Відео

The UA-cam "shorts" format only gives 60 seconds, but perhaps these links might be helpful: ua-cam.com/video/E1weiQBQcZs/v-deo.htmlsi=6CY_jgSz81UOeRss ua-cam.com/video/zzHxP1l9n8w/v-deo.htmlsi=8JM9ksCeTVtMhX9A God bless!

@@WillardPreacherPodcast I quickly scanned through the first one. Let me say this: There's no such thing as 'objective morality'. Our sense of morality came from our evolution as social animals, like our closest cousins, chimpanzees. They have ethics and social patterns of behaviour. Do they also have morals? And besides, if a sense of morality came from a god, then that would make them subjective, since it's based upon the opinons of that god. If he refers us to a standard outside of himself, then what do we need him for? The second 'evidence' is 'creation', which is a misleading term from the get-go. A 'creation' implies a creator, but a beginning does not. We know bird's nests and beehives are built by birds and bees because we can observe this. Assuming a someone started the Universe is unsupported by any evidence. Besides which, can you give me any examples of things that don't have a builder or creator? Anything? This is pretty basic stuff which is easily and often refuted; it does not come anywhere close to actual evidence. Just misguided or misinformed opinion.

Sounds like a loving God who lets you make your decisions, but holds you accountable for the choices you make. Though in the end those consequences were your choice.

Sounds like you need more love and joy in your heart and I pray that it finds its way into your life, in Yeshua's name, Amen.

@@DarrenCorley Ah yes, empty threats from a religious cult member. Very typical.

@@ethansalas3575 Sounds like you haven’t submitted to Islam. You better hope the Muslims aren’t right. You’re putting a mere prophet, Isa (Yeshua, Jesus) above Allah. What’s really curious is that Jews, Christians and Muslims worship the same god as described in the Old Testament, the god of Abraham. So, _ _ _ _ you and the magical, invisible, flying Jew zombie god…OK? Good luck on the geographical god lottery.

​@@rogerbee697my friend, I didn't make any threats, I was simply stating facts. God is loving and wouldn't force anyone into an eternity with Him if they don't want to be with Him. If you choose separation from Him, He will grant you that separation from Him. In the end it's your choice.

Wonder why

Maybe use your brain a bit, won't be so funny if you learn how to think

Make* Can't formulate a sentence correctly but you are still loved.

@ethansalas3575 Thanks for the correction, I am from Pakistan anyways.

@@OfficialFalakSher Yeh Khushi ki baat hai

Please explain. Christ is fully God and fully man, two natures in one Person. That is the sense the term "Godman" is being used.

You are very welcome.

I'm very glad ❤

Christ is and has always been God so to say that Mary isn't the Mother of God is to claim Christ isn't God (arianism) or wasn't God at some point (adoptionism) or that He is two schizophrenic persons (nestorianism). Arianism, adoptionism, or nestorianism. All condemned as heresies early on in the life of the Church.

Google "Nestorianism" if you want nonsense.

Why do you say that?

Yes, Hell is an unquenchable fire, and there will be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth, but what is the nature of that fire? The scriptures tell us that God is a consuming fire. Is Helll the purifying fires of God’s love eternally rejected by the sinner, or is it a literal lake and a literal fire? The Scriptures tell us that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Therefore God’s nature must be the same towards those in heaven and those in hell. The difference is in the nature of those who are experiencing God. Those who have been restored to godlikeness will experience the uncreated light (consuming fire) of God as Paradise. Those who refuse to repent will experience the uncreated light (consuming fire) of God as torment. It is not God who changes, it is we who change.

I think the Orthodox response is that it is both.

Sadly

I do

God is omnipresent, so there is nowhere that he is not.

Yes there is

@@BrotherRay304 i know. I was shit kicking false doctrine

@BrotherRay304 sorry for the profane language. Even the devil knows God's Word is true.

@@Thunder_Lightning_and_Fury true

@BrotherRay304 We know the gospel, yet we continue to work relentlessly to thwart it, knowing it will be our brethren who will cast us into that lake of fire 🔥

And who gets to interpret the scriptures?

