A Little Something to Chew On

Sorry, I've been insane the past few, and have not had the diligence to post, but here's a little something to chew on from A W Tozer, as you read it, remember that it was written in 1966...and yet, it's as fresh and relevant as could be.

The Old Cross and the New - A W Tozer

ALL UNANNOUNCED AND MOSTLY UNDETECTED there has come in modern times a new cross into popular evangelical circles. It is like the old cross, but different: the likenesses are superficial; the differences, fundamental.

From this new cross has sprung a new philosophy of the Christian life, and from that new philosophy has come a new evangelical technique-a new type of meeting and a new kind of preaching. This new evangelism employs the same language as the old, but its content is not the same and its emphasis not as before.

The old cross would have no truck with the world. For Adam's proud flesh it meant the end of the journey. It carried into effect the sentence imposed by the law of Sinai. The new cross is not opposed to the human race; rather, it is a friendly pal and, if understood aright, it is the source of oceans of good clean fun and innocent enjoyment. It lets Adam live without interference. His life motivation is unchanged; he still lives for his own pleasure, only now he takes delight in singing choruses and watching religious movies instead of singing bawdy songs and drinking hard liquor. The accent is still on enjoyment, though the fun is now on a higher plane morally if not intellectually.

The new cross encourages a new and entirely different evangelistic approach. The evangelist does not demand abnegation of the old life before a new life can be received. He preaches not contrasts but similarities. He seeks to key into public interest by showing that Christianity makes no unpleasant demands; rather, it offers the same thing the world does, only on a higher level. Whatever the sin-mad world happens to be clamoring after at the moment is cleverly shown to be the very thing the gospel offers, only the religious product is better.

The new cross does not slay the sinner, it redirects him. It gears him into a cleaner and jollier way of living and saves his self-respect. To the self-assertive it says, "Come and assert yourself for Christ." To the egotist it says, "Come and do your boasting in the Lord." To the thrill seeker it says, "Come and enjoy the thrill of Christian fellowship." The Christian message is slanted in the direction of the current vogue in order to make it acceptable to the public.

The philosophy back of this kind of thing may be sincere but its sincerity does not save it from being false. It is false because it is blind. It misses completely the whole meaning of the cross.
The old cross is a symbol of death. It stands for the abrupt, violent end of a human being. The man in Roman times who took up his cross and started down the road had already said good-by to his friends. He was not coming back. He was going out to have it ended. The cross made no compromise, modified nothing, spared nothing; it slew all of the man, completely and for good. It did not try to keep on good terms with its victim. It struck cruel and hard, and when it had finished its work, the man was no more.

The race of Adam is under death sentence. There is no commutation and no escape. God cannot approve any of the fruits of sin, however innocent they may appear or beautiful to the eyes of men. God salvages the individual by liquidating him and then raising him again to newness of life.

That evangelism which draws friendly parallels between the ways of God and the ways of men is false to the Bible and cruel to the souls of its hearers. The faith of Christ does not parallel the world, it intersects it. In coming to Christ we do not bring our old life up onto a higher plane; we leave it at the cross. The corn of wheat must fall into the ground and die.

We who preach the gospel must not think of ourselves as public relations agents sent to establish good will between Christ and the world. We must not imagine ourselves commissioned to make Christ acceptable to big business, the press, the world of sports or modern education. We are not diplomats but prophets, and our message is not a compromise but an ultimatum.

God offers life, but not an improved old life. The life He offers is life out of death. It stands always on the far side of the cross. Whoever would possess it must pass under the rod. He must repudiate himself and concur in God's just sentence against him.

What does this mean to the individual, the condemned man who would find life in Christ Jesus? How can this theology be translated into life? Simply, he must repent and believe. He must forsake his sins and then go on to forsake himself. Let him cover nothing, defend nothing, excuse nothing. Let him not seek to make terms with God, but let him bow his head before the stroke of God's stern displeasure and acknowledge himself worthy to die.

