Posted on 06/23/2015 7:19:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Best summation remains Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin. That’s of course as opposed to the Islamic prescription for persuasion of “Convert or Die!” (followed immediately by “Cute little boy and girl you’ve got there. Think I’ll take them home”).
The article didn’t say capitulate. I said capitulate.
Ain’t that the truth!
I just get my shows from BitTorrent these days. I’m not going to give these people my money or my eyes to view their BS ads.
What I got from that was, some local bank manager made the decision to celebrate them not someone very high up in San Francisco (Wells Fargo HQ)
I vaguely remember an alternate universe long, long ago where 2 signs were prominent:
“No shirt, no shoes, no service.”
“We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.”
==
Should and must are light years apart.
There is no equivalent among the heterosexual crowd unless you are talking about even a smaller subset of serial philanderers. They even have a clinical name for this disease practiced by that tiny heterosexual subset.
But, at the same time, they tell us this behavior is normal among homosexuals and homosexuality is normal. Go figure.
The way I would like to be treated is:
to hear what I USED to hear the Reverend say, namely, that the wages of sin is death, and the path to Salvation is through the Lord Jesus Christ. Come to Jesus, His burden is light and His yoke is easy.
Treading softly will not bring these people into the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Like islam or the American left, they only see kindness as a weakness to be exploited.
I would rather be saved by the Grace of God and be ‘offended’ in this life, than enjoy today only to spend an eternity in hell.
To follow Jesus’ commandment to love one another as I have loved you is to say/do what is best for that homosexual. Loving someone doesn’t always mean being ‘nice’.
I just hope Franklin is doing this of his own free will and not the result of LGBT pressure groups.
I believe they also sponsored the local gay pride parade. Where is that different from a TV ad?
Graham does not seem to know the meaning of love in the sense Jesus was talking about.
An example of love would be to give some one who is starving something to eat, enemy or not.
Being friendly has nothing to do with it.
Good luck finding any business that does not support this satanic act.
Looking for the Tiffany ad, I found a reference to J Crew’s LGBT ad and that they used “Witeck Combs, a P.R. firm that focuses on LGBT clients.” Check out their client list for businesses to avoid: http://www.witeck.com/case-studies/
See page 3 of another LGBT public relations firm’s clients - http://www.aaf-rdu.org/upload/file/LGBT%20Market%20Overview%20March%202011.pdf
Graham is being consistent with the example of Jesus; he cared about and was FRIENDLY with tax collectors, adulterers, and sinners.
He did NOT endorse their sin or excuse it....in fact, the Lord called Matthew out of the corruption of tax collection, He told the woman caught in adultery to “sin no more”, and influenced Zaccheus to pay back all he stole.....
We, too, should be friendly and loving in attitude while staying true to biblical standards. The former without the latter results in immorality and the latter without the former creates legalism.
BB&T isn’t just being friendly in one location. They are members in the Miami-Dade Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce - http://business.gaybizmiami.com/list/Member/bb-t-bank-2050
Proof required to substantiate your charge they are "money-grubbing" or else retract your statement.
Substantiate "fancy houses, cars, planes, lifestyles" or retract your statement.
You may not like the Graham family and that's your right not to do so. But before you apply these labels you need to be able to substantiate it.
I would ask the question though....how high is too high?
For those saying he makes too much that falls right into the liberal playbook.
I also understand that if you're in the ministry every dollar you make will be questioned.
Sometimes I think people want religious leaders to live in utter squalor.
Graham, 57, and his two boards of directors pointed out that most of his 2008 compensation came not from increases in his salaries, which have remained flat in recent years, but from accelerated contributions to his retirement. The boards said they were playing catch-up -- Graham received no retirement during his first few years at the two organizations -- and were hoping to satisfy his goal of working for free when he reaches age 70.
In addition, Graham and the boards said, nearly half of what he received last year from BGEA -- $300,000 -- was deferred retirement money that had been committed and reported over three previous years. Under new IRS rules, which have affected other nonprofit CEOs, the money had to be re-reported as a lump sum in 2008, the year Graham became vested.
Even with that $300,000 -- plus accrued interest -- taken out, Graham's compensation at BGEA rose 21 percent in 2008, from $250,000 to $303,000. The median increase for CEOs of nonprofits in 2008 was 7 percent, according to an annual survey released last week by the Journal of Philanthropy.
If you have to ask, you can't afford it.
The average salary for any American clergy is 50k per year, Catholic priests receive considerably less. For those saying he makes too much that falls right into the liberal playbook.
Send him some more money quickly before the liberals win. I also understand that if you're in the ministry every dollar you make will be questioned. Sometimes I think people want religious leaders to live in utter squalor.
You have no idea how difficult it is to live on a paltry $1.2 million dollars a year. Squalor I tell you, squalor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.