknowledge that - to my knowledge - no nation in the Old Testament is rebuked for failing to institute true worship as civil policy. Israel, of course, is. The nations are rebuked for idol worship and pride. Not civil policy. Israel is held in particular (covenantal!) accountability as a nation responsible to God for the promises given to her. This doesn’t necessarily prove that nations aren’t required to promote true religion, but it is curious that no nation, all of which are God’s servants, is rebuked for failing to do so.
My criticisms are likely revealing my, admittedly, Baptist hand, covered as it is with the leftovers of the most recent potluck. I think Baptist political theological, in particular, suffers from a paucity that will prayerfully be rectified in the coming years. Baird’s book will almost certainly be a very helpful and useful refining tool to that end.
More work needs to be done in explaining how Christian political theology, especially in the last 300 years, cashes out “common good” as a category. The minor premise of Baird’s syllogism is the hinge, as he acknowledges. Does the common good include promoting true religion? Or it is about creating and protecting moral order? Baird says it’s the former, but his reading of Scripture is, in my view, inconclusive and, perhaps, a bit selective. It is inconclusive in this way: to cite Nebuchadnezzar as promoting true religion simply proves too much. Nothing in the text indicates, requires, or proves that all governments everywhere must institute true religion. Rulers are accountable God, but the text doesn’t require civil worship. This is true for the other Old Testament examples, too.
Similarly, Baird doesn’t acknowledge that - to my knowledge - no nation in the Old Testament is rebuked for failing to institute true worship as civil policy. Israel, of course, is. The nations are rebuked for idol worship and pride. Not civil policy. Israel is held in particular (covenantal!) accountability as a nation responsible to God for the promises given to her. This doesn’t necessarily prove that nations aren’t required to promote true religion, but it is curious that no nation, all of which are God’s servants, is rebuked for failing to do so.
My criticisms are likely revealing my, admittedly, Baptist hand, covered as it is with the leftovers of the most recent potluck. I think Baptist political theological, in particular, suffers from a paucity that will prayerfully be rectified in the coming years. Baird’s book will almost certainly be a very helpful and useful refining tool to that end.
December 17, 2025
Very good. With a quibble here and there hardly worth mentioning, this was the best primer class work on political theology that I have found. I greatly prefer it to Torba and Isker's work on the topic, and I plan to re-read this soon.
October 12, 2025
“Government must promote Christianity as the only true religion.”
This thesis is provocative for sure, however, Baird offers a clear and concise (~80 pages) argument for his position. This is an excellent read for anyone trying to discern how a Christian should think about the government’s relationship to religion and God.
Baird packs in a useful amount of evidence from the Bible and American History. He briefly explains the modern day misunderstanding of the first amendment’s “freedom of religion” resulting from Everson v. Board of Education, a United States Supreme Court ruling in 1947 that outlawed public school teachers from leading students in prayer. This was a seismic shift in American history. It would have been neat to see Baird do a little more engagement on the importance of a ruling like this, and how it shapes future generations in thinking about “freedom of religion”.
He does dive a little deeper in explaining how the modern man sees freedom as “freedom of choice”, whereas historically freedom was viewed as “freedom to do right, or good”. This is an important distinction I would have liked to see more of.
Baird cites many of the original State constitutions which required adherence to Christianity for public officials, and the promotion of Christianity by the State. This was helpful to see and crucial to understanding foundation and “vision” for America.
This book is great for its length. I hope any future edition would contain:
1) more time in the exegesis of Scripture
2) more engagement with the original State constitutions, as well as the individual development over time
3) more engagement with critics of Baird’s position
Every chapter has the ability to be expanded and defended much more thoroughly but again, it is an excellent place to start if you are trying to make sense of governments place and function as a Christian.
Five stars because I think everyone should read it.
This thesis is provocative for sure, however, Baird offers a clear and concise (~80 pages) argument for his position. This is an excellent read for anyone trying to discern how a Christian should think about the government’s relationship to religion and God.
Baird packs in a useful amount of evidence from the Bible and American History. He briefly explains the modern day misunderstanding of the first amendment’s “freedom of religion” resulting from Everson v. Board of Education, a United States Supreme Court ruling in 1947 that outlawed public school teachers from leading students in prayer. This was a seismic shift in American history. It would have been neat to see Baird do a little more engagement on the importance of a ruling like this, and how it shapes future generations in thinking about “freedom of religion”.
