Audacity or Mendacity?

by Rick Brentlinger
(Pace, Florida)

Does Audacity reveal Ray Comfort's Mendacity?

Does Audacity reveal Ray Comfort's Mendacity?

I am thankful for Ray Comfort, his love for the Lord and his desire to witness. I respect him as my brother in Christ so this critique is not intended to hurt Ray or detract from biblical street witnessing and winning the lost to saving faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Ray Comfort's Audacity movie
Watch it FREE on Youtube

My purpose is to admonish Ray Comfort and the Living Waters ministry to preach the biblical gospel and to stop adding to the gospel what Jesus never added to the gospel. Witnessing and winning lost souls to Christ is a matter of life and death yet we must bear witness to the truth of the glorious gospel of Christ without adding false teaching to the gospel.

The premise of Audacity is that being gay leads to spiritual death because if you're gay, you're not saved and you're headed for hell. At the end of Audacity, E.Z., Ray Comfort's son in law, who played one of the cops in the movie, says: "It's been our aim to convey biblical truth with love, humility and compassion." Does the Audacity movie convey biblical truth about repentance and the glorious gospel of Christ?

Three troubling things
about the Audacity movie

I. Ray Comfort's false gospel adds a "turn from all your sin" clause never found in the Bible.

Turn from all your sin is never part of the glorious gospel of Christ so why does Ray make it an integral part of his street witnessing? The turn from all sin gospel is not good news. It is a false gospel, Galatians 1:6-9, 1 Corinthians 15:1-9.

Adding his own opinion to the gospel and telling gays they must turn from all their sin to get saved is a major distortion of the gospel and an impossible demand to place upon any lost sinner, a demand which Jesus never puts upon lost sinners, Matthew 11:28-30.

Rays says: "Well no, you gotta repent, turn from all sin. No lying, stealing, adultery, fornication, homosexuality; gotta turn from all sin."

No one gets saved by turning from all sin. Why does Ray Comfort add "turn from all sins" to the gospel when Jesus never added that to the gospel? Repentance in the Bible never means, turn from all your sins and no soul winner in the Bible ever says, Turn from all your sin.

Why are some Christians defending
the "turn from all your sins" gospel?

YOU haven't turned
from ALL your sins!

The truth is, for two thousand years, no Christian anywhere, including Ray Comfort, has ever turned from all his sin, at salvation or after salvation. Turning from all your sins has never been part of the biblical gospel.

"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." - 1 John 1:8. By adding "turn from all sin" to the gospel, Ray Comfort makes an impossible demand that no one can fulfill. Ray is deceiving himself and the gays and lesbians to whom he witnesses.

Repentance means to change your mind - it does not mean to turn from all your sins. When dealing with salvation, repentance means to change your mind about your basic goodness so that you stop trusting your own righteousness and instead, trust the perfect righteousness of Christ alone to save you, Romans 10:4.

Why "turn from all sin"
is a false gospel

1. Ray's "turn from all your sins" gospel is NEVER found in the Bible. That fact ought to be enough to convince us, never to make "turn from all sin" part of God's plan of salvation in our witnessing. The basis of salvation is Christ's finished work on the cross and the justification by grace alone through faith alone, Romans 3:24, which Jesus won for us when He suffered the wrath of God as our substitute, thus satisfying God's justice and placating God's wrath, Romans 1:18, 3:28, 1 John 2:2, Romans 10:9-10.

2. It is perfectly scriptural to preach repentance but perversely unscriptural to imply that repentance means turning from all your sin. The reason John's Gospel was written is so that people can get saved. John emphasizes the importance of believing, Gospel of John 3:15-18, 36, 5:24, 20:30-31 yet never mentions repentance or turning from all your sin.

Please note: John 8:11 is NOT a proof text for telling anyone to "turn from all sins." "She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." In this story, Jesus did not share the gospel of the grace of God - the death, burial and resurrection of Christ - with this woman. He did not tell her that repentance means, turn from all your sins, and He did not approve Ray Comfort's false gospel.

"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." - John 20:30-31

3. In Audacity, Peter, the male character, opines that gays who say they are saved are self-deceived because they have not turned from all sin.

"A lot of people make professions of faith in Christ and then they just continue to live however they want to live. It's called self-deception when they do that." 21:01

In his Audacity movie, Ray Comfort snarkily tells us that gays and lesbians who say they got saved are self-deceived. If they cannot stop being gay, if they cannot become heterosexual, according to Ray's opinion, they didn't really turn from all sins so they didn't really get saved. That is a wicked mean-spirited ungodly unbiblical message to preach to lost sinners.

II. Ray Comfort's false analogy equates being gay with choosing to be an adulterer and a fornicator.

In Audacity, Ray equates homosexuality, an unchosen sexual orientation with chosen sins like adultery and fornication. In his movie, Ray makes no distinction between saved and unsaved gays because he believes if you're gay, you are not saved. By equating an unchosen sexual orientation to chosen sinful acts like adultery and fornication, Ray demonstrates a serious lack of understanding.

Why not make a movie about
your own fornicating supporters?

Josh Duggar is a heterosexual supporter of Ray Comfort and Living Waters and an opponent of gay rights. As a teenager, Josh molested four of his younger sisters and as an adult, is a self-described porn and sex addict and unfaithful husband who hires prostitutes to sate his lust. Sadly, Josh also helps promote the anti-gay ministry of Ray Comfort and Living Waters.

Why are gays the focus of the Audacity movie? Why insult us? There are famous adulterers and fornicators among Ray's supporters, about whom Ray could have made his movie. Will we ever see a movie from Ray about the tsunami of sexual sin among heterosexual Christians in conservative churches?

III. Ray Comfort's false teaching, which says homosexuality is the exact equivalent of the Greek word, arsenokoitai, in 1 Cor 6:9.

In the Audacity movie, the lead character Peter tells a bold lie: "It is true that the word, homosexuality, wasn't in there (the Bible) because the word hadn't been invented yet. It was coined sometime around 1900 but the original Greek word that was in there, that's the exact equivalent to the modern word of homosexuality."

Saying that the Greek word arsenokoitai is the exact equivalent of our modern word, homosexuality, is an astonishing lie. There is not a shred of biblical, cultural, doctrinal, historical or linguistic evidence to support Ray's blatant lie. Further, there is not a shred of evidence that anyone in the first century AD understood arsenokoitai to refer to gays in general or used arsenokoitai to mean homosexual.


Watching Ray Comfort's Audacity movie is like taking a road trip with someone who doesn't bathe regularly. It’s not merely bad - it’s unpleasant in a hostile way.

What must I do to be saved?

Return to Gay Christian FAQ

Return to 101 Community

Grab our free Bible Studies

Return to
Gay Christian 101 Home Page

Special thanks to Raymoan Ford and David Keener
for their help with this article.

This page revised May 1, 2016

Comments for Audacity or Mendacity?

Click here to add your own comments

Nov 26, 2015
by: Kevin S.

The movie is one long endorsement for Ray Comfort's ministry. It is manipulative, edited, selective and slanted so called truths. No real exegesis of the Scriptures presented takes place. The same old misinterpretations and Evangelical Fundamentalist slants on the Bible are rehashed as truth.

It begins by using the most deceptive and convoluted fact to begin building an argument- that homosexuality is the equivalent of adultery and fornication, therefore being gay is just another sinful desire. The truth is he compares apples to oranges to build his theologically incorrect argument.

This video represents the best of the Evangelical Fundamentalist argument; and it's flawed according to sound hermeneutics, biblical exegesis, historical accuracy, cultural accuracy, and scholarly linguistics. It's Sunday School, Bumper Sticker theology. Sadly that is where the American Church is today.