Having done this let him gaze with simple trust upon the risen Saviour, and from Him will come life and rebirth and cleansing and power. The cross that ended the earthly life of Jesus now puts an end to the sinner; and the power that raised Christ from the dead now raises him to a new life along with Christ.

To any who may object to this or count it merely a narrow and private view of truth, let me say God has set His hallmark of approval upon this message from Paul's day to the present. Whether stated in these exact words or not, this has been the content of all preaching that has brought life and power to the world through the centuries. The mystics, the reformers, the revivalists have put their emphasis here, and signs and wonders and mighty operations of the Holy Ghost gave witness to God's approval.

Dare we, the heirs of such a legacy of power, tamper with the truth? Dare we with our stubby pencils erase the lines of the blueprint or alter the pattern shown us in the Mount? May God forbid. Let us preach the old cross and we will know the old power. (A. W. Tozer, Man, the Dwelling Place of God, 1966)

"From the Hip"

1 Peter 3:15 - But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

One of the most intimidating aspects (for me) when witnessing is not knowing what question I will be asked. I know that may sound silly, but when you get caught off-guard with a question you can stumble around and lose the opportunity that’s in front of you.

How well can you answer spiritual questions “from the hip”? I mean when someone asks you a spiritual question, can you give a biblical answer…even if your Bible isn’t handy, and you can’t do a word search? Can you answer?

There are people who have questions, and are looking to see if we have answers. I recently talked to an old friend Carl and when he saw that I was reading my Bible he started asking questions that I know have been bothering him for some time. For example: He asked “How can you believe that God literally created the world in a week?”

How would you answer?

Would you just say “Because the Bible says so!”? I mean, that’s good enough for me, but for someone who has no faith in the Bible? His question led into a very good opportunity to explain some of the evidence, and myths that he had been taught. He asked about the dinosaurs, and I got to show him Behemoth in the book of Job, He was astonished!

I say all this to ask my readers (all 5 of them) what questions you have been asked that may have caught you off-guard, or what questions would you predict someone asking in a spiritual conversation. I would like to hear (or read) them so I can examine my preparedness to answer. My idea is to take some questions and try and give my “off the top of my head” answer as if I was answering someone out on the street, and post them so you can in turn criticize me, I mean to make me better not to damage my fragile little emotions : )

So anyways….it’s a cheap way to get comments and material for future blog posts all in one…not bad huh?

Another Step Toward Ecumenicalism

Anyone see this coming?

Dutch bishop: Call God 'Allah' to ease relations

Roman Catholic leader stokes already heated debate on religion

AMSTERDAM - A Roman Catholic Bishop in the Netherlands has proposed people of all faiths refer to God as Allah to foster understanding, stoking an already heated debate on religious tolerance in a country with one million Muslims.

Bishop Tiny Muskens, from the southern diocese of Breda, told Dutch television on Monday that God did not mind what he was named and that in Indonesia, where Muskens spent eight years, priests used the word "Allah" while celebrating Mass.

"Allah is a very beautiful word for God. Shouldn't we all say that from now on we will name God Allah? ... What does God care what we call him? It is our problem."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20279326/?GT1=10252

My Public Apology

Greetings,

First – I would like to publicly apologize for the biggest mistake I made in sending out “My Plea to the Street Preachers”, and that was using an “open cc”. Never in a million years did I think that it would have had everyone questioning why they were on the list, or why so-and-so was on the list. I was wrong, and if I sent it out again I would have used a “blind cc”.

To answer why you were on the list you only need to look at the following link http://www.preachtruth.org/fellowlabors.html after meeting Larry Keffer I visited his website, and found this link from there. The others that were on this list are people I know, sites that I had visited in the past, or people who I have looked up to in regards to street ministry. It really was not personal, I just looked for the active street preachers, and your names came up.

