(The Conversation) — Polls and analyses from journalists, scholars and even religious leaders often seem to assume that evangelicalism represents a singular religious and social identity. Former president and Republican nominee Donald Trump, who received 81% of the white evangelical vote in the 2016 election, is predicted to garner a majority share of this vote again in 2024.
Yet, the reality is much more complex. In 2016, for example, evangelical leaders such as Jerry Falwell Jr. and Robert Jeffress celebrated Trump’s victory and evangelicalism’s role in bringing America back to God. Others – such as Russell Moore, currently editor of the evangelical magazine Christianity Today – saw Trump as the opposite of what evangelicalism represents.
Led by prominent figures such as the late Jerry Falwell, contemporary evangelicalism emerged as a political force in the 1970s and 1980s and championed conservative religious values. Since then, evangelicals have been regarded as a uniform, monolithic group who are opposed to gay rights, abortion and more, and that they are a reliable conservative voting bloc.
As a scholar of American religion who has studied the evangelical movement for over 30 years, I was dissatisfied with this interpretation. At University of Southern California’s Center for Religion and Civic Culture, we decided to bring together our collective research on evangelicalism to develop a broader template to understand the dynamics of American evangelicalism. The result was a report first published in 2018 that we continue to update.
We have identified and described five varieties, or “types,” within the broader evangelical movement.
Evangelicals and their beliefs
At its core, evangelicalism is characterized by a belief in the literal truth of the Bible.
For example, evangelicals believe that the world and humans were created by God; that Jesus was literally God’s son and also born as a human; that Jesus died and physically rose from the dead; and that God currently acts through humans to achieve his ends for humanity. A hallmark belief for evangelicals is having a “personal relationship with Jesus Christ” and a focus on encouraging others to be “born again” or “saved” through Jesus.
Despite sharing the same basic theology, there are differences within evangelicalism politics and social engagement.
We used three criteria to develop our five categories: First, each type shares a basic agreement on evangelical theology. Second, they each understand themselves as existing within the larger tradition of American evangelicalism. And third, their theology motivates how they act in the world, including appropriate social and political actions.
Typologies simplify in order to explain, but they also can blur some of the finer distinctions between categories. Still, the perspectives these different varieties of evangelicals maintain shape not only who they will vote for but also why they vote a certain way.
1. MAGA-vangelicals
MAGA-vangelicals consist of the white Christian nationalist core of the “Make America Great Again” or MAGA, movement, with some Latino, Asian and Black American pastors aligning themselves with this movement.
MAGA-vangelicals have been the most vocal and visible group of evangelicals since the 2016 election.
The origins of this group trace back to the 1980s – the time of the emergence of the religious right. MAGA-vangelicals echo many of the same issues – such as opposition to abortion and LGBTQ+ rights and support for anti-immigration policies. One significant shift, however, since the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, is an increased acceptance of political violence. “Jan. 6 was not an insurrection,” evangelical leader Lance Wallnau has falsely asserted. “It was an election fraud intervention.” The baseless election fraud myth was the pretext for the violence on Jan. 6.
2. Neo-fundamentalist evangelicals
Neo-fundamentalists are evangelicals who are as theologically or politically conservative as MAGA-vangelicals but maintain a [theological commitment] to remain separate from any relationships – whether personal, social or political – that would, in their view, compromise the teachings of evangelical Christianity and their own identity as evangelical Christians.
For example, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary President Albert Mohler and Christianity Today editor Russell Moore have opposed Trump due to his, by evangelical standards, lack of values and amoral lifestyle.
The Rev. Russell Moore.
AP Photo/Mark Humphrey, File
However, they support how the Trump administration furthered the political goals of evangelical Christianity. In particular, they support the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade and supporting evangelicals’ religious freedom to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people in their businesses.
Yet there has recently been some qualified support among neo-fundamentalists offered for Trump himself, despite their opposition to his personal morals. For example, Mohler has argued that Trump is the better candidate to achieve their goals in 2024, despite his personal shortcomings. Mohler takes the position, though, that this support largely depends on Trump remaining committed to evangelical goals on issues such as abortion.
