Christian Dominionism: What Matthew 28:18-20 Actually
Short answer: Christian dominionism is the idea that Christians are commissioned to take control of earthly institutions, governments, and cultures and to govern them on Christ's behalf. Matthew 28:18-20 is often pressed into that service, but the text itself does not support it. There, Jesus says, as Matthew 28:18-20 says, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth," and that authority is his, already granted, not delegated to his followers to rule the nations. The command that follows is to make disciples of all nations, baptising them and teaching them to observe all that he commanded. The means are preaching, baptism, and teaching; the end is disciples, not political control. Dominionism reads a mandate into a commission, and it mistakes the church's mission for a state-building project.
What Christian Dominionism Claims
Christian dominionism is a family of ideas rather than a single denomination or statement of faith. At its core is the conviction that Christians are obligated to take dominion over the institutions of this world, including government, law, education, media, and the arts. Some versions say the church must do this by cultural influence; others say by direct political control. The label covers writers and movements that have differed sharply with one another. What they share is a reading of the Bible in which the original creation mandate to have dominion over the earth becomes a mandate to rule over people and the structures of society.
The roots of the view are usually traced to Genesis 1:26-28, where God says, "Let's make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the sky, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." Dominionists argue that this commission was never revoked and now falls to redeemed humanity in Christ. That seems plausible at first glance. But notice what the dominion in Genesis actually covers: fish, birds, livestock, and every creeping thing. It is a commission to steward the created order, not to govern human beings or to seize the machinery of the state.
The movement gained a popular hearing in the late twentieth century through books and conferences on Christians and culture. A moderate version urged believers to be salt and light in every sphere of society. A stronger version insisted that Christians have a biblical duty to reconstruct society according to Old Testament law. A yet stronger version imagined a coming takeover of civil government by the righteous. These are not the same claim, and it is unfair to lump every cultural conservative with every theocratic radical. Still, the underlying instinct is consistent: the Great Commission is treated as a charter for cultural and political conquest, and the church's task is redefined as dominion.
It is worth saying plainly that many Christians who care deeply about public life are not dominionists. Working for justice, voting, serving in office, and seeking the good of a city are legitimate Christian callings. The question is not whether Christians may be involved in politics. The question is whether Christ has commissioned the church to rule the nations in his name before he returns. On that point, the New Testament answers with unusual clarity. When Jesus speaks of his authority and his commission, he does not hand the nations over to his disciples to govern. He sends them to speak, to baptise, and to teach.
All Authority Belongs to Jesus, Not to Us
The opening sentence of the Great Commission is a declaration about Jesus, not a grant to his followers. Matthew 28:18 reads, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth." The verb is passive and the tense is completed. Something has already happened. The authority is possessed by Christ because of his resurrection and exaltation. He is not appointing a cabinet; he is announcing his own enthronement. Any teaching about Christian power in the world must begin here, with the recognition that the authority is his and remains his. The church does not hold it as a franchise. It lives under it as a people.
Consider the setting. Matthew has just described the women at the empty tomb, the earthquake, the angel, and the risen Lord meeting his disciples in Galilee. The eleven worship him, though some doubt. Into that moment Jesus speaks not of their ascension but of his. Every earlier claim to authority in Matthew's Gospel has been contested: Herod's, Pilate's, the chief priests'. Now one man claims all of it, in heaven and on earth. The disciples are not told to go and seize what he has won. They are told to go and announce it. The difference between those two postures is the difference between the gospel and dominionism.
It is also significant that this authority is universal in scope. Heaven and earth, every nation, all things. Nothing is outside his rule, and nothing needs to be brought under his rule by human effort. The dominionist instinct assumes that Christ's reign is not yet complete and that believers must finish the job. But the New Testament presents the reign of Christ as already established and already comprehensive. What remains is the spread of the announcement and the gathering of the elect. The nations are not waiting for the church to conquer them; they are waiting for the church to tell them who is already on the throne.
This is why the Great Commission is a gospel Commission and not a political programme. The disciples are not sent to hold office; they are sent to bear witness. When Jesus says all authority is his, he is reassuring a small, frightened group that their message will not fail because their master governs everything. That is comfort for missionaries, not a strategy for revolution. The proper response to Christ's authority is not to ascend to seats of power but to bow before the one who already holds them, and then to speak of him to everyone who will listen.
