When journalists talk about so-called “evangelical voters”, the former are doing the public a disservice. That is because the word evangelical has nothing to do with politics.
An evangelical is a believer in Messiah Jesus who strives to share the Gospel message with those who have not yet heard it or read it. Such a believer can do so without ever being involved in political issues.
If evangelicals register to vote in elections, then they don’t have join any political party. If they do join one, then they can join any political party – including the Democratic Party – and still be evangelicals.
When journalists say “evangelical voters”, what they mean is “church-going voters who mix religion with politics”.
This mixing of religion with politics is detrimental to evangelism. In a blog post immediately following the election of President Donald Trump, Reverend Thabiti Anyabwile has this to say:
In the same post, Rev. Anyabwile states, “The number of evangelicals who put gospel and character before politics and party are small.”
Just how bad that politics interferes with the evangelism is revealed in a story that Russell Moore tells:
That elderly white man might have been a member of that church, but if he had been an evangelical, then he wouldn’t have said what he said.
In a commentary for the Gospel Coalition, Russell Moore explains the flaw in trying to use the muscle of the state to make people conform to religious beliefs:
The Gospel message transcends all politics, which is why the words evangelical and voters shouldn’t be linked together.
So, what should journalists call church-going voters who mix religion with politics? Why not simply call them church-going voters? After all, that is what they are.
The “Wanted” posters say the following about David: “Wanted: A refugee from planet Melmac masquerading as a human. Loves cats. If seen, contact the Alien Task Force.”