What do you think?
Rate this book
Lincoln's God: How Faith Transformed a President and a Nation
Lincoln's wartime spiritual journey from heretic son and cold skeptic to America's first evangelical Christian president, the role his conversion played in the Civil War, and the way it in turn transformed Protestantism.
Abraham Lincoln, unlike most of his political brethren, kept organized Christianity at arm's length. He never joined a church and only sometimes attended Sunday services with his wife. But as he came to appreciatee the growing political and military importance of the Christian churches, and when death touched the Lincoln household in an awful, intimate way, the erstwhile skeptic effectively evolved into the nation's first evangelical president. The war, he told Americans, was in some fashion divine retribution for the sin of slavery.
This is the story of that transformation and the ways in which religion helped millions of Northerners interpret the carnage and political upheaval of the 1850s and 1860s. Rather than focus on battles and personalities, Joshua Zeitz probes the social impact of the war on Northerners' spiritual worldview and the impact of this religious transformation on the war effort itself. Characters include the famous--Harriet Beecher Stowe, Frederick Douglass, Henry Ward Beecher--and ordinary soldiers and their families whose evolving understanding of mortality and heaven and beliefs about mission motivated them to fight. Long underestimated in accounts of the Civil War, religion--specifically evangelical Christianity--played an instrumental role on the battlefield and home front, and in the corridors of government.
More than any president before him--or any president after, until George W. Bush--Lincoln harnessed popular religious enthusiasm to build broad-based support for a political party and a cause. He did so as a master politician and sincere believer, though his belief was characteristically heterodox--and widely misunderstood then, as now. After his death and the end of an unforgiving war, Americans needed to memorialize Lincoln as a Christian martyr. The truth was, of course, considerably more complicated, as this original book explores.
Abraham Lincoln, unlike most of his political brethren, kept organized Christianity at arm's length. He never joined a church and only sometimes attended Sunday services with his wife. But as he came to appreciatee the growing political and military importance of the Christian churches, and when death touched the Lincoln household in an awful, intimate way, the erstwhile skeptic effectively evolved into the nation's first evangelical president. The war, he told Americans, was in some fashion divine retribution for the sin of slavery.
This is the story of that transformation and the ways in which religion helped millions of Northerners interpret the carnage and political upheaval of the 1850s and 1860s. Rather than focus on battles and personalities, Joshua Zeitz probes the social impact of the war on Northerners' spiritual worldview and the impact of this religious transformation on the war effort itself. Characters include the famous--Harriet Beecher Stowe, Frederick Douglass, Henry Ward Beecher--and ordinary soldiers and their families whose evolving understanding of mortality and heaven and beliefs about mission motivated them to fight. Long underestimated in accounts of the Civil War, religion--specifically evangelical Christianity--played an instrumental role on the battlefield and home front, and in the corridors of government.
More than any president before him--or any president after, until George W. Bush--Lincoln harnessed popular religious enthusiasm to build broad-based support for a political party and a cause. He did so as a master politician and sincere believer, though his belief was characteristically heterodox--and widely misunderstood then, as now. After his death and the end of an unforgiving war, Americans needed to memorialize Lincoln as a Christian martyr. The truth was, of course, considerably more complicated, as this original book explores.
336 pages, Hardcover
First published May 16, 2023
27 people are currently reading
376 people want to read
About the author
Joshua Zeitz
9 books55 followersJosh Zeitz has taught American history and politics at Cambridge University, Harvard University, and Princeton University. He is the author of several books on American political and social history and has written for the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Smithsonian Magazine, The New Republic, The Atlantic, Dissent, American Heritage, and Mother Jones.
Josh also appeared as a commentator on two PBS documentaries –Boomer Century, and Ken Burns's Prohibition.
A former gubernatorial speechwriter and policy aide, Josh earned his B.A. with highest honors at Swarthmore College and his Ph.D. in American History at Brown University. He lives in Hoboken and Ocean Grove, New Jersey with his wife, Angela Zeitz, an artist, and their two daughters.
Follow him on Twitter at @JoshuaMZeitz
Josh also appeared as a commentator on two PBS documentaries –Boomer Century, and Ken Burns's Prohibition.
A former gubernatorial speechwriter and policy aide, Josh earned his B.A. with highest honors at Swarthmore College and his Ph.D. in American History at Brown University. He lives in Hoboken and Ocean Grove, New Jersey with his wife, Angela Zeitz, an artist, and their two daughters.
Follow him on Twitter at @JoshuaMZeitz
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
June 29, 2023
Remember when Bill Clinton was called "the first Black president"? While it obviously wasn't literally true, there was meant to be a deeper meaning to it. In a similar, though less ironic, way, Joshua Zeitz proclaims Abraham Lincoln the "first evangelical president" - even though Lincoln was a longtime religious skeptic, was never as faithful as his Christian supporters might have wished him to be, and may have peppered many of his speeches with religious allusions for practical, political purposes. But, as in the case of the white Bill Clinton being a "Black president," in declaring the largely impious Lincoln to be an “evangelical president,” Zeitz sets out to show how it is possible to both be a thing, while clearly not being that thing.
Countless biographers have emphasized Lincoln's longtime aversion to organized religion. In that context, his later public religious references can come across as political pandering to a more pious populace. Others have attempted to get inside Lincoln's head to determine the sincerity of those religious references and the depth of his own personal faith - which is an impossible task, but doesn't stop them from trying, and proceeding to portray him as far more devout than he probably really was. So when Zeitz writes in his preface how Lincoln "underwent a spiritual renewal" as president and describes his aim to tell of Lincoln’s “spiritual journey from skeptic to believer," I worried he was just another biographer who was making a leap and overstating his case.
But it turns out his arguments are measured and well-made, the book unfolds in an understandable and convincing way, and Zeitz is ultimately very persuasive in his conclusions.
As with many books featuring Lincoln's name and likeness on the cover, you need to consider this book's subtitle in order to discern its true focus and intent. “Lincoln’s God: How Faith Transformed a President and a Nation” is not solely about Lincoln and his faith, but about the faith of Americans of the era as a whole. So Lincoln’s “spiritual renewal” is considered in the context of his time and place.
A good deal of the book, then, traces the country's religious development during Lincoln’s lifetime, from the top-down predestinarianism of Lincoln's parents' Christianity that he rejected, to the more bottom-up self-determination of evangelical Christianity that developed in later years, concurrent with the rise of democracy and the market economy that altered people’s political and Biblical worldviews.