Nov 28, 2015
Gave up after awhile of viewing
by: KJ

I never completed watching the entire video.

It just rang false from the start.

I am thankful for this website posting their review; it states what the "falseness" was better than I could state it.

Dec 28, 2015
Is Ray Comfort adding to the gospel?
by: Robert C

I believe that Ray would agree with you that we are justified by grace alone and through faith alone. He is not, I believe, espousing a works-based salvation.

- At 31:40 Ray says to, 'Repent and trust alone in him.'

- He gives the example of trusting in a parachute, saying that you don't flap your arms and the parachute saves you. He used this to explain that we are not saved by our efforts.

- He also says to, 'Trust alone in Jesus. Don't try and save yourself'

Additionally, Ray's "turn from all sin" gospel is not adding to the gospel and it is found in the Bible.

Ray uses the phrase "turn from all sin" synonymously with the word 'repent', which is obviously in scripture.

To repent is to change your mind on something, in this case to acknowledge that it was wrong for you to have sinned and that it is wrong to sin anymore.

With this change of mind would come a desire to live rightly before God and to turn away from all sin.

John 8:11 is quoted in the movie as an example of this, where Jesus says to the woman caught in adultery, "Go, and sin no more."

Sin no more = turn away from all sin.

He seemed fairly clear I and felt that his presentation was being taken where it was never intended. Thanks.

Rick's comment: Hi Robert C - If repentance meant, turn from all sin, then you and Ray would have a point. But the apostle John effectively destroys your argument. In his Gospel, he never mentions repentance or turning from all sin. He does say this however.

"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." - John 20:30-31

If we believe what John wrote, to get saved, no one needs to hear the word, repent, and no one needs to turn from all sins. Adding "turn from all sins" to the gospel creates a false gospel, a gospel that Jesus and Paul never preached.

Jesus never taught this false gospel. None of the apostles taught it. No human author of the Bible taught it. Born again Christians for the last two thousand years didn't believe or teach this false gospel.

"Turn from all sins" is a peculiar identifying mark of modern neo-Calvinists, what some call the young, restless and reformed Calvinists, so Yes, Ray Comfort IS adding to the gospel.

Dec 28, 2015
Repent, in the original language of the NT, does not mean, turn from sin
by: Kevin S.

Frankly, I'm so sick and tired of hearing Christians, especially pastors and evangelists, misuse that word, repent, because of ignorance or deliberate personal interpretation.

While I don't claim to be a Greek scholar, after a few years of studying Koine Greek in Bible College, I do have the basics. A first year Greek student will tell you the word repent means "a change of mind," period!

When we manipulate and slant the words to fit our personal theology, we are treading on spiritually deadly ground and have become a hindrance to the gospel.

Dec 28, 2015
Change of mind concerning?
by: Robert C

Firstly, I think it important to point out that the word 'repent' is used frequently in scripture. It is used by John the Baptist to prepare the way, by Christ during his ministry and by the apostles in the early church. Its absence in John should not restrict its use.

Even so, I agree with the statement that no one needs to hear the word 'repent' or the phrase 'turn from all sins' in order to be saved. Other words can be used to explain man's standing before God and his plan for redemption (John obviously found them). But I don't think that finding the right phrasing is our main concern. The accusation is that something is being added to the gospel, and therefore that a false gospel is being proclaimed.

I am having trouble seeing the error. I agree with Kevin S when he says that 'repent' means a 'change of mind' but this call to repentance needs a context; if we went up to people and merely told them to change of minds without giving context it would be unclear. So how should Christians more correctly express to the unsaved what they are to 'change their minds' about?

Rick's comment: Hi Robert C - The error is telling a lost sinner he or she must turn from all sins.

Ray didn't turn from all sins when he got saved.

You didn't turn from all sins when you got saved.

I didn't turn from all sins when I got saved.

All of us kept sinning and all of us struggle with habitual sins even though we are saved. As I understand it, no one told Ray he had to turn from all sins when he got saved. I don't know about your salvation experience but no one told me I had to turn from all sins when I got saved.

The common sense meaning of "turn from all sins" conveys an impossible requirement to the lost sinner. That phrase is NOT part of the gospel and only brings confusion. It not only sounds unbiblical - it IS unbiblical.

What should sinners change their mind about? They should change their mind about their sin (most think they are a good person) and they should change their mind about the inability of their own righteousness to satisfy the justice of a holy God.

They should change their mind about their need for a Savior - they think they don't need one or that Jesus will save them without any repentance on their part.

I included a number of text links in the article which provide additional information.

What must I do to be saved?

Dec 29, 2015
Thanks for clarifying.
by: Robert C

The issue, as I understand it, is that the phrase 'turn from all sins' is being taken to mean that once Christians are saved, they have to live without sinning. As you have rightly said, this is impossible requirement, as all of us keep sinning and continue to struggle with sin.

Rick's comment: Hi Robert C - No, that is not the issue. The issue is, Ray is telling people to turn from all sin, AS IF that is part of getting saved, AS IF that is part of the gospel message. Ray confuses things because he misunderstands the meaning of repentance and then conveys that misunderstanding to the lost sinner.

It would be disturbing for us to hear of a new Christian who thinks that this is what he means. To believe that they must now live a perfect life, only to continue failing time after time, would be a recipe for discouragement and despair. If this does occur, my hope is that their inability to live a holy life, would further highlight that their only hope: Christ.

However, I don't believe that Ray means that we now must live a perfect life when he says, 'turn from all sin'. Sin characterised our lives when we chose to live our own way; not in accordance with God's desire for our lives. The phrase 'turn from all sin' urges people to turn away from living sinful lives and by extension, to turn back to God's way.

You're right, in practice we do continue to sin. But we should seek to be more like Him. The Bible makes it clear that we should be seeking to 'be holy as He is holy', 'to go and sin no more' and this would mean seeking to 'turn from all sin'.
Will we succeed? No but thank God that Christ already has.

Dec 29, 2015
Robert C -Allow the Word and the Holy Spirit do their job
by: Kevin S.

WHY do we, as Christians feel we need to engage our intellect, experience, education, personal prferences, bedazzling personality, logic, and convictions that we know best, when ministering the simplistic message of the Gospel?

The Apostle Paul in Romans 1:16 tells us, "I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ for "IT" (THE GOSPEL) is the power of God unto salvation.

In my experiences as I traveled the world for two years singing and presenting that Gospel, it became abundantly clear that when human knowledge and human intent fail, God's Word never does. Kevin always fell short of the requirements of a messenger, but the Gospel (THE MESSAGE) always accomplished its goal to supernaturally change the lives of humans and bring life to those who are spiritually dead.

The day I became a member of the singing group that would take me on that ministry journey, the director and his wife gave me just one instruction, one directive. And in the 43 years since, I've never forgotten it or changed my view.

"Kevin, God doesn't need your talent, gifts, intelligence, education, or abilities, because he created them. What he needs is your AVAILABILITY. If you forget that, he will raise up someone who will remember."

Let us just allow the Power of the Gospel do the work in people's lives. Trust it will. I'm 64 years old and I can experientially assure, "IT" (THE GOSPEL) works when all else fails.

It's good to know all the wonderful aspects of proper exegeses, firm foundational hermeneutics, have a work knowledge of Biblical linguistics, and even a sincere desire to serve the Lord by having a burden for souls. But none of that is a replacement for the supernatural power of the words of Scripture and the eternally profound effect of the simplistic message of the Gospel. Let's trust it!

Dec 29, 2015
Agreeing to disagree
by: Robert C

Kevin S, I feel the need to engage in this discussion with such conviction because a man (and by extension his ministry) has been said to be proclaiming a false gospel that is not found in the Bible; one that is perversely unscriptural. I disagree with these claims.

