independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sat 15th Dec 2018 7:54am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Billy Graham Dies @ 99
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 5 of 5 <12345
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #120 posted 03/04/18 1:55am

IanRG

Dasein said:

"Graham's Ministry of Intolerance" -


The Reverend William (Billy) Franklin Graham Jr.(1918- 2018) has died at the age of 99. Too often,
hagiographies are painted when people die, especially of ministers. The televangelist, however, is not
deserving of such high praises.

While Graham’s inarguably the most influential minister of the 20th Century his ministry -which
provided pastoral counseling to U.S. presidents from Harry Truman to Barack Obama -lived at the
crossroads of fear and intolerance as the wrath of God.

Graham promoted his brand of evangelical Christianity- the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association--like
a traveling salesman by conducting tent revivals in rural backwaters and gospelfests in urban cities...

Graham referred to homosexuality as a chosen lifestyle, a “sinister form of perversion,” and “an
ungodly spirit of self-gratification.” Graham used his bully pulpit to denounce LGBTQ activism, and his
cautionary warning to Christians who supported LGBTQ civil rights was that “we traffic in
homosexuality at the peril of our spiritual welfare.”

To his dying day, Graham believed LGBTQs could cured. His website still promotes reparative therapy:
“If you have a loved one who’s homosexual, you may refer to "Someone I Love Is Gay" by Anita
Worthen and Bob Davies, or if you’re a Christian struggling with homosexuality, consider "Coming Out
of Homosexuality" by Bob Davies and Lori Rentzel.”

As an opponent of marriage equality, Graham’s pastoral advice concerning LGBTQ marriages was that
“The Bible provides God’s blueprint for marriage and for His good gift of sex in Genesis 2:24. The gift
is only to be enjoyed within a marriage between a man and a woman. There are no exceptions
suggested, such as homosexual partnerships.” And, in 2012 Graham supported actions to amend his
state constitution to define marriage “between one man and one woman.”

********

Now that's what I call intolerant.


brick

.

You keep imagining I am defending someone else's intolerance, when I have not and all you are is doing exposing your's. Merely being a fundamentalist is no reason to crucify anyone. Your intolerance is no better from the worst you see in other's.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #121 posted 03/04/18 6:15am

Dasein

I don't have the crayons necessary to explain to some gullible Orgers that the idea that I was truly
desiring Christian fundamentalists' actual murder via an ancient execution rite as opposed to simply
being a sarcastic smartass is utterly stupid.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #122 posted 03/04/18 10:56am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

According to Karen Armstrong Christians used to be left wing. The Scopes Monkey Trial drove them to the right.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #123 posted 03/04/18 11:20am

IanRG

Dasein said:

I don't have the crayons necessary to explain to some gullible Orgers that the idea that I was truly
desiring Christian fundamentalists' actual murder via an ancient execution rite as opposed to simply
being a sarcastic smartass is utterly stupid.

.

You have not yet developed the mental capablility to understand that no one said you really wanted to actually murder anyone. You are just hoping for a replay of something in another thread with another person. Dasien, you have truly lost it,

.

What I said is your intolerance is no better from the worst you see in other's. You silly game play here starting with Post #105 is only demonstrating your desperation. You do deserve an Orgy - It is the "Mum, look at me, Mum, look at me, Mum look at me, Mum, look at me" Orgy.

.

Well, no one is looking at you with any thought except it is such a shame.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #124 posted 03/04/18 11:30am

IanRG

2freaky4church1 said:

According to Karen Armstrong Christians used to be left wing. The Scopes Monkey Trial drove them to the right.

.

Not all of us.

.

This does not explain revolution theology, the actions of people in non tele-evangelist supported Christian charities, the actions of Social Justice groups within parishes etc.

.

There was a very strong recognition of Jesus as a left-wing radical during the 1960s and 1970s long after Scopes. Australia's Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd wrote a paper during his first term about how we need to rescue the public perception of Christians as being part of the right.

.

I would blame the US Christian Right since the 1980s. A group of people who are far more far right than Christian. This is shown by how they just fell in lock-step behind Trump as soon as it was obvious that no-one from the Republican party could beat him in the Primaries.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #125 posted 03/04/18 11:37am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

I said most Christians in America. Most radical Christianity is in south america.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #126 posted 03/04/18 12:15pm

IanRG

2freaky4church1 said:

I said most Christians in America. Most radical Christianity is in south america.

.

You may have thought most Christians in the USA: You said "According to Karen Armstrong Christians used to be left wing. The Scopes Monkey Trial drove them to the right."

.