To Lincoln, as an early religious skeptic, “the Bible was foundational literature and a commonly shared reference point, but not a divine source of truth," Zeitz observes. But as he advanced in the political world, he became "more attentive… to the religious sensibilities of his audiences" and became more "acutely sensitive to the growing political importance of evangelical churches."
This was particularly true during his 1846 Congressional campaign. His "Handbill Replying to Charges of Infidelity," publicly defending himself against allegations of his irreligiosity, was his first attempt to align himself with the Christian public, albeit without outright declaring his own faith. Later, as slavery dominated the political discourse, while most antislavery advocates saw the institution as an economic or political evil, Lincoln emphasized its moral evil - first in a secular way, and later infused with Christian sentiment. Some themes he subsequently used as president, such as considering war to be divine retribution for national sin, were first expressed by religious leaders and later appropriated by Lincoln.
"Always a shrewd student of popular opinion, the president understood that an already religious nation had rallied to the Union cause,” Zeitz writes. So “his rhetorical pivot was surely calibrated in some part for his audience."
Sure sounds like a crafty, cynical politician. And yet Zeitz argues that Lincoln’s expression of religious beliefs was not opportunistic, but sincerely felt. Much as he seemed to both guide and be guided by public opinion on slavery, Lincoln seemed to both guide and be guided by increasingly politically- and socially-influential evangelical Christians. They and Lincoln appeared to move in tandem in many ways as they turned to religion to make some sense out of all that was happening at the time - first they were skeptical of abolition, and later they embraced it as a main war aim. First, they rejected violence and confrontation, and later they "came to view warfare as a legitimate and even divinely ordained enforcement of God's will." First, they questioned whether Lincoln was up to the task as president, and later they came to believe the war was a divine cause and Lincoln was doing God’s will in waging it.
Zeitz ultimately concludes that Lincoln was evangelical in words and deeds, if not quite in personal belief. He "never shared the personal relationship with God through Christ that most of his coreligionists felt," but he was "the first president to channel the spiritual currents of his electorate into a powerful political movement." That, together with his sincere, though incomplete, spiritual evolution, made him a religious leader regardless of the depth or strength of his own personal faith. So our "first evangelical president?” Count me as a convert - after reading this thoughtful and well-crafted argument, I’m convinced.
Ahead of this book's May 16th release, my thanks to NetGalley and publisher Viking Press for declining the request for a review copy from someone who has spent the past year and a half reading and reviewing about five dozen Lincoln-related books and may be somewhat qualified to offer a relatively informed opinion about this one for the benefit of would-be readers, and instead approving the request for a review copy from a random new account created on a whim, with no history of ever having read or reviewed anything at all. Thanks (and sorry)!
Countless biographers have emphasized Lincoln's longtime aversion to organized religion. In that context, his later public religious references can come across as political pandering to a more pious populace. Others have attempted to get inside Lincoln's head to determine the sincerity of those religious references and the depth of his own personal faith - which is an impossible task, but doesn't stop them from trying, and proceeding to portray him as far more devout than he probably really was. So when Zeitz writes in his preface how Lincoln "underwent a spiritual renewal" as president and describes his aim to tell of Lincoln’s “spiritual journey from skeptic to believer," I worried he was just another biographer who was making a leap and overstating his case.
But it turns out his arguments are measured and well-made, the book unfolds in an understandable and convincing way, and Zeitz is ultimately very persuasive in his conclusions.
As with many books featuring Lincoln's name and likeness on the cover, you need to consider this book's subtitle in order to discern its true focus and intent. “Lincoln’s God: How Faith Transformed a President and a Nation” is not solely about Lincoln and his faith, but about the faith of Americans of the era as a whole. So Lincoln’s “spiritual renewal” is considered in the context of his time and place.
A good deal of the book, then, traces the country's religious development during Lincoln’s lifetime, from the top-down predestinarianism of Lincoln's parents' Christianity that he rejected, to the more bottom-up self-determination of evangelical Christianity that developed in later years, concurrent with the rise of democracy and the market economy that altered people’s political and Biblical worldviews.
To Lincoln, as an early religious skeptic, “the Bible was foundational literature and a commonly shared reference point, but not a divine source of truth," Zeitz observes. But as he advanced in the political world, he became "more attentive… to the religious sensibilities of his audiences" and became more "acutely sensitive to the growing political importance of evangelical churches."
This was particularly true during his 1846 Congressional campaign. His "Handbill Replying to Charges of Infidelity," publicly defending himself against allegations of his irreligiosity, was his first attempt to align himself with the Christian public, albeit without outright declaring his own faith. Later, as slavery dominated the political discourse, while most antislavery advocates saw the institution as an economic or political evil, Lincoln emphasized its moral evil - first in a secular way, and later infused with Christian sentiment. Some themes he subsequently used as president, such as considering war to be divine retribution for national sin, were first expressed by religious leaders and later appropriated by Lincoln.
"Always a shrewd student of popular opinion, the president understood that an already religious nation had rallied to the Union cause,” Zeitz writes. So “his rhetorical pivot was surely calibrated in some part for his audience."
Sure sounds like a crafty, cynical politician. And yet Zeitz argues that Lincoln’s expression of religious beliefs was not opportunistic, but sincerely felt. Much as he seemed to both guide and be guided by public opinion on slavery, Lincoln seemed to both guide and be guided by increasingly politically- and socially-influential evangelical Christians. They and Lincoln appeared to move in tandem in many ways as they turned to religion to make some sense out of all that was happening at the time - first they were skeptical of abolition, and later they embraced it as a main war aim. First, they rejected violence and confrontation, and later they "came to view warfare as a legitimate and even divinely ordained enforcement of God's will." First, they questioned whether Lincoln was up to the task as president, and later they came to believe the war was a divine cause and Lincoln was doing God’s will in waging it.
Zeitz ultimately concludes that Lincoln was evangelical in words and deeds, if not quite in personal belief. He "never shared the personal relationship with God through Christ that most of his coreligionists felt," but he was "the first president to channel the spiritual currents of his electorate into a powerful political movement." That, together with his sincere, though incomplete, spiritual evolution, made him a religious leader regardless of the depth or strength of his own personal faith. So our "first evangelical president?” Count me as a convert - after reading this thoughtful and well-crafted argument, I’m convinced.
Ahead of this book's May 16th release, my thanks to NetGalley and publisher Viking Press for declining the request for a review copy from someone who has spent the past year and a half reading and reviewing about five dozen Lincoln-related books and may be somewhat qualified to offer a relatively informed opinion about this one for the benefit of would-be readers, and instead approving the request for a review copy from a random new account created on a whim, with no history of ever having read or reviewed anything at all. Thanks (and sorry)!
