Recent tragedies have highlighted the increasing danger religious persons and organizations face in American society. The August 27, 2025, shooting at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis killed two children and injured eighteen others. The assassination of Charlie Kirk, an outspoken conservative Christian, on September 10, 2025, occurred at Utah Valley University in front of hundreds of people personally present and millions of people online. Most recently, on September 29, 2025, a man drove his truck through the doors of a Mormon church in Michigan, began shooting congregants, and then set fire to the building, killing several people and destroying the building. In each instance, hatred toward persons of religious convictions appears to be at the heart of the matter. These horrific acts have been condemned almost universally and have united many people in calling for the need to protect religious liberty.

These tragedies highlight how important and necessary it is to protect religious liberty and religious institutions in this country. And, while not all of it, much of this attack comes from far-left-wing activism, an ideology that is at dire odds with Christian belief and practice. To that end, many people are placing all such attacks under the label of “Christian persecution,” despite the fact that not all these religious entities hold to the same doctrinal beliefs. In fact, the doctrinal distinctives of Protestant Christianity, when contrasted with Roman Catholic and Mormon teachings, make it clear these are distinct religions with the barest of connecting threads. While some tend to dismiss these differences as minor disagreements, others rightly recognize that each faith system has entirely different beliefs about sin and salvation that cannot be swept aside. These differences, when considered biblically, determine who and who is not actually Christian.

At the heart of the Roman Catholic system is the belief that Christ did indeed die for sin, but only inasmuch as He grants an infusion of righteousness into the believer. This infusion makes it possible to obey the law, thus requiring the adherent to merit salvation through his works. Part of those works is complete submission to the Catholic Church and the papacy, outside of which, there is no salvation. In comparison, Mormon doctrine similarly teaches that converts are saved by the grace of Christ, “after all we can do.” While the similarity of grace plus works initially appears to mirror the Catholic teachings, it vastly differs in the person and character of Christ. Where the Catholic church rightly recognizes Jesus as the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, and God eternal, Mormonism teaches Christ is an exalted man, spiritually born of the god Elohim in Heaven, who came to earth as a man, and who attained to godhood by his obedience and ultimate sacrifice. When compared to biblical Christianity, which affirms the Scriptures that Christ is God, who took on humanity, lived in perfect obedience to the Father, died to take the wrath of God for sinners, rose again in fulfillment of prophecy, and who imputes the fullness of His righteousness to those who repent and believe in a one-time act of justification, the distinctions between these religious systems could not be more clear.

The question then must be asked, why do these differences matter? The answer is found by comparing the end goal of those who are attempting to unite these disparate faiths under one banner to the end goal of Scripture itself. There is little question that America today finds itself in a culture war that is at a fever pitch. Far-left activism for years has painted conservatives and Christians as the enemy responsible for all the perceived ills in the culture. To that end, they have lobbied for and created laws and policies that have elevated and celebrated evil in the forms of abortion, transgenderism, sexual depravity, and much more. They have also sought to marginalize and silence conservative and Christian voices, labeling their opposition as hateful, bigoted, fascist, and sexist. Their efforts have been aimed at making all such opposing speech illegal. This rhetoric has and continues to inspire violence toward Christians and conservatives alike.

Therefore, many persons in right-wing media and politics have argued that the recent tragedies should simply be recognized as Christian persecution regardless of the vast differences between the groups involved. This is because they believe that the end goal is sociopolitical victory, wherein far-left ideology is eradicated, and all the moral positives of religion become the basis for a renewed social order. On the surface, this seems a laudable goal to attain. In most cases, these religious groups hold to a heterosexual ethic, belief in the sanctity of life, marriage, and family, and sincerely desire the stringent protection of religious liberty. These causes are beneficial not only to the religious groups themselves, but they also provide a stable foundation for the nation as a whole. Therefore, it makes sense that each group would be co-laboring for politically conservative policies that would achieve policy change that promotes these practices. Thus, political and media pundits believe it is more important to classify all these religions under one label. On one hand, it provides a rallying point that highlights not only leftist attacks on Christian belief but also the wickedness of the left’s own doctrinal beliefs. On the other hand, it unites all the groups together as one sociopolitical demographic instead of disparate entities that must be courted and used separately. The argument, then, is one of pragmatism toward a particular goal that has a specific application in this world at this time.

However, the Christian religion is not to be simply concerned with achieving sociopolitical victory in this world. It has a very specific goal, one that transcends the current culture war and the conflicts of ages to come: the glorification of Jesus Christ through the proclamation of the gospel and the redemption of sinners. All of Scripture points the Christian toward this particular end goal, the evangelization of the lost and the discipleship of believers. This does not mean that the Christian faith is unconcerned with life in this world; quite the contrary. Christians are called to live in complete obedience to God in this life, loving their neighbors, praying for their enemies, and calling sinners to repentance and faith in Christ. Christians are to call out sin in the culture and to demand obedience to the commandments of God. All of these things impact how Christians live out every aspect of their lives, including, where they are able, involvement in the political arena. Therefore, Christians involve themselves at various levels of cultural engagement, but always with the specific purpose of calling the lost to Christ, edifying the body of the church, and glorifying God above all. The Christian involvement in the culture war may have a practical impact in the world, but its primary goal is spiritual.

Therefore, Christians must steadfastly resist the urge to abandon doctrinal distinctives that define the difference between true Christianity and pseudo-Christianity. Any practical impact that such ecumenism would achieve would, at best, make the culture simply outwardly clean while still rotten internally through sin and wickedness. Worse still, the blending of Christianity with false religious systems confuses the very harvest field we seek to win. Those who find appeal in outwardly Christian policies that were achieved through such a blending of beliefs would have no reason to distinguish between true and false doctrine. An ecumenical conservative victory would produce better-behaved citizens who seek out religion, but who see no difference between the various faith groups and will choose that which gives them the most comforting experience. Instead of being confronted with the wickedness of their sin and seeing their only hope in Christ alone, these people now can pick and choose based on their own personal preferences. In the end, such ecumenical mish-mashing could only achieve, at best, a more outwardly moral culture from which many people will still go to everlasting condemnation when they die.

Christians should definitely be involved in engaging the culture, but they must not sacrifice the truth of the gospel on the altar of ecumenical pragmatism. We can love and support those of disparate faith systems when they experience the tragedy of far-left violence. We can mourn with those who experience deep and tragic loss, but it cannot end there. We must convey that true comfort comes, not through the false promises of a false church, but only through the true Christ of Scripture. We can stand alongside conservative political pundits about the need for protection of religious liberty and rail against Christian persecution, but we must distinguish the true church as being separate and apart from other faith systems that experience similar assaults. In the end, our primary goal is to preach Christ and Him crucified as the only real hope of deliverance from sin, wickedness, and death. Nothing else matters if we fail to do this.

Note: This article was also published at X.com.