Still I disagree. Yes, the Fundamentals was written in the US and released in 1919 largely driven, supported and adopted by the portion of US Christians who rejected evolution (a scientific understanding broadly accepted by many, many Christians outside of the US back then). This led to the Scopes trial, so Armstrong missed the real start in the US. It is the success of the Fundamentals that led to Scopes and inspired the right wing US Christians.

.

Re revolution theology: Yes, it was strongest in South America, but it was strong in Asia and Africa and existed in Europe and Australia as well. The Jesus hippies existed strongly in the US in the 1960s and 1970s and elsewhere with Godspell and Jesus Christ Superstar etc., etc.

.

The Church in Europe tended to favour the right wing up to the 1848 revolutions in Europe. It was following these that they took a long hard look at themselves and re-found their left wing roots. The Church in the US, having left Europe before this, maintained it right wing leanings in many ways. Today the Church is like everything else outside of politics - it is left and right and everywhere in between.

[Edited 3/4/18 12:23pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #127 posted 03/04/18 12:44pm

Dasein

lol

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #128 posted 03/04/18 12:49pm

Dasein

"Remembering Billy Graham" -


Throughout Graham’s career he was none too shy about his feelings on homosexuality. According
to Pink News, “The preacher, who met with 12 U.S. Presidents spanning 60 years, preached that
homosexuality is ‘detestable’ and ‘a sinister form of perversion’ contributing to the decay of civilization
– and the Billy Graham Evangelical Association continues to advocate gay ‘cure’ therapy on its
website.”

Even as recently as 2012, Graham at the age of 93 was a public supporter of an anti-marriage
equality measure proposed in his state of North Carolina. "The Bible is clear — God's definition of
marriage is between a man and a woman. I want to urge my fellow North Carolinians to vote FOR the
marriage amendment on Tuesday, May 8," he had said.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #129 posted 03/04/18 12:51pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Ian, thank the black church. Even though much of them follow the prosperity bs.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #130 posted 03/04/18 12:55pm

Dasein

A Question "answered" from the Billy Graham Evangelical Association:

Are Homosexuals Born That Way?

Many homosexuals hold to the belief that they were born that way, and there are some researchers
who suggest, on the basis of several recent studies, that there may be a genetic predisposition toward
homosexuality in some people.

However, even those who argue this believe that certain environmental factors would also have to be
present for the tendency to develop. In any case, other scientists have challenged these studies, and
there is presently no generally accepted scientific evidence that the homosexual inclination is inborn.

Also, in a broken world, the discovery of a genetic link would not prove that such a condition was
God’s intent.

It must be emphasized that even if a biological predisposition to homosexuality in some people exists,
it would not change God’s opposition to the behavior. Neither would it change the fact that through
the transforming power of Jesus Christ freedom from sinful behavior is always available.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #131 posted 03/04/18 1:01pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

It is not a behavior it is what you are. Gender itself is fluid. A trans brain looks different.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #132 posted 03/04/18 1:09pm

Dasein

2freaky4church1 said:

It is not a behavior it is what you are.


Homosexuality is quite normal, and in a theological context, it makes total sense for God to love
LGBTQIA+ members just as much as God loves everybody else. Going against this presentation
of divine love being extended to everybody and framing love that is not heterosexual as being
sinful is enough for me to crucify you!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #133 posted 03/04/18 1:13pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

As long as you get that we are all sinners? Sin just means that you have childish qualities that make us fallable. Why we Christians use the term fall of mankind. Homosexuality is not a sin but making sex an idol is. Idolizing money is sin.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #134 posted 03/04/18 3:59pm

Dasein

2freaky4church1 said:

As long as you get that we are all sinners?


My lord and savior, Satan, told me I don't have any sins.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #135 posted 03/04/18 4:09pm

IanRG

Dasein said:

2freaky4church1 said:

It is not a behavior it is what you are.


Homosexuality is quite normal, and in a theological context, it makes total sense for God to love
LGBTQIA+ members just as much as God loves everybody else. Going against this presentation
of divine love being extended to everybody and framing love that is not heterosexual as being
sinful is enough for me to crucify you!

.

Please show in any of your cut and pastes where this says God loves any person less than anyone else.

.

Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with you that he was wrong on homosexuality and marriage equality (as are virtually every senior people in virtually every religion across the world today and almost all politicans world wide up until very, very recently), I do not think that he taught that divine love from God is not extended to everyone. Love as taught in the Christian Church is not framed as only between hetrosexual couples at all. The love between mother and child, sisters and brothers, of self and of neighbour as one loves themselves has nothing to with hetro or homo sexuality.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #136 posted 03/04/18 4:12pm

IanRG

2freaky4church1 said:

Ian, thank the black church. Even though much of them follow the prosperity bs.