He does dive a little deeper in explaining how the modern man sees freedom as “freedom of choice”, whereas historically freedom was viewed as “freedom to do right, or good”. This is an important distinction I would have liked to see more of.
Baird cites many of the original State constitutions which required adherence to Christianity for public officials, and the promotion of Christianity by the State. This was helpful to see and crucial to understanding foundation and “vision” for America.
This book is great for its length. I hope any future edition would contain:
1) more time in the exegesis of Scripture
2) more engagement with the original State constitutions, as well as the individual development over time
3) more engagement with critics of Baird’s position
Every chapter has the ability to be expanded and defended much more thoroughly but again, it is an excellent place to start if you are trying to make sense of governments place and function as a Christian.
Five stars because I think everyone should read it.
October 31, 2025
It was an okay read. Though I would agree with the author on many principles, the history is flat and bland, as if the founders of the nation overwhelmingly all meant the same thing. A monolithic view of the founders. There's no thoughtful reflection on how the founders had absorbed John Locke's view of 'religion' as a utilitarian good (use religion to promote the national wellbeing, not because one religion or the other is right). Much like the atheists who now call themselves 'cultural Christians.' Such as Benjamin Rush's letter of Education where he wants to promote Christianity, but many religions will work just fine, "Such is my veneration for every religion that reveals the attributes of the Deity, or a future state of rewards and punishments, that I had rather see the opinions of Confucius or Mohammed inculcated upon our youth than see them grow up wholly devoid of a system of religious principles. But the religion I mean to recommend in this place is the religion of JESUS CHRIST."
The author also seems to embrace an over realized eschatology that we can vote and legislate and politic the kingdom into supremacy, now, by our actions and works and steam and energy. It seems to me that this is a similar position as the social justice crowd, but he leans hard right instead of left (flip side of the same coin). This is clearest when he encourages readers to grasp for power, get power, reach for power. Hmmmm. That seems to fly in the face of Mark chapters 8 through 10, where Jesus disciples are constantly grabbing for power, and can't embrace that the way of the Messiah is the way of the cross. Peter wants to rebuke Jesus for talking about a cross, and Jesus says, "Get behind me, Satan! For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man” (8:33). Or in chapter 9, while our Lord is talking about the cross again, his disciples are bickering over who is the greatest in the kingdom. And our Lord must challenge them with, "If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all” (9:35). And then again, while talking about the cross once more, James and John come up wanting power, 'put me on your right hand in the kingdom and put him on your left hand!' And our Lord corrects them once more (10:42-44) pointing our power-grabbing is not the kingdom way, and ending with some gospel good news, "For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45).
It's an okay read but misses the mark in substantial ways and places.
The author also seems to embrace an over realized eschatology that we can vote and legislate and politic the kingdom into supremacy, now, by our actions and works and steam and energy. It seems to me that this is a similar position as the social justice crowd, but he leans hard right instead of left (flip side of the same coin). This is clearest when he encourages readers to grasp for power, get power, reach for power. Hmmmm. That seems to fly in the face of Mark chapters 8 through 10, where Jesus disciples are constantly grabbing for power, and can't embrace that the way of the Messiah is the way of the cross. Peter wants to rebuke Jesus for talking about a cross, and Jesus says, "Get behind me, Satan! For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man” (8:33). Or in chapter 9, while our Lord is talking about the cross again, his disciples are bickering over who is the greatest in the kingdom. And our Lord must challenge them with, "If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all” (9:35). And then again, while talking about the cross once more, James and John come up wanting power, 'put me on your right hand in the kingdom and put him on your left hand!' And our Lord corrects them once more (10:42-44) pointing our power-grabbing is not the kingdom way, and ending with some gospel good news, "For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45).
It's an okay read but misses the mark in substantial ways and places.
October 19, 2025
Clear, concise, compelling. Pick up a copy for yourself and read it!
You can just do things—like promote the true religion.
You can just do things—like promote the true religion.
October 5, 2025
Incredible. Concise, clear, compelling. The weaving together of the Bible’s teaching with American history was especially helpful. The book is so concise and well written it could easily be read by middle schoolers for their studies in civics.
November 25, 2025
This is a good book on the topic of whether the civil government should promote true religion, namely, Christianity. The book argues that it should, and makes its point well and succinctly, in a clear manner, with many good points and answers to objections along the way. This book will go on my list of books to recommend concerning civil government.
