When They Won’t Listen: Having Difficult Conversations Workshop with Justin Lee

You know what you believe, but how do you talk to non-affirming parents, pastors, or friends who don’t want to listen? In this workshop, Justin Lee, author of Torn and Talking Across the Divide, discusses common barriers you’re likely to encounter and shares effective strategies for overcoming them-based on research, biblical principles, and his 20 years of experience having these difficult conversations. Learn practical skills you can use the next time someone wants to argue with you about what the Bible really says, changing hearts and minds without letting it turn into an argument.

[@danielwilda8167]

Excellent presentation you have a true understanding of what God is truly saying to us. Rather than bigotry from insecure people who rationalize there lack of knowledge to feel superior to other human beings ✝️💙⭐️🇺🇸🌈👍🏳️‍🌈✡️

[@The_Word_Is_The_Way]

So if a person is more knowledgeable than someone bringing the affirming argument disagrees, that by default is "bigotry"? What happened to rational views?

[@user-vm5yk2js6w]

@@The_Word_Is_The_Way HERE SOME SCIENTIFIC FACTS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY: + The WHO, World Health Organization, stated clearly, that homosexuality not a disease or disorder, but a healthy natural sexual orientation. + It is most likely innate (determined by SNP in several genes and by antibodies (NLGN4Y) during pregnancy), as the opposite sex is never sexual attractive to people born homosexual. + Evolution scientists stated in several publications, that homosexuality exists since sexuality exists, since 385 million years. + They also stated, that having homosexual members in the own tribe, gives several evolutionary advantages, which explains the permanent share of 4-10% homosexuals of the population. >> So, the question would be rather: why putting an ethical limit on homosexuality if its natural, healthy and even with a natural sense? >> Especially now as more and more homosexuals marry and adopt and raise kids that else wise would have no parents.

[@keithrogers4170]

That's very powerful Justin.Sharing personal experience can profoundly shake the views and prejudices of others.

[@peraman2022]

Before having a debate with someone, both parties have to use the same language. I usually like to ask how someone defines certain words before going further with a debate/discussion.

[@bradwalker7233]

Very wise and humbling loving compassionate!!!🙏✝️🕊🔥🫂🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍🌈😍😍😍😍

[@keithrogers4170]

"If the burden of circumcision was enough to put people off Christ,how much more does the burden if lifelong celibacy put non believers off Christ?" That is a superb and really incisive parallel to make. This attitude to LGBTs...condemning them to a loveless life of loneliness.. is a major obstacle to winning souls to christ.

[@michaelsayad5085]

The problem with his reasoning is that it would lead to complete absurdities if he were logically consistent. For example, what if someone was only attracted to animals or children? Would it not be a heavy burden for that person to live a life of celibacy rather than commit these heinous sexual sins? The Bible is very clear on this subject. In Mark 10:5-9, Jesus overturns Moses’ law on divorce quoting from Genesis a timeless principle about God’s purpose for marriage. It includes a male and female becoming one. This is the Biblical definition of marriage regardless of these other types of “deceptive philosophy”. (Colossians 2:8). Justin seems like a kind person but he is not being objective on these issues. He seems to be focused too much on his own experience rather than God’s Word!

[@keithrogers4170]

@@michaelsayad5085 You arent comparing like with like,so the analogy doesn't work. Bestiality and paedophilia are abusive practises,they arent expressions of love,but coercive and abusive practices that hurt and degrade the victims.Neither can consent,so they are on a par with rape! A loving and committed gay relationship is a consensual expression of affection,tenderness and mutual support.Its also an innate sexual orientation,fixed in the hypothalamus of the brain. I think you intended to reference the scripture in Matthew,not Mark....but you omitted the rest if what Jesus said-this teaching about Male-female lifelong marriage is NOT for everyone-and not everybody can accept this teaching: Matthew 19:10-13:- "Not everyone can accept this teaching,but only those to whom it is given.For there have been eunuchs who have been so from birth(this includes gay men),and there are eunuchs who have been made so by men(castrated),and there are eunuchs who have made them selves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom(Christians who choose not to marry a woman,so as to evangelise).Let the one WHO IS ABLE to receive it,receive it"

[@michaelsayad5085]

@keith rogers Lol. No, I was not referencing Matthew. It is Mark 10:4-9. Why are you strawmannirg my argument so that you can attack it? lol. Please read Mark 10 so you can respond adequately!!! That whole idea of consent between two adults principle is not Biblical. My analogy does fit because your side is trying to re-define marriage because “it’s a heavy burden”. My point is that if your side was logically consistent then you could re-define many biblical morals based on that same principle. Many people find it nearly impossible not to have pre-marital sex, for example. Again, Justin’s principle is that if it is a heavy burden then it should not apply. My principle: We Must follow Biblical ethics regardless of difficulty!!!