.

I do.

.

Re Prosperity BS - It is timely as this Sunday's reading was about the thieves in the temple and Jesus ousting them.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #137 posted 03/04/18 5:13pm

Dasein

Does the Bible Approve of some homosexual relationship?

The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association says:

The Bible provides God’s blueprint for marriage and for His good gift of sex in Genesis 2:24. The gift is
only to be enjoyed within a marriage between a man and a woman.

There are no exceptions suggested, such as homosexual partnerships. From Genesis on, the Bible
praises the marriage of a man and a woman, but it speaks only negatively of homosexual behavior
whenever it is mentioned.

The Old Testament states, “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable”
(Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13). The New Testament agrees, listing “homosexual offenders” among a list
of people who “will not inherit the kingdom of God” unless they are cleansed through Christ (1
Corinthians 6:9-11).

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #138 posted 03/04/18 7:19pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

IanRG said:

Intolerance is the primary cause of racism, sexism, misogyny, violence against those considered the other, attacks based on gender and gender attraction etc. This applies whether it is those expressing this intolerance through a politically or socially normative position or those who would crucify a person merely on the basis of a belief, race, gender, social or cultural group.



yeahthat clapping

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #139 posted 03/05/18 4:21am

Dasein

I love the indirect posts the best. That being said, I can read you like a book, homeboy.

rolleyes

The fact of the matter is that Billy Graham himself was intolerable of homosexuals and not deserving
of the honor he was given in death for that reason including supporting an unjust war where he made
attempts to use his political cache to personally influence US presidents with that sentiment. Some
people in this thread, who are Christian, are so caught up with being socially acceptable by making a
fuss about those of us who abhorred Billy Graham and voiced our displeasure with his "crusades"
even in his death that they forget that their Leader was interested in disrupting silly yet harmful social
norms:

Oh my god! Jeezus was hanging out with prostitutes and tax collectors, the lowest of the low? That's
socially unacceptable and I'm gonna let him know about it! What? Dasein and Pop were criticizing
Billy Graham for being a bigoted homophobic warhawk BEFORE Graham's family had enough time to
mourn him? That's socially unacceptable and I'm gonna let them know about it!

For you kids who think I'm comparing myself to Christ, well, I am Christ. But, my point is that people
often pick and choose what they find to be socially (un)acceptable depending upon context. It just so
happens to be the case that Billy Graham is a Christian and as an irritant against unthinking phoney
baloney Christianity (and those who just say goofy shit too), I am grossly disliked here at the Org by
two or three Christians (and those who just say goofy shit) and so you have this thread where I'm
made out to be practicing slander in pointing out the obvious about Silly Graham. In 2018, we
should not be praising dividers who die who campaigned with false theologies that hurt thousands
of people who also supported a disastrous unjust war and made some effort to influence policy about
that unjust war, however slight. Everybody deserves a seat at the Table of Life; come as you are -
doesn't that seem to be a theme of the New Testament? But, if you come to that Table talking that
ish about my way of life is a "sin" or supporting unjust wars at the Table, when you die, your obituary
will not pander to stupid social norms of not speaking ill of the dead; isn't that how we respect the
living and tell the truth in death?

Finally, of course all people are flawed. But, depending upon how many people are and have been ad-
versely impacted by those flaws determines whether or not I open my big fat mouth about why I am
not going to abide by social norms to speak no ill of the dead, which is fucking ridiculous. What - we
should wait until Hitler is actually buried and give his family a chance to mourn before we point out
the obvious? When Donald Trump eventually dies, are you gonna wait for for his family to mourn him
post-burial ceremony honoring US presidents before you utter any critical word about his overall in-
tolerance?

I've said my piece in this thread.







[Edited 3/5/18 4:56am]

[Edited 3/5/18 4:58am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #140 posted 03/05/18 8:10am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Ian, no, it is ignorance. You may have bigotry and not know it.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #141 posted 03/05/18 9:50am

namepeace

Dasein said:

Everybody deserves a seat at the Table of Life; come as you are -
doesn't that seem to be a theme of the New Testament? But, if you come to that Table talking that ish about my way of life is a "sin" or supporting unjust wars at the Table, when you die, your obituary will not pander to stupid social norms of not speaking ill of the dead; isn't that how we respect the living and tell the truth in death?

[Edited 3/5/18 4:58am]


The Table is a family Table. And we've argued from the very beginning. Jesus wasn't gone but a few years before the leading Apostles had food fights at the table. Literally. We start from the premise that we're all flawed, and we're going to fight, even at the Table.

