Did Evangelical Christianity Create the Moral Decline It Condemns?

Many voices today cry out for America to “return to God” and, more specifically, to evangelical Christianity. They claim that the country’s moral decay stems from abandoning Christian values. However, a strong case can be made that the blame for much of the moral confusion and lack of self-control in modern society can be laid squarely at the feet of evangelical Christianity itself.

For centuries, religious institutions wielded fear as a primary tool of control. One hundred fifty years ago, the idea of hell—an eternal torture chamber for the disobedient—was an effective means of coercion. The fear of divine wrath and endless suffering kept many people in line. But as knowledge and awareness have expanded, fewer people buy into this fear-based approach to spirituality. More and more individuals recognize that a truly loving God would not condemn people to eternal torment. The concept of hell as taught by evangelicals does not hold up to scrutiny, and once that fear dissolves, people begin to question the entire system that promoted it.

The Numbers Don’t Add Up

Another reason for the decline of evangelical influence is simple demographics. There are approximately 8 billion people on this planet, yet evangelicals make up no more than 10% of the global population. Are we to believe that a just and loving God would design a system in which only a tiny fraction of humanity finds salvation while billions of others are doomed to unimaginable suffering? This view not only defies logic, but it also contradicts the very nature of a deity that is supposed to be merciful and just.

This exclusivist mindset—one that insists that only those who believe in a particular interpretation of Christianity are saved—has done more harm than good. It alienates people and makes faith seem like an exclusive club rather than a universal invitation to love, transformation, and understanding. As people become more aware of the diversity of beliefs worldwide, the evangelical claim to exclusive truth becomes harder to accept.

The Suppression of Alternative Christianities

The problem runs even deeper when we look at how orthodox Christianity suppressed other expressions of Jesus’ teachings throughout history. Early Christianity was incredibly diverse, with many different interpretations of Jesus’ message. Some groups emphasized love and wisdom, others focused on mystical union with God, and some even saw Jesus’ teachings as a call to inner enlightenment rather than strict religious dogma.

However, as the centuries passed, orthodoxy sought to silence these alternative voices. Councils were convened, creeds were written, and texts were declared heretical. The diversity of early Christianity was forcibly narrowed into a rigid framework that could be controlled. What we now recognize as mainstream Christian doctrine was not a natural evolution of Jesus’ teachings but a carefully curated and politically motivated selection. This historical reality makes it easier for people today to dismiss Christianity altogether. When they see that much of what they were taught was shaped by power-hungry religious leaders rather than divine revelation, they conclude that the entire enterprise is untrustworthy.

A Lost Opportunity for a Gentler Christianity

Imagine if Christianity had taken a different route—one that truly emphasized love over fear. What if the dominant message had been one of grace, compassion, and inclusion rather than eternal punishment and exclusivity? A Christianity that modeled itself after the most profound teachings of Jesus—love your neighbor, forgive endlessly, serve humbly—could have been a unifying force rather than a divisive one.

Instead, much of Christianity, particularly in its evangelical form, chose to define itself by what it opposes rather than what it stands for. It became known for its condemnations rather than its embrace of the broken, the lost, and the searching. It became a political force rather than a spiritual refuge. Is it any wonder, then, that so many people today reject it?

The Late Canonization of Scripture

Another major issue that undermines evangelical credibility is the late canonization of Scripture. Many believers assume that the Bible has always existed in its current form, but this is far from true. The process of determining which books were “inspired” and which were not was a lengthy and politically charged process. By the time the biblical canon was finalized, centuries had passed since the events it describes.

Furthermore, those who controlled this process had clear agendas. Emperor Constantine, who convened the Council of Nicaea, was more interested in unifying the Roman Empire than in preserving theological diversity. The result was a rigid system that left little room for alternative perspectives. When people today learn about the human—and often political—elements behind the Bible’s formation, it becomes easier to question its authority.

Rethinking Jesus' Teachings on Hell

One of the most misunderstood aspects of Jesus’ teachings is his references to hell. The word he most frequently used was Gehenna, which was an actual location—the Valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem. This place had a dark history, once being a site of child sacrifices and later a burning trash heap. Jesus’ references to Gehenna were likely a response to contemporary Jewish teachings about the afterlife rather than a declaration of eternal torment.

In first-century Judaism, some groups believed that sinners would spend a limited time in Gehenna, similar to purgatory, before being purified. It is very possible that Jesus was not endorsing this view but rather critiquing it. Yet over time, this evolved into the Christian concept of an everlasting hell, a doctrine that has driven people away from Christianity rather than drawing them toward it.

Where Do We Go from Here?

If evangelical Christianity bears significant responsibility for the current moral confusion, what is the solution? The answer is not necessarily to abandon spirituality altogether but to embrace a version of faith that is based on love, inclusion, and understanding rather than fear, exclusion, and control.

A return to the core of Jesus’ teachings—emphasizing love, mercy, and justice—could offer a compelling alternative to both rigid fundamentalism and outright secularism. Many people still long for spiritual connection and meaning, but they will not find it in a system that relies on outdated fear tactics and exclusivity. They will, however, be drawn to a faith that recognizes their intrinsic worth, encourages their growth, and fosters a sense of belonging.

Conclusion

The idea that America must return to evangelical Christianity to solve its moral problems is deeply flawed. If anything, evangelicalism itself has contributed to the very issues it now laments. By promoting fear over love, exclusivity over inclusion, and dogma over genuine spirituality, it has driven many away from faith altogether.

But all is not lost. There is still an opportunity to reclaim the essence of Jesus’ message—one that invites, heals, and transforms rather than threatens, divides, and controls. If Christianity is to have a meaningful future, it must embrace this shift. It must move beyond fear and into the radical love that Jesus himself embodied. Only then can it offer something truly worth believing in.