Just in time for Super Tuesday, The Christian Post made its first foray into politics—by opposing Donald Trump. This follows another such move by Christian author and preacher Max Lucado, who broke his usual political silence by attacking The Donald last week.
From The Christian Post‘s editorial board:
As the most popular evangelical news website in the United States and the world, we feel compelled by our moral responsibility to our readers to make clear that Donald Trump does not represent the interests of evangelicals and would be a dangerous leader for our country.
The editors argue that Trump is not a Christian, as he claims. “There are certain non-negotiable actions needed to become a Christian: One must repent of their sins and follow Christ as Lord and Savior. Trump doesn’t talk this way, even when urged to,” the editors note.
They also warn that Trump’s words and actions do not demonstrate the fruit of the spirit: “Trump is a misogynist and philanderer. He demeans women and minorities. His preferred forms of communication are insults, obscenities and untruths.”
The Christian Post editors acknowledge the legitimate concerns of Trump’s supporters, but note that Trump has “taken a political position both pro and con on virtually every subject and major political party.” They mention his stated willingness to ignore the authority of the Supreme Court, Congress, and the Constitution if he were to become president, and his support for widening libel laws to make it easier to sue the press.
Trump, an admirer of Vladimir Putin and other dictatorial leaders, may claim to be your friend and protector now, but as his history indicates, without your full support he will turn on you, and use whatever power is within his means to punish you.
The editors cited many Christian leaders who have attacked Trump, such as Russell Moore and Max Lucado. Lucado broke his political silence last week, in a post entitled “Decency for President.” The author and preacher wrote about the standards he used when determining if a boy were fit to date one of his daughters—above all, it boiled down to decency: “Would he treat my daughter with kindness and respect? Could he be trusted to bring her home on time? In his language, actions, and decisions, would he be a decent guy?”
Trump falls terrifyingly short of that test, Lucado warned.
He ridiculed a war hero. He made a mockery of a reporter’s menstrual cycle. He made fun of a disabled reporter. He referred to the former first lady, Barbara Bush as “mommy,” and belittled Jeb Bush for bringing her on the campaign trail. He routinely calls people “stupid,” and “dummy.” One writer catalogued sixty-four occasions that he called someone “loser.” These were not off-line, backstage, overheard, not-to-be-repeated comments. They were publicly and intentionally tweeted, recorded, and presented.
These attacks may be too little too late, but both The Christian Post and Max Lucado bring up important questions. If you wouldn’t let Trump date your daughter, why let him run your country?