July 20, 2023
While the 19th century variant of Calvinism likely oversimplifies Calvin’s original concept, Zeitz further limits it for his own purposes to the idea of predestination. He then claims this was the belief of Lincoln’s parents and that Lincoln rejected the idea. Lincoln clearly believed he could escape the drudgery of frontier farm life and studied hard to position himself for more intellectual pursuits. He may have even been an “infidel” in his early years, reportedly writing an antireligion screed that his friends fortuitously destroyed. Just as clearly, however, Lincoln increasingly relies on religious language to get his points across, as well as move public sentiment in the direction he thinks it needs to go. Zeitz argues that the strife of the presidential years – death of son Willie, Mary’s financial shenanigans and increasingly erratic behavior, and the overwhelming burden of hundreds of thousands of dying soldiers under his watch – led Lincoln down a religious journey that made him, in Zeitz’s words, “a believer,” and even perhaps “the nation’s first evangelical president.”
But does Zeitz demonstrate it? He strongly implies it, but the actual documentation of Lincoln’s conversion is limited and debatable. Did Lincoln really become a “believer,” or was he merely a savvy politician who came to understand the religious fervor of the era and the desperate need for a public exhausted by the death of loved ones in a seemingly never-ending war? Did he also see the potential violence of northerners wanting to punish southerners, not so much for slavery, for which Lincoln reminds all were complicit, but for the violent deception and treason that cost so many lives? And did Lincoln see that same violent potential in southerners unhappy with losing “property” and power, and thus the need to convince all parties that “God has his own plans,” that likely did not coincide with the hopes of either side? Doing so might help get all parties on a path to reconciliation under new realities. There is some support for Lincoln’s spiritual evolution, such as his “meditation on the divine will,” a short note to self that was not intended for public consumption, and a letter to Eliza Gurney. Notwithstanding these sources, by the end of the book those questions are not answered.
But it would be wrong to think the book is solely about Lincoln’s supposed transformation and your take on the book may depend on how you read the title and subtitle. Based on time spent, the book is arguably more about the transformation of the nation’s religiosity and how Lincoln used that evolution to help end slavery. Perhaps Lincoln was invoking moral persuasion as part of his doctrine of necessity, finding ways to motivate public sentiment toward saving the Union while ensuring a Union worth saving (i.e., without the enslavement of four million of its citizens). Zeitz spends much of the book talking about the public’s views on religion, and the public’s pleas to a higher power for some explanation for all the death and destruction. Zeitz makes a good case of this societal transformation, although he perhaps overextends it to relate to the more recent evangelicalism, which mostly serves the opposite purpose as it did in Lincoln’s time. In that time, which Zeitz does point out, there was a struggle within the religious community on how it should react to the prospects for abolition of slavery. The slaveholding South adamantly defended the institution as a moral duty, while the North’s views were more varied and complicated.
So is this a good book? That may largely depend on what you expect to find in it. Zeitz occasionally throws out absolute statements to suggest Lincoln got religion and became “a believer,” and “evangelical,” but they sit without real support or context to support them. More often the book suggests Lincoln was simply using religious language and the Bible as an understandable reference point for the masses. Which was it? The result is inconclusive but at the same time the book offers thought-provoking discussion. For that reason, the book is a worthwhile read for those interested in Lincoln’s religious side.
David J. Kent
Author, Lincoln: The Fire of Genius
President, Lincoln Group of DC
But does Zeitz demonstrate it? He strongly implies it, but the actual documentation of Lincoln’s conversion is limited and debatable. Did Lincoln really become a “believer,” or was he merely a savvy politician who came to understand the religious fervor of the era and the desperate need for a public exhausted by the death of loved ones in a seemingly never-ending war? Did he also see the potential violence of northerners wanting to punish southerners, not so much for slavery, for which Lincoln reminds all were complicit, but for the violent deception and treason that cost so many lives? And did Lincoln see that same violent potential in southerners unhappy with losing “property” and power, and thus the need to convince all parties that “God has his own plans,” that likely did not coincide with the hopes of either side? Doing so might help get all parties on a path to reconciliation under new realities. There is some support for Lincoln’s spiritual evolution, such as his “meditation on the divine will,” a short note to self that was not intended for public consumption, and a letter to Eliza Gurney. Notwithstanding these sources, by the end of the book those questions are not answered.
But it would be wrong to think the book is solely about Lincoln’s supposed transformation and your take on the book may depend on how you read the title and subtitle. Based on time spent, the book is arguably more about the transformation of the nation’s religiosity and how Lincoln used that evolution to help end slavery. Perhaps Lincoln was invoking moral persuasion as part of his doctrine of necessity, finding ways to motivate public sentiment toward saving the Union while ensuring a Union worth saving (i.e., without the enslavement of four million of its citizens). Zeitz spends much of the book talking about the public’s views on religion, and the public’s pleas to a higher power for some explanation for all the death and destruction. Zeitz makes a good case of this societal transformation, although he perhaps overextends it to relate to the more recent evangelicalism, which mostly serves the opposite purpose as it did in Lincoln’s time. In that time, which Zeitz does point out, there was a struggle within the religious community on how it should react to the prospects for abolition of slavery. The slaveholding South adamantly defended the institution as a moral duty, while the North’s views were more varied and complicated.
So is this a good book? That may largely depend on what you expect to find in it. Zeitz occasionally throws out absolute statements to suggest Lincoln got religion and became “a believer,” and “evangelical,” but they sit without real support or context to support them. More often the book suggests Lincoln was simply using religious language and the Bible as an understandable reference point for the masses. Which was it? The result is inconclusive but at the same time the book offers thought-provoking discussion. For that reason, the book is a worthwhile read for those interested in Lincoln’s religious side.
David J. Kent
Author, Lincoln: The Fire of Genius
President, Lincoln Group of DC
September 16, 2025
A very fascinating exploration Abraham Lincoln’s faith and how it evolved over time. The book also doubled as a history of Protestantism in America from our nation’s founding through the 1860s. It’s remarkable that Lincoln rode the evangelical wave to the presidency despite not being a professing Christian at the time. It remains unclear whether he accepted Jesus as Lord during the war, with conflicting accounts from those close to him. It seems he never accepted the divinity of Christ, though he certainly embraced the God of the Bible in other ways after the death of his son.
The first major politicization of the evangelical movement in America happened during this Antebellum period and fueled the rise of the Republican Party. The book describes the challenges this presented for churches and the immense influence evangelicals had on elections during the period. It was interesting to learn how many northern evangelical leaders cast the Civil War as a “Holy War” to rid our nation of slavery and regenerate it for the coming of the millennium rule.
