Відео

Very nice church

To the speaker in this video, you really need to know how completely unpersuasive this talk is. You seem anxious and smarmy, clearly irritated and on edge, and that does nothing for your thesis statement, which I assume is “gay is bad, it is just as bad as incest and pedophilia, actually worse, people need to know how much god hates butt sex.” You come off as insulting to the decent person’s sensibilities. You use straw man hyperbole, bringing up rape/incest to disgust people, and hope they equate this disgust with homosexuality simply by claiming they are the same. Your argument is pitiful and weak. You honestly sound a little scary, the way you badmouth consent as a standard for sex. It makes sense, rape and incest are part of the Old Testament, and I’m sure you follow the cruel mosaic law? I never want you to lose faith, because without this authority to a supernatural invisible sky daddy, I truly think you will become a serial killer. So… go Jesus!

I bet this guy is really fun when he lets loose, the life of the party 🎉

🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

“We are applying their view consistently!” I think heterosexual marriage is gross, an abomination. It’s time to evangelize this truth

🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕 here’s a little message to this guy from the entire lgbtq community. F*ck you. Equating the love my brother has for his married same sex partner to rape and incest is beyond repugnant. They are not the same, and the fact that he can’t see that explains how the only way he can get laid is the force a woman into a god covenant that gives him authority over her. The Christian sex ethic is a joke written by losers that can’t get their preferred partner, male or female. It is a pathetic flag, this guy is waving it around proclaiming “I follow god” when everyone knows he means “I have a micro penis and was laughed at!” In a patriarchy where women are men’s property, the sex ethic is a natural consequence, and it is rigid because without it losers like this guy couldn’t trick someone into being a lifelong sex partner.

This guy is just an incel, so nobody gets to have sex!

The Apostle Paul pronounced a curse on most churches today because the main Christian denominations of today preach a different gospel than what Paul preached. To quote exactly what Paul said, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8). Both apostle Paul and Peter preached the same gospel and quote from the prophet Joel (2:32) saying, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of Yahweh shall be saved." (Romans 10:13 and Acts 2:21). The English translations say “Lord” instead of “Yahweh.” But “Lord” does not translate “Yahweh” it is a substitution of a totally different word altogether. This substitution activates two additional curses because if you substitute a word you are both adding and subtracting at the same time. “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Revelation 22:18, 19) We are commanded by Messiah that, “...repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” (Luke 24:47). In other words, we are supposed to preach the gospel that came out of Jerusalem and not preach the gospel that came out of Antioch, or Rome, or England, or New York, or Chicago, etc. By the time the gospel got to Antioch it had already been perverted as we read, “...And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” (Acts 11:26). The problem with this is that Yahweh spoke of a people called by His name (Deuteronomy 28:10; 2 Chronicles 7:14; Isaiah 43:6, 7; Daniel 9:19; Amos 9:12; Acts 15:17). Yahweh did not choose the name “Christian” for Himself. The people of Antioch chose that name and all the so called main denominations of today embrace that name “Christian” for themselves. When Peter and Paul preached the gospel they quote the prophet Joel, “Whosoever shall call on the name of Yahweh shall be saved.” (Joel 2:32; Acts 2:21; Rom. 10:13). The English word "Lord" is not a translation for the name Yahweh but is a substitution. I ask you, how many of the church fathers and so called main denominations of today preach that gospel? None of them. Absolutely none! “Blessed are those servants, whom the Lord when He comes shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them.” Some people say that they are watching all the time but they overlook verse 38. “And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.” (Luke 12:37-38). Under normal circumstances people are sound asleep during the second and third watch. Therefore Luke 12 is not talking about watching in a figurative way. The LORD is talking of a literal watch. There are appointed times in the scriptures for us to fulfill a literal watch. In fact, all of the appointed times of holy convocations (moedim) listed in Leviticus 23 are watches and vigils of Yahweh. Each one of them are fulfilled by both an Old Testament and corresponding New Testament historical event. In other words they will be assembled together in a holy convocation and not out and about driving cars and flying airplanes. Like the 120 were assembled in the upper room Acts chapter 2 for the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost). Unfortunately, because of a man-made ecclesiastical calendar many will not be watching at the appointed time when He comes.

