In the dusty and blood-stained geography of the Middle East, regional balances are being rewritten not only through oil wells or geopolitical calculations, but also through far deeper theological codes. As the destruction generated by the U.S.-Israel-centered military alliance in the region turns into a humanitarian tragedy that wounds the conscience, global public opinion watches this spiral of violence with growing alarm. Strikingly, the tensions initially justified by the pretext of "nuclear weapons” have even evolved into a conflict of belief within Christianity itself, stretching from the corridors of the Vatican to the ornate offices of the White House in the last few weeks.

On one side stand the increasingly vocal objections of the Pope and the Catholic world, on the other, U.S. President Donald Trump’s bold rhetoric identifying himself with a messianic figure. Yet, the picture is not limited to this contrast. From Paula White, senior adviser to the White House Faith Office, to Franklin Graham, son of Evangelical leader Billy Graham, Evangelical-dispensationalist circles in the United States have at times portrayed Trump as a modern "prophet-king” and sacralized the war as if it were a religious necessity. This phenomenon demonstrates that the issue rests not merely on political calculations but on a distinct doctrinal framework.

What, then, lies at the core of Evangelicalism? What are the theological roots and doctrinal premises of this motivation that shapes U.S. foreign policy through the rhetoric of "holy war”? This essay traces the contours of a belief system that, metaphorically speaking, fuels the fire in the Middle East.

Theology of Evangelism

Evangelicalism has become one of the most frequently invoked concepts in discussions of Middle Eastern theopolitics. Yet, it is neither singular nor homogeneous; rather, it encompasses a broad constellation of Protestant movements that have produced diverse theological orientations, eschatological expectations and political attitudes throughout history. To regard it merely as a form of piety would be misleading. It is an intellectual and religious tradition shaped in close interaction with modernity, migration, secularization and the rise of nation-state ideologies. From the 19th century onward, apocalyptic and literalist interpretations of Scripture gained prominence, including the attribution of a distinctive and central role to Israel within certain Evangelical circles.

Although Evangelicalism’s roots are often traced to the 18th-century Great Awakening, its deeper theological foundations lie in 17th-century English Puritanism. Seeking to eliminate Catholic influence within the Anglican Church, the Puritans constructed a Bible-centered religiosity that also gave sustained attention to the Old Testament. They frequently read Old Testament promises symbolically and metaphorically, applying them to their own historical context, understanding themselves as the "New Israel” and, upon migrating to America, envisioning the New World as a "New Jerusalem.”

Under leaders such as John Winthrop and John Cotton, this movement institutionalized an ideal of a disciplined, moral and industrious society. Drawing on Calvinist theology, it sacralized labor and productivity, interpreting material success as a sign of divine favor. In the 18th century, themes such as "new birth” and "revival” infused this theological heritage with emotional intensity and mass appeal. By the 19th century, it had expanded under the name "Evangelicalism” into a multifaceted and enduring Protestant identity.

The intersection of Evangelicalism and dispensationalism marks one of the most critical turning points shaping contemporary theopolitics. Dispensationalism, an eschatological doctrine asserting that God governs human history through distinct "dispensations,” was systematized in the 19th century by the English theologian John Nelson Darby. Dividing world history into seven dispensations, Darby sharply distinguished between Israel and the Church, arguing that Old Testament promises would be fulfilled literally in the future for Israel. The doctrine of the "pre-tribulation rapture” further redefined the Church’s position within the eschatological drama.

While Darby’s ideas reached America through the Plymouth Brethren movement and his own visits, they gained decisive momentum with the publication of the Scofield Reference Bible in 1909 by American theologian Cyrus I. Scofield. Through its annotated notes, this edition disseminated dispensationalist interpretations to a broad readership, linking the Abrahamic land promise to the modern State of Israel. In doing so, it laid a durable doctrinal foundation for contemporary Christian Zionism.

Emergence of Christian Zionism

From antiquity onward, the Christian tradition maintained that Israel had once been "chosen” and bound to God through a special covenant. However, with the advent of Jesus Christ and the proclamation of salvation from sin, this understanding underwent a profound transformation. The Church was conceived as the "new Israel,” inheriting the designation of God’s chosen people. Old Testament narratives and eschatological promises were thus reinterpreted within a symbolic and Christ-centered theological framework. Darby’s periodization of history, by contrast, represented a sharp departure from this long-established tradition.

