panelarrow

Witnessing to Homosexuals

| 65 Comments

In light of the disastrous and disappointing decision from one activist federal judge’s decision to usurp the will of the people of California by declaring Proposition 8 unconstitutional, I’ve decided to re-post two articles below that demonstrate how to properly and politely preach the Gospel to our gay friends through one-on-one conversations and open air preaching.

Quoting one news source, “On Wednesday, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ruled in favor of four homosexuals who claimed that voter-approved Proposition 8, which defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman, violated their civil rights.”

65 Comments

  1. Garrett, I never said gays should not have rights. This is a discussion about same sex marriage. My argument is based on history. The Bible is a historical document and is one of several sources that fails to mention a marriage between members of the same sex Historically the term marriage has been used to define a union between a man and a woman (or as Bathtub points out a man and several women). I just feel we should not change that definition.

  2. Marriage is defined as a basic civil right by the Loving v. Virginia case. So yes, you are saying gays should not have rights.

    You’re making an appeal to tradition. So, we have historical documents saying they had marriage as between a man and a woman. So? That doesn’t give a good reason for reinterpreting marriage as a commitment between multiple, consenting adults (I notice you guys aren’t pushing for legality of polygamy).

    You feel we shouldn’t change the definition? Why? Because that’s what we’ve always been doing? How on earth would anything ever get accomplished if THAT was considered a good reason?

  3. Note guys, that when Steve is cured of his “sexual immorality” he can still marry a woman and retain his sexual identity.

  4. Is that it? Are you guys done?

    If this is the best you can muster, I suspect you take their advice and “get used to it.”

  5. Garrett, I am still checking this discussion. To me it looks like it may have run out of steam.

  6. Mike F, I made a direct reply to you nearly a WEEK ago.

    Either you missed the post directly above you or you’re the one out of steam.

  7. Garrett, I looked back and I think I responded to all your comments directed at me. The last one you asked if I had arguments that were not based on the Bible and I replied that there were no accounts on there being same sex marriages in history. this concept appears to be new.

    Historically there have been societies that embraced homosexual lifestyles, but when it came to marriage it was between a man and a woman (example the Roman Empire).

  8. Mike, the SECOND post on this page has a response to that. Here I will repost it:

    “Marriage is defined as a basic civil right by the Loving v. Virginia case. So yes, you are saying gays should not have rights.

    You’re making an appeal to tradition. So, we have historical documents saying they had marriage as between a man and a woman. So? That doesn’t give a good reason for reinterpreting marriage as a commitment between multiple, consenting adults (I notice you guys aren’t pushing for legality of polygamy).

    You feel we shouldn’t change the definition? Why? Because that’s what we’ve always been doing? How on earth would anything ever get accomplished if THAT was considered a good reason?”

    Already addressed your appeal to tradition. Gimme something new, Mike.

  9. Garrett, Tradition, along with history and Biblical references make me feel we do not need to change the definition that appears to have been in place for over 2000 years.

    when I have met a same sex couple (and I have) I do not dispute their comment they are married, but in my mind I do not see their relationship fitting the definition. I see a loving commitment, but that is all.

    If same sex marriage becomes legal I will recognize the legality of the relationship, but it still will not change the definition in my mind.

    There is a professor from back east (Tony Campolo) that made the comment that the government should get out of the marriage business. That instead of issuing marriage licenses they should issue domestic partnership agreements. Then marriage could be a function of the church and not the state. This sort of makes sense to me and may be a reasonable solution to the problem.

  10. Why do we not need to change it? You seem to intend on being exclusionary for the sake of being exclusionary.

    While I don’t have a real issue with the government ceasing its recognition of marriage in lieu of “domestic partnership” or “civil unions,” it seems like needless semantics. And no matter what, people will call it marriage anyways. Probably because “domestic partnership” doesn’t quite roll off the tongue the way “marriage” does.

  11. you people are freaking idiots. you call yourself christians, yet here you are judging all of these people? since when did [G]od give you the right for that. i came upon this site by accident while looking for inspirational videos, and quickly became disgusted after watching several of them. i myself am a christian, but i have humility and class about it. the bible is not historical document, its a book written as a guideline of how man should carry himself in this twisted backwards world. [G]od is not here to scare us all into line, or to make sure that every man follows “the path” he wants us to make mistakes, and hopefully through those mistakes we find who we are.

    i know that by making these statements i am no better than you evangelist a——-, but it really pisses me off to watch “christian” people act like you are better than your brothers and sisters o this planet. it is not your job to tell the athiest professor that he is wrong. maybe that works for him. he seems to be a genuinely good guy. and hes living a life the way our [G]od would be proud of. it sickens me that some of the best christians arent even christian, and you people are definately not any of them.

  12. I think everyone else missed this in the video. Did anyone else see how dismissive and judgemental Ray was of the transvestite’s decision to simply dress like a woman? As far as I know the bible doesn’t condemn crossdressing, but Ray easily juxtiposes what God wants with what society wants, tossing in that, respect what God AND man wants, where did that come from?

  13. Ray did a great job witnessing to the cross-dresser! Awesome ministry!
    There is a new DVD out called GO- STAND-SPEAK it’s very powerful it’s a teaching on street preaching. There’s some clips on my web-site.
    Bulldogministries.com

  14. MY DEAR FRIENDS, FORGIVE ME FOR SPELLING THE WORD FRIEND. I LOVE YOU ALL. BRO:LUIS

  15. my friends, I am asking you the most. Inportant Question of your entire life. your answer will determine were you will spend your eterniy! The question is: are you save? The question is not if your a member of a church, but are are you saved? It is Not if you are leading a good LIFE, But Are You Saved? It is not if you are working on it Or hoping to be, but are you saved? To be saved, you frist must admit that you are a sinner. “As it is writted, there is none righteous, NO, NOT, ONE, “for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of god;” My Dear Friends; secondly, WE ALL! Need to realize that someone LOVED’ YOU AND ME AND DIED FOR YOU AND me; jesus christ died on the a cross to pay for ours sins and to give you and i an opportunity to go to heaven. “but god commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, chris died for us,” when chris jesus died on the cross, his blood paid the penalty for you and my sins. ” in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:” Acts 16:31, belive on the lord jesus christ, and yuo will be saved”. bro: luis

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.