They did have the Septuagint version of the Old Testament back then, but that is not where the Apostles got their doctrine. They got it from Jesus. It would have been impossible for them to discern all of New Testament doctrine from the Old Testament. Paul said that the Scriptures were inspired and useful, but he also said that the Church is the pillar and ground of truth, follow the tradition whether written or oral, and Jesus said that the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church. It is the Church who wrote the Scriptures, it is the Church who put them together, and it is the Church who said what they mean. The Scriptures never stood alone outside of the Church started by Christ.

@@WillardPreacher-qg6hc Paul never said that the church is the pillar and ground of the truth. If he did, then his letter of rebuke to the Corinthians would have been in error, because they were doing everything correctly, because they are the church. The church did not write the scriptures, the old testament was written long before the church was even started. The scripture also stood alone as the truth, if not, then the old testament isn't truth, because it was written way before the church started. The pharisees followed tradition, and Jesus called the vipers and hypocrites.

@@livingforjesus8551 1Tim. 3:14-15 - These things I write to you, though I hope to come to you shortly; 15 but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. 2Thess. 2:15 - Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our [h]epistle. 1Cor. 11:2 - Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. Mt. 23:1-3 - Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.

@@livingforjesus8551 1Tim. 3:14-15 - These things I write to you, though I hope to come to you shortly; 15 but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. 2Thess. 2:15 - Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our [h]epistle. 1Cor. 11:2 - Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. Mt. 23:1-3 - Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.

@@livingforjesus8551 1Tim. 3:14-15 - These things I write to you, though I hope to come to you shortly; 15 but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. 2Thess. 2:15 - Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our [h]epistle. 1Cor. 11:2 - Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. Mt. 23:1-3 - Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.

You say that a fetus or embryo is not a baby. Both are stages of development within mammals. (All mammals go through the same stages of development). So, once you say that a woman is pregnant with an embryo or fetus you are saying she is pregnant with a mammal. What sort of mammal is she pregnant with? Obviously, a human mammal, and, as opposed to a fly or a ground hog, humans are persons. So, as soon as you say that a woman is pregnant with an embryo or fetus, you are saying that she is pregnant with a mammal, It has to be a human mammal, and humans are by nature persons. This is not hard to figure out. We just don't want to because, as I said, we want sex without consequences.

​@@WillardPreacher-qg6hcShe is pregnant with a human fetus not a human baby. My mother is a human woman that does not make her a human baby. If I clip my fingernails those are human fingernails not human babies. The same is true for any animal. This isn't even a question of value. It's a question of language. You're trying to redefine what a human is, and your redefinition isn't even consistent. This part of the conversation is pointless. You are trivially wrong but you're wrong in a really boring way. Fetuses are not babies that does not mean fetuses are without value. Dogs aren't babies either. That doesn't make it okay to kill a dog. You can accept the shared language and the realities of human development while still being opposed to abortion. If you refuse to accept reality or speak the same language as everyone else. No one is going to listen to you. It's like calling the people you disagree with the "Antichrist secular elite". It makes you sound like a crazy person. Are you saying negative consequences are necessarily good? For you, is this issue about protecting fetal life or seeing your enemies suffer?

@@Molly-jh4kz When people who are pro-choice use the term fetus, they are using it to mean that it is not a human being. I am trying to show them that it is. The term fetus just designates a stage of development as does the term new-born. Is a new-born a baby? Virtually everyone would say yes. It is both a newborn and a baby. Is a fetus a baby? Many would say yes. It is both a fetus and a baby. Those who don't believe that a fetus is a baby overwhelmingly believe it is not a human being and so can be aborted and no human being has been killed. If you believe that a fetus is a human being and therefore shouldn't be killed in abortion, but you don't want to call it a baby, that's fine. It would be a trivial point that wouldn't be worth arguing about. If you are not saying that let me know.

