I am afraid, [it] is painfully obvious and simultaneously painful to utter: evangelicals support Donald J. Trump, in spite of his immorality and venality, because he is white and a male.
By Jim West
Ming Hua Theological College
Why do evangelicals in America seem unalterably aligned with Donald Trump? That question has occupied many thinkers since the announcement by Trump that he would run for the office of the Presidency of the United States of America and was immediately surrounded, it seemed, by a cadre of high profile evangelical leaders like Robert Jeffress, Jerry Falwell Jr., Paula White, and Franklin Graham among many others. What is it about both evangelicals and Trump that finds them attracted to one another?
The usual answers are 1) Trump is pro-Israel and evangelicals are staunchly supportive of Israel. Indeed, many Christian Zionists are also evangelicals and evangelical Trump supporters. 2) Trump is ‘conservative’ and will appoint conservative Justices to the Supreme Court and those conservative Justices will overturn Roe v. Wade, the law permitting abortion. 3) Trump is on ‘our side’ in regard to the question of social issues like Gay marriage. Unfortunately for evangelicals, Trump has never given any evidence that he is at all concerned with moral questions. Quite the contrary, he seems averse to morality. Even his attempt to bar transgendered persons from military service was a mere pandering after conservative approval. No evidence exists to suggest that Mr Trump shares evangelical attitudes towards LGBTQ persons.
But are those reasons the actual reason that evangelicals support Trump? It seems very unlikely. As to Trump’s putative pro-Israel stance; while he has had rather a lot to say that seems supportive of Israel his recent actions have placed Israel in incredible peril. And everyone who has followed the career of Donald Trump knows that he is not a true Conservative in any sense of the word. His position on abortion has, until lately, been thoroughly left leaning. His position on ‘family values’ and morality is patently liberal. In short, there is nothing Conservative about the man except his pandering rhetoric.
So what are the real reasons that evangelicals support Trump? To answer that question we will first need to discover precisely what we mean when we use the term ‘Evangelical.’ Then we will need to What is an evangelical ask the important question: Who is Donald J. Trump? Only then will we be in a position to address our central question: ‘Why Do Evangelicals Support Donald J. Trump?’ And, having done that, we will briefly pursue an answer to the question: ‘What is the Future of Evangelicalism?’
What is an Evangelical?
The word ‘Evangelische’ was used originally in Germany in the 16th century as the theology of Luther took hold and his followers were described by the word that means ‘gospelers’. Persons called ‘Evangelische’ were persons who had left the Catholic Church and adhered to the teaching of the upstart theologian from Wittenberg who, all knew, focused his concern on the ‘Gospel’ instead of on the traditions of the Roman Church. Over time the word came to be used interchangeably with ‘Protestant’ and these two terms became the predominate descriptors of Lutheranism. Reformed Christians, followers of Zwingli and Calvin, were not called Protestants nor evangelicals, but instead simply Reformed or Calvinists.
Over the course of time the terms naturally blurred and in rather loose usage came to be used without any concern for their original status. Protestant came to be applied to Lutheran and Reformed and Evangelical slowly found itself displaced in the European context (though some Lutherans preferred it to the more anthropocentric ‘Lutheran’ label).
In America, the term wasn’t widely used before the rise of Fundamentalism in the nineteenth century, when members of that sect turned to the past to find roots for their views. ‘Evangelical’ was the more positive sounding term whereas ‘Fundamentalist’ soon took on a negative hue. When Fundamentalism coalesced into an actual theological movement, with the publication of a series of pamphlets in the 1900’s called The Fundamentals, it did so as a reaction against the encroachment of Modernism and Historical Criticism (as practiced by the likes of Duhm and Wellhausen). More than a movement forward it was, and remains, a retreat to the past, to a pre-critical pre-scientific reality which simply no longer exists. And yet Fundamentalism then and now continues to fight for its very existence against the insurmountable tide of time.
Moving swiftly forward in time, ‘evangelicalism’ really became a force in American Christianity in the era of Billy Graham and his widely attended widely admired Crusades. News media referred to Graham as an evangelical and his many millions of followers, conservative Christians especially, with roots in Fundamentalism (like some of the Baptists and some of the Methodists), adopted the term for themselves. Now, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and others who were Fundamentalists at heart could denominate themselves underneath a positive umbrella term which transcended denominational lines and identified them as members of a specific movement: evangelicals.
Evangelicalism, in its American context, in the 70’s and 80’s, was simply Fundamentalism with better publicity. These very conservative Christians, with roots firmly planted in the dirt of Fundamentalism and with their nourishment drawn from the remnants of racism and misogyny so much a part of Fundamentalism, flourished during the Revivalism of Graham and the Reaganism of the 80’s.
Planted in the same patch of ground as American Political Conservatism (with its barely concealed racism and misogyny), evangelicalism and Political Conservativism were plants sprung from the same fearful seed: a longing for the era of white male authoritarianism and the subservience of women and people of color.