A quote that stuck with me from the book: “While most Christians were not abolitionists, most abolitionists were Christians.” Many professing Christians of the time were blinded by racism and influenced by the culture of the world around them more than Scripture. Reading about this period compelled me to pause and consider areas in my Christian walk where I may be allowing the ways of the world to influence my worldview more than the teachings of Christ. However, it’s important to understand the abolitionist movement was decidedly a Christian movement. It remains the most enduring Christian reform movement in the history of our nation. There’s no doubt Lincoln was an “instrument of God” to bring freedom to the slaves. Thank God for raising him up to purge this barbaric practice from our land.
This is a fantastic read for anyone interested in American history, Christianity, and the intersection of religion and politics during this formative era.
The first major politicization of the evangelical movement in America happened during this Antebellum period and fueled the rise of the Republican Party. The book describes the challenges this presented for churches and the immense influence evangelicals had on elections during the period. It was interesting to learn how many northern evangelical leaders cast the Civil War as a “Holy War” to rid our nation of slavery and regenerate it for the coming of the millennium rule.
A quote that stuck with me from the book: “While most Christians were not abolitionists, most abolitionists were Christians.” Many professing Christians of the time were blinded by racism and influenced by the culture of the world around them more than Scripture. Reading about this period compelled me to pause and consider areas in my Christian walk where I may be allowing the ways of the world to influence my worldview more than the teachings of Christ. However, it’s important to understand the abolitionist movement was decidedly a Christian movement. It remains the most enduring Christian reform movement in the history of our nation. There’s no doubt Lincoln was an “instrument of God” to bring freedom to the slaves. Thank God for raising him up to purge this barbaric practice from our land.
This is a fantastic read for anyone interested in American history, Christianity, and the intersection of religion and politics during this formative era.
September 26, 2024
Zeitz examines Lincoln's faith against the American religious landscape of his day. Lincoln's faith journey has been pretty well understood: he was not a conventionally religious person, certainly not a Christian, and a skeptic and even a scoffer in his early days. Nevertheless, he was intimately familiar with The King James Bible and quoted from it liberally. In later years he came to believe in "Providence", a divine plan that orders events. Ironically, as Zeitz points out, this belief was akin to the Calvinism of his father which the young Lincoln had rebelled against.
All of this is placed in the context of the largely Evangelical beliefs of the time. It's the first time I've encountered an examination of the Civil war era from this standpoint although I've encountered some of his conclusions before in Drew Gilpin Faust's "This Republic of Suffering" and Chandra Manning's "What This Cruel War Was Over." What was especially interesting was the blending of religion and politics, an issue that concerns us to this day and the fact that the Civil War represents the first instance of Evangelical bloc voting.
All of this is placed in the context of the largely Evangelical beliefs of the time. It's the first time I've encountered an examination of the Civil war era from this standpoint although I've encountered some of his conclusions before in Drew Gilpin Faust's "This Republic of Suffering" and Chandra Manning's "What This Cruel War Was Over." What was especially interesting was the blending of religion and politics, an issue that concerns us to this day and the fact that the Civil War represents the first instance of Evangelical bloc voting.
February 24, 2024
Despite its title, this well researched and thoughtful book gives most attention to the evolution of Christian evangelicalism during the Civil War era; how most mainstream Christian denominations became widely politicized and went from their antebellum business of saving souls to the campaign to abolish slavery, which proved a formidable political asset to the Republicans and the President's re-election in 1864. Zeitz sees a transformation in Lincoln too in these years. From the young man who believed solely in reason and not religion to a President, who after the death of his young son, Willie, and in the midst of the unrelenting carnage of civil war, came to see the God of his Second Inaugural--a God working His own inscrutable purpose in human affairs wholly apart from human agency, will or aspiration. While Lincoln did not believe that God was on the side of the rebellion, he was, at the same time, never quite sure that He was on the side of the Union.
June 25, 2023
An intimate look at our 16th president's religious views, this book was a real eye-opener. I found the narrative to be very engaging and the text flowed well. The only gripe I have with the book is a misstatement about the abolitionist Elijah Lovejoy; he was not lynched at Alton, Illinois, but was in fact shot. Other than this error, I have no complaints about the book.
January 5, 2024
Timely and insightful; not just of the President but of the politics of America then and now.
July 19, 2023
This could be titled Lincoln's God and The Union's God. It would be more accurate.
The first half of the book, Zeitz covers Lincoln's spiritual development from an outspoken skeptic as a young man, to a believer by the time of his death. Lincoln was never a doctrinal Christian, but certainly developed into a more spiritual person while he was President, believing he was serving a Godly purpose during the Civil War.
The second part of the book focuses on how the churches in the North supported the Civil War, believing it was a holy war against Slavery.(holy War is my term to describe what Zeitz ws trying to communicate, not Zeitz's). Evangelical Christians in the North consistently kept up support of the War and Lincoln during some of the darkest days of the Civil War..
A worthwhile read If your interest is in Lincoln and religious history of the United States.
The first half of the book, Zeitz covers Lincoln's spiritual development from an outspoken skeptic as a young man, to a believer by the time of his death. Lincoln was never a doctrinal Christian, but certainly developed into a more spiritual person while he was President, believing he was serving a Godly purpose during the Civil War.
The second part of the book focuses on how the churches in the North supported the Civil War, believing it was a holy war against Slavery.(holy War is my term to describe what Zeitz ws trying to communicate, not Zeitz's). Evangelical Christians in the North consistently kept up support of the War and Lincoln during some of the darkest days of the Civil War..
A worthwhile read If your interest is in Lincoln and religious history of the United States.
May 16, 2023
I have long read almost anything that I can get my hands on about Lincoln. He is a fascinating man and President. This book explores a part of his life that is not often explored, his religious beliefs. After death touched the Lincoln family, he changed his thinking about religion. Not only did his beliefs change, but so did the country's. With a Civil War waging, many people turned to religion to explain and comfort them during this time of great trials. This book explores this change in the country and the man that was leading them.
March 31, 2025
I received this book from my mother in law, Arlene Chettleburgh, as a Christmas gift and am grateful for her attention on Lincoln and his faith. Shas as well as my family and a circle of friends and associates are aware of my research in this area of Lincoln. Further that I wrote and performed a one man act play on Lincoln’s faith as seen through the eyes of of one of his personal secretaries (John Hay). John Hay knew Lincoln from the his days when he worked with his uncle Milton (a Springfield attorney). John Hay worked with Lincoln from his election to the night he was murdered.