Second – I would like to publicly apologize to anyone who either was offended or felt targeted on this list. I got many positive replies sent to me, but as many of you have read, I received a certain amount of replies that were less than favorable. Many viewed this as a public rebuke, and I want to clarify that, that was never my intention. I viewed it sort of like a sermon, you preach and hope to encourage as well as challenge. I did not follow the outline in Matthew 18 as many of you pointed out, and here was my reason why…

Matthew 18: 15-17
15: Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. 16: But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17: And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

I did not feel that anyone had trespassed against me. I was not personally offended by anyone. I did not feel as that this was dealing with sin in the body, but rather methods in a movement. Not one of us would agree with Bill Hybel’s methods of ministry, and some of us have even preached against such drivel, but we do not go to him personally because he is not trespassing against us personally. We criticize the methods of the emergent church, as we should, but have any of us sat down with Rob Bell or Brian McLaren?

Third – I’d like to publicly apologize for any sarcasm I used in my replies to any of you. I got in the flesh with a few responses, and I was wrong. I wrote most of my replies with a smile, but tone is rarely conveyed correctly through e-mail.

Fourth – I’d like to publicly apologize for the barrage of e-mails many of you have received because of being on my “open” cc list, again this was a mistake on my part, and I am sorry for bringing you all into this.

Fifth – I’d like to publicly apologize for pointing out the motes in my brother’s eye, and neglecting the beam in my own. If I failed to act biblically in sending out my “Plea” it would be in this area. You guys are out there all the time and have been for many years. For various reasons I am not out at all the events I’d like to be, and I do not face the same crowds as you. I do not know how I would react, only how I would like to.

Finally - I would like to close by saying that what I do not regret is opening up the dialog. I think I learned from this, and have been profited by the whole ordeal. I regret upsetting people, and looking divided.

I still believe that calling people names out of spite is wrong, (even if it’s a name used in the Bible), but I will not pretend that I know your motives, and I will make it a point to always try and assume the best.

I still believe that intentionally provoking the police is wrong in regards to Romans 13, but I will try and always assume that when I see this you are obeying God rather than man, and are justified. This is not said with sarcasm; I know that if we just were to roll over that eventually we’d have all our rights taken away in this arena.

I have said from the beginning that our ultimate goal is the same, to see sinners come to repentance toward God, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. I will do what I can to accomplish this the way the Lord has me do it, and I will pray for your ministries as you do what you can to accomplish this.

I would ask that we end the mass e-mails. If anyone would like to respond please do it in private, or limited to those you are addressing. I will only answer questions or charges that are sent to me. Also if anyone would like me to remove their e-mail off my blog, I will do so at their request.

God Bless you all, and your ministries.
In Christ, for His Glory
Shannon Young,
2 Tim 2:24-26, Eph 3:8

Wow...now my friends are getting publicly spanked.

This is from James Lyman. (see Photo) He's the one dressd up like the devil dressed up like the angel Maroni

Dave,
You do not seem very tolerant of us streetpreachers Dave.
These are not hypothetical situations, we were accused by this Shannon Young-(I have never seen him-perhaps he was off giving donuts to the Mormons or something)-of specific acts. As well, no one has answered hatefully in these letters. Why does truth sound so harsh to the soft Christians. Certainly you have been blessed by Young's repsonses-you are probably as watered down as he is.
Remember some of these men may have displayed little grace because frankly, we are tired of attacks from the "brethren" about what to say, how to say it and what to do to preach more effectively. If you or Young are around Buffalo tomorrow come on out-I would love to hear you preach to the sodomites, fornicators etc. as they are spitting at you and possibly swinging. If you are not interested in that perhaps you can bring some stuffed animals and do some trivia quizzes.

WELCOME FRIENDS

Since Bro. Ruben Israel just invited everyone to my blog to be an encouragment, I would just like to extend a hardy welcome to all first time visitors. Enjoy!

This may be what pushes me above my 5 readers...lol.