Who is Donald J. Trump?
The biography of Trump is fairly well known and easily discoverable. Here I will simply sketch the briefest of outlines. Trump was born to a wealthy family in New York and rose to public notice as a self promoting advocate of self aggrandizement. He understood better than most the usefulness of being on the cover of magazines and newspapers and of being on television at any and every opportunity. Having received a substantial inheritance from his father, he managed to expand his holdings through a series of deals which left many poorer in his wake. Well known for stiffing his suppliers and not paying many to whom he owed money, he endured a number of bankruptcies and he also experienced a number of marriages and extramarital affairs.
He rose to political prominence in the Republican Party in spite of the fact that he was only (at that time) a member of it for a very short time, in the early months of 2016. Having managed to successfully and against all odds and all the pundits predictions receiving the nomination of his recently adopted party, became the President of the United States in 2016.
His administration has been a twitter driven hellscape. And yet through all of it, from crude and vile remarks about women to racist overtones to immoral scandals, his evangelical supporters have remained steadfast. Why?
Why Do Evangelicals Support Donald J. Trump?
As intimated above, the usual suggestions made in answer to this question are not really the actual reason that evangelicals supported and continue to support a man whose life and lifestyle they would decry in any Democratic President. Recall, for instance, the outcry from evangelicals when Bill Clinton entered into his illicit and ill conceived tryst with Monica Lewinsky and other women. It is, coincidentally, the rank hypocrisy related to the way Conservatives have given Trump a pass whilst demonizing Bill Clinton that has led many young self-identified evangelical people to leave evangelical churches and adopt a more progressive politics and expression of faith. Furthermore, If Barack Obama had been the man Donald Trump is (in terms of ethics and morality, or actually in terms of the absolute absence of those attributes), evangelicals would have staged protest marches and demanded his impeachment. So then, again, why do so many white, middle aged and older, evangelicals support Trump?
The answer, I am afraid, is painfully obvious and simultaneously painful to utter: evangelicals support Donald J. Trump, in spite of his immorality and venality, because he is white and a male. Evangelical supporters of Donald J. Trump support him because they are racists and misogynists. Trump is not a Black man like Barack Obama and Trump is not a woman like Hillary Clinton.
To be sure, some will see that explanation as far too simplistic. And at one level it is. Voters make choices on a whole range of issues from motives known and unknown. Yet it is painfully obvious to any impartial observer that evangelicals were never supportive of Obama and they have never cared for either Bill or Hillary Clinton. But why? Why do evangelicals find themselves willing to hitch their wagon to a man as immoral as Donald Trump; a man who is nothing like them in either lifestyle nor testimony nor behavior? Because he is like them. He is white. And he is a male.
When it comes to racism, it is well known that there is a long history of racism among White evangelicals. The Southern Baptist Convention was literally founded on the premise that White Southerners had the right to own slaves whilst Northern Baptists disagreed and believed slavery to be immoral. Southern Methodists and other (then) relatively conservative religious groups across the South held the same views. Evangelical believers (using the word a bit anachronistically now) were supporters of Jim Crow laws across the South after the Civil War and to this day many evangelicals in the South continue to support laws and behaviors which deny civil rights to people of color, as evidenced in their rejection of Lyndon Johnson’s legislative efforts in the 60’s.
Evangelicals long for the return of a time when white males were in positions of unchallenged power. A time when men ruled home and office and church and state. This because, again, at heart, they are Fundamentalists. Donald Trump represents, to them, that time.
Had Joe Biden run for the Democratic nomination, he would be President right now. Because he is white. And he is a male. Had any other leading Democrat white male run, he too would have won. But because the Democratic Party nominated a woman; and a Clinton woman at that, the evangelical Fundamentalists would not follow and so they chose the lesser of two evils (in their minds): Trump. Because at the end of the day it’s better, so far as the evangelical Fundamentalists are concerned, to support and vote for a womanizing reprobate who happens to be a white male than it is to support and vote for a woman.
What is the Future of Evangelicalism?
America is a country undergoing incredible systemic and racial change. White people are slowly becoming the minority and people of color are on the ascendency. To White Fundamentalist evangelicals the fact that America will be predominantly populated by non-Whites in 2045 is a terrifying prospect. Power must be maintained at any cost. No matter what. And if that means grabbing on to the coattails of a man who is morally inferior, then that is what American evangelicalism will do. It’s what it has done.
American evangelicalism’s days are numbered. Unless and until evangelicals abandon and renounce their racist and misogynistic roots, they will continue to be both a dwindling religious force and a dwindling political force. As people of color rise to power, those clinging to the, as they suppose, halcyon days of white men in business suits running the country and the church while women stayed home barefoot and pregnant and the coloreds knew their place and stayed in it will slowly die out, along with their religion.
Lord, hasten the day.
From the Editors. The views reflected here are those of the author and its appearance is not a statement of support.