The author makes a bold statement with which I disagree, at the end of the book. He says “. . . Lincoln was, arguably, the nation’s first evangelical President.” I disagree with that inasmuch as I do not believe we have had but one such President, that being Jimmy Carter.
In Lincoln’s case, he “grew” into his faith over time. The pressures of that horrid war, his personal losses and one on talks with others while the daily pressures grew and grew caused him to seek “help” from sources other than mortal man. God. He lost his beloved Willie to typhoid fever in 1862 and wa terribly broken by that loss. He was seen to simply slumped down on his knees next to the bed where lay his dead son and sobbed. He was a broken man at that point.
In my personal case, I spent an entire year researching Lincoln’s faith from his days in New Salem to the end of his life. That year of research included reading very many of his writings of both personal, political and literally hundreds of news reports.
As you read his words in both personal and political documents, the reference to God and to His influence over events comes across very clearly. Lincoln was growing in his faith and especially of leaning more and more on God and prayer to guide his efforts to conduct the Civil War.
There is the story – as related by Elizabeth Keckly, a “freed negro” who lived in the Executive Mansion while Lincoln was President. She spoke of a night – or more correctly early morning hours – of finding the President in his office reading a book by light from the fire place. It turns out that he was reading the book of Job. I believe that he related to Job in many ways.
After a year of researching Lincoln’s faith the way he lived his life, what he said and how he spent so much time in the Bible, one could reach only one conclusion . . . Lincoln was a Christian. I remember talking to another student of Lincoln was also a pastor and he had researched Lincoln’s faith and was frustrated by the lack of a clear and concise statement from Lincoln so stating so. But then for each of us who are Christian, how many times have we actually written down that we are Christians?
The book’s author has done considerable research and in this book has made a significant contribution to understanding Lincoln and his faith.
His conclusion is the same as mine with regard to Lincoln’s faith, with a number of different sources and well presented.
The author makes a bold statement with which I disagree, at the end of the book. He says “. . . Lincoln was, arguably, the nation’s first evangelical President.” I disagree with that inasmuch as I do not believe we have had but one such President, that being Jimmy Carter.
In Lincoln’s case, he “grew” into his faith over time. The pressures of that horrid war, his personal losses and one on talks with others while the daily pressures grew and grew caused him to seek “help” from sources other than mortal man. God. He lost his beloved Willie to typhoid fever in 1862 and wa terribly broken by that loss. He was seen to simply slumped down on his knees next to the bed where lay his dead son and sobbed. He was a broken man at that point.
In my personal case, I spent an entire year researching Lincoln’s faith from his days in New Salem to the end of his life. That year of research included reading very many of his writings of both personal, political and literally hundreds of news reports.
As you read his words in both personal and political documents, the reference to God and to His influence over events comes across very clearly. Lincoln was growing in his faith and especially of leaning more and more on God and prayer to guide his efforts to conduct the Civil War.
There is the story – as related by Elizabeth Keckly, a “freed negro” who lived in the Executive Mansion while Lincoln was President. She spoke of a night – or more correctly early morning hours – of finding the President in his office reading a book by light from the fire place. It turns out that he was reading the book of Job. I believe that he related to Job in many ways.
After a year of researching Lincoln’s faith the way he lived his life, what he said and how he spent so much time in the Bible, one could reach only one conclusion . . . Lincoln was a Christian. I remember talking to another student of Lincoln was also a pastor and he had researched Lincoln’s faith and was frustrated by the lack of a clear and concise statement from Lincoln so stating so. But then for each of us who are Christian, how many times have we actually written down that we are Christians?
The book’s author has done considerable research and in this book has made a significant contribution to understanding Lincoln and his faith.
His conclusion is the same as mine with regard to Lincoln’s faith, with a number of different sources and well presented.
June 4, 2023
In LINCOLN’S GOD, bestselling author Joshua Zeitz delves deeply into the religious beliefs of Abraham Lincoln and the effect they would have on a nation divided and in chaos.
When Lincoln took office for his first term, seven states seceded, and war broke out two weeks later with the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter. Issues of slavery were at the forefront, making his moral stance an essential piece of his presidency. Raised by a domineering father who held to a strict Calvinist view that included the doctrine of predestination, Lincoln had a mind of his own and wanted to succeed where others, including his father, were willing to accept less than the best.
As he campaigned for the nation’s high office, Lincoln’s intellectually lodged, deist understandings would need to be fused within a larger format as he met with faith leaders and addressed abolitionists. Lincoln, who suffered the crushing loss of a son as the war raged on, was no stranger to tragedy and its consequences. Gradually he took on the cloak of religion in language, and, with the Emancipation Proclamation, in deed. The alteration in his beliefs, presented here in fascinating detail by Zeitz, is seen most clearly in his second inaugural address, which is unique for its “religious sentiment and phrasing.”
Since Lincoln is a figure much studied and often glorified, Zeitz has created a focus that successfully encompasses his personal convictions and public face. This includes his disdain for those avowed Christians who could use their Bible to justify the continuation of slavery, and his willingness to encourage believers by addressing that institution head on with the Proclamation, sweeping large blocs of Christian voters to his side. Though it is likely, given the well-researched materials presented here, that Lincoln privately held fast to his personal understanding that God does not take sides, it is equally plain that he believed Black slaves should be freed. He would stand on that principle and face the consequences.
Zeitz portrays the man on the podium and immersed in congressional debate and declaration, as well as the son, husband and father who had to rise beyond the pangs and crises that those roles required. In this thoughtful assessment, Lincoln was someone who learned and grew from his service as the nation’s leader, who was able to state, as the war was reaching its end, that all Americans should proceed “[w]ith malice toward none; with charity for all, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right...”
Reviewed by Barbara Bamberger Scott
When Lincoln took office for his first term, seven states seceded, and war broke out two weeks later with the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter. Issues of slavery were at the forefront, making his moral stance an essential piece of his presidency. Raised by a domineering father who held to a strict Calvinist view that included the doctrine of predestination, Lincoln had a mind of his own and wanted to succeed where others, including his father, were willing to accept less than the best.
As he campaigned for the nation’s high office, Lincoln’s intellectually lodged, deist understandings would need to be fused within a larger format as he met with faith leaders and addressed abolitionists. Lincoln, who suffered the crushing loss of a son as the war raged on, was no stranger to tragedy and its consequences. Gradually he took on the cloak of religion in language, and, with the Emancipation Proclamation, in deed. The alteration in his beliefs, presented here in fascinating detail by Zeitz, is seen most clearly in his second inaugural address, which is unique for its “religious sentiment and phrasing.”
