"Christianity Today Magazine", founded by evangelist Billy Graham, calls for Trump to be removed

[Actinguy 862]

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html

[Actinguy 862]

"None of the president’s positives can balance the moral and political danger we face under a leader of such grossly immoral character.

To the many evangelicals who continue to support Mr. Trump in spite of his blackened moral record, we might say this: Remember who you are and whom you serve.

Consider how your justification of Mr. Trump influences your witness to your Lord and Savior."

- A Message From The Editor, "Christianity Today" Magazine

(I have cherry picked a few lines, but the entire article is an important read.)

[Anthony_270 1,107]

Christianity Today isn't an evangelical magazine. It leans left.

[Actinguy 862]

1 minute ago, admin_270 said:

Christianity Today isn't an evangelical magazine. It leans left.

I'd encourage you to the read the article, in which they point out that they have historically avoided politics all together.

[Patine 514]

As a Christian myself, I could not, with all due morals and convictions, support George W. Bush. But it was appalling how many Evangelical "Christians" were staunchly behind him, and even, in some cases, claimed he was doing the Lord's work.

[Anthony_270 1,107]

Just now, Actinguy said:

I'd encourage you to the read the article, in which they point out that they have historically avoided politics all together.

Framing it as being founded by Billy Graham and addressed to evangelicals makes it sound like it's a right-leaning magazine. It isn't, even if the editors previously tended to avoid explicit political endorsements.

[Anthony_270 1,107]

2 minutes ago, Patine said:

As a Christian myself, I could not, with all due morals and convictions, support George W. Bush. But it was appalling how many Evangelical "Christians" were staunchly behind him, and even, in some cases, claimed he was doing the Lord's work.

I am led to believe from your corpus here on the forum that you could not support any recent President, @Patine!

[Anthony_270 1,107]

6 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

I'd encourage you to the read the article, in which they point out that they have historically avoided politics all together.

It appears you didn't read it carefully, as they pointedly note they called out Clinton in the 90s.

Why is this article important? It's the standard Democratic take with a gloss of 'we're the true Christians, not you backward evangelicals we've put up with for the last few years.'

But I have to admit, this line made me laugh out loud:

"That he should be removed, we believe, is not a matter of partisan loyalties but loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments."

[Actinguy 862]

3 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Framing it as being founded by Billy Graham and addressed to evangelicals makes it sound like it's a right-leaning magazine. It isn't, even if the editors previously tended to avoid explicit political endorsements.

There is a difference between not-leaning and left-leaning, which is what you said.

And there can be no doubt that Christianity, at least for the past 39 years or so, has been viewed as right-leaning (to say the least).  We can debate whether it actually IS right-leaning, but not whether it is perceived that way.

Regardless, it appears Christianity Today has really only waded into politics three times. 

1) The impeachment of Richard Nixon, in which they neither supported nor called for the ousting of Nixon, but instead called for "the constitutional process to be followed".  

2) The impeachment of Bill Clinton, when they said "Unsavory dealings and immoral acts by the President and those close to him have rendered this administration morally unable to lead." 

3) The impeachment of Donald Trump, which I've linked here.

[Anthony_270 1,107]

1 minute ago, Actinguy said:

There is a difference between not-leaning and left-leaning, which is what you said

They're a left-leaning magazine that tends not to be explicit in their politics.

[Actinguy 862]

1 minute ago, admin_270 said:

It appears you didn't read it carefully, as they pointedly note they called out Clinton in the 90s.

 

Actually, I did read it.  And the fact that they called for Clinton's removal in the 90s lends credence to the fact that they are not at all "left leaning" as you stated.

[Actinguy 862]

Just now, admin_270 said:

They're a left-leaning magazine that tends not to be explicit in their politics.4

What on earth.  "Christianity Today", which called for Bill Clinton's removal, is a left-leaning magazine?  Come on, man.  What reality do you live in?  Are you okay?

[Anthony_270 1,107]

Just now, Actinguy said:

What on earth.  "Christianity Today", which called for Bill Clinton's removal, is a left-leaning magazine?  Come on, man.  What reality do you live in?  Are you okay?

Have you recently *read* much of Christianity Today?

[Actinguy 862]

1 minute ago, admin_270 said:

Have you recently *read* much of Christianity Today?

No.  I'm left-leaning, I'm not their target audience.

[Anthony_270 1,107]

Just now, Actinguy said:

No.  I'm left-leaning, I'm not their target audience.

OK. 

[Actinguy 862]

Seriously.  Sometimes things happen which are not in Donald Trump's favor.  

You can't dismiss everything as a left-wing conspiracy.

[Patine 514]

19 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

I am led to believe from your corpus here on the forum that you could not support any recent President, @Patine!

I'm doubting Christ, Himself, would either, judging by His Ministry in the Gospels.

[Anthony_270 1,107]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

I'm doubting Christ, Himself, would either, judging by His Ministry in the Gospels.

Render unto Trump what is Trump's. 

[vcczar 1,260]

@admin_270 it’s right-center according to this:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/christianity-today/

[Anthony_270 1,107]

7 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Sometimes things happen which are not in Donald Trump's favor.

I'm guessing this is bad for Trump. Perhaps it will be the point historians look back at and say "That's when the end really started for Trump!" But I doubt it. It appears to be more a yawner to me. Evangelicals by and large are not in the CT world.

[Patine 514]

3 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Render unto Trump what is Trump's. 

The "Caesar parable" seemed to actually show a dismissal of mortal governance as a major asset or tool toward Salvation, but viewed it as something Christians must endure and work around - an endorsement from the Lord and Saviour Himself for a de facto separation of Church and State.

[darkmoon72 2]

8 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Seriously.  Sometimes things happen which are not in Donald Trump's favor.  

You can't dismiss everything as a left-wing conspiracy.

I think the mask is coming off and we are realizing just how "right-leaning" somebody really is.

[Anthony_270 1,107]

1 minute ago, vcczar said:

it’s right-center according to this

Ya, but it's considered right largely because it's pro-life.

[Patine 514]

Just now, darkmoon72 said:

I think the mask is coming off and we are realizing just how "right-leaning" somebody really is.

Supporting Trump does not make one "right-leaning," considering Trump is a vapid, populist RINO with no ideology or platform who hijacked the leadership of the Republican Party with empty promises, vitriol, and showmanship. It's not like he's @Reagan04 for supporting Trump (case-in-point, @Reagan04 DOESN'T support Trump).

[Anthony_270 1,107]

3 minutes ago, darkmoon72 said:

I think the mask is coming off and we are realizing just how "right-leaning" somebody really is.

Heh. I'm comfortable with most of Sanders' major policy views. In Canada I would probably fit most easily into the Red Tory category. 

But I don't like nonsense, including misleading nonsense about Trump, such as suggesting Billy Graham's views are similar to CT's. Billy Graham voted for Trump, and Franklin Graham is a big Trump supporter.