3. iVangelicals
iVangelicals are evangelicals primarily focused on personal faith and the weekly worship experience in their churches. They are mainly concentrated in the evangelical megachurch movement.
iVangelicals want to reach large numbers of people through their popular worship services, varied social programs and small group ministries.
iVangelicals are particularly adept at borrowing and adapting elements of popular culture to provide a “relevant” church atmosphere.
For example, most iVangelical megachurches include music that, other than the lyrics, is nearly indistinguishable from secular pop and rock bands, in both style and quality. Although they are generally conservative in their theology and politics, they tend to stay away from overtly political messages in their churches.
There is, however, a range of beliefs and commitments among iVangelicals, with some being attracted to groups such as Evangelicals for Harris, a new effort to mobilize evangelicals to move away from Republicans, Trump and MAGA and to vote for Harris. Their approach uses biblical examples and references to argue that true Christian teachings and actions are more aligned with Democrats than Republicans.
Evangelicals for Harris.
4. Kingdom Christians
Kingdom Christians are evangelicals who, in their churches and ministries, strive to mirror the demographic and socioeconomic mix of the neighborhoods where they are rooted.
They tend to have a more diverse racial and ethnic mix of members than other evangelical churches. Their focus is to be a part of, and to serve, their local communities in a manner that mirrors their conception of the kingdom of God on Earth.
Leaders among Kingdom Christians often critique the economic and political systems that produce poverty and racial injustice. The focus of their efforts, however, is on creating relationships with local businesses and activists in the local community and contributing to policy through engagement with local officials.
Kingdom Christians are present-oriented; the kingdom of God is to be realized in the communities where believers live, as well as in some future spiritual world.
5. Peace and Justice evangelicals
Peace and Justice evangelicals are a loose network of pastors, nonprofit leaders, professors and activists. They are a small segment within evangelicalism often embedded in larger organizations, and they focus their work on key social and political issues such as racial justice, immigration reform and environmental issues. They seek to have a wider impact than just a focus on the local community.
Peace and Justice evangelicals trace their origins to the late 1960s publication, The Other Side, originally Freedom Now, which represented a freshly emerging evangelical social consciousness around issues of racial justice. Following close behind was the Sojourners community, and Sojourners magazine, which is still active today.
In 1973, a group of evangelical college professors wrote the Chicago Declaration of Social Concern, which ultimately led to the launch of Evangelicals for Social Action as a national organization in 1978.
This is a small but growing minority in the larger evangelical world, with many belonging to traditional evangelical institutions. For example, Alexia Salvatierra, at Fuller Seminary, is a longtime “faith-rooted” community organizer and has more recently been instrumental in forming Matthew 25/Mateo25, a group that aids immigrants and “defends the vulnerable.” Shane Claiborne, a long-time urban activist, is currently head of Red Letter Christians, a movement that combines “Jesus and justice” and seeks to “live out Jesus’ counter-cultural teachings.”
Several Christians work with organizations that help immigrants.
AP Photo/Russell Contreras
Evangelicals and the future
Following historical evangelical voting patterns, it is likely that most white evangelicals will vote for Trump in 2024. I believe many will do so with enthusiasm, while others will vote for him because of his policies, while remaining troubled by his rhetoric.
Of the evangelicals who oppose Trump, some will refuse to vote for either Trump or Harris, refusing to cast a vote for president. Others will vote for Harris, following the example of many Republican leaders who are seeking to move beyond the damage that Trump and the MAGA movement have done to the Republican Party and to conservatism.
Meanwhile, for the Kingdom Christians and Peace and Justice evangelicals, the true values of evangelical Christianity will be supported by the more progressive policies of the Democratic Party.
Regardless of how they vote in the 2024 election, evangelicals in all of these categories will continue to promote their distinct vision of evangelicalism and educate members on how they should bring their faith to bear on important social and political issues in American culture.
(Richard Flory, Executive Director, Center for Religion and Civic Culture, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)