Since Lincoln is a figure much studied and often glorified, Zeitz has created a focus that successfully encompasses his personal convictions and public face. This includes his disdain for those avowed Christians who could use their Bible to justify the continuation of slavery, and his willingness to encourage believers by addressing that institution head on with the Proclamation, sweeping large blocs of Christian voters to his side. Though it is likely, given the well-researched materials presented here, that Lincoln privately held fast to his personal understanding that God does not take sides, it is equally plain that he believed Black slaves should be freed. He would stand on that principle and face the consequences.
Zeitz portrays the man on the podium and immersed in congressional debate and declaration, as well as the son, husband and father who had to rise beyond the pangs and crises that those roles required. In this thoughtful assessment, Lincoln was someone who learned and grew from his service as the nation’s leader, who was able to state, as the war was reaching its end, that all Americans should proceed “[w]ith malice toward none; with charity for all, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right...”
Reviewed by Barbara Bamberger Scott
July 28, 2023
The author does a good job showing how the evangelical movement of the mid 19th century influenced, and was influenced by, the politics surrounding abolition. Most evangelists in the 1830's and 40's followed the "moral suasion" path of the early abolitionists like Garrison. They did not hold that political activism for emancipation was the right course to pursue. Evangelists like Charles Finney held that the conversion of souls itself would bring about reforms on a wide range of social issues not singling any specific causes like abolition, temperance and others. Others, like Theodore Weld, believed that the pursuit of emancipation should be the express intended outcome of religious activity. The Tappan brothers, supporters of both Finney and Weld, came to share Weld's perspective.
As the tumult over slavery increased, the connection of emancipation and politics changed substantially toward more engagement with politics. Many evangelists took overtly political stands on the issues of the day, particularly migrating their support for the new Republican party. By the time of the war, there was blatant opining from the pulpit on the imperative of the religious to lobby and advocate for the suppression of the rebellious slaveholding South. The separation of church and state, long held as the proper view of the religions in America, sharply lessened. The obsession with hastening the millennium through social reforms also played a major part in the growing political activism by evangelicals. The author recounts well how the conflict of pro and anti slavery religious doctrines caused the schism between northern and southern branches of the major denominations.
Lincoln's views on religion were always somewhat ambiguous. Throughout his life Lincoln was never a member of any church. Early on, he was accused of being at best a Deist and perhaps a nonbeliever. As the burdens of the war came upon him, and certainly after the death of his son Willie, his references to the will of God as affecting events became clearer. But, he believed that the intentions of God were somewhat inscrutable and that God's plans did not necessarily align entirely with the virtue of the North's causes. His incredible 2nd inaugural address vividly shows how his interpretation of scripture formed his thinking on the meaning of the causes and perpetuation of the war.
As the tumult over slavery increased, the connection of emancipation and politics changed substantially toward more engagement with politics. Many evangelists took overtly political stands on the issues of the day, particularly migrating their support for the new Republican party. By the time of the war, there was blatant opining from the pulpit on the imperative of the religious to lobby and advocate for the suppression of the rebellious slaveholding South. The separation of church and state, long held as the proper view of the religions in America, sharply lessened. The obsession with hastening the millennium through social reforms also played a major part in the growing political activism by evangelicals. The author recounts well how the conflict of pro and anti slavery religious doctrines caused the schism between northern and southern branches of the major denominations.
Lincoln's views on religion were always somewhat ambiguous. Throughout his life Lincoln was never a member of any church. Early on, he was accused of being at best a Deist and perhaps a nonbeliever. As the burdens of the war came upon him, and certainly after the death of his son Willie, his references to the will of God as affecting events became clearer. But, he believed that the intentions of God were somewhat inscrutable and that God's plans did not necessarily align entirely with the virtue of the North's causes. His incredible 2nd inaugural address vividly shows how his interpretation of scripture formed his thinking on the meaning of the causes and perpetuation of the war.
August 21, 2023
This was an interesting book. The author has a great readable style and has done some very good research. Having read many other biographies on Abraham Lincoln, I didn't find anything in here that didn't square with other things I already knew about Lincoln. But I did get an expanded, well-researched understanding of his spiritual/religious side. I wonder if Zeitz was responding at all to Ron Anderson's work on Joseph Smith and Abraham Lincoln (2014) or Tim Ballard's poorly researched, highly speculative book (2016).
However, my main issue with book is that I think it is somewhat misnamed. I realize that the sparsity of material makes Lincoln's religious/spiritual views difficult to access, but this book was way more about the religious landscape of antebellum American than it was about Lincoln's personal religious/spiritual development. Certainly, all of that is important context for Lincoln's personal transformation, but I think the title should have been something more like, "Religious movements in Antebellum America and how they affected Abraham Lincoln." I know that's not catchy, but it would have better represented the balance of the book.
Having said that, I love learning about this era and about this great president, and I definitely think the book is well worth reading.
However, my main issue with book is that I think it is somewhat misnamed. I realize that the sparsity of material makes Lincoln's religious/spiritual views difficult to access, but this book was way more about the religious landscape of antebellum American than it was about Lincoln's personal religious/spiritual development. Certainly, all of that is important context for Lincoln's personal transformation, but I think the title should have been something more like, "Religious movements in Antebellum America and how they affected Abraham Lincoln." I know that's not catchy, but it would have better represented the balance of the book.
Having said that, I love learning about this era and about this great president, and I definitely think the book is well worth reading.
June 10, 2023
As presidential biographies go, this book was a bit dry and unsatisfying. It’s central core tenant was that Lincoln was not an adherent to Christianity in the traditional sense and not beholden to Christianity nor any particular denomination (a point made repeatedly). Rather, he was more of a deist who harnessed Christian beliefs to inspire union soldiers to prevail in their duties during the agony in the civil war to preserve the Union and channel them against the evils of slavery. In successfully doing so, Lincoln increased religious fervor among Northerners and in so doing became a (non traditional) evangelistic president.
I am always fascinated by unique historical anecdotes of how other presidents react to each other and therefore the lines of how James Buchanan removed his hat to honor his successor as Lincoln’s funeral procession passed by Lancaster, PA was of interest to me.
I am always fascinated by unique historical anecdotes of how other presidents react to each other and therefore the lines of how James Buchanan removed his hat to honor his successor as Lincoln’s funeral procession passed by Lancaster, PA was of interest to me.
July 27, 2023
The thesis of this book is fairly well trodden in the margins of countless other Lincoln bios—Lincoln wasn’t terribly religious though he spent his life as a reader of the Bible and constantly around religion. His spirituality was heightened during the civil war as he suffered many setbacks and great stress during that time. This book offered little here that was new to me in this regard.
