Church attendance didn't predict antisemitism. Theology did.

In my survey of more than 1,000 young Christian men, church attendance did not predict antisemitic attitudes. What they believed about God’s promises to the Jewish people did.

That finding should get the Church’s attention. Young Christian men are being shaped in more than one place. What they hear in church matters. So does what they watch online.

In early summer 2026, I surveyed 1,090 Christian men ages 18–30 in the United States. I asked about their faith, media habits, politics, views of Jewish people, and comfort discussing Israel. The men came from Catholic, Evangelical, mainline, nondenominational, and other Christian traditions.

The strongest predictor of antisemitic attitudes was beliefs that God’s promises to the Jewish people have ended. When I compared the factors together, these beliefs were about four times as strong a predictor as political conservatism. Church attendance, by contrast, did not predict antisemitic attitudes in the study.

There was also a hopeful finding. Men who believed that God’s covenant with the Jewish people continues had lower antisemitic-attitude scores.

That means what churches teach matters. Christians need to ask a basic question: What does Scripture say about God’s faithfulness to the Jewish people?

Romans 11 offers a clear place to begin. Paul warns Gentile believers not to boast over the Jewish branches. He reminds them, “you do not support the root, but the root supports you” (Romans 11:18). Later in the same chapter, Paul says the Jewish people are “beloved” and that “the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable” (Romans 11:28–29).

Christian faith cannot be separated from its Jewish roots. Jesus was Jewish. His first followers were Jewish. Much of the New Testament assumes the story, promises, and Scriptures of Israel.  In Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity (2021), theologian Gerald McDermott argues that Christians better understand their faith when they understand its Jewish roots.

Ignoring those roots does not make Christianity stronger. It makes it easier to forget that Christianity grew from a Jewish story, Jewish Scriptures, and a Jewish Messiah. As Kendall Soulen argues in The God of Israel and Christian Theology (1996), what Christians believe about Jews and Israel can shape how they think and act.

But young men are not formed only in church. They are also formed online.

My study found a clear pattern in media use. Young Christian men who regularly watched Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, or Nick Fuentes had higher average antisemitic-attitude scores than men with little or no engagement with them. About one in six men in the study watched Fuentes at least monthly.

The pattern moved in the same direction for all three figures. Regular viewers scored higher in each case. Each comparison is between regular viewers and men with little or no engagement with that particular figure; these are not before-and-after scores. That does not prove that watching these figures causes antisemitism. It does show that engagement with these figures and antisemitic attitudes are linked in this group.

The media finding also remained important when other factors were considered together. Media exposure was still linked to antisemitic attitudes after theology, politics, contact with Jewish people, gaming, and church attendance were taken into account.

But one of the most important findings came when theology and media were considered together.

Men who believed that God’s covenant with the Jewish people continues had lower antisemitic attitudes. Yet they were not less likely to engage with these media figures. In other words, stronger beliefs about God’s faithfulness to the Jewish people did not automatically lead to different media choices.

At the same time, beliefs that God’s promises to the Jewish people had ended were linked to greater engagement with these figures. Theology and media habits overlapped, but one did not cancel out the other.

That matters for churches. Teaching sound theology is important, but it may not be enough. Young Christians also need help thinking carefully about what they watch, share, and trust online. One kind of teaching cannot simply stand in for the other.

The survey also revealed a gap in how ready young men feel to talk about Israel. Fewer than half said they felt comfortable discussing Israel in church or ministry, and only 44% said they felt equipped to discuss it from a biblical perspective. Nearly four in 10 said they avoid conversations about Israel because they tend to become tense.

Relationships matter as well. Men who reported no personal contact with Jewish people had higher antisemitic-attitude scores. Almost half of those surveyed said “no” or “not sure” when asked whether they knew a Jewish person.

That should give churches another reason to build real relationships with Jewish neighbors and communities. Antisemitism should not be addressed only as an idea. Christians also need opportunities to know Jewish people as people, not just as names in a Bible lesson or a news story.

The good news is that churches are not powerless.

What happens in ordinary pulpits, classrooms, small groups, and homes matters. Church leaders can teach the Jewish roots of Christianity. They can take Romans 9–11 seriously. They can help young Christians build relationships with Jewish communities. And they can teach young people to ask better questions about the voices that reach them through their online feeds.

My study cannot tell us whether this media content causes antisemitism. Because the survey captured one point in time, it is also possible that men who already hold antisemitic ideas seek out voices that echo those ideas. More research is needed to sort out cause and effect.

But the practical lesson is already clear: churches need to address both theology and media habits. Good theology does not automatically change what young men watch, and media literacy cannot provide the theology they need.

The Church cannot choose every voice that reaches a young man’s screen. But it can help shape the faith, wisdom, and judgment he brings to what he hears.

Author’s note: This study was developed and conducted by the author as a research project for a quantitative methods course in Gratz College’s Ph.D. program in Antisemitism Studies, the world’s only doctoral program in the field. The author gratefully acknowledges Dr. Ayal Feinberg for his guidance and support in developing the study. The research was funded by the Academic Engagement Network and the Israel Institute at Regent University.