King of Kings: A Reformed Guide to Christian Government

by James Baird, Joshua David Ling (Narrator)

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 listened to in one sitting, it provides a gateway into a rich tradition that many have forgotten—and a vision for recovering it today.

Genres: Theology, Politics, Christianity, History, Christian, Philosophy

Audible Audio

Published October 14, 2025

Reviews

[Sean McGowan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I had an opportunity to read the manuscript before it was published. This is an excellent introduction to classical Protestant political theory. Recommended.

[Thomas Duell · Rating 5 out of 5]

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.

[Scott Bielinski · Rating 4 out of 5]

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.

[Cody · Rating 5 out of 5]

“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.

[Michael Philliber · Rating 3 out of 5]

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.

[Logan Thune · Rating 5 out of 5]

Clear, concise, compelling. Pick up a copy for yourself and read it!

You can just do things—like promote the true religion.

[Cory · Rating 5 out of 5]

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.

[Peter Bringe · Rating 5 out of 5]

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).

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Short. Sweet, and compelling.

[Matthew Deans · Rating 5 out of 5]

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!

[Jason Vaughn · Rating 1 out of 5]

Too many false dichotomies. Reminded me of reading a high school paper.

You either agree with him or you’re agnostic or an atheist. Lol. Yes. The logic is that bad. I’m sure it’s persuasive to those with less convictions or not as well trained. But unfortunately it spoils what he has to say because the argument is more manipulative than helpful.

Make your case. Let the reader decide. And you can be a solid understanding believer and disagree with Mr Baird.

[Eddie Kaiger · Rating 5 out of 5]

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.

[Cullen Kenneth · Rating 5 out of 5]

“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

[Sammie Hargrave · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good. A few small nitpicks but a great primer for how Christians should view the government

[S. Paterson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Clear, reasonable, and brief. A great resource to hand to a friend.

[Peter Reynolds · Rating 1 out of 5]

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.

[Stephen Woodworth · Rating 2 out of 5]

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.

[Reader · Rating 3 out of 5]

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.

[StevieV · Rating 2 out of 5]

I genuinely wanted to understand brothers who are Christian Nationalists.

I read it all, came into it with an open mind. And in the end, I found this rhetoric to be deeply disturbing. Filled with oversimplifications, logical fallacies and cherry-picking scripture and the Westminster confessions to assert the bizarre and disturbing view that the US government’s leadership should strictly support and further Christianity.

Jesus good… government should go good = therefore “Jesus Government”

I must respectfully and unapologetically disagree. This ideology poses an enormous threat to the modern church.

I gave it one star for brevity. Second star for the author’s introductory concessions that his own central theme is alarming… he sought to substantiate his wild claims with the book, and he did not succeed.

[Justin Genus]

5 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.

[Z. Carlos Portillo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Baird’s primer on Reformed political praxis is pithy, but excellent. When reading, I found there were many occasions where I wished the author would expound. Having completed the book now, I am grateful for Baird’s brevity. He did not waste a word.

Readers may not agree with Baird’s conclusions but they will bear the burden to reckon with his sound argument. Using a plethora of primary sources biblical, historical, and theological, Baird convincingly argues that Christians bear a responsibility to love their neighbor through legislature and that government must promote true religion for the public good.

Do read the book. You’ll be challenged, and better for it!

[Lindsey Finton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent short treatise on why the government should promote true religion. His argument is convincing, and I’m looking forward to my boys reading this when they’re older. I wish I had been able to read this when I was in high school.

[David Jamison · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great introduction to the topic and tight argumentation. Will likely buy copies to give away

[Gabe Mira · Rating 5 out of 5]

To echo Doug Wilson, I’d give it a 6 out of 5 too. Great easy read as to why government should support Christianity as the only true religion.

83 pages!!

[Colin Fast · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good book, succinct.

Many won’t like it.

[Malachi Liberda · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is an excellent starting resource for the Christian who thinks the secularist project is a good one. May the church repent of the foolishness this book clearly and succinctly condemns, and find truth again in the Word, and the church fathers.

[Desmond Gilmore · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book. Simple, accessible, historical, Scriptural.

[Daniel Taylor · Rating 3 out of 5]

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.

[Creeds, Confessions, and Catechisms · Rating 5 out of 5]

Founders Ministries sent me a copy of "King of Kings: A Reformed Guide to Christian Government" by James Baird in exchange for an honest review.

The relationship of Christianity to the political sphere is one of the hottest in-house Christian debates right now. This brief book (85 pages) is a valuable contribution to the discussion.

Baird's thesis is clear: "Government must promote Christianity as the only true religion" (2). Chapter 1 goes through the thesis and explains each of the key ideas. Chapter 2 breaks down the teaching of the American revision of the Westminster Confession of Faith on the Civil Magistrate. Chapter 3 is where Baird clearly lays out his argument in a syllogism (22). Chapter 4 deals with the biblical evidence relevant to the argument. Chapter 5 is a really helpful explanation of WCF 19.4 and how we should understand the Moral, Ceremonial, and Judicial laws. Chapter 6 argues that the thesis is not in any way unamerican, especially if we look at primary sources from the Founders. Chapter 7 is about Christian liberty. Chapter 8 looks at the relationship between love and political action. Chapter 9 deals with the role of wisdom in Christian governance. Chapter 10 addresses what it means for Christians to live as exiles.

Considering how much the book covers in such a small page count, it is nothing short of impressive. It was well-put and enjoyable to read. Baird's syllogism is valid, so any criticism of his thesis must rely on demonstrating his premises to be false. Highlights for me were chapters 4-6. There are few places in chapter 6 where I wish Baird had provided more primary source evidence. However, I corresponded with him and it seems as though he's working on another book that makes up for those weak spots in this book.

Regardless of where you fall in this debate, you can't deny that Baird has made an indispensable contribution to the conversation. He gives you lot to chew on. It's definitely worth checking out this book, especially if you're thinking through the issue of Christ and culture.

[Will O'kelley · Rating 4 out of 5]

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!