[@keithrogers4170]

@@michaelsayad5085 If a burden is too onerous that it causes deep depression and it's because it's a basic,fundamental human need...love,affection and companionship IS a fundamental need....and nobody has a right to place such a milestone around someone's neck that they themselves cannot bear. Sorry I was not intentionally "strawmanning" you..I genuinely you thought you meant Matthew and quoted Mark by mistake . Hell,its no big deal...and i wasn't "getting" at you..

[@keithrogers4170]

Yes here in Mark Jesus is discussing divorce and adultery...and how in many cases,divorce constitutes adultery.Yes,the normative model he describes is Male-female marriage. He doesnt develop this in Mark,but in Matthew he makes the same comment,but expounds by saying that "this teaching is not for everyone,only those who can take it".So Male-female marriage is normative for the majority,but not for the three types of eunuchs he describes. The important point is that the context is Jesus condemning divorce,there was no conception of same sex marriage...the "one man and one woman" paradigm was his way of emphasising that a man should not keep divorcing and rec marrying new women.

[@ComradeLavender]

Great points about asking questions like Jesus. I usually fail at this, but when asked about being trans, I tried. When asked "what makes you trans?" I answered "what makes you cis?" and they had no answer.

[@alanaschoffer994]

@disciple duSeigneur You're right no person can do that, But God did, and You're never gonna change the minds God has changed, open your heart truly to Him and you'll be surprised

[@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns]

The attitude that debates are beneath him doesn’t help

[@Warhol-jb9zx]

Really good Justin! So important and useful!

[@budmoore7971]

I need a support network. As a minister who has had the Lord lay the lost and rejected LGBTQ community on my heart while attending a non-affirming Church, I feel utterly alone. Regardless, I will reach out to this community and minister to those the Lord puts in front of me.

[@Jen8973]

Really good approach, very good it helps to frame the discussion before you begin to talk.

[@e_b_]

"Who made Steve" hahahhahahah 😂😂😂😂😂

[@MarcosJ-mq4lk]

Satan.

[@ddrse]

Jesus is the cure for homophobia anything short of that is unacceptable.

[@ComradeLavender]

Yes, but intelligently breaking people out of their echo chambers might make them more receptive to Jesus on deconstructing destructive interpretations of scripture.

[@alanaschoffer994]

@disciple duSeigneur @disciple duSeigneur You're right no person can do that, But God did, and You're never gonna change the minds God has changed, open your heart truly to Him and you'll be surprised

[@The_Word_Is_The_Way]

I believe Christ is the cure for lies as well. When a person says there is no support of same sex marriage in the Bible, that isn't hatred.

[@Ashdaesq]

⁠@@The_Word_Is_The_Wayconversely when a person reads into the text that the absence of explicit support of same-sex unions means that it is forbidden is hatred…

[@The_Word_Is_The_Way]

@@Ashdaesq No. This is a false equivalence and poor deduction. The revisionists are petitioning for the church to affirm same sex marriage. The definition of affirm is to assert as positive, to validate or confirmed. The Bible does no such thing in respect to same sex marriage. All examples of same sex activity in the Bible are denounced, not affirned.

[@colegio2239]

We asked my goddaughter today if she wanted to be a witness and sign our marriage certificate, and she flat out said no. We also asked if she would like to say a few words, she flat out repeated no. I helped to raise her and her siblings so we have a long history. I of course feel hurt. She and her husband are both against gay marriage, I wanted to at least have my goddaughter there, but due to the way she responded with just no to the questions above, I feel it’s going to be almost like a black cloud over the ceremony. I was wondering what you thought about this Justin. I was going to text her and tell her that if she’s uncomfortable then I will be uncomfortable, and that would defeat the purpose of the day. It’s our day and it should be a happy time. My goddaughter recently said she will never not love me, and she sees me in God’s image, but does not support the marriage. She did say she would come, but isn’t that hypocritical? If she doesn’t support us, then why would she come?

[@Justyn2941]

Super

[@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns]

What about those who are side A on same-sex eroticism and marriage, but who take issues with gender theory and some of the background claims of transgender ideology?

[@The_Word_Is_The_Way]

Notice they refuse to reply. Seems the intent is to drive this narrative that no affirming arguments and views must be on account of bigotry.

[@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns]

@@The_Word_Is_The_Way can you rephrase your reply? I’m not sure I understand. Sorry! I’m also under caffeinated

[@The_Word_Is_The_Way]

​@@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturnsSorry I sent that for someone else. But just to reiterate, the approach given is to brand anyone who may disagree with same sex affirmation on a Biblical basis branded as something negative such as "bigot" or "homophobe." They leave no room for a person being knowledgeable of the Bible opposing their argument without it being from a place of malice or ignorance.