It also takes some strong positions: arguing that Lincoln was overtly an unbeliever (which doesn’t seem true from his writings and speeches) and that Lincoln’s lifelong ambitious was the presidency (overtly false).
I appreciated some of the general history of how Protestantism reacted to and factored into the civil war.
It also takes some strong positions: arguing that Lincoln was overtly an unbeliever (which doesn’t seem true from his writings and speeches) and that Lincoln’s lifelong ambitious was the presidency (overtly false).
I appreciated some of the general history of how Protestantism reacted to and factored into the civil war.
August 18, 2025
This book was great. It really helped show the ways in which religion impacted the political and moral landscape of America in the days of the Civil War. Though it is called Lincoln’s God, and it certainly does talk about Lincoln’s personal relationship with his faith, my favorite parts of the book were when the author set the scene of the northern evangelicals at different points in time throughout this period. It was fascinating to read about the huge role that religion played in abolition and it is interesting to consider what would have happened without the work of northern evangelical abolitionists, who appeared to have a much great role in the Union war efforts than I was familiar with before
September 5, 2023
This book is well-researched, with copious footnotes for the serious reader to use to follow up. The author makes his point: namely, that Abraham Lincoln's attitude toward faith changed over the course of his life (Zeitz suggests the turning point was son Willie's death in 1862). He also does an excellent job in placing Lincoln's faith-journey against the backdrop of his times, especially the activities and attitudes of evangelical Christians. All that said, I found the book rather dull, repetitious at times, and perhaps too long for the central thesis. There are, indeed, things to be learned in this book, however, so anyone interested in Lincoln will not find it a waste of time...
March 15, 2024
This book delves into the impact of the Civil War on organized religion within the North and to a lesser degree the south. As the title suggests, Joshua Zeitz also shows how Abraham Lincoln adapted his own religious beliefs into politics during this war. It’s a fascinating look at this time period and the lasting impacts. Was God for the North, or for the South. Both sides believed they were fighting for God’s will. Lincoln pondered this and his role in God’s plan. The evangelical front became United in the North to support the abolition of slavery and ultimately they considered Lincoln and martyr in this cause. Politics as well as religion changed forever.
July 20, 2023
A well researched book and well written. Does an excellent job of surveying 19 th century pre Civil War Protestantism and presenting the attitudes of Northern evangelical ministers during the war . The changes the war brought on matters of belief is more fully covered in The Republic of Fear. The book is less convincing on positing a change in Lincoln’s own beliefs . One downside is repeated reliance on strings of similar quotes from ministers as evidence of some broader point .
September 14, 2025
While the discussion tends to be a bit repetitive, the author has clearly researched and structured his work well. The records show that Lincoln leaned into an active faith far more than what he acknowledged, but the greater context of the growth and impact of evangelical thinking on American political life is the larger story. And in the retrospect of 40 years post-Reagan (when the evangelical influence re-established itself) the parallels are notable.
September 10, 2023
This was a wonderful book. I am a life-long Presbyterian and Joshua Zeitz gave me more information about the history of that denomination than I knew. Lincoln's growth as a person who was influenced by faith was carefully delineated. The research was excellent and the writing clear and compelling. I will have to look for his other books.
June 14, 2025
Worth reading for folks very interested in American Christianity in the Antebellum period, but it might lack the detail and focus that such a reader would want. For the more casual reader its attempt to interweave Lincoln’s personal faith journey and an analysis of the national religious currents ends up feeing rather disjointed and limits the books appeal
October 14, 2023
Interesting picture of Lincoln over time. Not as religious as expected, much more a developing view of faith and belief
May 15, 2024
Asks a great question about the man, and poses an intriguing answer.
May 20, 2025
Very informative but super boring and hard to stay interested. Very advanced vocabulary
July 1, 2024
Abraham Lincoln And American Protestantism
Abraham Lincoln is rightly regarded as an American icon who continues to teach and to inspire. Yet, Lincoln was a notoriously private, enigmatic person who rarely shared his deepest convictions with others. This is no more true than in the matter of religion. Many thoughtful people are reticent about sharing their personal religious understanding; and of course many people are unsure of what they believe about God and are ambivalent. Lincoln's contemporaries said varying things about Lincoln's religious beliefs and how they may have changed over time. Most of seen him as something other than a traditional Christian. Lincoln scholars have also found difficulty in articulating Lincoln's private view of religion and God.
Joshua Zeitz is the most recent historian to write a book about Lincoln's religion in "Lincoln's God: How Faith Transformed a President and a Nation". (2023) His book tries to trace the development of Lincoln's religious thought in the context of his life, the growth of evangelical Protestantism, and the Civil War and the freeing of the slaves. While recognizing the iconoclastic character of Lincoln's view of God, Zeitz concludes:
"Though his brand of Christian faith was not evangelical by common definition, in his appeal to the prevailing religious sensibility of the country-- in his deft mobilization of Protestant churches, and in his knowing evocation of religious language and themes to help Americans understand the times in which they lived -- Lincoln was, arguably, the nation's first evangelical president."
Zeitz makes a strong claim, even with his several qualifications. His book makes it difficult to focus on Lincoln's religious beliefs. The work is short and attempts to cover a great deal. Chapters outlining Lincoln's life alternate with chapters on American religious history and on the rise of evangelical Protestantism, Evangelicalism is never adequately defined or differentiated from other forms of Protestantism. Zeitz writes that in the first halfof the 19th century, Americans underwent a spiritual transformation and "flocked to new evangelical churches, which held that through belief, repentance, and a personal relationship with Christ, individuals could find grace in this life and the next." The growth of evangelical religion before and during the Civil War occupies more of Zeitz's book than does his study of Lincoln's beliefs.
Zeitz studies Lincoln's early life and his determination to make something of himself and to escape the harsh, poor farming life and predestinarian views of his father. He gives a summary of Lincoln leaving home and trying to learn, rise and become involved in politics, which is tied into the rise of American individualism, personal effort, capitalism, and evangelicism. As a young man, Lincoln was a freethinker who learned that with a political and legal career in mind his deepest views were best kept to himself.
Zeitz shows the fissures in evangelical Christianity resulting from slavery and its gradual move to abolitionism and to support (in the North) of the Civil War as an effort to root out the evil of slavery. He draws parallels with Lincoln's life and his performance as president. He suggests Lincoln turned to religion and to the mysteries of life with the death of his beloved son Willie in 1862 and with his realization of the enormity of the conflict that the Civil War became, as reflected in the Gettysburg Address, the Second Inaugural Address, in some of Lincoln's letters and private notes, and elsewhere.