Go Therefore and Make Disciples, Not Rulers
The command in Matthew 28:19-20 is built on the authority just announced. Because all authority is his, they are to go and make disciples. The main verb is make disciples. Going, baptising, and teaching are the participles that describe how disciples are made. That grammatical structure matters enormously for this discussion. If Jesus had intended his followers to establish governments over the nations, this would have been the place to say so. Instead he names three activities: going out, baptising converts, and teaching obedience. All three are the work of a messenger, not the work of a magistrate.
Making disciples is a long, patient, personal labour. It is done by speaking truth to a neighbour, by bringing a new believer into the water, by sitting with someone over months and years as they learn to obey everything Christ commanded. It cannot be accomplished by legislation, by court rulings, or by winning elections. A law can restrain behaviour; it cannot create a disciple. A government can enforce outward compliance; it cannot produce repentance and faith. That is why the New Testament never instructs the church to take over the state as a means of fulfilling its mission. The tools it names are the tools of proclamation.
Notice also the scope of the command: all nations. Under the old covenant, Israel was a particular nation with a particular land and a particular king. Under the new covenant, the command goes out to all nations without exception, but it goes out as a message, not as a conquest. The church is scattered among the nations as a witness, not installed over them as a ruling class. This is exactly what Jesus had told Pilate shortly before his death, and the contrast with dominionism could hardly be sharper. The kingdom advances by witness, and it advances among every people on earth.
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever Christ commanded is a comprehensive mandate, but the content is Christ's teaching, not a blueprint for civil law. The Sermon on the Mount, the parables, the discourses of John, the ethics of the epistles: these are what disciples are to obey. Dominionism often imports the civil legislation of Israel into that gap, treating the Old Testament judicial law as binding on modern states. But the New Testament never does this. It calls the church to teach what Christ commanded, and Christ commanded repentance, faith, love of God and neighbour, and endurance to the end.
The Kingdom Is Not of This World
If there is a single verse that most directly answers dominionism, it is John 18:36. Before Pilate, Jesus says, "My Kingdom is not of this world. If my Kingdom were of this world, then my servants would fight, that I wouldn't be delivered to the Jews. But now my Kingdom is not from here." The logic is unmistakable. If Jesus were running an earthly kingdom, his followers would have taken up arms to defend him. They did not, and they were not supposed to. The absence of a fight was itself evidence about the nature of his reign. He was not a rival to Caesar, and his followers were not an army in waiting.
Some dominionist writers treat this statement as temporary, a kind of concession until the kingdom is fully established. But Jesus does not say his kingdom is not yet of this world; he says it is not of this world. The contrast is between two orders, not two phases. His servants in this age do not fight because the kingdom they serve is not sourced here. This does not mean the kingdom has no effect on the world. It means its power operates differently, through truth and witness and the work of the Spirit, not through the sword. Pilate could not have misunderstood that, and neither should we.
The same truth appears in Philippians 3:20, where Paul writes, "For our citizenship is in heaven, from where we also wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ." Believers live in earthly cities and owe them genuine loyalty in ordinary matters. But their citizenship is elsewhere. They are resident aliens, and they are waiting for a Saviour to come from heaven, not for a movement to install them in power. Dominionism reverses the posture. It tells believers to stop waiting and start ruling. But the New Testament tells believers to wait faithfully, serve where they are, and bear witness until he comes.
This waiting is not passive. Paul says the believer waits for a Saviour, and the church has plenty to do in the meantime. But the waiting defines the task. We do not build the kingdom; we receive it. We do not conquer the nations; we proclaim the king. When the kingdom does come in fullness, it will come because Christ returns, not because the church finally gained enough influence. Any teaching that says otherwise has traded the hope of the gospel for the mechanics of politics, and it has set the church up for disappointment when the world does not become what it promised.
What Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2 Say About Earthly Authority
The New Testament's teaching about government is not silence. It is remarkably direct, and it runs against the grain of dominionism. Romans 13:1 says, "Let every soul be in subjection to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those who exist are ordained by God." The passage goes on to describe rulers as God's servants for good and as those who bear the sword. Paul does not urge the Roman Christians to seize the empire in Christ's name. He tells them to submit to it, because God stands behind its existence and its limits. That is a very different posture from cultural conquest.
Peter says the same thing more briefly. In 1 Peter 2:13-17 he writes, "Therefore subject yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether to the king, as supreme," and then goes on to honour all men, love the brotherhood, fear God, and honour the king. Peter was writing to scattered exiles in a hostile empire, and his instruction was not rebellion but godly submission. If the apostolic church had believed it was called to take over the state, these would be strange words indeed. Instead they counsel respect, order, and quiet faithfulness, with the freedom of conscience that belongs to those who ultimately answer to God.
This does not mean governments are always right or that believers must obey every command. The apostles themselves said, in effect, that we must obey God rather than men when the two conflict. Romans 13 does not make the state infallible, and 1 Peter 2 does not require silence in the face of injustice. Christians may lawfully criticise rulers, advocate for just laws, and refuse to do evil at the state's command. But that is a far cry from the dominionist claim that believers are commissioned to capture the state. Criticising a government and ruling it in Christ's name are not the same thing, and the New Testament calls for the first while never teaching the second.
Taken together, these passages describe a church that is distinct from the state, respectful toward it, and not competing with it for ultimate authority. The state has its sphere, the church has hers, and both stand under the authority of the risen Christ. Dominionism collapses the two, and in doing so it distorts the church's identity and tempts her to use methods that do not belong to her. The church's weapon is the word of God, not the ballot box or the sword. She conquers by suffering and speaking, not by governing. That is the pattern of the New Testament, and it has never been improved on.
A Better Way: Faithful Witness in a Hostile Age
The alternative to dominionism is not defeatism. It is faithful witness. The church is called to be salt and light in a world that is often indifferent or hostile. She is called to serve the poor, to defend the vulnerable, to speak truth to power, to disciple her own members, and to preach the gospel to every creature. Some Christians will be called into politics, law, education, and journalism, and they should serve there with integrity and love. But they go as citizens of heaven serving their neighbours, not as agents of a Christian empire trying to take control of a society that has not been born again.
This distinction preserves the church from two errors. The first is withdrawal: retreating from public life entirely and leaving the world to its own devices. The second is conquest: assuming that the church's mission is to run the world. The New Testament steers between them. Believers are in the world but not of it, engaged but not absorbed, serving but not ruling. They are pilgrims who plant gardens and seek the welfare of the city even while they wait for a better country. That posture is more durable than dominionism because it does not depend on political outcomes, and it is more honest about how the New Testament actually speaks.
It is also a posture that fits the church's own experience. When the church has tried to rule, it has often become the very thing it opposed: coercive, self-protective, and distracted from the gospel. When the church has been faithful under pressure, it has grown and its witness has been powerful. The martyrs did not take over the empire; they won it by dying. The missionaries did not conquer the nations; they learned their languages and preached Christ. That is the way of the cross, and it is the way the kingdom has always advanced in this age.
None of this means that Christians should have no public convictions or no voice. There is a real difference between saying the church must take control of the state and saying that individual Christians should seek justice and the good of their neighbours. The first is a false commission. The second is the natural fruit of the gospel. A Christian who loves God and neighbour cannot be indifferent to how the weak are treated in his own city. The question is what the church's mission is, and the New Testament answers plainly: make disciples, baptise, teach, and bear witness, until the Master returns.
Common Dominionist Proof Texts and How They Function
Dominionist teaching rarely rests on a single verse. It weaves together the creation mandate in Genesis, the promises of the psalms about the nations, the kingdom parables of Jesus, and the authority language of Matthew 28. Each of these texts says something true, but none of them says what dominionism needs. Genesis 1 gives humanity a stewardship over the created world, not a commission to govern other humans. The psalms look forward to the rule of the Messiah over the nations; they do not tell the church to install that rule before he comes. The parables describe the growth and the mixed present state of the kingdom, not a takeover strategy.