[@stclairkaleb]

You did such an awesome delivery of such a difficult topic. Thank you, Justin, .. How can I reach you and discuss the topic a little? ❤

[@alanaschoffer994]

@disciple duSeigneur @disciple duSeigneur You're right no person can do that, But God did, and You're never gonna change the minds God has changed, open your heart truly to Him and you'll be surprised

[@dForrestTheComicker]

Anyone have a link to the study on political party mentioned in the presentation?

[@alanaschoffer994]

@disciple duSeigneur @disciple duSeigneur You're right no person can do that, But God did, and You're never gonna change the minds God has changed, open your heart truly to Him and you'll be surprised

[@miketrek8105]

🤝🤝🤝👏👏👏👏😎😎😎😎

[@bilbobaggins4403]

Dr. Wvil

[@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns]

Justin, the problem is that fence sitters desperately WANT you to have a “debate” or at least back and forth exchange on the proof texts. It HELPS them. Your constant refusal to do so actually makes it look like you’re not confident in your assessment of those texts.

[@kellymyer5318]

Well I listened on til the end… it is ALL JUST BLASPHEMOUS… 😢

[@user-vm5yk2js6w]

HERE SOME SCIENTIFIC FACTS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY: + The WHO, World Health Organization, stated clearly, that homosexuality not a disease or disorder, but a healthy natural sexual orientation. + It is most likely innate (determined by SNP in several genes and by antibodies (NLGN4Y) during pregnancy), as the opposite sex is never sexual attractive to people born homosexual. + Evolution scientists stated in several publications, that homosexuality exists since sexuality exists, since 385 million years. + They also stated, that having homosexual members in the own tribe, gives several evolutionary advantages, which explains the permanent share of 4-10% homosexuals of the population. >> So, the question would be rather: why putting an ethical limit on homosexuality if its natural, healthy and even with a natural sense? >> Especially now as more and more homosexuals marry and adopt and raise kids that else wise would have no parents.

[@The_Word_Is_The_Way]

"When they won't listen".... And what of the revisionist affirming shills who won't listen? James 3:1 NKJV My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.

[@stclairkaleb]

I attempted to friend you on FB... Guess my' friendship was below you!! I also was part of several FB groups that support your work and it felt like a clique and left.. Yeah! Go ahead and read into this, make your judgment, thinking this was rude.. No! Wrong! I wish you well and have gay friends that don't clique

[@melaniexoxo]

Sometimes the church feels that way and a new group will feel that way till they get to know you. You just don’t really know who people are online.

[@MarcosJ-mq4lk]

57:04 Satan

[@user-vm5yk2js6w]

HERE SOME SCIENTIFIC FACTS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY: + The WHO, World Health Organization, stated clearly, that homosexuality not a disease or disorder, but a healthy natural sexual orientation. + It is most likely innate (determined by SNP in several genes and by antibodies (NLGN4Y) during pregnancy), as the opposite sex is never sexual attractive to people born homosexual. + Evolution scientists stated in several publications, that homosexuality exists since sexuality exists, since 385 million years. + They also stated, that having homosexual members in the own tribe, gives several evolutionary advantages, which explains the permanent share of 4-10% homosexuals of the population. >> So, the question would be rather: why putting an ethical limit on homosexuality if its natural, healthy and even with a natural sense? >> Especially now as more and more homosexuals marry and adopt and raise kids that else wise would have no parents.

[@BibleBelieverUK]

Non-affirming = bible believers who KNOW their bibles and call sin, sin.

[@MusicalRaichu]

That was my position too for a long time ... until the issue came up and I dug a little deeper. I discovered I didn't know my Bible as well as I had thought.

[@melaniexoxo]

@Jesse Brown that’s a contemporary interpretation. Historically the Bible never said anything about gay ppl. There’s tons of material besides/in addition to what Justin is saying here on the internet.

[@Jen8973]

​@Jesse Brown neighter do straight people who sin sexually

[@user-vm5yk2js6w]

HERE SOME SCIENTIFIC FACTS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY: + The WHO, World Health Organization, stated clearly, that homosexuality not a disease or disorder, but a healthy natural sexual orientation. + It is most likely innate (determined by SNP in several genes and by antibodies (NLGN4Y) during pregnancy), as the opposite sex is never sexual attractive to people born homosexual. + Evolution scientists stated in several publications, that homosexuality exists since sexuality exists, since 385 million years. + They also stated, that having homosexual members in the own tribe, gives several evolutionary advantages, which explains the permanent share of 4-10% homosexuals of the population. >> So, the question would be rather: why putting an ethical limit on homosexuality if its natural, healthy and even with a natural sense? >> Especially now as more and more homosexuals marry and adopt and raise kids that else wise would have no parents.

[@user-vm5yk2js6w]

@@jessebrown3976 I hope you know that Moses never wrote a single word of Leviticus? It was first written down around 900 BC (hundreds of years after Moses death) it was developed over a long time and by that LEVITICUS is a list of man made subjective secular rules and NOT at all the word of god. And furthermore: >>LEVITICUS 18,3 "You must not do as they do in Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you."