The notion that white evangelicals as a group are more desirous of political power than other religious groups is simply a myth. So why all the attention to white evangelicals instead of other politically active religious and non-religious groups? The shock of Trump’s victory in 2016 sent much of the media and academia looking for a scapegoat to explain that electoral win. The high percentage of white evangelicals who supported Trump made them a natural candidate.

Once again, the topic of Christian nationalism is all the rage. It has become on the left what woke is on the right—a way to tar one’s ideological opponents. “Christian nationalism” can mean just about anything negative one wants it to mean. However, before I deconstruct this controversy let me be up front. I think it was a mistake, and not a small amount of hypocrisy, for Christians to support Donald Trump. That mistake is compounded by an almost blind loyalty that many Christians continue to give him. My criticism of how Christian nationalism is used should not be confused with a feeble attempt to defend Christian activism in all its forms.

Furthermore, let me assert that Christian nationalism does exist. I do not know the extent of the problem, but I have seen disturbing comments on social media advocating for a Christian state that treats those of other religions as second-class citizens. Often such individuals also make arguments supporting notions of a white ethnostate. I do not know the extent of such sentiment, and that is part of the problem, but it is a mistake to assume that Christian nationalism is a total myth.

I recently learned that the term Christian nationalism may have emerged in 2006 in a book titled Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism. But it did not get much attention until 2016.

Read More