I only have a couple minor critiques, and they do not undermine its argument for its thesis - (1) there was a paragraph and footnote on WCF 19.4 concerning the judicial laws could have been worded better and I think understate the degree to which they are binding on nations, although his basic point there is good, and (2) I think his argument and his focus on Jesus as ruler of the nations would be supported even more by a discussion of Christ’s mediatorial kingship, but I realize that this was a strategic choice on the author’s part to keep the argument focused, and what he does say is good. (While Christ’s mediatorial kingship is universal, it is not the origin of civil government, and so a focus on God as Creator and sovereign over all is important).
I only have a couple minor critiques, and they do not undermine its argument for its thesis - (1) there was a paragraph and footnote on WCF 19.4 concerning the judicial laws could have been worded better and I think understate the degree to which they are binding on nations, although his basic point there is good, and (2) I think his argument and his focus on Jesus as ruler of the nations would be supported even more by a discussion of Christ’s mediatorial kingship, but I realize that this was a strategic choice on the author’s part to keep the argument focused, and what he does say is good. (While Christ’s mediatorial kingship is universal, it is not the origin of civil government, and so a focus on God as Creator and sovereign over all is important).
November 14, 2025
Short. Sweet, and compelling.
November 10, 2025
Critical and timely read for every Christian in the United States.
This has overwhelming implications for how we think about our country's government and it's need to not only uphold religion, but to promote it. At this point in our history, it feels like a well needed overhaul, or even reformation, of how our country needs to run. I quickly get inspired thinking about what this could look like, but am equally discouraged by how equally daunting the road is to get there.
On one hand, I'm frustrated by how short it is, because there is so much more I want to explore with these ideas. However, I'm grateful for how short it was, as it made it easy to knock out, easy to suggest to others, and makes me hungry for his reading list at the end of the book. I will definitely be taking bites out of that list!
This has overwhelming implications for how we think about our country's government and it's need to not only uphold religion, but to promote it. At this point in our history, it feels like a well needed overhaul, or even reformation, of how our country needs to run. I quickly get inspired thinking about what this could look like, but am equally discouraged by how equally daunting the road is to get there.
On one hand, I'm frustrated by how short it is, because there is so much more I want to explore with these ideas. However, I'm grateful for how short it was, as it made it easy to knock out, easy to suggest to others, and makes me hungry for his reading list at the end of the book. I will definitely be taking bites out of that list!
October 13, 2025
The primer that was needed for our day. An accessible, concise and compelling argument for the promotion of the true religion at the civil level, weaving in Scripture, historical theology, and reason. This is the CN lite book that I’ll be recommending to the normies.
December 8, 2025
“It ought to be observed that something remarkable is here demanded from princes, besides an ordinary profession of faith; for the Lord has bestowed on them authority and power to defend the Church and to promote the glory of God.”
- Calvin on Isa. 49:23
- Calvin on Isa. 49:23
Read
December 13, 20255 star presentation of the Reformed view.
2 star argument for it being the correct view.
Baird's syllogism assumes the government has the capacity to promote the true religion in its true form. But this cannot be assumed. This, combined with some exegetical reaches, leaves me unconvinced of his main thesis.
That said, he did make me think. What should we do with an example of a Nebuchadnezzar or a Darius? And are there appropriate ways for the government to suppress false religion? I will also have to think more about the argument that being an exile should make me MORE concerned about desiring a godly government.
These, alongside some helpful virtue definitions and refutations of pitetistic errors, make Baird's work the place to start for people who want to wrestle with the traditional Reformed (and American?!) view of church-state relations.
2 star argument for it being the correct view.
Baird's syllogism assumes the government has the capacity to promote the true religion in its true form. But this cannot be assumed. This, combined with some exegetical reaches, leaves me unconvinced of his main thesis.
That said, he did make me think. What should we do with an example of a Nebuchadnezzar or a Darius? And are there appropriate ways for the government to suppress false religion? I will also have to think more about the argument that being an exile should make me MORE concerned about desiring a godly government.
These, alongside some helpful virtue definitions and refutations of pitetistic errors, make Baird's work the place to start for people who want to wrestle with the traditional Reformed (and American?!) view of church-state relations.
December 22, 2025
Great introduction to the topic and tight argumentation. Will likely buy copies to give away
November 26, 2025
Excellent book. Simple, accessible, historical, Scriptural.
November 18, 2025
I've been on a project for a few years now, trying to wrestle with how Christians should engage with politics. This might be my favorite book on the topic so far.