Rick's comment: Robert, the easiest way to end this disagreement is to show us in the Bible where repentance means to turn from all sin or where Jesus, Paul or anyone else ever told a lost sinner, You "gotta turn from all sins," to get saved. If it's in the Bible, fine. I'll apologize and correct my article, Audacity or Mendacity.

If it's not in the Bible, if it's not part of the glorious gospel of Christ - 2 Cor 4:4, 1 Cor 15:1-9, then you and Ray Comfort should stop defending it and admit that you are preaching a false gospel.

Rick, In your response to Audacity you have a quote where Ray says,

"Well no, you gotta repent, turn from all sin. No lying, stealing, adultery, fornication, homosexuality; gotta turn from all sin."

This quote is taken out of context from the movie and from Ray's ministry as a whole. It was a reply to a woman who appears to think that because she 'accepts Christ into her heart' that she can continue in sin.

Her later response when she says that she can 'do that (repent and forsake sin) on her death bed' shows her limited understanding of repentance. She knows she cannot honestly repent of sin, while harbouring the intent to commit further sins.

As stated before, Ray Comfort is not making a demand for Christians to have no sin. He knows Christians will continue to fall into sin. What he is saying is that true repentance means that we are not intending to sin any more.

"Am I saying that a genuine convert never sins? Of course not. Every Christian has a battle with the world, the flesh and the devil; and sometimes he does fall into sin. But that is the point, he falls into sin; while the hypocrite, the false convert, dives into sin." Ray Comfort - 'True and False Conversion', Living Waters Website)

Ray Comfort is NOT telling people that 'turning from all sin is a part of getting saved'. What he is saying is that this would be a consequence of true conversion; so once people are saved (and he makes it clear that this is by grace alone), they will seek to forsake all sin.

Your claim about Ray preaching a false gospel is untrue. You have twisted his words and taken them out of context. These inaccurate accusations distract from your other arguments.

Rick's comment: Hi Robert C - Are you an associate, friend, volunteer or employee of Ray Comfort or Living Waters?

You seem intent on trying to make this about not sinning after salvation but Ray keeps telling people as part of his attempt to lead them to Christ, that they have to turn from all sins. In the movie, he clearly is not talking about struggling with sin after one is saved.

I have not taken anything out of context. I didn't write or produce or film the movie. Ray and his people wrote the movie, shot the film, edited the movie and cut, then inserted the clips of Ray interviewing people.

You ignore the fact that later in the movie, Ray's character tells us that gays who say they got saved but are still gay are self-deceived. Ray wrote that because he believes if gays get saved and do not become ex-gay, they are, in Ray's script, "self-deceived" and are not "genuine" converts. See how carefully Ray parses his words?

You also ignore Ray's lie about the meaning of arsenokoitai. He is dead wrong on the meaning of arsenokoitai.

Dec 29, 2015
Further discussion
by: Robert C

No, I don't know Ray Comfort. I did listen to a couple of his sermons for the first time today, just to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding him. In his sermons he does encouraged Christians to examine themselves, to see whether they are 'in the faith'. He is concerned that there are false converts who have not truly repented or trusted in God. I do feel he is being misrepresented.

Rick's comment: Hi Robert - It is common for Calvinists to accuse people they disagree with, of not being saved or in Ray's words, not a genuine convert. I get that all the time from Calvinists who make comments on this website. On the other hand, charismatics who disagree with me on the gay issue, accuse me of being demon possessed. LOL - Neither group offered an in context biblical view to counter my views.

I. In the movie, the woman he is talking to about turning form sin, has claimed that she made a profession of faith. He was trying to point out that fruit follows conversion; that faith without works is dead; that true repentance means turning from the things that God sees as wrong. 'Turning from all sin' is a consequence of salvation, not a requirement. Ray knows this and teaches this. To say otherwise is twisting his message.

Rick's comment: Except that that is not at all clear in Ray's movie. Calvinists think if someone doesn't live up to their view of Christian behavior, that person is lost.

Let's not forget the premise of the movie. If you're gay, you couldn't possible be saved. If you're gay and think you are saved, you're self-deceived or not a genuine convert. That is Ray's belief and that is what the movie intends to convey.

II. In relation to your second point, to be honest, I can't find the spot where Ray's character tells us that gays who say they got saved but are still gay are 'self-deceived' or not 'genuine' converts. I have listened to the dialogue when the characters are interacting but can't find it anywhere.

Rick's comment: That happens in the restaurant scene after the robbery, where the gay couple take the hero who saved their lives, out to eat.

III. You also mentioned the meaning of arsenokoitai. The character in the movie says,
"...the original Greek word that was in there (the Bible), that's the exact equivalent to the modern word of homosexuality."

When I heard this, I did think that they glossed over the scriptures. But I can understand them not wanting to unpack too much (or even anything) at that point in the narrative.

Rick's comment: Not wanting to unpack too much is not the point. The words Ray wrote about arsenokoitai are not true. For 1900+ years after Paul wrote 1 Corinthians, almost no one, secular or Christian, linked arsenokoitai to gays or lesbians or homosexuality.

On my website I list the first 56 usages of the arsenokoit stem in the first 600 years of church history. No one in that time frame used arsenokoitai to mean gay or lesbian or homosexual. In the mid-first century AD, arsenokoitai referred to shrine prostitutes or rape or humans having sex with the gods.

Dec 30, 2015
Still can't find reference
by: Robert C

I cannot say whether Calvinists are good at accusing people of not being genuine converts.

Regrettably, I also cannot comment on the restaurant scene where Ray's character tells the gay couple, who claim to be christians, that they are 'self-deceived' or not 'genuine' converts because (after double checking) it isn't there.
You said,

"You ignore the fact that later in the movie, Ray's character tells us that gays who say they got saved but are still gay are self-deceived. Ray wrote that because he believes if gays get saved and do not become ex-gay, they are, in Ray's script, "self-deceived" and are not "genuine" converts. See how carefully Ray parses his words?

From what I can see, none of this actually occurs; definitely not in the restaurant scene.
Could you be thinking of another scene or something else?

Rick's comment: Hi Robert - Sorry - The scene I should have pointed you to is around 21:01 into the movie, where Ray is talking to the lesbian couple. Peter, the hero then opines that the lesbians who think they are saved are self-deceived.

Dec 31, 2015
A scrutiny of each detail of the movie is just smoke and mirrors.
by: Kevin S.

Robert C. - It is evident you have a theological agenda which is based in Calvinism. Exactly what your educational background, and how well versed you are remains a mystery after many posts.

Please know theology is a science which has a foundation in biblical linguistics (koine Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). It is based on biblical culture and historical application. Its foundation and backbone is systematically constructed from the basics of the Gospel of Apostle John to the revelatory truth of John the Revelator.

When theology is carelessly and unlearnedly tossed around like it's a soccer ball in play, major mistakes are made and harm is done. I've read your posts carefully and they obviously lack theological proficiency. They sound more like opinion than educated statements.

Ray Comfort also plays with theology like that soccer ball, to bolster his religious beliefs but his beliefs have little or nothing to do with biblical exegesis. Ray edits and nuances his movie to only present what he deems important to achieve his goal.

Scrutinizing what he said, or what they said or where and when it happened overshadows the truth. And the truth is, this movie is misleading and carefully nuanced, people's words carefully edited. Ray's religious beliefs take precedence over theology, worn out status quo thinking is elevated to the level of theology and Ray's agenda to demonize homosexuality and homosexuals is the real purpose.

It is anti-gay religious propaganda. There is nothing biblical or Christian about this fraudulent flick. Your continued defense of this movie is bewildering.

