A recent survey conducted by Pew Research Center to measure U.S. adults’ broad sentiments toward various religious groups revealed that “Far more Americans express favorable than unfavorable views of Jews, mainline Protestants and Catholics.”  It also suggested that “more Americans express negative than positive attitudes toward atheists, Muslims and Mormons (members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints).”  More details about the results are discussed below.

The above chart provides a summary of important results from the survey.  It shows that the majority of responses for each religious group were neutral: Responders had neither favorable nor unfavorable views on a religious group, or didn’t know enough to give an opinion.  For example, 58% of Americans chose not to express an opinion on Jews, while 35% had a very favorable or somewhat favorable opinion, and 6% had a very or somewhat favorable opinion of Jews.  The last column of the chart is a measure of likeability expressed as the difference between favorable and unfavorable opinions.  It shows that more Americans view Jews favorably rather than unfavorably by a 28-point balance of opinion.

Two other groups received positive favorability ratings: Mainline Protestants and Catholics.  Mainline Protestants are viewed favorably by 30% of Americans and unfavorably by 10%, which results in a 20-point balance of opinion.  Catholics are viewed favorably by 34% of Americans and unfavorably by 18%, with a 16-point balance of opinion.

At the other end of the spectrum, atheists, Muslims and Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) have negative favorability ratings.  Latter-Day Saints are viewed favorably by 15% of Americans and unfavorably by 25%, with a balance of opinion of -10 points.  Muslims are viewed favorably by 17% of the population and negatively by 22%, with a balance of opinion of -5 points.  Atheists are viewed favorably by 20% of the population and unfavorably by 24%, with a balance of opinion of -4 points.

Results for evangelicals are in the middle of the chart.  This group is viewed favorably by 28% of Americans and unfavorably by 27%, with a balance of opinion of +2 points.

The survey results also indicate that Americans view their own religious groups favorably, which tends to skew the results since some groups are considerably larger than others.  Removing the responses of members of a religious group from the sample leads to a drop in the favorability ratings of the group, as seen in the chart below:

In this chart, the favorability results for Jews remain roughly the same as they are in the previous chart because of the small size of the group (2%).  The survey authors note that the positive sentiment toward Jews shown by these results does not tell the whole story considering that other recent evidence points to a rise in antisemitism in the nation.  Unlike Jews, Catholics see a drop in their balance of opinion from +16 to +5.  Atheists, Muslims and Latter-Day Saints see their numbers in deeper negative territory.

Evangelicals and Mainline Protestants are not included in the above chart.  Their favorability ratings are shown in the chart below where they are compared to each other.  It is observed that the balance of opinion for evangelicals, when evangelicals are removed from the sample, drops to -14 from +2 in the first chart, an indication that non-evangelicals do not like them as much as they like themselves.  By comparison, the balance of opinion for Mainline Protestants, when Mainline Protestants are removed from the sample, only drops to +16 from +20 in the first chart.

The survey results also show that knowing somebody from a religious group makes a respondent more likely to rate the group more favorably.  That fact is illustrated by the chart below:

Noticeable in this chart is the fact that the balance of opinion for atheists rises from -24 among respondents who do not know any atheist to -2 for respondents who know an atheist.  For Muslims, it rises from -14 among respondents who do not know a Muslim to +4 for respondents who know a Muslim.  For evangelical Christians, it remains very negative even though it rises from -19 to -11.  Latter-Day Saints are the only group for which the balance of opinion remains unchanged at -12, an indication that they are not viewed more favorably by respondents who happen to know one or more of them.

The survey results were discussed by Kate Shellnutt in the evangelical publication Christianity Today.  The title of her article, “Evangelicals Are the Most Beloved US Faith Group Among Evangelicals,” shows her sense of humor when compared to the subtitle that appeared in much smaller characters: “And among the worst-rated by everybody else.”

It is interesting that Shellnutt, in her examination of the potential reasons for the negative feelings toward evangelicals, starts by mentioning their association with Donald Trump:

“Many evangelicals can speculate the reasons behind the negative reputation. Evangelical identity in the United States became associated with additional political baggage in recent years, as more supporters of President Donald Trump took on the label.”

This association is obviously linked to some serious political divisions in the nation.  White evangelicals tend to be Republicans and it is safe to say that any idea of compromise or friendliness between Republicans and Democrats is wishful thinking today.

Jesus told his disciples: “You are the light of the world” (Matthew 5:14).  He then added: “… let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven” (Matthew 5:16).