@@WillardPreacher-qg6hc Many people might say a fetus as a baby but many people also think the world is flat. Reality isn't contingent on what many people think. You are correct that many people who are pro-choice try to imply that a fetus is not a human being by saying it is a fetus, just like you're trying to imply that a fetus is a human being by saying it's a baby. The difference is they are technically correct and you are technically incorrect. It is not true that people who understand the difference between a fetus and a baby overwhelmingly do not think fetuses are human beings. You are basing your conclusion on ignorance, but that does not mean you have to be ignorant to come to that conclusion. You can acknowledge that a fetus is not a baby and still think it's a human being. Whether or not a fetus is a human being is debatable because "human being" is a squishy term. Human development goes like zygote, embryo, fetus, baby, toddler, child, teenager, adult. Saying a baby is a fetus is like saying a teenager is a baby. It is both wrong and unrelated to whether or not teenager is a human being. Teenagers are human beings but they are not babies. Newborn is a way of describing a baby. You have a newborn baby when your baby is newly born. You can't have a fetus baby for the same reason you can't have a 3-year-old baby. A fetus becomes a baby when it's born and a baby becomes a toddler around when they turn one. Fetus, baby, and toddler are non-overlapping categories. No, I don't think a fetus is a human being. I think it has significant value and should be protective in a variety of circumstances but I don't think it has as much value as a human being. The question of, "what is a human being?" is complicated. I think of it as a cluster concept. Of the traits in the cluster, a fetus does not have enough of them to be considered a human being. As a fetus, develops and gains more human traits its value increases and we ought to treat it more like a human being. I think this is born out in people's behavior. If I were to miscarry at 6 weeks I would be sad. If I were to miscarry at 3 months I would be devastated. If I were to miscarry at 7 months I would mourn it very similarly to how I would mourn a stillbirth. I think that is pretty normal because on an intuitive level people understand that a 6-week-old fetus does not have the same value as a 7-month-old fetus. There are lots of other examples of this, but I hope you agree that most people understand a fetus as increasing in value throughout pregnancy. I'm not saying I'm right because most people agree with me, but most people do agree with me. Edit: One other thing to this point. Polling on abortion varies quite a bit but in America over the last decade about 25% of people say abortion is always okay, 35% say it's mostly okay, 25% say it's rarely okay, and 15% say it's never okay. I'm being generous to the extremists here. Some polling suggests 70% or more of the US population is okay with abortion in some instances. Post Dobs public opinion has swung slightly more in favor of abortion but the moderates are still politically dominant. Simultaneously about 1/3 of Americans say that a fetus is a person with rights. That implies that there is a group of people who thinks fetuses are people with rights and yet are okay with abortion in some instances and that there is a group of people who thinks fetuses are not people and yet thinks abortions are not okay in some instances. My point being that Americans do not have consistent views on abortion, but your seeming view, that abortion is always wrong and fetuses are human beings, is consistently the least popular amongst Americas while my view, The fetuses are not human beings and abortion is sometimes okay is consistently the most popular. Protecting fetal life is good and important, but it's not the only important thing. It is worth considering a parent's right to decide the course of their life including when they have children. It's important to consider the burden that pregnancy and birth puts on a woman. It's important to consider the quality of life that the future baby will have if it is born. Abortion politics are complicated. I would like to circle back around to the suffering of the Antichrist secular elite. Based on your video and what you have said here, you don't seem to really care about fetal life very much. Mostly you seem to want to see your enemies suffer because they have done something that you think deserves consequences. Who are the Antichrist secular elite, why is there suffering as a consequence of their bad decision making so important to you, and how would you like to see them suffer?

@@Molly-jh4kz The main point I would like to address is your contention that one is not a human being until they develop to a certain point. A zygote is everything we as human beings are supposed to be at that stage of our development. Of course, if you compare a zygote to a baby it is less developed, as a baby is less developed than a toddler, or a teenager than an adult, but we don’t say that a baby is less human than a toddler or a teenager is less human than an adult. Why then do we say that about the zygote, and why does being less developed equate to being less human? Who gets the final say as to who is developed enough for us to consider them to be a human being and therefore illegal to kill? Isn’t all, or at least most, enslavement, genocide etc. based upon one group saying that for some reason another group is lesser than they are? Aren’t we doing the same thing here? The fetus is less developed than the baby so we can kill it. Who gets to decide, and how do we know they are right so that we can be sure that we are not killing somewhere around a million innocent and helpless human beings a year? Finally, I don’t remember ever saying that I want the antichrist secular elite to suffer.