What Obi-Wan Kenobi said 35 years ago has been true for the Church for millenia -- many of the truths we cling to, depend greatly on our own point of view. Rev. Graham was no different, showing intolerance or worse for gays, Catholics, Jews, and some minorities through the course of his life. He married his theology to politics, which seemed to be jet fuel for his ministry. He was snared by the traps and trappings of Christendom that have captured scores of powerful people.

But his intolerance towards gays was and is a reflection of the Church as a whole, across denominations, and though society seems to be moving at a quickening pace to resolve it, the Church will take longer.

twocents

Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016

Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #142 posted 03/05/18 10:10am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

That should be the main point of Religion. Invite more people to the table.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #143 posted 03/05/18 10:47am

namepeace

2freaky4church1 said:

That should be the main point of Religion. Invite more people to the table.


No argument there.

Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016

Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #144 posted 03/05/18 11:55am

IanRG

2freaky4church1 said:

Ian, no, it is ignorance. You may have bigotry and not know it.

.

You can be ignorant of your intolerance and bigotry and it looks no different to the outside. You can ignorant but not intolerant and it looks entirely different.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #145 posted 03/05/18 1:12pm

IanRG

Dasein said:

I love the indirect posts the best. That being said, I can read you like a book, homeboy.

rolleyes

The fact of the matter is that Billy Graham himself was intolerable of homosexuals and not deserving
of the honor he was given in death for that reason including supporting an unjust war where he made
attempts to use his political cache to personally influence US presidents with that sentiment. Some
people in this thread, who are Christian, are so caught up with being socially acceptable by making a
fuss about those of us who abhorred Billy Graham and voiced our displeasure with his "crusades"
even in his death that they forget that their Leader was interested in disrupting silly yet harmful social
norms:

Oh my god! Jeezus was hanging out with prostitutes and tax collectors, the lowest of the low? That's
socially unacceptable and I'm gonna let him know about it! What? Dasein and Pop were criticizing
Billy Graham for being a bigoted homophobic warhawk BEFORE Graham's family had enough time to
mourn him? That's socially unacceptable and I'm gonna let them know about it!

For you kids who think I'm comparing myself to Christ, well, I am Christ. But, my point is that people
often pick and choose what they find to be socially (un)acceptable depending upon context. It just so
happens to be the case that Billy Graham is a Christian and as an irritant against unthinking phoney
baloney Christianity (and those who just say goofy shit too), I am grossly disliked here at the Org by
two or three Christians (and those who just say goofy shit) and so you have this thread where I'm
made out to be practicing slander in pointing out the obvious about Silly Graham. In 2018, we
should not be praising dividers who die who campaigned with false theologies that hurt thousands
of people who also supported a disastrous unjust war and made some effort to influence policy about
that unjust war, however slight. Everybody deserves a seat at the Table of Life; come as you are -
doesn't that seem to be a theme of the New Testament? But, if you come to that Table talking that
ish about my way of life is a "sin" or supporting unjust wars at the Table, when you die, your obituary
will not pander to stupid social norms of not speaking ill of the dead; isn't that how we respect the
living and tell the truth in death?

Finally, of course all people are flawed. But, depending upon how many people are and have been ad-
versely impacted by those flaws determines whether or not I open my big fat mouth about why I am
not going to abide by social norms to speak no ill of the dead, which is fucking ridiculous. What - we
should wait until Hitler is actually buried and give his family a chance to mourn before we point out
the obvious? When Donald Trump eventually dies, are you gonna wait for for his family to mourn him
post-burial ceremony honoring US presidents before you utter any critical word about his overall in-
tolerance?

I've said my piece in this thrad.

.

You are not grossy disliked at all, nor are you an irritant. You are just so often wrong, but wrong with a plain as the nose on your face agenda to push your own beliefs as if they are so good, they are God-given. In this you are just like Billy Graham. Indeed, you are our Billy Graham. I remember when you told me before you talked your way out of your faith that you were working on launching your own Christ based religion.

.

And why do you keep raising the same points over and over and over? Everyone has agreed with you that Graham was wrong on these same two issues.

.

We have all agreed that the views of Graham on gender attraction are wrong - wrong despite being held by virtually every current senior religious leader in virtually all religions across the world today and virtually every politician world wide up until very recently. Most politicians had to be convinced to change laws that meant homosexuality was a criminal offence in most places for most of Graham's lifetime - and they were no convinced by a moral argument, just by the polls. This is the reason Christ hangs around us prostitutes and tax collectors - We are ones who force change in our "leaders", our Pharisees and Roman Governors.

.