 I have in mind here particularly his order to withdraw American troops from Syria and Afghanistan. This, according to military specialists, leaves Israel perilously exposed by an expanding Iran.
 Cf the Brookings Institute study here- https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2018/03/14/the-us-will-become-minority-white-in-2045-census-projects/ , accessed 21 December, 2018.
Do you not think it's possible for Evangelicals to support Trump because of his policies and not just because he is a white male?
This does not explain why they preferred Trump to the other white/male Republicans running in the primary.
Actually it does. They found in Trump the spokesman for their views. They didn’t find that in the others.
I would love to support a black president or a female president. I would vote for Condaleeza Rice in a heartbeat and so would all the other white “evangelical” people I know. Sounds like someone on the outside, knowing nothing about conservative Christians write this. We are intelligent enough to vote based on policy as shocking as that may be to this author.
It's easy to find exceptions to the rule. Sure, some folks who call themselves 'evangelicals' can vote for all manner of persons. The fact remains, however, that they didn't, did they?
I believe your analysis is not reaching enough. Brought up in the faith, there's an element of destined fullfillment that projects events and characters that and who satisfy predictions based on the Bible.
I look forward to reading your essay on the subject. And, naturally, to you doing a better job of it.
What a racist, sexist and stupid thing to say--that evangelicals only support Trump because he is a white male. We support him because of his policies. I would vote for any human regardless of race, regardless of sex, based on the Trump agenda. I do not know one single person in my circle of friends and family who would vote based on sex and race. However, I DO know many liberal friends who voted for Hillary just because she was a woman.
I was brought up a Catholic, but I began new questioning when I discovered Charles Darwin. Darwin was a threat to my beliefs, but instead of attacking or ignoring Charles Darwin, I immersed myself in Darwin when I learned that he had concluded that: the fittest survive and the unfit did not. Since the Biblical Jews had survived longer than any other people, I concluded rightly that the Tanakh was based on science. When I was asked to write a review of the evolutionary biologist David Sloan Wilson's Darwin's Cathedral: Evolution, Religion and the Nature of Society I quoted Ken Ham:
"Ken Ham, the fundamentalist Christian, is lambasted because he espouses Creationism over evolutionary theory, but then Ham is a religious man whose primary concern is not for the physical sciences. He says:
"If Christian leaders have told the next generation that one can accept the world’s teachings in geology, biology, astronomy, etc., and use these to (re)interpret God’s Word, then the door has been opened for this to happen in every area, including morality."
Ham's concern is morality, especially sexual morality. So, what does the Bible say sexual morality provides?
The Levitical prohibitions at Leviticus 18: 19-24, when observed, generate a high total fertility rate. On the other hand, lack of sexual morality, such as in LGBT behavior, lowers a community's total fertility rate (TFR) "spewing them out of the land (see Leviticus 18: 24-30)."
Fundamentalists aligned with Trump are interested in protecting Biblical morality and their total fertility rate.
Shulemith Firestone who wrote the progressive Dialectic of Sex in 1970 envisioned a world in which women were completely free because the means of reproduction had been wrested from them altogether and they could no longer have babies. This is the progressive utopia for women: mechanized births with permission (complete control of TFR).
Here is the proof of my assertion:
At the same time, Orthodox Jewish groups such as Kiryas Joel in New York (see Wiki) have some of the highest birth rates in the world because they completely eliminate progressive LGBT ideology's access to their communities.
"Gitty would reach her late teens before she realized she was living in perhaps the most religiously conservative community in America. “In my parents’ house, there’s no TV, no radio, no newspapers not in Yiddish, no Internet,” Gitty says.
Gitty knew “I couldn’t live in Kiryas Joel anymore, that I didn’t want to be one of those women who pop out babies every eighteen months and think whatever their husbands tell them to…”"
Note the deliberate and complete isolation from LGBT propaganda. The Biblical author who wrote about Abraham's covenant with God and its promise of many descendants, may also have been the author who went back and created man and woman a second time in Genesis (2:18-25), so that woman could be subjugated for child bearing (pop out babies every 18 months).
Ken Ham is right. You can ignore all sorts of scientific anomalies in the bible (miracles), but you can't ignore the Levitical prohibitions which are the behavioral guarantors of Abraham's covenant with God.
The fundamentalists, in the words of Ken Ham above, are concerned with the morality that binds them together and encourages their reproduction increasing their total fertility rate. They know that LGBT progressive ideology cannot be adopted if they are to survive.
The fundamentalists are protecting their own total fertility rate from the ravages of progressive intellectuals, who want them to abandon the science in the bible and stop having babies.
Donald Trump offers the fundamentalists and the rest of us - survival. He's the only one to offer survival and so he must be embraced, warts and all, because everyone else has fallen for the bait and switch of progressive ideology which was not created out of love for us, but to shrink our population. As you can see from Gitty's words, progressive ideology is rejected by Orthodox Judaism.