Thank You Sir May I Have Another pt. 5

After writing my "Plea to the Street Preachers" I was given godly counsel to send it out to as many street preachers that I could. I knew there was a chance that some would take it the wrong way. I am posting the responses to my plea, so we can all learn from the street preachers where the flaws in my plea were. I want to say this...everyone of these guys has been doing it longer and in more places than me. They make some good points, so I want to share the responses from those that thought I was wrong in saying what I said.

This one is from Ruben Israel again...http://www.officialstreetpreachers.com

I have been in San Francisco this past weekend working with ‘the discoverychannel’ for a film that will be ready early next year. Thursday morning Iwill be leaving for South Dakota ‘Sturgis’ for about 5 days. Withthatsaid,I had not had time to respond to a reply by Shannon Young who posted back tome in private. But since this was done with an unasked cc list, I will respond in kind when I return from S.D. For those of you that wish to view this person, click the link below.

http://shannonyoung.blogspot.com:

I think if Shannon really heard the voice of God, he should have taken thismatter a different avenue, one that supports sound Biblical teaching.

Take this offence to that brother in question.

Take witnessesThen, take before the church.

But since he has cc’ed this list, I will ‘out him’ and place Shannon on the‘hot seat’ for a cluster of questions that he needs to answer, lest his name be tainted among us.

1) Have I ever preached with you?
1a) give dates, city, location1b whom on this cc list have you preached in public with?
2) Was your information regarding the mormnons given from God, someone elseor an article?2a) IF from God, please give me details
2b) words heard, dream, feeling, etc.
3) Have you every seen anyone on your cc list call a women a ‘whore’ just because she was a sinner walking?
3a) give me the name or names.
3b) what was the context of that conversation you overheard while callingsomeone a whore.
4) Have you ever seen anyone on this list wipe their back part with a mormon garment?
4a) please give a name/names of those that have done this
4b) or who told you this happened and did this person give you a name of whohe saw, heard or read about?
4c) what city did this happen?
5) Do you believe the Father/Holy Ghost/Jesus would have someone do or saysomething that contradicts the Bible?
6) You seem to make time and find email addresses of many active preachers, please give your reason why on each name/email you chose that person
7) How long have you been preaching in public?
8) How often do you travel outside the state in which you live to preach?
9) What were the names of those ‘godly counsel’ people that encouraged youto send your email? Names please.
10) Since a person REALLY has a ‘broken heart’ that would make it easy tosay ‘I’m sorry, I made a mistake’ I put the cart way before the horse, no?

Ruben Israel

(my reply is in the comments)

Thank You Sir May I Have Another Pt. 4

After writing my "Plea to the Street Preachers" I was given godly counsel to send it out to as many street preachers that I could. I knew there was a chance that some would take it the wrong way. I am posting the responses to my plea, so we can all learn from the street preachers where the flaws in my plea were. I want to say this...everyone of these guys has been doing it longer and in more places than me. They make some good points, so I want to share the responses from those that thought I was wrong in saying what I said.

This one is from a Rochester standard - Kevin Deegan

Shannon

A number of folks on this list have wondered who you are. I see your domain is based in Rochester NY. Having preached on street corners and events in Rochester for 25 years I wonder why I nor any of our group of Street Preachers know of you. Could you introduce yourself?

Reading the responses to your plea seems it was not received as a encouragement as you intended. I am not surprised since Street Preaching is a difficult ministry at best and surely not a popular ministry within the church. Having served with many of these men for a number of years I am intimately aware of the victories and of the disappointments/struggles some of these men have endured! A number of the men I have mentored in this work have endured all manner of attacks and discouragement.

From reading your plea, I would contend that when you "heard preachers move from preaching to name calling" that would be the proper forum and the proper time to deal with the issue!