In short but very punchy fashion, Baird argues for a view of politics that is rooted in Scripture, Christian tradition, and American history. If there was one book I could recommend to friends on this topic, this might be the one. My only reason for giving this four stars is that I think there is still a kind of Kantian morality and/or religious "neutrality" that this book sometimes tries to advocate for. Statements like the following capture what I'm talking about: "In other words, the people were free to practice their religion, but the state would teach the people Protestantism. The Founders did not see any contradiction between these two statements." But do we really believe that in a Christian state, Christian "tolerance" would permit non-Christians to truly "practice their religion"? What if said religion involved the proselytizing of those outside the religion? What if the religion was Molech worship that involved child-sacrifice? I don't think any Christian government would actually tolerate such expressions of religion, but where to draw lines seems to be very gray. On the one hand, this grayness can be defended by arguments, many of which come from the conservative political tradition, that there is no 'one-size-fits all' option, and that we cannot simply try to apply abstract principles to a particular people, time or culture. However, the devil is in the details. It is precisely *how* we exercise tolerance vs. non-tolerance towards sin and unbelief that still seems to be the Gordian knot of this issue, and this is a knot that Baird isn't willing to try and untie.
Highly recommend this book overall!
In short but very punchy fashion, Baird argues for a view of politics that is rooted in Scripture, Christian tradition, and American history. If there was one book I could recommend to friends on this topic, this might be the one. My only reason for giving this four stars is that I think there is still a kind of Kantian morality and/or religious "neutrality" that this book sometimes tries to advocate for. Statements like the following capture what I'm talking about: "In other words, the people were free to practice their religion, but the state would teach the people Protestantism. The Founders did not see any contradiction between these two statements." But do we really believe that in a Christian state, Christian "tolerance" would permit non-Christians to truly "practice their religion"? What if said religion involved the proselytizing of those outside the religion? What if the religion was Molech worship that involved child-sacrifice? I don't think any Christian government would actually tolerate such expressions of religion, but where to draw lines seems to be very gray. On the one hand, this grayness can be defended by arguments, many of which come from the conservative political tradition, that there is no 'one-size-fits all' option, and that we cannot simply try to apply abstract principles to a particular people, time or culture. However, the devil is in the details. It is precisely *how* we exercise tolerance vs. non-tolerance towards sin and unbelief that still seems to be the Gordian knot of this issue, and this is a knot that Baird isn't willing to try and untie.
Highly recommend this book overall!
November 4, 2025
Baird makes a valiant effort here, but falls woefully short of his goal. The writing comes across as a high school essay rather than a serious, academic treatment of the subject. His primary proofs are a combination of the Old Testament and writings from 1700s America. America is not Israel, and we are no longer living under the dictates of the 1700s. The American Constitution does not support his primary arguments, and his calls for the government to exclusively promote Christianity are naive and overly simplistic. America was founded on the principles of plurality, individual freedom, and the separation of church and state. Most importantly, he spends no time discussing the Biblical view of the Kingdom of God, as he seems to imply it is synonymous with earthly kingdoms. I am sure this book will promote discussions, but it unfortunately falls short of providing the deep theological and political firepower that a real conversation on the subject demands.
October 8, 2025
I appreciate how upfront the author is with his argument, and how he sticks with his argument all the way through this book. I do, however, disagree with the Thesis, and although his argument followed a consistent line of thought, I did not find it compelling. I found there to be lack of strong biblical evidence, and not a very clear application of the thesis to real life. Finally, the way he presented any disagreement with his thesis as a rejection of one of his two true premises, means that one cannot disagree with him without disagreeing with Scripture. I found this to be dishonest. I do appreciate, however, how this book made me think deeper about the relationship of the church with state.
October 18, 2025
I am thoroughly amazed at how much material Baird covers in such a small number of pages (85!). It hits most of the main points, arguing for Christian government, without getting bogged down in minutiae. The writing and presentation is clear, accessible, and helpful. This will be my first recommendation on the topic for the people of my church.
P.S. - I am amazed at the breadth of endorsement Baird received for this book. There are endorsements from professors of Reformed seminaries, Southern Baptists, Moscow-adjacent thinkers, Senators, law professors, and more. To me, this demonstrates the power of Baird’s thesis.
P.S. - I am amazed at the breadth of endorsement Baird received for this book. There are endorsements from professors of Reformed seminaries, Southern Baptists, Moscow-adjacent thinkers, Senators, law professors, and more. To me, this demonstrates the power of Baird’s thesis.
