Christianity Today Op Ed

[Mountain Man]

Here is a page with responses by some other Evangelicals in addition to Franklin.

I was particularly interested in the quote from CT honcho Galli, author of the article under discussion, where he characterizes himself and his associates as "elite" Evangelicals, and considers Trump supporters "alien."

Yeah, that quote from Galli about being an "elite" evangelical is quite eye-opening, especially his sneering at people who don't have college degrees, or are working "blue collar" jobs. He sounds very much like the pharisee who thanks God that he's better than everybody else.

And now he's aligning himself with the party of abortion and "gender fluidity" to convict an innocent man of crimes the evidence says he never committed.

[Charles]

Jay Parini shares his opinion in the article 'Christianity Today' anti-Trump editorial is a sign of things to come:

It's not a stretch to say that white evangelicals put Trump into office in 2016. About 80% of them voted for him. They did so because of the abortion issue, mostly. They wanted pro-life judges throughout the justice system. But this was a devil's bargain, at best.

Younger evangelicals, those under 45, have been slowly but steadily moving away from Trump during the past two years or so, unhappy about his example.

A key topic that has driven them away is immigration. Loving your neighbor as yourself has always been a bedrock Christian value. And Trump's stance on immigrants (especially those of color) has upset the younger generation of evangelicals, with two-thirds of them saying in surveys that immigrants strengthen our country, bringing their work ethic and talents with them from Mexico or Central America or Syria.

Humility lies at the heart of Christian behavior. As does honesty.

In these, Trump has set a terrible example, and he's now been taken down for this by an important Christian voice. If only another 10 percent of evangelicals take this seriously, and I suspect they will, Donald J. Trump's presidency is destined for the ash heap of history.

I do not feel very certain that very many evangelicals will follow CT but I do hope so.

[MaxVel]

Jay Parini shares his opinion in the article 'Christianity Today' anti-Trump editorial is a sign of things to come:





I do not feel very certain that very many evangelicals will follow CT but I do hope so.

Yes, because clearly you're so very concerned to maintain the purity of Christian conduct.

[Charles]

Yes, because clearly you're so very concerned to maintain the purity of Christian conduct.

I am concerned about the purity of human conduct and that of course includes Christians.

[MaxVel]

I am concerned about the purity of human conduct and that of course includes Christians.

Of course you are. Strangely, Christians seem to be the ones who most need your concern. Must just be coincidence, or something.

[Charles]

Of course you are. Strangely, Christians seem to be the ones who most need your concern. Must just be coincidence, or something.

Not Christians in general but quite many white Christian evangelicals support what is wrong and when I discuss with them, I share my opinion. And since it is a topic often discussed here it is not much of a coincidence. Even if it was not it would still not make my points any less important. You seem to be focusing on anything but the important topic.

[MaxVel]

Not Christians in general but quite many white Christian evangelicals support what is wrong and when I discuss with them, I share my opinion. And since it is a topic often discussed here it is not much of a coincidence. Even if it was not it would still not make my points any less important. You seem to be focusing on anything but the important topic.

Do you find that makes you uncomfortable? That's a surprise to me.

[JimL]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. That was the excuse presented by the Democrats for not wanting to wait for the courts to resolve the issue between Executive Privilege and Congressional subpoenas and why they had to pass at lightning speed this impeachment. And yet now we see that was yet another lie as they are stalling the process indefinitely.

Don't act like such an air head, rogue. Executive priviledge had nothing to do with it and you know it. Trump publicly stated at the very beginning of this process that he was going to challenge every legal subpoena whether for witnesses or documents, not for national security reasons, but just to obstruct the congress from carrying out their oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the U.S. and to check the abuse of executive power. Try being a defender of your country rather than a shill for your rogue and corrupt party.

[Mountain Man]

Calvin ball. It's really easy to confirm a made upvdiagnosis. Because you can just make up the symptoms as you go along, matching them to whatever person you want to degrade using the term.

ETA. Oh look, I'm a time traveler- I answered MM before he posted the reply I'm answering

Yeah, it's because when I try to edit a post from my phone, a bug causes it to be deleted instead, so I sometimes resubmit a post to fix errors and then delete the previous one. Usually I catch it before anybody responds. Occasionally I don't.

[oxmixmudd]

Yeah, it's because when I try to edit a post from my phone, a bug causes it to be deleted instead, so I sometimes resubmit a post to fix errors and then delete the previous one. Usually I catch it before anybody responds. Occasionally I don't.

Ii understand. I have the same problem with the mobile app, so I've got it set to full site on my phone. Fun to time travel though

[oxmixmudd]

Yeah, that quote from Galli about being an "elite" evangelical is quite eye-opening, especially his sneering at people who don't have college degrees, or are working "blue collar" jobs. He sounds very much like the pharisee who thanks God that he's better than everybody else.

And now he's aligning himself with the party of abortion and "gender fluidity" to convict an innocent man of crimes the evidence says he never committed.

The evidence quite clearly shows he did commit them. That is why the op-ed was written.

[rogue06]

TDS is a derogatory term applied by Trump-supporting evangelicals rather than admit they have hitched their wagon to someone with a severely disordered personality about whom nothing good can be said categorically.

And yet you can see it for yourself virtually each and every day.

What else explains the compulsion to physically assault someone just for wearing a red hat with MAGA written on it?

[Cow Poke]

So, let me get this straight. When CT says:
They are not enemies of the cross.

Correct. Because Christianity Today (the magazine - the company) did not say it - it was an editorial. Nor was it the sum of all they say.

But when Tassman says:

Then he is an enemy of the cross?

Because of the totality of his presence on Tweb, yes.

You claimed the last part here: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post693929

I can see Tassman taking it a bit further than CT but they are certainly making some clear statements as well.

Tassman is an anti-Christian bigot who is not here for the fellowship, but to do battles with Christians. He never encourages Christians or their work, nor provided guidance for living the Christian life.

Anything else, Charles?

[Cow Poke]

I am not sure you got the point.

Yeah, what was it again?

[KingsGambit]

And yet you can see it for yourself virtually each and every day.

What else explains the compulsion to physically assault someone just for wearing a red hat with MAGA written on it?

There seems to be a significant leap between garden variety opposition to Trump (i.e. Sparko just labeled Mark Galli with the term) and the desire to commit physical assaults. Which is it? Is this an umbrella term that can cover all who oppose Trump, or does it refer to those with rage that leads to physical violence or personal harassment?