Would you agree that the scriptures give clear direction in dealing with an erring brother?
MT 18:15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

Or is your intent that there are many on this list guilty of such behavior so you went directly to verse 17?
In addition such a generic plea leaves one wondering just who on this list is the target.
I find many items in your plea, that are difficult to deal with being without specifics.
If fact such statements as "I am not trying to get anyone to tone down their message…I begging some of you to change" seem to indicate you are throwing charges about hoping that some will stick. Why wouldn't you simply send an email to the individuals that you see as the problem rather than to a list you assembled from the internet? A shotgun plea rather than specifics must scatter aspersions upon all on this list.

Since you brought this topic to this forum is your intent now to shrink from it?

Thank You Sir Can I Have Another pt. 3

After writing my "Plea to the Street Preachers" I was given godly counsel to send it out to as many street preachers that I could. I knew there was a chance that some would take it the wrong way. I am posting the responses to my plea, so we can all learn from the street preachers where the flaws in my plea were. I want to say this...everyone of these guys has been doing it longer and in more places than me. They make some good points, so I want to share the responses from those that thought I was wrong in saying what I said.

This one is from James Lyman from http://www.revivalneeded.com/

Shannon and whoever else is interested,
In response to your email I would like to add a few comments.
1. Certainly as representatives of the Lord Jesus Christ we need to examine our actions and words on the street and keep ourself in check as we preach the word.
2. Brother Ruben brings out a very valid point as to specifics regarding dates, events and individuals.
3. I am curious as to what signs and banners you think should not be lifted up. Again, please be more specific.
4. How do you suggest that we preach to the sodomites and exactly what words "do you believe" would be inappropriate. Sodomite, effeminate, female-looking, confused, wicked, pervert, ungodly, abominable-what do you think of those?
5. Regarding the Mormons, I have never seen anyone utilize the backside technique that you are speaking of but I would like to add that as a former LDS member, some may respond with the compassionate plea to "consider the real Jesus" but most have already been well-versed on the "anti's" and need a direct and straightforward approach. Regarding the Moron issue (in contrast to the word Mormon) at the Hill Cumorah this year one of the head security gentlemen inquired about one of the streetpreachers calling them morons. Certainly unless something was stated that was extremely inappropriate, I am going to defend a streetpreaching brother when dealing with a lost individual. I do not believe that I have ever called a Mormon a moron, however after being approached by this LDS leader I had to ask him the definition of a moron and then asked if someone who believed in Kolob, supernatural undergarments, eternal progression, the moon being inhabited etc. would fit that definition. Is it not "idiotic" to believe such nonsense?
6. While having never carried a toothbrush preaching, I usually am ready for a confrontation by the police. While I do not jubilantly look forward to it, I believe that being prepared is both wise and scriptural. "A prudent man forseeth the evil and hideth himself, but the simple pass on and are punished."
7. Regarding calling someone a "whore" or a "harlot" I have been , preaching on the streets for about 20 years and full time for 4 1/2 and have directly called someone by these words no more than three or four times. About the same amount, perhaps a few more times, I have stated that someone was dressed in the attire of a harlot or that a harlot 100 years ago wore more clothes than the individual was at the time. Last week in Buffalo at the rock concert, a woman, already barely dressed bent over and lifting up her dress, exposing her underclothes (which my wife stated were barely underclothes). This she did in front of young children as well as many men. I told her that she was a whore. Do you believe that was wrong? I say it was not! Again keep in mind that in preaching thousands of times publickly over the last 20 years I have only used that word directly 3-4 times. Here we have a woman exposing herself to children and men in a publick setting! Another woman opened her jacket to completely expose her bra and made every attempt to rub against me! If not for my wife "bodyguarding" me, she would have! What do you recommend in this scenario? Weeping and pleading with her to come to Christ? I say not!8. You mention the Cross of Christ being the offense and surely many times it will be. But so is preaching against sin! Should I preach only the cross and not against sin-I do not believe that would be scriptural. Also I would say it is safe to say that many were offended by Elijah's mocking in 1 Kings 18:27.9. Understanding the intention of your letter to mainly be encouraging us to "weep" "be prepared " and "preach with a broken heart" I certainly can say that we always should be as spiritually prepared as possible, and that weeping and having a broken heart is SOMETIMES and MANY TIMES a factor in our preaching. My disagreement with that statement is that at times the LORD has us go and rebuke and warn without the emotional attachment. Look at how Paul dealt with Elymas in Acts 13. There was no gospel witness, he was warning as he called him a child of the devil etc. Certainly I and most or all of the others on this list grieve much over those that we witness to and warn. My God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but there are times when we are called to just warn. I have a message called Warning and Witnessing that I preached some time ago and I would be glad to get a copy to you. Let me add also that as I began going around the country, I got more acquainted with other preachers and at times questioned their words or methods. But the Lord has taught me many lessons as I have grown. I will not always agree with every streetpreachers message, words or methods and surely many will disagree with mine. Unless they are outrageously unacceptable and I can prove from scripture that they are wrong, I will keep my mouth shut. If they were to ask my opinion I would tell them. I also need to be scriptural and go to them personally. I wonder if John the Baptist, Elijah, Stephen and Enoch would have had some differences, even disagreements, about methods and exact words each other used if they were to preach side-by-side. OR WOULD THEY HAVE RECOGNIZED THAT BECAUSE THEY WERE GOD'S MESSENGERS AND ALL ON THE SAME SIDE THEY NEEDED TO SUPPORT EACH OTHER! I leave you with these things and pray that you will take them in the right spirit.