November 4, 2025
Short and concise... yet Christians need to read and engage in its main thesis. The author offers a syllogism which is unpacked and explained in the rest of the work. 1st premise: Government must promote the public good. 2nd premise: AS the only true religion, Christianity is part of the public good. Conclusion: Government must promote Christianity as the only true religion. This syllogism is hard to argue against as a Christian. Baird addresses objections as well as goes into some of the common question most people have.
Politics is a hot topic- which can get confusing on how Christians are to approach... this is a good start for understanding.
Politics is a hot topic- which can get confusing on how Christians are to approach... this is a good start for understanding.
December 23, 2025
This is a solid introduction to the topic. Some of the highlights are the clear-sighted understanding of the reformed teaching on government and his demonstration of the founding of America on the Christian religion. Reading the Constitutions for various states was excellent; we have certainly lost much of what we were founded on. That being said, there are definitely moments I wished James would have expanded on an idea or clarified his meaning on things he assumes. The book could have been stronger with another 50 or so pages to shore up these gaps.
PS, it's fun to read something from someone I went to church with years ago!
PS, it's fun to read something from someone I went to church with years ago!
December 14, 2025
Terrific - easy, clear, and concise read that answers many of the main arguments typically wielded against so-called Christian Nationalists, and he does so (dare I say) winsomely and effectively. He did a great job of citing Scripture and various theologians to build his case for why government must promote Christianity, but his exposition of American history from state constitutions and quotations from our Founding era really laid to rest any concern that this proposal is "un-American." Well worth the quick read, and it whet my appetite to read a few more of the books he cites or recommends.
December 16, 2025
This is an unhelpful and mildly dangerous book. It consists of an argument that the government has the moral obligation to promote Christianity as the only true religion. It insists on this argument every few chapters, but doesn't make consistent accurate arguments for it, while also overlooking important historical and theological points. Then it does not provide specifics on what government-promoted Christianity looks like.
This book alienates people who disagree with a theocracy and gives people inclined to Christian Nationalism carte blanche to raise the banner without guardrails.
This book alienates people who disagree with a theocracy and gives people inclined to Christian Nationalism carte blanche to raise the banner without guardrails.
October 19, 2025
When the author says to aim to read this in one sitting, he has a valid point. There were several times where I was like, this sounds sort of impossible or crazy, possibly even wrong. But then you read on and gain more clarity and you’re like, okay… I can get on board now!
Quick read. If you’re hesitant about being involved with politics as a Christian because you think it’s counter intuitive or not the goal of being a Christian, this book will have you thinking again.
Quick read. If you’re hesitant about being involved with politics as a Christian because you think it’s counter intuitive or not the goal of being a Christian, this book will have you thinking again.
October 14, 2025
Baird’s argument hinges on the assumption that the “public good” includes positive advancement of Christianity. Baird failed to reckon with arguments confining the concept of public good to only that which maintains and upholds that which is shared between the believer and the unbeliever, namely, the civil order.
October 31, 2025
A very clear and direct identification of what the government should (or rather must) do. It is convicting for both the Liberal Christian and Conservative Christian as it forces us to ask the question “Am I promoting Biblical Christianity in the government?” This is a short and fairly broad book (which author intended) I would love a follow up book that dives into specific issues.
November 24, 2025
This book is a masterpiece, that is well worth reading multiple times for every Christian. As someone who has read and thought about the relationship of Christ and the state a little bit this book was incredibly eye opening and helping. If you want to begin to understand how we should think about political theology, and political prudence look no further than this book.
December 6, 2025
Mostly scripturally justified concise argument for government to advocate for Christianity as a public good. So, preaching to the choir, which the author clearly believes is necessary.
As someone who believes government should be minimized, this is a difficult position for me to climb on board with. Still I must agree that the argument is well constructed and idealistically coherent.
As someone who believes government should be minimized, this is a difficult position for me to climb on board with. Still I must agree that the argument is well constructed and idealistically coherent.
October 6, 2025
Great short introduction and argument for the thesis that governments should promote Christianity. The author provides the necessary qualifications to ensure this thesis is not misunderstood while being faithful to the classical Protestant view of civil government’s relationship to religion.
November 4, 2025
Not bad. Probably 3.5⭐️
For a better review than I could pen see Andrew Walkers brief review here… https://andrewtwalker.com/promoting-t...
Like Andrew’s review his chapter on prudence was great.
For a better review than I could pen see Andrew Walkers brief review here… https://andrewtwalker.com/promoting-t...
Like Andrew’s review his chapter on prudence was great.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews