In the April 2015 edition, there were at least two articles that would have been construed as racist if written from the opposite perspective.
In the first, three theologians were asked, “Which false teachings are evangelical Christians most tempted to believe in?”
Before we get started, the “e” in the “evangelical” is not capitalized.
In a story regarding the Roman Catholic or Orthodox Churches, would those beginning letters be “decapitalized” so as to minimize the importance of these sects?
But now, back to the tirade.
Fuller Theological Seminar Professor Amos Young responded that racism is the one.
In his piece, the academic denounces “the long-standing Euro-American cultural privilege.”
He writes, “Too many times, ethnic minorities, especially Blacks and Hispanics are marginalized and blamed for it.”
Does Christianity Today intend to publish an expose on the frothing anti-White and anti-American sentiment emanating from the pulpits of many lefwting and minority churches?
The second anti-White incident in this very same issue of Christianity today occurred in an interview regarding a book by church historian Justo Gonzalez on the Gospel of Luke.
The article celebrates how the text “applies a Latin American lens to familiar parts of Scripture.”
The review obsequiously ponders, “When a Latin American theologian reads Luke, what there gets noticed that others might underplay?”
Does Christianity Today intend to publish an article openly asking with uncontainable anticipation of other noted scholars, “When a Teutonic American reads [insert preferred Biblical text here], what themes get noticed that others might underplay.”
Perhaps a New Testament gem that gets overlooked these days is that, if you don't work, you don't eat.
In his reply to the interview, Gonzalez celebrates how the Scripture is worded to favor the poor over the rich.
Therefore, it needs to be asked in regards to the royalties for the books he has sold over the years should these instead be given to someone that hasn't worked as hard as Justo Gonzalez to master these fields of scholarship?
Or does this Marxist posturing only apply to other people, particular those such as Whites that the editors of Christianity Today have gotten on the bandwagon against?
By Frederick Meekins