Dec 31, 2015
More discussion
by: Robert C

Kevin S - There seems to be a double standard here. A detailed critique of Ray Comfort's movie, theology and his motivations = OK - Attempting to provide a detailed contrary view (which admittedly lacks theological proficiency) = smoke and mirrors?

Rick - Although the movie's focus is homosexuality, Ray's ministry does not solely address homosexuality, but seeks to evangelize to all unsaved. He is claiming that anyone (regardless of sexuality) who makes a profession of faith in Christ, and then continues to live how they want to live, is self deceived.

Rick's comment: Hi Robert - No, that is not what Ray is claiming in the context of the movie. He beieves the lesbian couple is lost and on their way to hell. He tells them, "Gotta turn from all sin." That is not a biblical message, not a Christian message, not the message Jesus and Paul preached.

Your views differ from Ray's on whether a homosexual relationship and the Bible are compatible. So obviously he will be encouraging repentance of a sin that you do not.

Rick's comment: No, he will be encouraging repentance of something he THINKS is a sin but which is never called a sin in the Bible, except in a few new translations which inject the word homosexual into the Bible when it has not been in the Bible for 1900 years.

By the way, Ray used to reject the new translations and recommend the old KJV. He used to publish his Evidence Bible in the KJV but not in the NIV. Now he uses new translations in his witnessing to gays because he believes the new translations legitimate his false views about gays.

It would be easy to demonize his motivations because of this difference of opinion. However, I do not believe Ray is out to shame or discredit people's faith, but is encouraging them to examine the genuineness of their faith.

Rick's comment: Wow Robert - that is odd. When I critique Ray's false gospel, you call it demonizing Ray's motivations. If Ray doesn't want to shame or discredit anyone's faith, the best way to keep from doing that is to tell them the truth when he is witnessing.

Inventing a non-biblical requirement and foisting that non-biblical requirement on lesbians and gays is not kind, not nice, not loving. Frankly, it's kinda creepy.

The woman in the movie had said words (20:23) but she didn't really believe in anything (27:30). Ray wanted that woman to be genuinely converted.

Rick's comment: If Ray wants genuine converts, he should start giving the genuine gospel. There is nothing in the genuine gospel about turning from all sins to get saved or to stay saved or to prove to a Calvinist that you are saved.

Jan 03, 2016
Clarification and references
by: Robert C

I would like to point out some things about Ray's witnessing to the lesbian couple and also mention some scriptures that support the need for Christians to turn from all sin.

1. The woman on the right in the lesbian couple is not a Christian (but she does know something of Christianity).
- Firstly, the woman claims to be a Christian
WOMAN: "I accept Christ into my heart and that's all that I need to be a . . ."
- Next Ray clarifies what becoming a Christian would mean.
RAY: "Well no, you got to repent; turn from all sin. No lying, stealing, adultery, fornication, homosexuality; you got to turn from all sin."
- Finally, the woman says that she can turn from her sins on her death bed, if she really doesn't believe that she will make it.
WOMAN: "Well, I can do that on my death bed if I really don't believe that I'll make it."

Rick's comment: Hi Robert - If Ray is talking about a changed life AFTER salvation, that is not what the movie portrays. In the movie, even by your explanation, Ray believes the lesbians are unsaved and believing they are unsaved, he tells them "gotta turn from all sin."

Later in the film we see a clip where the woman is asked if she believes in God. The same woman says that she doesn't believe in anything (27:30). Ray cannot shame or discredit this woman's faith as, by her own admission, she has no faith. The lesbians are lost and are going to hell because they remain in their sins, not because they are lesbians. (Although I do concede that Ray's movie does argue that one of their sins IS remaining is a homosexual relationship.)

Rick's comment: Yes, that is interesting since both you and Ray assume homosexuality is a sin without producing any in context verses which say that. For 1900 years, the word homosexual has not been in our Bible in any language.

2. Christians are to 'turn from all sin'.
Nb - I have already pointed out that this does not mean that Christians are to be perfect but that they are to seek to live holy lives in accordance with God's will. As said before, it is not working for salvation, but a consequence of our salvation.

Rick's comment: And of course, I've never contended that 'turn from all sin' means sinless perfection. You are adroit at restating a view that is not an issue. The point at issue is Ray Comfort telling lost sinners to whom he witnesses that they must turn from all sin. On the dozens of witnessing videos I have watched, he never says 'turn from all sin' in the context of living a holy life AFTER salvation.

2 Timothy 2:19b - "And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity." KJV
"Everyone who confesses the name of the LORD must turn away from wickedness." ESV

(nb - The woman tried to name the name of Christ but Ray pointed out that this would mean turning away from wickedness/sin/iniquity.)

The Bible says that CHRIST died so that we could be dead to sin (1 Peter 2:24); that Christ suffered because of our sins (1 Peter 3:18); that He came to take away our sins (1 John 3:5); that through no less than Christ's blood, we are washed of sin (Revelations 1:5).

Christ's actions show that the we should turn from all sin because sin caused the suffering and bloodshed of our Saviour. Additionally, we would turn from all sin, because Christ died so that we would be removed from our sins.

Rick's comment: As I have pointed out, no one in the Bible ever says 'turn from all sin' to lost folks as part of preaching the gospel. You are beating a dead horse by trying to shift the conversation from salvation to sanctification.

PAUL is saying that Christians should 'turn from all sin' when he says that Christians should be dead to sin (Romans 6:2 & 11); that Christians should not be serving sin (Romans 6:6); that Christians should not be ruled by, used of, or dominated by sin (Romans 6:12-14).

Rick's comment: Again, Ray in Audacity, is talking to people he believes are unsaved. Romans 6 is not aimed at unsaved people.

The writer of HEBREWS tells us to lay aside every sin (Hebrews 12:1) PETER also confirms that we are dead to sins and should be living unto righteousness (1 Peter 2:24); that, having the same mind as Christ, we should have ceased from sin (1 Peter 4:1)

JOHN tells us that whoever sins has not seen or known God (1 John 3:6); that he who sins is of the devil (1 John 3:8); that he who sins is not born of God (1 John 3:9)

I believe that it is clear from scripture that we are to turn from all sins.

I also believe that Ray is accurately giving the gospel.

Rick's comment: I'm trying to figure out if you are being intentionally obtuse by making these arguments. The issue is not Christian living, holiness or sanctification for saved folks. The issue is Ray Comfort adding to the gospel by telling lost folks they must 'turn from all sin' as part of his effort to lead them to Christ.

PS - Rick, I would appreciate it, if possible, for you to comment after my comment (rather than throughout it) as I feel it unfairly disrupts the flow of what I am writing. Thanks. Robert C

Rick's comment: I answer point by point to make it easier for readers to follow point - counterpoint.

Jan 03, 2016
Intent of debate
by: Kevin S.

ROBERT C. - QUOTE - "Kevin S - There seems to be a double standard here. A detailed critique of Ray Comfort's movie, theology and his motivations = OK - Attempting to provide a detailed contrary view (which admittedly lacks theological proficiency) = smoke and mirrors?'

It is not and has not; up to this point in time, been my attempt to "critique" Rays "INTENT". Only God can judge the heart. HOWEVER, it is a totally different and separate issue to critique and judge his words, and subsequently his spiritually careless and selectively damning video.

As a writer, like Rick, when you produce a controversial media which will be viewed by the public, it is ridiculously naive to NOT expect critique, controversy, and out n out literary and verbal crucifixion. Yet Rick and I have hardly risen to that level of critiquing.

The Scripture most certainly not only allow us to critique some ones theology, it admonishes us to do so(according to the Apostle Paul).