We have all agreed that the views of Graham on the Vietnamese war were wrong. Just as wrong as Kennedy's, as LBJ's, as all the Executive, Parliamentary and military people who were the actual people responsible for deaths and injuries of the Vietnamese, Cambodian and Laotian people as well as the military personnel from places like USA and Australia who never should have been there. Given 60% of people in the US and the wide cross party support for the war initially, Graham was no orphan. In one way he had no power to do anything, so the buck stops with Kennedy, LBJ and Nixon, not Graham, but, again, no one has whitewashed (outside of your mind) Graham's error because no Christian leader should ever have preached involvement in a war like this.

.

Your whole stand is about social norms to not speak ill of the dead and truth as if these means people were saying never speak ill of dead - they were not - and truth is limited to just the negative - it is not. In this you are the Pharisees - The one who is only interested in trashing those you seek to tag as the "prostitutes and tax collectors" that you must distance yourself from. What Jesus taught is that Jesus did what he did for us all - The tax collectors, the prostitutes who know their faults as well as those preaching that these people are not worth any respect - when you limit your "truth" to just why you hate a person as if this is the whole person, then you are not being Christ-like at all. You are doing exactly what Christ was opposed to. A wise man once said "The one badge of Christian discipleship is not orthodoxy but love... The only question is: are you committed to Christ?" It is not about justifying your own hate of other people.

.

Billy Graham for all his faults positively inspired a lot of people and most of these people already know that things like discrimination against those with different gender attractions has been deplorable and is being slowly reversed. Sure there are some holding on the old ways. These people will not change their minds because of some internet SJW who only ever uses popular memes against those he is religiously opposed to whilst giving a free pass to anyone with similar faults so long as they are not Christian.

[Edited 3/5/18 21:55pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #146 posted 03/05/18 1:24pm

IanRG

namepeace said:

Dasein said:

Everybody deserves a seat at the Table of Life; come as you are -
doesn't that seem to be a theme of the New Testament? But, if you come to that Table talking that ish about my way of life is a "sin" or supporting unjust wars at the Table, when you die, your obituary will not pander to stupid social norms of not speaking ill of the dead; isn't that how we respect the living and tell the truth in death?

[Edited 3/5/18 4:58am]


The Table is a family Table. And we've argued from the very beginning. Jesus wasn't gone but a few years before the leading Apostles had food fights at the table. Literally. We start from the premise that we're all flawed, and we're going to fight, even at the Table.

.

And at the table is best place to have that fight. It is when we cannot even eat and talk together that things fall apart and are never resolved. "Eating together" relies not just on recognising our flaws and our differences but it is a social norm that brings us together as equals.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #147 posted 03/06/18 12:58pm

namepeace

IanRG said:

namepeace said:


The Table is a family Table. And we've argued from the very beginning. Jesus wasn't gone but a few years before the leading Apostles had food fights at the table. Literally. We start from the premise that we're all flawed, and we're going to fight, even at the Table.

.

And at the table is best place to have that fight. It is when we cannot even eat and talk together that things fall apart and are never resolved. "Eating together" relies not just on recognising our flaws and our differences but it is a social norm that brings us together as equals.


But sometimes we invalidate each other at the Table. The main fight used to be over Justification -- we used to tell one another we were both wrong and damned. Now, we do the same thing over, inter alia, sexual and procreation mores -- our stances on gays and/or abortion cause us to disqualify each other and tune each other out. We can't even recognize and appreciate our differences, and seek to exclude those who don't agree from the Table. As you say, He never wanted it that way.

Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016

Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #148 posted 03/06/18 2:38pm

IanRG

namepeace said:



IanRG said:




namepeace said:




The Table is a family Table. And we've argued from the very beginning. Jesus wasn't gone but a few years before the leading Apostles had food fights at the table. Literally. We start from the premise that we're all flawed, and we're going to fight, even at the Table.



.


And at the table is best place to have that fight. It is when we cannot even eat and talk together that things fall apart and are never resolved. "Eating together" relies not just on recognising our flaws and our differences but it is a social norm that brings us together as equals.




But sometimes we invalidate each other at the Table. The main fight used to be over Justification -- we used to tell one another we were both wrong and damned. Now, we do the same thing over, inter alia, sexual and procreation mores -- our stances on gays and/or abortion cause us to disqualify each other and tune each other out. We can't even recognize and appreciate our differences, and seek to exclude those who don't agree from the Table. As you say, He never wanted it that way.


.
Yes, there must a willingness to listen, learn and understand the other person even if you don't agree. If you only come to crucify or to condemn damming all social norms to win at all costs, you might as well never come to the table. If you have not come to share and eat together as equals, you have already lost in your intent because both lose.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 5 of 5 <12345
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Billy Graham Dies @ 99