Matthew 28 itself functions differently in the dominionist reading than it does in context. In context, all authority belonging to Jesus is the ground of confidence for a small, scattered, persecuted community that is about to face centuries of opposition. It does not say that the disciples will themselves exercise that authority over the nations. It says they will be safe as they carry the message because their Lord holds all power. The verse has been used to bless everything from missions to empire, but its plain sense is pastoral comfort and missional command, not political charter.
It should be said that some Christians who use this language are not calling for anything like theocracy. They mean that the gospel should influence culture and that believers should be good citizens and honest workers. That is not dominionism in the strict sense, and it should not be labelled as such. Words matter, and fairness requires distinguishing between those who want the church to run the state and those who simply want Christians to be faithful in public life. This article is addressing the stronger claim, because it is the one that most often appeals to Matthew 28 in support of its programme.
For those who want to think further about what whole-hearted Christian faith looks like in public and private life, the Wesleyan tradition offers helpful material. Wesley's vision of scriptural Christianity, his sober warnings about the almost Christian, and the apostolic teaching on walking in the light all provide a more biblical framework for engagement than any scheme of taking dominion. Christians have always done their best work when they have been clear that their citizenship is in heaven and their mission is to make disciples. That has never failed the church, and it never will.
Biblical fidelity check
Matthew 28:18-20 establishes three things clearly. First, all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Jesus. Second, his disciples are sent to all nations to make disciples, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to observe all that he commanded. Third, he promises to be with them always, to the end of the age. The passage is a commission to proclamation, not a charter for political rule. It tells us who holds authority; it does not tell us that we hold it or that we are to exercise it over the nations in this age.
The passage does not establish that the church is commissioned to take control of civil governments, law, education, or media in Christ's name. It does not promise that Christians will achieve cultural or political dominance before Jesus returns. It does not replace the church's mission of making disciples with a mission of ruling society, and it does not authorised believers to use the state's coercive power to advance the kingdom. Nothing in this commission gives the church the sword, and the rest of the New Testament confirms as much when it grounds the state in God's ordination rather than the church's commission. A common misreading takes the phrase "all authority has been given to me" and shifts the subject from Jesus to the church, so that believers act as his deputies in governing the world. That is wrong because the sentence names Jesus as the one who receives and holds the authority, and because the commission that follows sends the disciples to speak and baptise and teach rather than to rule.
Other passages that speak to Matthew 28:18-20
The themes of this passage run through the whole New Testament. Scriptural Christianity: A Bible Study from John Wesley's Classic Sermon explores what whole-hearted faith looks like when the gospel is taken seriously, and The Almost Christian: A Bible Study from John Wesley's Classic Sermon warns against a faith that stops short of full surrender. For a study of how the apostolic witness grounds our fellowship with God and with one another, see What Does 1 John 1:1 Mean? Context, Theology, and Application, and for the companion call to honesty about sin, see What Does 1 John 1:8 Mean? Context, Theology, and Application. Together they keep the focus where the Great Commission puts it: on faithful witness to a risen Lord whose authority is already complete.
Frequently asked questions
Is Christian dominionism the same as Christians being involved in politics?
No. Believers may vote, run for office, advocate for just laws, and serve their communities. Dominionism is a stronger claim: that the church as the church is commissioned to take control of civil institutions and govern them in Christ's name. The New Testament calls Christians to good citizenship and faithful witness, but it never assigns the church a mandate to rule the state. The distinction is important because it separates legitimate public engagement from a false reading of the Great Commission.
Doesn't Jesus give his authority to his disciples in Matthew 28?
He does not. Matthew 28:18 says the authority has been given to him. The disciples are then sent to make disciples, baptise, and teach. Their role is to bear witness to his authority, not to exercise it over the nations. If the text meant that they now wield his authority in governing the world, the command would look different. Instead Jesus sends a small group of preachers into the world with a message, a promise of his presence, and nothing resembling a political programme.
What about the creation mandate in Genesis 1:26-28?
That passage grants humanity dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the livestock, and every creeping thing. It is a commission to steward the created world, not to govern other human beings. Dominionists often read it as a political mandate, but the text itself is about the created order. The New Testament applies it to stewardship and to the dignity of human beings made in God's image, not to the church's calling to capture earthly institutions for Christ.