My so named "ATTEMPT" to provide a detailed contrary view is absolutely NOT lacking THEOLOGICAL PROFICIENCY, especially after 7 years of Bible College/Seminary, ten years of ministry across the world, and an earned BA, MASTERS, and PhD.(MDIV). It is an insult to carelessly make demeaning comments like that even if in ignorance. It speaks to who you are rather than who I'm.

Finally; My smoke and mirrors are founded in years of doctrinal, linguistic, and cultural studies. And while debate is a process of discovery of the truth, insults are the feeble tools of the uneducated who only seek to win an argument, determining "who is right", rather than having a productive debate, determining "what is right".

So much like those who espouse RELIGION rather than Biblical truth; your arguments and personal insults seem self-serving and narcissistic as opposed to seeking Biblical enlightenment through debate.

At 64 years old and after conversations with tens of thousands of people; I have learned to save my breath. There seems to be no further need for me to comment on an unproductive, biased and closed-minded group of nonsensical and accusatory ramblings.

Rick has an abundantly greater resource of grace, understanding, and patience. I'll leave you in his capable hands. "There is none so blind as he who will not see"

Jan 05, 2016
Apology and elaboration
by: Robert C

Kevin S - My apologies. I saw MYSELF as the one attempting to give the contrary view. Therefore, I was agreeing with you when you said that MY comments were lacking theological proficiency.

I was trying to ask why a detailed case (from Rick) against Ray comforts movie was OK but MY attempting to write a detailed case supporting some elements was 'smoke and mirrors'. I did not mean to offend and I am sorry if I have misunderstood your comments.

Rick - Salvation or sanctification? Good point and thank you for directing me/us to the heart of the matter.

I agree that the two are being blurred when Ray speaks to the lesbian couple. However, I also think it needed in this case because the woman claims to be saved. Ray is pointing out an aspect of sanctification to this woman because it is an aspect that should have followed her 'salvation'. i.e. If she truly were converted she should be seeking to forsake all sin.

Rick's comment: Hi Robert - If that is what Ray is doing, it does not come off that way in the movie. Instead, the movie makes it appear that Ray is telling a woman he believes is lost, that she must 'turn from all sin' to get saved. THAT is the problem because that is not part of the gospel and is not part of getting saved.

If I am to repent (have a change of mind) and be saved, this will have consequences in relation to God, my sin, who has authority over my life, my purpose on earth, my priorities and a whole lot of other things. How much of this broader context needs to be mentioned when witnessing to the unsaved is a more general discussion but in this particular case, I believe Ray brings up 'turning from all sin' to achieve two things:
1. Highlight the impotence of the woman's previous 'conversion' and,
2. Encourage her to see her need for true conversion.

PS - Sorry about the misunderstanding about 'sinless perfection'. I genuinely thought that you equated 'turn from all sins' with a requirement for 'sinless perfection'.

Your section entitled, 'YOU haven't turned from ALL your sins', confused me. You give the strong impression that when Ray's uses the phrase 'turn from all sins', that he is requiring new converts to be sinlessly perfect.

Rick's comment: And yet, without reading into the movie, your supposition that Ray is referring to sanctification and your admission that Ray was blurring the gospel by telling the lesbians to 'turn from all sin,' Ray's witnessing as portrayed in the movie does indeed tell lost people that they must 'turn from all sin,' which is not a biblical message.

Certain phrases in the comments added to my misunderstanding, such as:
- 'Ray hasn't turned from all sin when he got saved';
- 'All of us kept sinning and all of us struggle with habitual sins even though we are saved',
- 'The common sense meaning of "turn from all sins" conveys an impossible requirement to the lost sinner.'

After reading these, I thought that you were claiming that none of us were sinlessly perfect, and therefore that Ray was unfair in requiring people to 'turn from all sins' (be sinlessly perfect) to get saved.

I now know that you were not talking about sinless perfection, but what did you mean?

Rick's comment: I was pointing out that the turn from all sin mantra is not a biblical message. No one in the Bible preached that message to anyone anywhere anytime.

If I have to turn from all sins to get saved, that is an impossible requirement for a human being. I am not a Calvinist but Ray is a Calvinist. As a Calvinist, Ray believes that no lost person can call upon Jesus as His Savior and get saved.

Ray, as all Calvinists, believes in unconditional election, that God in eternity past chose / elected totally depraved and totally fallen people to salvation. In electing some to salvation, He damned everyone else by not electing them to salvation.

Then God had to save the people He elected, using irresistible grace and God saved those elect people against their totally fallen will. Then and only then can those now saved individuals believe on Jesus. In plainer words, according to Calvinist belief, unsaved people can only believe on Jesus after they are converted, regenerated, saved against their will.

That is what makes the Audacity presentation of the gospel so egregious. Believing what Ray believes as a Calvinist, he still tells the lesbians who he believes are lost, "You gotta turn from all sin." He says that believing they cannot possibly turn from any sin because Ray believes their will is totally depraved and fallen, unable to believe on Jesus or turn from sin.

Ray says that believing the Calvinist lie that even if they could turn from all sin and call upon God, God would only save them if they were elect. Calvinists believe that non-elect people have not a snowball's chance in hell of getting saved.

Ray also believes God will not save any non-elect person who calls upon Him and that God is just and right to send non-elect people to hell even if they call upon Him for salvation. That Creepy Calvinism is the framework through which Ray views the Bible and the framework which compels him to say the things he says when witnessing.

Ray's witnessing is his attempt to obey the Great Commission while his Calvinist belief system screams at him that no one he witnesses to can get saved because the only people who get saved are people whose fallen will God sovereignly overpowers. In plainer words, God only saves people by saving them against their fallen will.

Contra the Creepy Calvinist belief system, In the Bible, Jesus' death on the cross is presented as penal substitution, in which Jesus dies for the sins of the world, even for false prophets, for those who deny Him and for folks who end up not getting saved.

Scripture tells us our sins were imputed to Jesus on the cross so that He was literally our Substitute, dying as us for us, taking upon Himself all the wrath of God against our sins. In the wisdom of the Trinitarian Godhead, God punished Himself for our sins so that He can offer salvation to all who will receive it.

When we receive Jesus Christ as our Savior from hell, sin and the wrath of God, God imputes the righteousness of Christ to us so that it is as if we lived the sinless life Jesus lived. In plainer words, once we are saved, God views us as justified, sanctified and therefore sinlessly perfect.

Sinless perfection is our standing but not our state. Our state is that we are saved but still in the body of this flesh. And so, we still sin and struggle with sin. In plainer words, our actual state is that we are still sinners but we are saved sinners, with the righteousness of Christ imputed to us.

That is called justification by faith.

Jan 09, 2016
Robert, thanks for your apology - here's my heartfelt response.
by: Kevin S.

Robert C. - Please let me speak to the INTENT of our heart, in what Rick and I have said. After knowing Rick for several years, and having shared many spiritual conflicts and society and religious biases, I can speak to who he is, what he believes and the intent of his heart.

From this point on, I'll use "we" referring to Rick and I, both as Christians and as gay men.
We are basically concerned when any statements are made which cloud, muddy, confuse, mislead, misguide, defer or replace, the clarity of the message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as proclaimed by the Apostle Paul.

Sadly, many statements by preachers, TV evangelists, missionaries and spiritual leaders are made, perhaps with good intentions but also with bad theology and/or human pride. In the Church we've become comfortable with using ecclesiastical verbiage about salvation, that we as believers, understand, but the unsaved either misunderstand or view as religious.

For example, accepting Jesus in your heart, turning your life over to Christ, turning from all sin or making a 180 degree turn, giving up sin, walking the isle and leaving the sin at your seat, and so many other unclear and confusing proclamations from a pulpit or during a witnessing effort.

