This guy is a hypocrite and a religious scaremonger. Did you pick up (who hasn’t?) on the BIG WARNING that God is watching us? That’s what he’d wanted to say from the beginning, and so he used the Middleton bandwagon. I bet EVERY Protestant blog and website out there is riding the same wave. And his context is so far wrong that it is cringeworthy, even for a deceiver and self-appointed moralist of the Christian universe. He does talk a lot. If I were him, I’d shut it.
He “feels” for the Royals? Rubbish. (And who asked his opinion on it, anyway?) So there are cameras everywhere, and that means what? Should we now pretend and be hypocrites because there might be cameras around…somewhere? Is God a camera? Is He going to show our lives to us (the juicy, naughty, private bits that happened to us legally) to us in 3D? Would talk-a-lot Franklin like to ban all cameras? Would that make him feel more relaxed? More in control?
Does this scaremonger understand the New Birth? Or does he subscribe only to daddy’s very weird “rules”?Good God; imagine hypocrites like these running a country or even a little town.
Does this scaremonger–this fake moralist — know that pride comes right before a ….?
I don’t get why or how Franklin Graham is reflecting on Kate Middleton’s privacy while on vacation with her husband as somehow relating to God’s omnipresence. He’s not even comparing apples and apples, and it is a horrible analogy–if that’s even the right word. It happened almost 5 years ago. I hope the dear lady soon prevails handsomely in this lawsuit.
Thank you Jo. I doubt God is much focused on women hanging out with their husbands in a private setting topless. And Graham makes 750,000 a year for what exactly?
These puritanical hacks are scandalized by topless women. It’s because they are equal parts mysoginist and Oedipus complex. I am telling you…sexuality is a very strange thing in neo-Calvinist circles (apropos–it’s no wonder child sex abuse scandals are so popular amongst the “church”). They claim they love women, and yet demand submission from them, calling this love. Further, is it obvious to anyone else that women–especially young and attractive women–absolutely terrify mystics like Graham?
Argo, oh, there’s a definite link between the likes of Graham and his special brand of Christianity and Calvinists (both neo and normal rubbish) and sex. It’s a boys’ club, Argo. They target attractive women; I have witnessed it so many times. Because they are powerful and have “answers” that no one else has.
And now they feel violated because of a topless photo of a woman who was that way in private. They give me the creeps and the women I have talked to agree.
Argo, in the early days of the movement all they talked about was sex from “smoking hot wives” to Driscolls call for sodomy at an Acts 29 boot camp to mentioning sex in every sermon. They were eaten up with it. Piper is downright creepy superimposing references to sexual thinking on proof texts and tweeting them out.
There is something there to misogyny and creepy sort of Freudian view melded into their doctrine.
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
This guy is a hypocrite and a religious scaremonger. Did you pick up (who hasn’t?) on the BIG WARNING that God is watching us? That’s what he’d wanted to say from the beginning, and so he used the Middleton bandwagon. I bet EVERY Protestant blog and website out there is riding the same wave. And his context is so far wrong that it is cringeworthy, even for a deceiver and self-appointed moralist of the Christian universe. He does talk a lot. If I were him, I’d shut it.
He “feels” for the Royals? Rubbish. (And who asked his opinion on it, anyway?) So there are cameras everywhere, and that means what? Should we now pretend and be hypocrites because there might be cameras around…somewhere? Is God a camera? Is He going to show our lives to us (the juicy, naughty, private bits that happened to us legally) to us in 3D? Would talk-a-lot Franklin like to ban all cameras? Would that make him feel more relaxed? More in control?
Does this scaremonger understand the New Birth? Or does he subscribe only to daddy’s very weird “rules”?Good God; imagine hypocrites like these running a country or even a little town.
Does this scaremonger–this fake moralist — know that pride comes right before a ….?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t get why or how Franklin Graham is reflecting on Kate Middleton’s privacy while on vacation with her husband as somehow relating to God’s omnipresence. He’s not even comparing apples and apples, and it is a horrible analogy–if that’s even the right word. It happened almost 5 years ago. I hope the dear lady soon prevails handsomely in this lawsuit.
LikeLike
Thank you Jo. I doubt God is much focused on women hanging out with their husbands in a private setting topless. And Graham makes 750,000 a year for what exactly?
LikeLike
These puritanical hacks are scandalized by topless women. It’s because they are equal parts mysoginist and Oedipus complex. I am telling you…sexuality is a very strange thing in neo-Calvinist circles (apropos–it’s no wonder child sex abuse scandals are so popular amongst the “church”). They claim they love women, and yet demand submission from them, calling this love. Further, is it obvious to anyone else that women–especially young and attractive women–absolutely terrify mystics like Graham?
LikeLike
Argo, oh, there’s a definite link between the likes of Graham and his special brand of Christianity and Calvinists (both neo and normal rubbish) and sex. It’s a boys’ club, Argo. They target attractive women; I have witnessed it so many times. Because they are powerful and have “answers” that no one else has.
And now they feel violated because of a topless photo of a woman who was that way in private. They give me the creeps and the women I have talked to agree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Argo, in the early days of the movement all they talked about was sex from “smoking hot wives” to Driscolls call for sodomy at an Acts 29 boot camp to mentioning sex in every sermon. They were eaten up with it. Piper is downright creepy superimposing references to sexual thinking on proof texts and tweeting them out.
There is something there to misogyny and creepy sort of Freudian view melded into their doctrine.
LikeLike
If the devil is your sleeping partner, what else can you expect from these perverts, Lydia?
LikeLike