For Zeitz, Lincoln returned to something approaching the belifef of his father in his view of divine Providence and predestination. Lincoln kept his own mind and differed from others in the North in refusing to conclude that God was on one side or the other in the conflict or that people could understand God. As reflected in his speeches, which were political statements designed to move others, and in his life, Lincoln did seem to move to a vague but deeply held view of divine providence and in modern terms spirituality. But this is far, in my view, from seeing Lincoln through the eyes of evangelicism or Christianity.
Zeitz discusses the relationship between secularism and religion and finds that they became closely intertwined in Lincoln's time and continued so to the present, with the divisive polarization in our country as one result. I agree with him that polarization is due in large part to religiosity and to differing interpretations of religion and of what God demands of individuals and of society. I am uncomfortable with this, as I think Zeitz is.
This book does not probe deeply, given its scope, and overstates Lincoln's evangelicism or evangelical influences. I still found the book thoughtful and worthwhile. It encourages reflection on Lincoln, religion, and on our own troubled times.
Robin Friedman
Abraham Lincoln is rightly regarded as an American icon who continues to teach and to inspire. Yet, Lincoln was a notoriously private, enigmatic person who rarely shared his deepest convictions with others. This is no more true than in the matter of religion. Many thoughtful people are reticent about sharing their personal religious understanding; and of course many people are unsure of what they believe about God and are ambivalent. Lincoln's contemporaries said varying things about Lincoln's religious beliefs and how they may have changed over time. Most of seen him as something other than a traditional Christian. Lincoln scholars have also found difficulty in articulating Lincoln's private view of religion and God.
Joshua Zeitz is the most recent historian to write a book about Lincoln's religion in "Lincoln's God: How Faith Transformed a President and a Nation". (2023) His book tries to trace the development of Lincoln's religious thought in the context of his life, the growth of evangelical Protestantism, and the Civil War and the freeing of the slaves. While recognizing the iconoclastic character of Lincoln's view of God, Zeitz concludes:
"Though his brand of Christian faith was not evangelical by common definition, in his appeal to the prevailing religious sensibility of the country-- in his deft mobilization of Protestant churches, and in his knowing evocation of religious language and themes to help Americans understand the times in which they lived -- Lincoln was, arguably, the nation's first evangelical president."
Zeitz makes a strong claim, even with his several qualifications. His book makes it difficult to focus on Lincoln's religious beliefs. The work is short and attempts to cover a great deal. Chapters outlining Lincoln's life alternate with chapters on American religious history and on the rise of evangelical Protestantism, Evangelicalism is never adequately defined or differentiated from other forms of Protestantism. Zeitz writes that in the first halfof the 19th century, Americans underwent a spiritual transformation and "flocked to new evangelical churches, which held that through belief, repentance, and a personal relationship with Christ, individuals could find grace in this life and the next." The growth of evangelical religion before and during the Civil War occupies more of Zeitz's book than does his study of Lincoln's beliefs.
Zeitz studies Lincoln's early life and his determination to make something of himself and to escape the harsh, poor farming life and predestinarian views of his father. He gives a summary of Lincoln leaving home and trying to learn, rise and become involved in politics, which is tied into the rise of American individualism, personal effort, capitalism, and evangelicism. As a young man, Lincoln was a freethinker who learned that with a political and legal career in mind his deepest views were best kept to himself.
Zeitz shows the fissures in evangelical Christianity resulting from slavery and its gradual move to abolitionism and to support (in the North) of the Civil War as an effort to root out the evil of slavery. He draws parallels with Lincoln's life and his performance as president. He suggests Lincoln turned to religion and to the mysteries of life with the death of his beloved son Willie in 1862 and with his realization of the enormity of the conflict that the Civil War became, as reflected in the Gettysburg Address, the Second Inaugural Address, in some of Lincoln's letters and private notes, and elsewhere.
For Zeitz, Lincoln returned to something approaching the belifef of his father in his view of divine Providence and predestination. Lincoln kept his own mind and differed from others in the North in refusing to conclude that God was on one side or the other in the conflict or that people could understand God. As reflected in his speeches, which were political statements designed to move others, and in his life, Lincoln did seem to move to a vague but deeply held view of divine providence and in modern terms spirituality. But this is far, in my view, from seeing Lincoln through the eyes of evangelicism or Christianity.
Zeitz discusses the relationship between secularism and religion and finds that they became closely intertwined in Lincoln's time and continued so to the present, with the divisive polarization in our country as one result. I agree with him that polarization is due in large part to religiosity and to differing interpretations of religion and of what God demands of individuals and of society. I am uncomfortable with this, as I think Zeitz is.
This book does not probe deeply, given its scope, and overstates Lincoln's evangelicism or evangelical influences. I still found the book thoughtful and worthwhile. It encourages reflection on Lincoln, religion, and on our own troubled times.
Robin Friedman
December 31, 2024
I'm honestly not entirely sure what this book is supposed to be. The title suggests it will focus on Lincoln's religious evolution. Instead, it only partially traces this development, and then largely focuses on how Christianity developed in American culture in the run-up to and progress of the Civil War. It then closes with a broad overview of the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy in the late 19th/early 20th century. The scope based on the title is far broader, and the way it closes makes it hard to understand how Lincoln ultimately tied in. His largest role really seems to be in how he tapped into the growing religious fervor.
Now this is an interesting book for what it's worth. I felt like it is a good companion to Mark Noll's The Civil War As a Theological Crisis; it's helpful for some perspective on how Christians reacted to, adapted to, and justified their stances on the war.
Where Zeitz was actually at his weakest was when he was trying to describe the fine details of Christian theology. His description of Calvinism was questionable and he mixed up premillenialism and postmillenialism (he described postmillenialism but consistently referred to it as premillenialism). He's more of an American historian than a religious historian it seems.
Overall an enjoyable read, I just wish its actual trajectory was communicated better.
Now this is an interesting book for what it's worth. I felt like it is a good companion to Mark Noll's The Civil War As a Theological Crisis; it's helpful for some perspective on how Christians reacted to, adapted to, and justified their stances on the war.
Where Zeitz was actually at his weakest was when he was trying to describe the fine details of Christian theology. His description of Calvinism was questionable and he mixed up premillenialism and postmillenialism (he described postmillenialism but consistently referred to it as premillenialism). He's more of an American historian than a religious historian it seems.
Overall an enjoyable read, I just wish its actual trajectory was communicated better.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews