Відео

When men stop eating potato salad, they can have an opinion about carrot cake. Can the men who don’t go to war have an opinion? What about the women who go to war?

Nope.

Ouch!

Obviously there are some things people don’t get to choose. I’m curious what that has to do with a conversation about making good decisions with the things we can choose.

Not everything done in the name of Christianity reflects the teachings of Jesus. Claiming evil actions as “Christian” doesn’t make them aligned with God’s standard. When people act contrary to God’s commands, it reveals human wickedness, not a flaw in the moral standard. In fact, recognizing these failings reinforces the need for that standard. For example, God commands us not to murder. If a Christian commits murder, we don’t conclude that the moral standard is flawed, but that the person failed to meet it. The wrongs you mentioned, things like slavery and violence represent people falling short of God’s commands, not living up to them. Christians believe that God’s moral law reflects His perfect nature. He is loving, just, and unchanging. Unlike human standards, which vary with culture or preference, God’s standard is consistent. It provides an objective basis for right and wrong. Without this foundation, morality becomes subjective, and history shows the consequences when humans ignore or distort God’s law. So while terrible things have been done in the name of religion, they do not invalidate God’s standard. Instead, they show just how much we need it.

@@GatheringDaytonthis is good

Yes, the mindset that dehumanizes human beings in the fetal stage is evil. It is an evil way of thinking to belive that one has the right destroy a life in the womb.

@@jonholman5220 agreed. Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Isaiah 5:20

@@BountyDaDawgHunter yes!

No one is trying to control women; rather, we are encouraging women to control themselves and make good, ethical decisions. It’s reasonable to expect that, in a society, people refrain from harming others. If a human being in the fetal stage is alive, they deserve protection. This isn’t about controlling women or pushing an agenda, but about protecting the right to life of our unborn neighbors. A human fetus, by definition, is a living human being- a developing human offspring. To call it a “minuscule clump of cells” is to ignore biological reality. From conception, a fetus is a distinct human life with its own DNA and potential. Dehumanizing a baby in the womb is just a way of denying the truth: humans, regardless of their developmental stage, are worthy of protection. We aren’t pushing an agenda- just standing for the right to life for all humans, born or unborn.

@@jonholman5220 control themselves? tf is wrong with you? what about women who get pregnant via rape? whose contraception didn’t work? again, fetuses are NOT human beings, it is a clump of cells. you just proved with this comment you are an utter misogynist who only wishes to subjugate women. go back to the 1800s, women can choose now, deal with it

@@pretzeleater1414 Firstly, calling a fetus a "clump of cells" is scientifically disingenuous. By the time most abortions occur, the fetus has a heartbeat, can move, and is in the process of developing organs-it's far more than just a "clump." Calling it that simply ignores the reality of prenatal development. Secondly, no one is suggesting that women who are raped or whose contraception fails should be forgotten. But let's not use those statistically rare cases to justify a broader defense of all abortions. The issue here isn't about controlling women. It's about protecting the most vulnerable: unborn children. Calling someone a misogynist because they care about life in the womb is not an argument. it's name calling. You are arguing for special rights for women to destroy unborn life, while ignoring the rights of the unborn who can't speak for themselves. And no, we aren't going back to the 1800s. We're in 2024, where human rights, including those of the unborn matter. It's time to deal with the reality that a civilized society ought to protect the weakest among us. We must protect the unborn.

Cows and chickens have nothing to do with the topic of human abortion because they are not human beings. The issue is not about whether they are "cognitively aware," as cognitive awareness is not what defines life. Nor can we apply such a definition across the board. For example, does a human in a coma suddenly become less human or lose the right to life because they are no longer cognitively aware? Certainly not. The value of a human being cannot and should not be reduced to their cognitive abilities. If we base the right to life solely on one's ability or inability function in anyway, we risk dehumanizing anyone with limited physical or mental capacities, which would include the disabled or elderly. Human beings in the fetal stage are alive, as they exhibit growth, development, and biological function, even if their cognitive abilities are not yet fully developed. Therefore, they too deserve to be granted the right to live, irrespective of their level of cognitive function. You concluded your comment by saying, "feel free to live as you choose," yet that very statement contradicts your position if it denies unborn children-the most vulnerable among us-the freedom to live. We cannot embrace the principle of "live and let live" if one side of the argument is inherently denying life to others.