Judgment for the wicked. May God's love pour out on His blessed children 🙏

Very helpful. Thank you!

Amen! All churches need to be preaching this message.

What you will say is, he tells us we all fall short. There are other things God hates. Most people ignore them, because they affect the masses, and it's always easier to pass judgement on the few.

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.

'Promo SM'

Great message. You have given us many spiritual things to think about. Mainly doing all to Glorify God in all things.

🔥 🔥 🔥

Good morning from Leesburg Florida! I love listening to God's Word.

Good job! All glory be to God

Excelent video

I really liked your message, it adheres clearly to the scripture and is well delivered. I would suggest two things - obviously just my random opinion. First, when you cite the bible verses - slow down, and consider putting them up on the screen for people to visibly see them, and read them with you. Second, Dress and prepare for what you are doing. A clean shave and a nice shirt give the impression that this is important. They suggest that it really matters to you, and that maybe it should matter to others as well. If Christianity defines your life, represent it well. Instead of presenting this material as if it is just a casual and unimportant chat, no different than how the local baseball team is doing. Maybe that shouldn't ultimately matter, but I think it does, and people will see you differently.

Relationships are based on personal preference. Just like food or music preference. God may have designed in such a way to have relationships and enjoy music and food but we still determine what those are. The Bible is verry rarely prescriptive when it comes to relationships, save to say that we should love our neighbors and our enemies; but neither of those things require a relationship and to force a relationship out of obligation is often worse. Scripture is not convincing for those who don't care about it. So you can always base your understanding on scripture but you will need more to convince those who aren't swayed by it. That being said marriage has never been a purely heterosexual or monogamous practice. Queer people have existed throughout society in one form or another. Not that historical norms matter, segregation, xenophobia and racism used to be the norm but obviously that doesn't mean we should participate in those practices. There are strong correlative factors that predict the likelihood of a man being Queer. Not that it matters, choosing to be gay isn't any more wrong than being born Gay. If someone has a response to every argument you're making, maybe you're making bad arguments. God did not "ordain" marriage as anything, marriage is a practice. The Bible constantly refers to polygamous marriages. Marriage was never designated in scripture as purely heterosexual & monogamous or even as the only legitimate avenue for sex. Procreation is not the sole purpose of sex. Or why else do we accept marriage between the elderly. Abomination is a mistranslation, as are the verses in Corinthians. Abomination was a designation for all sorts of activities and was even used in other contexts to describe the cultural practices of the Egyptians. It's closer to words like "distasteful" or "gauche" than the modern usage of the word abomination. Not that it matters because the passages in Leviticus likely refer to incest and pagan prostitution and are part of the Mosaic law that is no longer followed by Christians. μαλακοὶ (malakoi) is the word used in Corinthians to refer to people who are part of a pederastic relationship or in this case prostitution in the Temple of Aphrodite in Corinth. The incest comparison isn't valid, because consent can not be given in a familial power dynamic, just like a drunk person can't give consent. Likewise a child can not consent, because they do not have the knowledge or security to do so in a power dynamic with an adult. Both these are slippery slope arguments, neither deal with homosexuality. Consent is key, but it's far from the only thing. Two people might consent to sex only to find out that one is married. It would be commonly agreed upon that the unmarried person was violated and put into a position that they should not have been put into. Consent was given, but that does not mean that it was right. Forming a straw man of a competing sexual ethic does not strengthen your position. You're right in saying that without a God, morals are only personal preference. But once again, attacking a competing idea, does not strengthen yours. Consistency is taking into account all principles not picking out, misinterpreting it and exaggerating it past viability Even a sound principle would be harmful at that point. What is egomania, but self-esteem gone to far. What is nosiness but curiosity run amok. I appreciate the reminder that all sin should be considered but I find it very ignorant to assume that all Queer people are atheists or Non-Christians. That simply isn't the case. Overall, bad video, not scripturally based.

He looks like one of those hypocritical preachers condemning homosexuality and then being involved in it themselves. Those kind always preach the strictest conservative path. Maybe if he straightened up his wrists a bit more he'd be a bit more convincing. I trod that indoctrinated Christian path for 40 years, then realised it makes you so unhappy. The hetties love it as all their events and teaching focusses on themselves and their views.

