In the ongoing discourse surrounding America’s foreign policy, especially in relation to Iran, few intersectional lenses are as vivid as that of evangelical thought. When some reflect on Donald Trump’s recent military actions, particularly the bombings of three Iranian nuclear facilities, they don’t merely consider the military implications but delve into the prophecies that seem intertwined with these geopolitical decisions.
Scholars like Diana Butler Bass suggest that for many White evangelical supporters of Trump, the contentious dynamics between the United States and Iran is not merely a territorial or political confrontation; it is being framed within a larger biblical narrative that anticipates the return of Christ.
Bass, who grew up steeped in these ideas during the 1970s evangelical church movement, provides a captivating glimpse into how deeply ingrained prophecies shape perceptions of contemporary events. She expresses how the bombing of Iran could, in the eyes of Trump’s evangelical base, elevate him to a status akin to that of a divinely appointed protector of Israel—an embodiment of the “Chosen One.” This perception aligns with their belief that America’s conflict with Iran is a precursor signaling the apocalypse and the role of Israel therein.
Moreover, many evangelicals disregard potential escalations of war, viewing them as necessary subsequent events—a precursor to the anticipated ‘end times.’ Trump’s administration has previously showcased such a belief system, especially evidenced through the controversial transfer of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
But, does such fervent support come with ripple effects? Historians like Jemar Tisby warn that intertwining biblical prophecy with foreign policy can lead to ramifications that overlook human rights concerns, particularly those of Palestinians. This concern echoes throughout religious scholarship as they implore for a more nuanced understanding instead of a reactionary one driven by apocalyptic fears.
The theology of dispensationalism—rooted in notions from the 19th century—contributes to this blending of prophecy and America’s foreign policy. Adherents believe that the modern State of Israel plays a crucial role in the scriptural narratives that lead to the second coming of Christ, a belief that perpetuates unwavering support for Israel among political leaders and their followers.
Particularly, Trump capitalized on such sentiments in the 2024 election, winning overwhelming support from White evangelical voters. After the strikes on Iran, polls indicated that a staggering 87% of Republicans viewed Trump favorably regarding military decisions. Figures like Mike Huckabee, a known evangelical leader, echoed sentiments during communications with Trump, reinforcing the narrative that divine favor rests upon the former president amidst these geopolitical maneuvers.
Nonetheless, the discourse surrounding the bombing of Iran rests heavily on a theological belief system rather than a mere military or political call to action. Critics argue that should foreign policy be shaped by such interpretations of scripture, especially allegations of supposed divine favor, it places the ramifications of conflict dangerously outside the bounds of traditional governance. The merging of faith with foreign policy harbors significant risks—not only to international stability but also societal cohesion within a diverse and pluralistic society.
Thus, as the landscape shifts and Trump’s stance solidifies, the question lingers: is America contemplating another clash in the Middle East, driven by motivations too intertwined with theology to disentangle? Is this chosen path part of a more extensive narrative waiting for biblical fulfillment?