The Church all to often fails miserably to separate SALVATION and SERVICE (as a child of God after salvation). Mixing those when we witness to lost folks is like mixing like oil and water. Paul made it clear in Galatians 1:6-9, if we add anything to the gospel of salvation by Jesus, paid by his shed blood, and secured by his resurrection, we are perverting that Gospel with works, and therefore we are accursed.

Sadly it has become okay for Christians to go off track in regards to the simplicity and gracious truth of the Gospel, because of their particular repulsion to homosexuality. Honestly Robert, when was the last time you've seen or heard a spiritual leader address divorce, adultery, gossip, and a number of other sins with the same fervor they use to attack gays?

Yet homosexuality, being gay (the emotions and feelings), is not a sin, for they are not acts, they are feelings. Heterosexuals are not immoral or moral because they are heterosexual. They chose the morality via their behavior, not the sexual orientation. And that is also true of homosexuals. We chose our morality not our sexual orientation.

You see, we can also be moral or immoral, depending on our behavior, our actions. Big surprise, many of us chose not to live a bar scene-hookup sexually promiscuous life. Many of us will do, and have done what heterosexual Christians do. We find a person we love, commit to them, live a monogamous sexual life as a married couple.

And now legal marriage is available to us and we can live our lives in harmony with our faith and with our sexual orientation. There is NO gay lifestyle, as movies and books, both Christian and non-Christian, like to stereotype us as having. There are many lifestyles, some honoring to God, some not!

I'm going to assume you are a believer for arguments sake but only God knows if that is the case. We do understand that most believers do not understand what seems to you to be an oxymoron - GAY CHRISTIANS. That's primarily true because of two facts. First, is a person born gay or do their actions and environment make them gay?

Second; is the gay orientation, the gay feelings, the gay emotions, and the romantic and physical attractions to the same sex, a sin? In theology in my freshmen year we learned a basic premise of Biblical Christianity. It is: We're not sinners because we sin, we sin because we are sinners, (it's our nature).

The example here is not about sin per say, it's about the fact we are gay because it's an innate characteristic, just like heterosexuality is an innate characteristic. People are not gay because they engage in a particular sexual behavior. Many were FAITHFULLY married to a woman, in my case, for 34 years.

In those 34 years, I didn't consider myself gay, for I had never, "done that". (The act). But a time came when I discovered the feelings I had denied. I had always been gay. I'd just never had a same sex physical relationship. You see, I realized the feelings defined my sexual orientation and emotions, not any acts because I had never done anything gay.

Yet I'm as gay as gay gets and always have been. I served the Lord in ministry, accomplished a conservative Christian education, was a faithful Christian husband and dad to two sons, raising them in a Christian home. Yet I'm still gay.

Can you begin to imagine what I feel when those who have never sacrificed anything to serve the Lord, ridicule, demean, criticize, call me pervert, equate being gay to being a pedophile? And many go as far as telling me I'm going to hell dispite the teachings of the Scriptures. Yet none of that is true.

Movies like Ray's Audacity lump every LGBT person into the category of degenerate sinners, under the banner of "we love the sinner but hate the sin." The specifics of Audacity and its theological bases are flawed, intentionally inflammatory, and only serve to reinforce the misconceptions Christians have about us while pushing the LGBTQ community further away from the Gospel by confusing the Gospel with legalistic misinformation.

If you are really a seeker of truth, read some of Rick's information about what the Bible says or does not say about homosexuality and in so doing you'll at least be enlightened to our perspective. You'll better understand our motives and why we say what we say. You need not agree, just attempt to understand.

Jan 10, 2016
Unfair representation
by: Robert C

Rick, Your review of Audacity implies that Ray uses the phrase 'turn from all sin' as an impossible requirement for sinners to be saved. When we examine Ray's wider ministry (or even the movie in its entirety) this just isn't true of him.

Based upon this small quote (which I think appears once?) Ray's 'false' theology of salvation is expounded and you say:
- Ray is 'adding to the gospel'.
- that it is 'a major distortion of the gospel'.
- 'Ray Comfort makes an impossible demand that no one can fulfil.'
- that what Ray is allegedly saying is, 'perversely unscriptural'.
- that 'Ray Comfort snarkily tells us that gays and lesbians who say they got saved are self-deceived. If they cannot stop being gay, if they cannot become heterosexual, according to Ray's opinion, they didn't really turn from all sins so they didn't really get saved. That is a wicked, mean-spirited, ungodly, unbiblical message to preach to lost sinners.'

Rick's comment: Hi Robert - I see what you are saying yet I am not the one who spent a million dollars to make what is essentially, an anti-gay movie. I am not the one who believes that lesbians and gays cannot possibly be saved if they are still gay or lesbian. I am not the one who, in my witnessing, tells people whom I believe are lost that they "gotta turn from all sins."

Ray does those things. You feel that my Bible oriented, doctrinal response is less than gracious. You feel that me pointing out that Ray is a Calvinist and that his Calvinist belief system impacts the way he witnesses is not gracious.

It seems strange to me that you do not regard doing those things to gays and lesbians and adding "turn from all sins" to the gospel message as ungracious.

You have most recently gone on to imply that part of Ray's 'Creepy Calvinism' is to witness to people whom he knows will never become Christians (as if he were meanly seeking to taunt them by holding a treasured prize just out of their reach). Yet ironically, the meaning you give to 'turn from all sins' would be completely contrary to the view of any Calvinist worth his salt.

Rick's comment: Beliefs have consequences. I am quite sure that Ray would admit that some of the folks to whom he witnesses will not become Christians. As a Calvinist, Ray does believe that there are many people who can never be saved because, according to Calvinism, in eternity past, God never elected them to salvation.

You wrote: "(as if he were meanly seeking to taunt them by holding a treasured prize just out of their reach)" - That is not anything I wrote; that is your view, your words. I didn't characterize Ray in that mean way.

You also wrote: "Yet ironically, the meaning you give to 'turn from all sins' would be completely contrary to the view of any Calvinist worth his salt."

As I've pointed out, given Ray's Calvinist views, that is pretty much true - Ray says things in his witnessing which are not biblical and which also do not line up with his Calvinism.

As a contemporary of Ray, I am 65 years old and I am also a street witnessing, tract passing soul winning born again Christian. My purpose is to challenge Ray and the ministry he leads, to stop the unbiblical "turn from all sins" gospel and preach the glorious gospel of Christ.

From my first response I have been concerned that Ray has been unfairly represented. I remain of the same opinion. Obviously you disagree with Ray's dissenting view on homosexuality, I just wish it could have been done more graciously.

PS - Kevin, You say that most Christians believe that a gay Christian is an oxymoron. In your experience, do most Christians appear to be condemning anyone who is same-sex attracted, or merely condemning homosexual acts?

Feb 13, 2016
well worded critique
by: jamie

I made myself watch this movie. it mimics the views of the evangelical church and bible group that I belong to . Never have I really cared about this issue in any way until my own precious daughter came out lesbian. Now I have to care because of my love for her. Now I read the pertinent verses for myself, pray & seek answers to original text translations.

Now I see how the church has perpetuated misinformation (surely Satan is thrilled) that has deluded generations and tortured unknown numbers. May we all have a loved one to slap us from our own slumber on this issue. Shameful that I couldn't bring myself to care by loving my neighbor as myself. Shameful that I could only care when it was my daughter.

Rick's comment: Hi Jamie - The Lord will use you to share these truths with others who have ears to hear.

Feb 14, 2016
The Christian confusion
by: Kevin S.

ROBERT C. - If you simply exchange HETEROSEXUAL for HOMOSEXUAL and then ask the question, Can you separate sexual attraction, sexual identity, emotional attraction, romantic preference, and sexual expression, from being HETEROSEXUAL, you may realize how impossible and profoundly illogical that convoluted thinking truly is. Why must we LGBTQ people live lives separated from our physical interaction with the person we love, with whom we have emotional and romantic attractions?