Amen

Your white Republican American Jesus is a lie

Great message Brother Joe!!!

Bible??? Sin??? In every culture. Every country. Nation. City or state. Around the world men & weman are giving birth to gay children. Do me & woman sin??? When. They give birth to a gay child??? If not Than being gay is not a sin. Its just part of being human. 🤗 ppl. Given birth to. Ppl. Humans. 👋👋👋

Love you brother

Thanks, Joe! Good history shared. Looking forward to next week. Peace & God’s blessings.

Blessings brother great teachings God is Sovereign and wonderful he is using you Mightily Jesus Christ is Lord

10:30 No, you can't, because rape is allowed and/or condoned at various points in the Bible. Also, Paul says that spouses are commanded to provide sexual activity to their partner and that husbands are in authority over their wives. So, pure b******* overarching misogyny aside, that is license to rape.

9:00 strawman slippery slope to a reductio ad absurdum. You've got a hat trick.

You can't appeal to a higher authority. You just declare that there is one. Basically you've left the door open for anyone to just posit something outside themselves as a higher authority.

Rape wouldn't be the most effective way to reproduce and propagate the species, because it would lead to more children being born in situations without the care and other resources necessary to their survival. Also, reproduction isn't a moral imperative, except perhaps in your view. It isn't even clear that it is an imperative within the Bible.

Consent isn't always required by your Bible. So you aren't being consistent with something that you have actively declared to be the basis of your beliefs.

Also, your slippery slope fallacy based on strawmen is showing. Consent isn't said to be the only factor. It is a limiting factor in that the withholding of it renders sex as rape. Giving consent may still not be enough depending on other attendant factors.

Red herrings and strawmen. Sex with someone under age is not considered consensual because, while we cannot perfectly ascertain that a person above a certain age is capable of informed consent or a person below that age is incapable, we set an age limit to better guarantee the possibility that the person is capable of making an informed choice.

Actually, there are passages in the Old Testament where God commands rape and forces marriage between a rape victim and her rapist. So, no, you don't believe that consent is sacrosanct, at least not if you believe in your Bible.

There is no moral imperative to reproduce. By what standard do you say that relations between men or between women do not work? Does that mean infertile couples or couples that don't reproduce are somehow invalid? Individuals may be just as happy if not happier in same-sex relationships as in male female pairings. Reproduction is not flourishing. Everybody and everything dies.

If you are referring to the Bible, you're referring to a document that explicitly condones polygyny via laws by which it is governed and the absence of prohibition except in the case of clergy.

2:30 Fallacious appeal to tradition/authority.

Wow, you have zero honesty, don't you? No, people don't just say that whatever a person feels is right. They don't say that personal preference is the final authority. They argue that there is no significant qualitative difference in the type of love and therefore no basis to argue for a punitive approach or unequal protection under the law.

If the unbeliever has an indefensible position, why are you unable to take it down? It seems more like a one-way logic gate and pathway to spiritual abuse than any kind of honest assessment of the truth of existence and the perception of it.

Your worldview can't answer why human life is valuable. You just interject cuz God and blank out at that point.

False equivalence between pre and post term humans and responsibilities entailed. No law would force a person to be physically connected to another post term human in order to keep that human Man, you really don't care about being honest, do you?

Even the Roman Catholic Church distinguished between animate and inanimate fetuses until 1869. That wouldn't happen if your allegation that the clear and consistent testimony of the Bible treated abortion as murder was true.

You of course know that the passage in Exodus is highly contested and that Jewish tradition holds that ensoulment occurs at the moment at first breath. You are leaving out an entire history of understanding that passage as regarding injury to the woman and penalizing injury or death to the preborn with a fine.

Here's the usual litany of verses that don't in any way connote the full personhood of the preborn.

I'm counting at least two to three strawman within the first minute and a half. Nobody says that the preborn are not human. The arguments that would allow for abortion are not pro-abortion but pro-choice. They are also arguing in terms of privacy and bodily autonomy rather than for abortion.

Given that the Bible does not prohibit abortion, this should be interesting.

You can be gay and Christian.