Thank You Sir May I Have Another pt. 2

After writing my "Plea to the Street Preachers" I was given godly counsel to send it out to as many street preachers that I could. I knew there was a chance that some would take it the wrong way. I am posting the responses to my plea, so we can all learn from the street preachers where the flaws in my plea were. I want to say this...everyone of these guys has been doing it longer and in more places than me. They make some good points, so I want to share the responses from those that thought I was wrong in saying what I said.

This one is from Ron McRea from http://www.streetpreachersfellowship.com

Brother Young, "open rebuke is better than secret love", and that verse is just aaccurate towards open air evangelists as to the world. Young man, quit talking in generalities and have enough courage to point a finger at who you are talking to and tell them what is on your heart. Lay aside the liberalwritings of Sutek and Mormon newspaper reporters [I have personally preachedat SLC, and questioned every street preacher there about your false statement of street preachers wiping their backsides with their religious material, which you borrowed from the lying news reports...I have yet to find one preacher that has ever done that or saw anyone do it]...and Sutek's illustration about preacher's carrying their tooth brushes was a nameless reference to this preacher, taken out of context and cowardly applied to excuse Gerald's cowardly belief that preacher's should never go to jail forrefusing to quit preaching. Shannon, if you are going to "plea", name the person you are aiming at or just shut up until you have talked to the preacher you are referring to. You are not helping yourself, or any of us. I know a lot of the men on your Cc list, and most have proven time and againt hat they have a broken heart. But a broken heart and a contrite spirit, doesn't fake spirituality, and it doesn't dodge the person's face while pleading to everyone else about him. I agree to a large extent on some of your views, but they are easily gleaned from watching the wrong crowd, who think a loud mouth is a calling from God, and a raging countenance is zeal for the Lord. But no soldier ofthe cross fires buckshot accusations at all street preachers, when God has given you a sword. If you do not have the courage to stick the person you have described, or at least speak to them personally before you plead with everyone about their problem and you are the only one without it, you do noone a favor including yourself with a general nameless plea, howsoever humble. This old man has learned that "voluntary humility" (see Colossians2:18) and hyper zeal are just two ends of the same stick called "fraudulent spirituality". Most of the older men on your list have said and done things that we would never do again on the street. But Shannon, you learn to use good judgment many times by using bad judgment, and where the Spirit of the Lordis, there is liberty. And often times more than we care to repeat, that isthe liberty to make a mistake and learn from it. Howbeit, cowards teach noone wisdom. They only make more cowards. But allow me to teach you a truth about open air evangelism that you can take to stake with you. The love of Christ mixed with experience and a desire to train men for God can always teach a street preacher wisdom, either in word or experience. But you cannot give him back his zeal, once you take it from him, or put it out with the admonitions of a coward's heart to tone it down, because you do not like what he says or how he said differently than you would say it, when you cannot or will not tell him that to his face. God and experience will teach you how to preach to the strong and to the weak. But you take zeal away from a street preacher, and I have found no remedy to give it back to him! A fool despiseth instruction (Proverbs 15:5). However, street preaching is foolishness to them that perish. That alone makes open air preaching a very good place for fools to hide from their secret lives by going overboard in their show boat zeal for God. You will never change that kind of'street thug for Jesus', who for the most part preach in the open against the sins of the private lives. Some of the men on your list, like myself have learned to leave those Rambo's for Jesus alone....they make the rest ofus look better, and they have a tendency to flush out the sissies and cowards, and spiritual fakes, so we can identify both groups! Becauseneither will be around very long. Steer clear of both ends of that bamboo stick and thou shalt do well. But do not throw smoke grenades back into our ranks because you do not have the courage to sit down and face the person you are whining about, or because your voluntary humility moves you to think you're spiritual enough to generalize the sins of men more zealous than you at certain moment. Shannon, sometimes the reason God allows certain men to be overly boldand zealous around you, when it doesn't seem to bother other men more experienced than you, is because He cannot get you to do it, so He has to use the likes of others you now plea against, when Christ said, "forbid himnot, for he that is not against us is for us" (Luke 9:50).