Is it because homosexual sexual acts offend God, or is it because they offend religious folks and some non-religious heterosexuals? I suggest the latter, the offense of the religious is the true problem for Christianity in general, which promotes that illogic. To attempt partial and superficial acceptance of gays by separating our sexual identity and actually living out our sexuality through having sex with the one we love, is ludicrous.

In fact, it's only a feeble attempt to appear inclusive. Spare us the insult. If we can't love our lover as you love yours, then your offering is the same old "similar rights but not equal rights". We want what you enjoy, the freedom to express our love to its fullest extent. To try to separate us from our physicality is asking us to be celibate monks, so we'll be acceptable to religious folks. You see, God already accepts us.

And please don't insult my intelligence by equating our homosexual physical interaction and expression of love to adultery and fornication. That's an apples and oranges comparison. I, like Rick, believe we as gay men are to adhere to biblical standards of monogamous, legal and life-long relationship. Obviously you and we, part ways on the same gender issue.

But we do see it as Biblical and Rick has spent much of his time, knowledge, and energy, writing a book that is true to Biblical exegeses and uses sound Biblical hermeneutics, which supports that truth. This website is as biblically sound and theological correct as any I've experienced in 56 years of being a Christian and 44 years in formal Biblical study.

I'm not trying to brag, however, after earning a BA, ThB, and PhD, and an honorary DD, in Biblical Studies, I think I have a good understanding of how to discern God's Word. Finally, this movie and this man, are an offense to me as a student of the Word, and as a gay Christian.

Your continued defense of his thinly disguised homophobic movie, wrapped in pseudo-Christian love and concern, says much about you and where you're coming from. May I also make an observation? Your continued commenting and relentless arguments on this site which you know are contrary to your perspective, tells me you may not be as SURE, and CONVINCED of your argument as it appears on the surface.

Maybe you're searching beyond the certainty you've represented here. Maybe you're looking for a truth, to be convinced, to be persuaded by facts outside the Status Quo evangelical thinking. I hope so. I hope you're truly open to new info. Because if you're not, I don't get your persistence? Unless you are just bored.

My former uncertainty on this issue was addressed both with Rick's book, this website and more importantly, personal study using all I was taught in Bible College and Seminary (which were conservative institutions).

Ray make talk the talk of Christian love and "we love the sinner but hate the sin" bumper sticker theology, but his actions as declared in his movie conflict with love, forgiveness, redemption, and inclusiveness. His adherence to Calvinistic Theology says much about his pseudo-evangelistic intent. His movie subtly condemns more than it offers invitation to the salvation in the gospel.

May 29, 2016
Biblical Definition of Repentance
by: Bible Believing Christian

If we truly want the correct definition of the word repentance, then we must go to the scriptures to see how God defines it.

Matthew 12:41 (KJV)
41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

We know that only the saints of God are called to judge according according to the letter written to the Corinthian church.

1 Corinthians 6:2 (KJV)
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

So we see can conclude that the men of Nineveh who repented were saved and subsequently made saints of God even though they were still looking forward to the cross.

Therefore, if you want to define what repentance is you will have to go back to the third chapter of the book of Jonah to properly define it.

Jonah 3:1-10 (KJV)
1 And the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the second time, saying,
2 Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee.
3 So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days' journey.
4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.
6 For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.
7 And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:
8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.
9 Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?
10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

According to verse 8, they repented by "turning every one from his evil way."

That sounds like turning from sin to me, or was our Lord and Saviour teaching works salvation according to your logic sinner.

Stop teaching the false doctrine of Antinomianism and get saved by first making a mental decision to turn away from your sodomy and ask the Lord Jesus Christ to save you from this abomination. Give him the broom and he will clean your life up.

We can't do it because we are helplessly guilty of breaking God's law. That doesn't give us a right to break his laws. Many of my fellow Baptist are guilty of teaching this same false gospel of easy believism.

They will teach the doctrine of eternal security correctly, but they will fail to teach the full council of God correctly in regards to repentance. I really feel sorry for you and your followers.

There is 99% truth in everything your teaching but it only takes an eye dropper of rat poisoning to kill someone if mixed in with Koolaid.

I do believe in Lordship Salvation as you and many others call it.

Jude 1:4 (KJV)
4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

2 Peter 2:1 (KJV)
1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Sir! You are an ungodly man and a false prophet according to Jude 1:4 and 2 Pt 2:1. You twist the scriptures to suit your sinful lifestyle.

Take my advise and close the site down before your bring additional judgement upon yourself and others.

Rick's comment: LOL - another missive from an Anonymous gutless wonder who rants that I am "an ungodly man and a false prophet."

For the record, in the Jonah passage, God is the one who repents or changes His mind. Quoting the verses and then asserting that God has defined repentance as turning from your sins, when the passage doesn't say or imply that, is a gross misreading.

The Jonah passage in no way defines repentance as turning from one's sins. Turning from one's sins is the result of repentance, not the definition of repentance and not a precursor of salvation.

Turning from your sins comes AFTER repentance, not before repentance. Any Calvinist worth his salt believes that no one can turn from his sins until he is saved.

Repentance has always meant: to change your mind - it has never meant, to turn from your sins although that happens when a man gets saved.

I pray you will repent your slavish devotion to John Calvin, another gutless wonder who had people flogged, imprisoned and starved in dungeons and burned at the stake for disagreeing with him about Bible doctrine.

Why are Calvinists so arrogant that they think disagreeing with them makes a fellow Christian a false prophet?

Disagreeing with you on the gay issue does not make me an ungodly man or a false prophet.

Thinking that it does indicates you are a young Christian or a proud Christian or an arrogant Christian or a Christian who isn't much of a Bible student.

I suggest a careful reading of 1 Timothy 5:1 - please read it and take it to heart since it is God's command to young Christians.

I am theologically wary of:


because all of them take verses out of context to promote their false teaching.

May 31, 2016
The simple answer is linguistics
by: Kevin S.

Dear "Bible believing Christian", While your excruciatingly long definition of repentance seem to make logical sense to you, it failed many litmus tests of sound Biblical exegesis. To save time let's look at repentance. Strong's 3341 - μετάνοια (metanoia). In the KOINE Greek. The word means a "change of mind."

And it does most often result in a change of behavior or sorrow for our sin. However, a change of behavior or feeling sorry, is not the meaning of repentance, nor is a change of behavior or sorrow required for salvation. To assert a change of behavior, turning from sin, regret, as a condition of salvation equates to WORKS FOR SALVATION.

Most OT verses are examples of God's temporal judgment upon the unbeliever for not forsaking sins. They are not in context of believing in Jesus and receiving eternal life. Most of the texts refer to the judgment of the Great Tribulation (Rev. 9:20,21 and 16:9,11.)

In studying the Scriptures, it's essential to understand dispensational truths. Most bad theology stems from not having a knowledge of the roots of dispensational truth. Confusion and bad theology happen by misunderstanding God's contracts (covenants) at different times with man.

Jun 02, 2016
Mostly revision
by: Robert C

Hello Rick and Kevin. Just to recap: Earlier in the year, we agreed that 'repent' means 'a change of mind'.

When I asked about what the mind was changed?
Rick said this would include, 'A change of mind about their sin.'

Presumably this means sinners now see their sins as wrong before God; see a need to be saved from the penalty of their sins; see the payment in Christ's precious blood that their sins required.
After realizing this, it is natural for a Christian to want to avoid sinning.

This is what Ray is speaking about when he tells people they should 'turn from all sin'. Ray's 'false gospel' is only found through quote mining and ignoring context; not by examining his doctrine as a whole.

