top of page

Blood-Red Church

How Redemption Colors Our Politics

How Redemption Colors Our Politics



Year written


Are there certain political positions that all Christians are required to take?

Blood-Red Church argues that the redeemed of the Lord do, in fact, have a responsibility to stand for certain non-negotiable ethical positions in the public arena. Christians are free to disagree on disputable matters, but when it comes to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, family, church, capitalism, and the sovereignty of this nation, redemption has colored our politics red.

This red-church position is not popular among many evangelicals today. Influenced by "the third way" of The Gospel Coalition, many pastors and other leaders celebrate "political diversity" in the Church, supposing they are transcending the arguments of both sides of America's political debate. The "grey church," as the author dubs them, desires to remain neutral in the culture war. What they do not realize is that remaining neutral at such a time as this amounts to capitulation to those who would tear the nation apart.

Blood-Red Church advances the position that the Bible speaks clearly to the issues that divide America. It is a call to the redeemed of the Lord to stand up for what is true and right.

About the Author:

Pastor Jeff Kliewer is pastor of Cornerstone Church in Mount Laurel, New Jersey, an Evangelical Free Church in America (EFCA). He lived in deep inner-city Philadelphia, doing urban youth ministry within a few miles of Eric Mason, for close to a decade. He experienced personally the spiritual impact of individuals swept away in social justice, with handfuls abandoning the true gospel of Jesus Christ for this false counterfeit.
Every denomination has had to confront Critical Race Theory in the last 5 years, and few institutions have stood strong against the Social Justice Gospel movement. The EFCA has remained orthodox, yet started requiring their pastors attend an online Diversity Equity and Inclusion training. Jeff asked questions and started getting the run around so wrote Woke-Free Church to clearly present these concerns. For this, Kliewer was brought under church discipline on 4 counts.
The first was Christian Nationalism which he was found not guilty. The second charge was misrepresentation, which he presumed refers to either the EFCA or certain pastors mentioned. The third charge was attitude, to which Kliewer credits thinking that he’s right, which is not a sin issue. The fourth charge was influence, also not a sin issue. His ministry credential being threatened in this type of congregational polity “defrocking”.

bottom of page