Thank You Sir May I Have Another pt. 1

After writing my "Plea to the Street Preachers" I was given godly counsel to send it out to as many street preachers that I could. I knew there was a chance that some would take it the wrong way. I am posting the responses to my plea, so we can all learn from the street preachers where the flaws in my plea were. I want to say this...everyone of these guys has been doing it longer and in more places than me. They make some good points, so I want to share the responses from those that thought I was wrong in saying what I said.

This one is from Ruben Israel from http://www.officialstreetpreachers.com

Me - We can preach to homosexuals without calling them names, and you canpreach sin, righteousness and judgment. I have no qualms with telling themthat unless they repent they will likewise parish, but I don’t need to callthem fags! I was once told to preach to them like they were lost familymembers.
Ruben - Who on this list calls them ‘fags?’ I mainly use the word ‘sodomite’ or 'abomination’ as most on this list do. Whoever told you to preach to sodomites as lost family LIED to you. See the word ‘abomination’ for details, if you wish to speak as an Ambassador for the kingdom of God.

Me - We can preach to Mormons without calling them Morons, or pretending towipe our backsides with their religious material, and still in compassiontell them that the Jesus they worship is not the Jesus of the Bible and willtake them to Hell.
Ruben - I have been in Salt Lake City for years, and Mesa/hill cumorah this yearwaving the mormon garments but I have never seen anyone wipe their backside.I have heard the mormons accuse us of that and blowing our nose with their undergarments. Is this your source? Please produce names and have you personally seem this done?

Me - We do not need to see just how far we can push the police every time.Though there are times when we need to protect our unalienable rights, we doActs 5:29 as well as Romans 13:1-3 as best we can. If you bring yourtoothbrush street preaching you are premeditating your clash withauthorities.
Ruben - Do you know of anyone that packs a toothbrush with their Bible or are you stretching the story? I think most in this list try to avoid jail as preaching is the main goal. But produce names, dates, events please whereyou have witnessed it.

Me - The lost girl who is dresses immodestly, does not need to be called awhore…she is lost! How do you expect her to dress? What rules is shefollowing without Christ in her life?
Ruben - When someone on this list addresses a girl as a ‘whore’ on the street, eventor campus there is a reason, no one on this list just uses that word, just because. But again be more precise on whom and where.