This paper may shock many Christians, not because it makes sensational claims or uncovers some scandalous secrets, but simply because it pulls together a range of material already in the public sphere – material that is supposed to be strictly Biblical – and shows how it fits together to serve, not the goals of true Christianity, but those of the Roman Catholic Church.
We do not intend to deal comprehensively with the flawed theology of ChristianityToday (CT).
It would simply take too long. Instead we will confine our examination tosome of the core themes and ideas that the magazine is using to redefine trueChristianity and bring the various ‘Protestant’ denominations closer to Rome. In doing so we are not relying on speculative arguments or the opinions of other writers, butsimply highlighting selected material across dozens of issues of the magazine, usually the front cover or its accompanying article, and asking, Is this something that a trulyChristian magazine would publish?Take the cover of CT shown above, where Christ is bizarrely depicted as a trans sexualor a transvestite. It is difficult to see how such an ambivalent image could have beenselected for publicationanywherein any Christian magazine. [We regret having toreproduce this and similar images in order to substantiate our claims.]Hopefully, over the course of this paper, we will have provided readers with sufficientobjective evidence to assess the integrity of CT and draw their own conclusions.The use of disrespectful and blasphemousimages of ChristThe second commandment forbids believers to depict God in any form. Of course,natural man has violated this commandment in countless ways, but the western ‘church’which violates it the most, by far, is the Roman Catholic Church. Not only doesCT adopt the Roman Catholic practice, but, as we have seen, it sometimes does so in aremarkably disrespectful way. Take the following example:
CT Cover: never know
Not only is Christ being depicted yet again (contrary to Scripture), but he is set in a pose that is well known to students of the occult, called “the eye of Horus.” In such a pose honour is given to Lucifer by covering or obscuring the right eye and sometimes part of the face. Many rock stars like to be shown in this pose on album covers and promotional videos since it tacitly advertises their solidarity with the so-called Angel of Light. This occult practice can possibly be traced to the prophetic description of theAntichrist in Zechariah 11:17 which states that “…his right eye shall be utterlydarkened.”On the following page we see pop singer Nelly Furtado adopting the same pose(unwittingly?) on no fewer than sixdifferent album covers. In each instance her righteye is obscured. Many other pop stars have done the same, including Madonna, LadyGaga, Britney Spears, Rihanna, and Christina Aguilera.Were the readers of CT alarmed and offended by the blasphemous portrayal of Christon the covers of October 1999 or April 2010? It would seem not because, just a fewmonths after the publication of the latter, another offensive image of our Redeemer was put on the front cover:
hipster
The editors of Christianity Todayclearly have no problem mocking and demeaning our Lord, in this instance by portraying him as a cool dude witnessing from door to door. Itshould be noted that the template for this image is the traditional Roman Catholic iconknown asThe Good Shepherd :
The Eye of Horus, an occult pose possibly based on the prophetic description of theAntichrist in Zechariah 11:17, which states that “…his right eye shall be utterlydarkened.”*******************www.zephaniah.eu4
Several other issues of Christianity Todayhave had covers that demean Christ in somemanner. Take, for example, the four shown on the next page. The first cover (A)cleverly suggests that Christ has legitimate rivals in the pantheon of gods but that he isstill the best choice.Readers familiar with the iconography of modern advertising and the use of occultimages and symbols in company trademarks will know that the Starbucks logo (whichB mimics) has a goddess as its centerpiece. So not only is Christ demeaned by placinghis image on a coffee cup, but he is blasphemed by giving him the iconic status of agoddess.In the third image (C), we findCT giving credence to the subversive Muslim allegationthat Christ was really a refugee of Palestinian origin who, as a child, was forced to fleeto Egypt (an Arab state) by the perfidious Jews. Incredibly, this issue was publishedonly weeks after 9/11.The fourth (D) is styled after another traditional Roman Catholic image, that of Christnailed to the cross. True believers regard crucifix-type images as highly disrespectful,even blasphemous, since they suggest – as Roman Catholic theology teaches – that Christ was not truly victorious on the cross but must be sacrificed again and again in theCatholic ‘sacrifice of the Mass.’
Cultural Relativism
The true Jesus of the Bible can also be distorted by portraying him in an alien context,for example by mixing disparate cultural and religious elements in the same image inorder to disorient or misdirect the reader. This technique is often used to imply that, if Jesus were around today, he would preach a different message. The technical term for this iscultural relativism, the view that a religious teaching is constrained by historicalcircumstances and must be ‘updated’ to meet the changing needs of society.
Take the following example: Muslims and the Son of God (Picture)
By juxtaposing a Koranic verse with a scene where Jesus is being baptized in a river which is plainly not the Jordan – note the buildings in the background – this unsettlingcover plays games with the reader’s mind. Is the man on the bank John the Baptist or aMuslim? (His clothing and hair style are suspiciously Islamic, while John was a Nazirite with very long hair.) Does this mean that the Holy Spirit is working in theKoran, just as He is in the Bible? And why is Jesus being baptized in another river?This image reeks of cultural relativism. Besides being disrespectful, it subtly impliesthat the Issa of the Koran is indeed the Jesus of the Bible and that terms like “Son of God” should not be interpreted too rigidly.By placing an Islamic-type figure in this key prophetic role, where the Saviour isreceiving the Holy Spirit in a special way, the image also suggests that Christianity andIslam have much more in common than we realize and that a truly broadmindedChristian would see beyond the incidental differences to the common truth that unitesthem.
Another issue of CT gave unnecessary prominence to a cynical, doubt-laden question, Is the God of Muhammad the Father of Jesus?It then went on to deal with the questionin a very
ambivalent manner.
p. 8