According to dispensationalism, "Israel” and the "Church” constitute two entirely distinct categories within God’s salvific plan. The promises and prophecies of the Hebrew Bible are not merely theological metaphors but historical and literal realities that will manifest, even on the modern geopolitical stage. In this view, Israel is not simply a theological symbol but an indispensable and active historical agent in the unfolding of the divine plan for the end times.

When Evangelicalism’s capacity to mobilize broad constituencies converges with dispensationalism’s future-oriented eschatological schema, a powerful theopolitical discourse known as "Christian Zionism” emerges. Within this framework, the existence and territorial expansion of the modern State of Israel are interpreted as vital stages in the execution of the divine program. Consequently, unconditional support for Israel among certain Evangelical circles in the U.S. is presented not as a contingent strategic choice but as a sacred obligation and religious mandate.

Evangelism in US politics

This theopolitical vision generates a complex and critical field of inquiry not only for theology and religious studies but also for international relations and political science. Institutionalized in the early 20th century and globally recognized through figures such as Billy Graham, Evangelicalism was further strengthened after World War II through anti-communist rhetoric and narratives of "American exceptionalism,” intertwining religion and national identity.

Today, the global Evangelical population is estimated at approximately 500-600 million. In the U.S., roughly 30-35% of the population, between 90 and 100 million people, identify as Evangelical. While some of these Evangelicals are dispensationalists, not all Evangelicals adhere to dispensationalism.

Since the 1970s, the Evangelical right in the U.S. has transformed into a significant political force through organizations such as the Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition, mobilizing around opposition to abortion, the defense of "family values,” and especially support for Israel. Lobby groups such as Christians United for Israel (CUFI), founded in 2006, have exerted influence within Congress.

In recent years, this support has reached a peak. Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and the relocation of the U.S. embassy were perceived as the fulfilment of long-standing Evangelical demands. Spiritual advisers such as Paula White called upon Christians to donate to Israel, while rhetoric likening Trump to Jesus circulated in certain circles. Televangelist Lance Wallnau described him as an "Old Testament prophet-king,” and Franklin Graham characterized him as "God’s chosen” in the face of the Iranian threat. The sharing of an image from the White House identifying Trump with Jesus illustrated the extent to which such religious rhetoric had permeated public and institutional spheres. These discourses and practices reveal the profound entanglement of religion and politics.

Risks behind theopolitics

Nevertheless, this theopolitical approach entails three major risks.

The first is theological: The identification of God’s salvific plan with a particular nation-state. Such a move reduces the universal scope of divine mercy and justice to a narrow historical and political framework. Moreover, it stands in tension with New Testament passages attributed to John the Baptist and Jesus. Both figures strongly criticized the belief that descent from Abraham conferred automatic privilege or guaranteed salvation.

In Matthew 3:9, John declares: "Do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.”

Similarly, in John 8:39-40, Jesus states: "If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing what Abraham did. But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God.”

These statements underscore that salvation cannot be reduced to lineage or ethnic identity, marking a clear divergence from both traditional exclusivist interpretations and modern Evangelical-dispensationalist readings that conflate divine election with specific political projects.

The second risk is ethical: The tendency to legitimize war and conflict as "eschatological necessities,” thereby relegating justice and human rights to the background.

The third is political: The portrayal of peace initiatives as opposition to the divine plan, effectively undermining diplomatic efforts from the outset.

Catholic, Orthodox approaches

Catholic and Orthodox Christians have distanced themselves from Evangelical-dispensationalist approaches. The Pope has openly criticized wars in the Middle East and aspects of U.S. policy toward Iran, calling for dialogue and peace.

In Catholic theology, God’s salvific design cannot be equated with any modern nation-state. The Church, understood as the "new Israel,” signifies a universal community of faith and unconditional political support for Israel is not regarded as a religious obligation.

Likewise, Orthodox churches prioritize regional peace and the protection of Christian communities. In Orthodox theology, eschatological expectations are not identified with the policies of any particular state. The preservation of sacred sites and the survival of local Christian communities take precedence over geopolitical alignments.

In conclusion, Evangelicalism today constitutes a powerful ideological and organizational force shaping U.S. policy in the Middle East. Dispensationalist interpretations transform support for Israel into a theological imperative, employing religious belief as a means of legitimizing geopolitical projects. Yet sacred texts call not for the absolutization of chosenness but for the centrality of universal justice, mercy and peace. The path to peace in the Middle East lies in disentangling religion from instruments of conflict and rearticulating it in a language that safeguards human dignity and a shared future. In brief, the divine will is not war but peace.