Cows and chickens? Come on! 😂

Supporting unborn children and caring for kids already born aren’t mutually exclusive. Many pro-life people also work hard to help children in need, whether through adoption, foster care, or supporting kids in poor countries. It’s not an either/or situation. People can and do care about both. As for the idea that men shouldn’t speak on this issue, human rights are everyone's concern. We should all speak up when it comes to protecting life, regardless of gender.

Free will is important, but it is not the highest value of Christianity. Christians are called to hold God’s truth above their personal desires and to submit their choices to that truth. This is what it means to "die to oneself" and to freely choose God’s will over our own. While God does not force His will on anyone, being a Christian means willingly aligning our free will with His truth. Regarding your point about free will and moral choices, this video isn’t suggesting that people don’t have free will. In fact, it affirms that we all have the ability to make decisions. What it does challenge is the idea that every choice is morally equal or without consequence. Just because we have the freedom to choose doesn’t mean we’re free from the outcomes of those choices. Many people mistake having free will for being free from consequences like guilt, shame, or regret, but those are natural responses to actions that go against moral or ethical truths. Christians promoting moral choices isn’t about taking away someone’s free will-it’s about encouraging others to consider the consequences of their choices in light of moral and ethical standards. Free will isn’t the freedom to do anything without consequence; it’s the freedom to choose wisely or unwisely, and live with the results. Promoting responsibility for our choices isn’t a contradiction of free will - it's actually what makes free will meaningful.

Honestly neither candidate is better than the other in any way. It’s just a battle of pick your poison. No matter who wins one group of people will improve while another suffers.

@@crutchstudio327 You'll never find a candidate perfect enough to meet all criteria, what you'll find however is that one candidate is the textbook definition of how not be.

@@A2NChess oh 100% sir, I think the biggest struggle today though is that media and news can alter and be manipulated so easily and it just makes it hard to see the true side of what a politician or any person for that matter is honestly supporting. In the case of the upcoming election depending on your viewing resources trump can seem like a horrible person who only supports war and the rich. While on the other hand media outlets also portray Harris as a horrible person who only cares about trying to increase the money the DNC has and doesn’t care about American people. So at the end of the day sadly it still becomes this issue with trying to find out what’s actually true because of media manipulation.

There is but one true Gospel. The Gospel of Jesus, his life, death, and resurrection. All other “gospels” are counterfeit and destructive. Galatians 1:6-9 "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel-not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed."

Yes, politics and one's faith cannot be fully separated- and it is possible and very easy to mix them too much. So much so, that we start co-opting the language of faith for our political agendas. Anything that we put in front of Christ and His mission, is an idol. So one must be cautious to not make politics an idol.

We can't speak for your employer, But we think it's cool.

I’m curious how you would describe someone wronging you. If someone were to steal from you, for instance, how would you express the wrongness/injustice of the crime you experienced?

What you’re discussing in your comment is not the main point of the message; at most, it’s a sub-point or related topic. The speaker specifically mentioned that he would not delve deeply into election and predestination in this message because it wasn’t the primary focus. So to claim that the message doesn’t sufficiently explain foreknowledge for a message about foreknowledge is correct, because that isn't what the message was about. It is a useless point to make nonetheless. Judging a church or preacher based on a small portion of a sermon is short-sighted. At The Gathering, those who regularly attend are continually growing in their understanding of the full counsel of scripture.

Free the hostages.

@@jonholman5220 free the hostages yeah but the Israeli government like to bomb there own citizens when they are hostages lol 😂 and blame your their government because they decided to kill the only person who was trying to make peace deals and let’s talk about the millions of innocent Palestinians who got kidnapped and tortured stay hostage ?

I’m too lazy to just keep running.

😂

Sounds like a relaxing way to go out.

Thank you, I will