These words imply that the disciples were to emulate his own attitude and conduct, and particularly his love of others – even his enemies – to be models of good will to all people.  He also warned them that they would be persecuted by the rulers of the world who would view their message of peace and love as a threat to their power and privileges.  It was a message of inclusion: Jesus himself led the way by associating himself, in spite of much criticism from the conservatives of his day, with societal outcasts, including the disadvantaged, the sick, tax collectors and “sinners.”

The early church was able to grow within the Roman Empire in spite of the persecution, presumably because their message was welcome by large portions of the population.  Today, one must ask whether Christian denominations have remained faithful to the original vision.  Evangelicals, today, would argue that they are disliked because they are faithful to Jesus.  Shellnutt quotes an evangelical leader:

“Back in 2020, National Association of Evangelicals president Walter Kim raised concerns about politicized perceptions of the faith, stating, ‘We are in a season in which the evangelical faith is being narrowly defined and misunderstood by many, with long-term ramifications for our gospel witness.’

‘Too many, especially young people and people of color, have been alienated by the evangelical Christianity they have seen presented in public in recent years,’ he said.”

In this statement, Walter Kim is assuming that evangelicals would be viewed more favorably if they were better understood.  I see things differently: When the Moral Majority became highly political in the later part of the 20^th century, the public simply assumed that their positions represented the Christian way.  Today, there is much more information available and a great deal of material is being published, so that the public has become more acquainted with the differences between evangelicals and other Christian groups.  In particular, the ties between evangelicalism, white supremacy and Christian nationalism have been brought to light as I have discussed elsewhere.  It is therefore not surprising that Shellnutt writes:

“Evangelical institutions have continued to reckon with racism, sexism, and abuse, past and present. Some leaders have spoken of ‘ministry from the margins’ as some traditional, conservative Christian stances on issues around marriage, gender, and family are falling out of favor in mainstream society. Plus, Christianity is aging and declining in the US as more leave the church or don’t follow their parents’ faith to begin with.”

Even though Shellnutt does not blame evangelicals for the listed issues, she is clearly recognizing that those issues are major reasons why Blacks, women, LGBTQ people and young people might view evangelicals negatively.

Shellnutt also quoted Dan DeWitt, executive director of the Center for Worldview Analysis and Cultural Engagement at Southwest Baptist University, who has been concerned about public perceptions of evangelicalism and was proposing changes to address that situation:

“DeWitt referenced Scripture’s call to be friendly to those outside the faith. Colossians 4:5–6 instructs Christians to ‘be wise in the way you act toward outsiders; make the most of every opportunity. Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.’ In 1 Timothy 3:7, elders are required to ‘have a good reputation’ with those outside the church.”

Clearly, Dewitt was recognizing that evangelicals made no effort to be friendly to outsiders.  Today, this is particularly true in the way they engage in political action, doing anything necessary to obtain and maintain power so that they can impose their will on others and “take back” their country.  Their association with Trump, a man who has openly demonstrated that his daily conduct is completely disconnected from whatever conscience he has, merely highlights a fact that has been brought to light in recent years: They believe God is on their side and therefore they must pursue their agenda at any cost.  In so doing, they will disregard the most obvious facts presented to them because they have their own “alternative facts.”  For example, the January 6 attack on the Capitol was merely a sightseeing event gone awry, with no violence involved.  Of course, I recognize that not all evangelicals fit this description.  But the most vocal ones whose words and deeds provoke negative reactions from outsiders certainly do.  As I have written before, in Jesus’ kingdom of God, truth matters.  It is actually the foundation upon which the kingdom is built.

Readers of the material in this website, I hope, know by now that my intent is to provide insights about New Testament Christianity and show how it differs from the various forms Christianity has taken today.  One important aspect of true Christianity is that it is non-coercive.  This is because it fundamentally relies on transforming people from within, using persuasion rather than coercion either through violence or through legal means.  Jesus’ followers saw themselves as citizens of heaven who lived in the world and strove to spread kingdom of God values in a hostile environment by acting in love and refusing to repay evil with evil even though their lives were often threatened.  The notion of a divinely mandated partnership between the church and a worldly kingdom legitimately using coercive power, such as Rome, was a deliberate misinterpretation of biblical teaching.  Indeed, the Old Testament prophets announced the coming of a new era in which God’s people would be transformed: They would have his word written in their hearts and would no longer have to rely on the written law (e.g. Jeremiah 31:31-34).  The New Testament teaches that the Holy Spirit, in the new era, dwells in God’s people and changes their hearts.  I think all Christians talk about the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit but many choose to disregard the implications of that belief.  They fail to recognize that by clinging to coercive means they implicitly reject a fundamental aspect of the Gospel of Christ.