Rick's comment: Hi Robert - That's odd, accusing me of quote mining because I quoted Ray's words. The Audacity script was written by Ray and accurately depicts his unbiblical view of gays and homosexuality. The Audacity movie conveys Ray's true beliefs. Ray wrote it and Ray believes it as written.

It is not quote mining to point out Ray's beliefs as he presented them in the Audacity movie.

You and Ray are content to ignore the biblical cultural doctrinal historical linguistic and religious context of the clobber verses.

You and Ray are content to rip the clobber verses out of context and then insist that the out of context verses mean something they did not mean in context.

That is not an honest way to handle the Bible but it demonstrates that you and Ray have an agenda unrelated to God's truth in scripture.

PS - Kevin, I am still curious about my earlier question, as I don't think you answered it directly. It was, "In your experience, do most Christians appear to be condemning anyone who is same-sex attracted, or merely condemning homosexual acts?"

Jun 02, 2016
To Robert C.
by: Kevin S.

QUOTE: PS - Kevin, I am still curious about my earlier question, as I don't think you answered it directly. It was, "In your experience, do most Christians appear to be condemning anyone who is same-sex attracted, or merely condemning homosexual acts?"

Sorry that I did not seem to answer your question. Let me sum up the problem with the general Christian community's condemnation of homosexuality, as I evaluate it, CONFUSION.

ASSUMING THE PERSON IS A BELIEVER, A CHRISTIAN: In the heterosexual community, emotion, love and romance, are not exclusively associated or linked to having SEX.

A heterosexual person can chose moral or immoral acts and behavior. It equally true that a heterosexual's SPIRITUALITY is not based on their sexual orientation but rather, their relationship with their Lord.

All those rules change when heterosexuals talk about homosexuals. Emotion, love, romance, everything we are and do is linked to SEX.

My experience is that Christians in general immediately assume that all homosexuals are sexually immoral, promiscuious, adulterous, fornicators.

Most Christians associate homosexuality with immorality, therefore any physically intimate contact and every emotional, love or romantic attraction within any gay relationship, even marriage, is viewed as sinful. Most Christians equate being gay with sinful desires like alcoholism and drug addiction. They view being gay as something to be battled spiritually.

To men like myself and Rick and many of my LGBTQI friends, those judgments are an insult and come off as self-serving self righteousness.

There is also the assertion on the part of some Christians that you can be a homosexual but you must never act on any emotional or romantic attraction because doing so is regarded as sin.

Therefore, anti-gay Christians are only satisfied to accept LGBTQI Christians if we live celibate lives or in an opposite sex relationship. We are told: CONVERT/CONFORM, CONCEAL/CONFINE or suffer CONDEMNATION.

For us LGBTQI Christians, that's a heck of a poor choice and a life of emotional and physical and soulful emptiness. We LGBTQI Christians cannot dissect or divide or destroy the Godly attribute of being TRIUNE: body, soul, spirit - created in God's image, anymore than other Christians can. We are who God created in totality, including our emotions and I'm not speaking about sinful sexual desires.

And yet, Robert, that is what most Christians want and require of us when they use terminology about, "not condemning homosexuality but rather the homosexual sex acts" or hating the sin but loving the sinner.

It is my understanding and experience that in essence, it is the "SEXUAL ACTS" they envision that are the real problem. But even in that, they are wrong. The images in their minds, of our physical relationships are products of their pastor's pulpit tirades about how perverted gays are, sometimes using graphic language which creates porn-like mental pictures.

Their mental images stem from what they may have seen at a Gay Pride parade (hey, some of those embarrass many gays and for that I apologize).

And like heterosexuals, there are LGBTQI people who choose very overt sexually perverse lives but many more do not. You just don't see or hear about us because we are at home doing the dishes, walking the dog, cuddling with our loved one as we watch The Voice, and loving God and being thankful for what He has given us.

I say to the general Christian public, spend less time thinking about what I do in my bedroom with my spouse behind closed doors and more time looking in the mirror at the person YOU are or should be as a child of God.

If I have not said this before Robert, let me say it now: "I'm content with who I am as a man, a child of God, a born again Christian believer in Jesus Christ for 55 years. I feel in harmony with my Lord, my faith, my Bible and my sexual orientation.

And best of all Robert, I know why God allowed me to be born gay. I understand and feel confident in His plan and purpose for me and my directive as a GAY CHRISTIAN. And frankly, it is not required that anyone else share in that confidence. But I did want to address your inquiry because of the humble attitude you displayed in asking. Hope I have helped.

Jun 04, 2016
Further thoughts for Kevin
by: Robert C

Rick's comment: Robert - I deleted your accusation against me about quote mining.

Kevin, Thanks for your response. I think I understand more because of your explanation.

Concerning the morality of homosexual sex, we know that there is disagreement amongst Christians. I can think of at least three difference positions.

1. It is moral.
2. It is a matter of conscience (moral for some but not others).
3. It is immoral.

Obviously Ray is of the third viewpoint.

But what you said about emotions being linked with sexuality made me think about individuals who are same-sex attracted but hold to the third viewpoint.

Church communities can be very family-centric at times. Singles can often be left on the outer. Additionally, males are generally less capable of developing and exploring emotional depth in their friendships. These factors (and no doubt many others) could lead to emotional isolation for a Christian male that is same-sex attracted. If so, they will have been condemned to a life of celibacy, but also banished to an emotional desert as well.

Anyway, I have some food for thought that I need to still digest but thanks for the discussion and the openness.

Jun 05, 2016
EMOTIONS - a response to Robert
by: Kevin S.

I'm glad we've been able to share some information, and maybe come to some common ground. If I may, I'd like to share a personal view point on all this.

I'm not sure that I mentioned the fact that I write romantic novels, love stories. I began writing because of a personal life changing event. The short of it is, I came out in 2006 after 32 years living in denial in a 32 year marriage. I was honest with her and she left.

Very shortly afterwards I met the first man in my life and fell in love. The love I had for him was unlike anything I'd ever known. It felt NORMAL, NATURAL, and MEANT-TO-BE. Being with him (not in a sexual way), made me feel more of a man emotionally and spiritually, than all those 32 years of marriage had done.

I felt whole before God, complete as His creation and fulfilled. Eventually we came to the place of marriage, which as you might be able to imagine, felt strangely unfamiliar. But my heart and soul affirmed my love. In all the time we were together, I never felt I was violating Gods will, or shame for loving a man.

Dominic was a former Catholic priest, although he was a bit of a rebel. Our many days of sharing our spiritual lives reinforced our relationship with God, and drew us together in an unusual bond, brothers in Christ, best friends, brothers as humans and lovers.

Robert, there was nothing immoral about who we were or what we shared. There was no basis for shame, only cause for celebration of a great love found. Sadly, Dominic died in an auto accident just 119 days after we met. We never got the life we hoped for but Dom found the unconditional love and acceptance he had prayed for, in me.

His love taught me how to love in a way I'd never known, to love God, even when life seems to hurt so much, to love others when they say angry, cruel and unsubstantiated things about you and to love someone totally and unconditionally.

That is why I have absolutely no question in my mind that God created me to be who and what I am, without hesitation. Dom's love and death inspired me to write my first novel, based on our love.

Ultimately, the morality or immorality of my life is judged by my Heavenly Father for He and He alone knows my heart. I stopped concerning myself about what others think of who I am, what I do and especially who I love. Sometimes, as in this case, I feel compelled to answer, because their heart seems in the right place.

Robert, I wanted you to know just how personal all that I've said is to me for I have lived what I preach.

Click here to add your own comments

Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How? Simply click here to return to Sermons.

Site Build It! Site Build It!