The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory: American Evangelicals in an Age of Extremism

Herschel Walker was closely watched by the nation during his Senate run. If elected, the Republicans would control the Senate. His rival Raphael Warnock, a pastor, warned of Walker’s many personal scandals. Walker, in return, called Warnock a “phony follower of Jesus” (295). In a rally, Walker compared Warnock to Satan. Walker cast himself as a “warrior” for God and promised to keep Warnock from dragging Georgia down morally. The substantiated allegations against Walker regarding domestic abuse, affairs, and coerced abortion were disregarded by pro-life advocates. They insist that Walker will oppose abortion as a public official, and that’s what matters. When asked if, since they believe abortion is murder, they think Walker is a murderer, they argue that the Democratic Warnock would allow hundreds of babies to die by keeping abortions legal.

Ralph Reed attended Walker’s rally. Later, in a second interview with Alberta, Reed points out that attacks on a candidate’s character are ineffective from a historical and modern perspective. Reed ignores the fact that he led the attacks on Bill Clinton’s character in the 1990s. He argues that people are fundamentally self-interested and will therefore elect whoever will benefit them, not whoever aligns best with ideals of leadership. Jeffress professes a similar opinion but replaces self-interest with fear. His belief that evangelicals were truly under siege made him support immoral candidates.

Reed disdains the idea of fear as a motivator. He instead views the evangelical change as a “rebellion” against a culture that considers their way of life “inherently intolerant and undemocratic” (301). Reed focuses on what he perceives as evangelical marginalization stemming from legalized abortion and prayer being banned in public schools. He states that evangelicals, because of his efforts and those of his peers, are no longer marginalized. When asked what victories he can point to as an example, Reed gives none.

In the end, Walker lost his bid for Senate to Warnock. Apparently, muses Alberta, attacks on character can sometimes cost a candidate their election. Mastriano similarly lost his bid in the midterms.

Millions of evangelicals identify as “single-issue voters,” concerned only with the pro-life movement. Candidates use that single-mindedness to amass wealth and power. After Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022, many evangelicals saw that as a validation of the compromises they made to achieve that goal. However, the overturn didn’t end abortion; it turned the legality of abortion into a “wild-west patchwork” of different state policies. In six states, the new lack of federal framework led them to create policies that dramatically increased access to abortion. All six policies were voted into effect.

Pro-lifers were also running into the problems that unwanted pregnancies pose. They were unwilling to provide the support that mothers unprepared for parenthood needed: They would not donate disposable income to the cause, and they would not volunteer their time to help care for mothers and children. Additionally, the moral stance that life is precious contrasts other political stances of evangelicals. Refugees, victims of gun violence, and other outsiders to the Church aren’t given the same protection as fetuses in cases of abortion.

This hypocrisy harms the credibility of the evangelical community. In response, Democrats became the new single-issue voters, turning out in record numbers to support abortion rights.

Chapter 17 introduces Charlie Kirk, a former youth activist who created Turning Point USA, an organization that promotes the right. He is known for his expert use of social media and online culture, creating “an empire of memes and merchandise” (312). Kirk urges his fellow Christians to ramp up their efforts to defeat a theoretical liberal “enemy” that seeks the downfall of Christianity. He issues a challenge specifically to pastors, condemning them for staying “silent and complicit” in the face of perceived tyranny. “Impotent pastors,” according to Kirk, are the only obstacle to full conservative Christian ownership of America’s key institutions.

One of Kirk’s allies is Eric Metaxas. Modern evangelicals often feel marginalized by academic, intellectual, and elite circles, their main weapon being bombast against the expertise of the intellectual community. A Yale graduate, Metaxas took advantage of that feeling by touting his academic achievements to lend credence to his Christian right philosophy. His persona as a “witty and winsome Christian intellectual” (316) appealed to American evangelicals. Metaxas, however, prioritized self-promotion, often chasing media exposure. Though Metaxas’s books on history were challenged on their veracity by other academics, he remained more interested in appearing to be an accomplished intellectual than actually adhering to facts. As a result, Metaxas was generally disregarded by the Republican elites but welcomed by the Christian extremists. He condemns middle-of-the-road evangelicals, calling them “fooled into silence” (319) and warning that God will deal with them more harshly if they refuse to confront the left.

Kirk supports Metaxas and wants his message to reach more people. He announces that he and Metaxas are teaming up to make a movie version of the latter’s book, Letter to the American Church. At a promotional event, Kirk sits down with Jeff Myers, an evangelical academic whose own book was about finding absolute truth in a world of “epistemological confusion.” The two of them disagree at several points during the conversation, with Myers uncomfortably indulging Kirk’s “adolescent” tirades to encourage Kirk’s followers to buy his book. Kirk expressed increasingly offensive language, such as his disbelief that a “lesbian in a wheelchair” (322) could understand ideas that white straight males could not. Myers points out that the lesbian is still made in the image of God. This is met with a lukewarm response from the audience. Instead, Kirk returns to the idea of the “dehumanization” of fetuses by the left, ignoring a frequent Conservative dehumanization of immigrants, Democrats, and the LGBTQ+ community.

Donald Trump created a turning point towards increasingly hypocritical political standpoints. Trump encouraged support from evangelicals, but in private he called them “ungrateful” if they didn’t meet his expectations. Evangelicals quickly reshaped their belief systems around him and excused his behavior. The development of a culture around Trump eventually created an ideology defined by his most commonly expressed beliefs called Trumpism, surpassing an idolization of an individual to become a widespread movement. Despite a common hard-right belief that the election was fraudulent, his defeat in 2020 proved to be a turning point for the evangelicals, where their culture stopped changing to accommodate Trump and left him behind. Trump had convinced them that “winning was everything” (327), so he ironically no longer aligned with Trumpism.

Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida, subsequently became popular with evangelicals. DeSantis gained status through his ability to “crush” the left through state power. He smothered perceived progressivism in schools, state agencies, and private corporations like Disney. Trump’s legacy, though, continued to endure. He convinced evangelicals that it was “better to win with vice than to lose with virtue” (328), a sentiment that now encourages extremist politicians and media figures who rely on outrage to gain followers.