Please never take this video down. I struggle with mouth at times. I watch this video multiple times a year to remind myself how important it is to shut my mouth. Thank you so much Dr. Doran! This message is a tremendous blessing to me.
Within days of being widowed, I was in a very difficult situation because of a malicious person and her mouth. A pastor heard of it and wrote to me a Proverb...where there is no wood, the fire goes out. So, I didn't answer her. Had to go no contact for my children's well being. That was 8 years ago. Up to a year ago, I hear she is still at it but we are safe and secure in Him.
Okay so the first time I heard the first half of this I was walking to work yesterday and I literally work with somebody who encapsulates everything you're describing and I still ended up in a two-hour-long debate with him and this is just bringing it all back around. I should have finished the video
@@irenedavo3768 Well, I asked because I want help with working it out, but here goes... I don't think simply dismissing the guy is the right response, because the guy has a valid point...who among us wouldn't save the 5-year-old first? The illegitimacy of the guy's argument rests in the false notion that because we believe all life is sacred there cannot somehow be a priority in terms of who we would strive hardest to save in such a situation. I believe the life of a 100 year old man is just as sacred as that of a 5 year old boy, and to kill either one is murder. But that doesn't mean it's not more shocking...more of a felt tragedy...when the boy dies. Likewise, in dealing with the fire scenario, it would be only natural and right to rescue the boy...one who readily appears as another person in danger and who can feel great terror, loss, and pain...as opposed to a metal canister full of embryos. The embryos are also sacred life, but order of priority for saving life is not simply dictated by numbers, but rather the totality of the circumstances. In short, the fact that I would feel compelled to save the boy first in no way demonstrates that somehow the embryos are not sacred human life, or that it is hypocritical to believe so. How about you?
Jesus often answered somebody's questions with a question of his own. I would probably do the same thing. "How did a five-year-old kid get into a room in a fertility clinic with a thousand embryos in the first place?"
If someone were to pose the question of saving a child or saving embryos I would simply say to them, "In your world view life has no value. You believe we evolved from slime or fish. You have to borrow from Christianity and my world view for life to have value. What difference does it make to you with your world view, if both the child and the embryos dies?"
Proverbs 19:25 & 29, etc., explains the answer fools understand. Let's not forget. In Matthew 5:22 Jesus tells us of the danger of casually dismissing those made in God's image as fools. Discern a foolish idea v. dealing with a fool, and go from there. To do this, we need to know how to universally distinguish folly from wisdom. Do you know where that dividing line is?
Why is it even debatable that somebody who would seek to Save a Life from destruction be more deplorable then somebody I would rather let them die how much less are actively seek to destroy them?
I’m disappointed he does not give an example of how he would respond to this person. If the question generated so many likes on Twitter, it seems reasonable you may get asked the question live in the real world. You have a choice whether to engage on social media, but if someone walks right up to you and asks the question, you can’t stand there and pretend he’s invisible and ignore him, you have to say something, so how would he respond in to at scenario.
I'll give my take on it. Embryos being in a burning building by the thousands is humans messing with things they should not be. Embryos should always be inside a female adult, therefore the question then becomes do you save a pregnant woman or a 5 year old? Now that is a hard question to answer. Just my thought.
Unless you have some place to refreeze or replicate whatever storage method they're using in the burning building you dragging them outside just kills them anyway. I realize this answer is Kind of a misdirection. The question sets up the idea that you do have a way to actually save them. But I don't think the two are equal it's not the number of babies that you could save but the fact there's a screaming child that's calling for your help in one corner of the room and a refrigerator in the other.
How can you carry 1k frozen embryos? Grab the child bc the child can already feel pain. The embryos while equally important haven't developed the ability to measure and feel pain.
MATTHEW 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. SEVERAL BIBLE VERSES DESCRIBES WHO IS A FOOL AND WHAT IS A FOOL...BUT WARNS CHRISTIANS ABOUT USING CALLING OTHERS NAMES THAT DEMEAN THEM AS A PERSON. FOOLISHNESS DESCRIBES ACTIONS. BUT NAME CALLING....IN WAY THAT DEMEANS A PERSON IN SPIRIT THAT YOU ARE BETTER THAN THEM IS CONSIDERED SIN.
...? Isn't it name-calling to call someone a fool when they're acting foolish? I don't think I understand your comment, because I think it suggests a distinction that doesn't seem to be there (calling someone a fool, vs calling someone a fool... because they're acting like a fool) ... isn't it just that distinction we have about being angry: It's not a sin to be angry, it's a sin to be angry and sin as a result, or it's a sin to be angry without a cause. Also... when you demean someone in spirit, isn't it actually a sin based on your intentions (pride behind your superiority) rather than that someone else _gets_ offended when you didn't actually do something to offend them? Like Jesus did nothing wrong but the pharisees were triggered. Also Jesus was better than them, and rightly called out the leaven of the Pharisees. When Jesus said "Woe to You, scribes and pharisees!" He wasn't blessing them no was he? I think it looked like he was judging them or pointing out their flaws in a way that would definitely be humiliating for people who considered themselves compliant with the law to be told things as strongly worded as being told they're children of the devil! (John 8 I think) Have a nice day! :)
@@silversilk8438 If you say to someone stop acting foolishly vs you are a foo, then yes grammatically you are identifying their behavior NOT calling them as a person. It identifies conduct that is harmful but not demeaning them as a person.
@@minbaroo8476 Thanks so much for your reply!! I really appreciate you taking the time to explain your perspective. So you call someone a fool when they're acting a-fool, because you care about the person and you want them to act right? Did I understand now? [words] I still agree with you, but I wonder how you understand your perspective in light of my perspective. Have a lovely day and God bless you!
@@silversilk8438 NO. DO not put words in my mouth. I have explained it to you twice now. SO you are just trolling. Calling a person a fool is to look down yor nose at them and demean them as a person. Addressing behavior as foolish IS NOT..I REPEAT...IS NOT CALLING THEM A FOOL. RESEARCH ENGLISH GRAMMATICAL RULES.
Could wearing a Trump T-shirt or a MAGA hat in front of an ANTIFA member with a hard face and laughter and no apology be considered answering a fool according to his folly?
@@YoxxSHIxx Except that the standpoints of each side will affect the ability to do the Bible. And having opinions about politics isn't sinful or rude, especially when one side leans into sin and the other not .
Separate the fool from his argument. Recall the first GOP debate, 2023. A lot of nobodies showed up and all, except one, were humiliated by one man. He stayed with the facts and ignored the personal insults.
Please never take this video down. I struggle with mouth at times. I watch this video multiple times a year to remind myself how important it is to shut my mouth. Thank you so much Dr. Doran! This message is a tremendous blessing to me.
Within days of being widowed, I was in a very difficult situation because of a malicious person and her mouth. A pastor heard of it and wrote to me a Proverb...where there is no wood, the fire goes out. So, I didn't answer her. Had to go no contact for my children's well being. That was 8 years ago. Up to a year ago, I hear she is still at it but we are safe and secure in Him.
My Understanding of this is, don't fall into a wicked trap, you avoid it by not answering their question, be quick to listen, and slow to answer.
Okay so the first time I heard the first half of this I was walking to work yesterday and I literally work with somebody who encapsulates everything you're describing and I still ended up in a two-hour-long debate with him and this is just bringing it all back around. I should have finished the video
So, what would a wise response be to the question about embryos and the 5-year-old? I never heard him give it.
sbag11 what would you do?
@@irenedavo3768 Well, I asked because I want help with working it out, but here goes...
I don't think simply dismissing the guy is the right response, because the guy has a valid point...who among us wouldn't save the 5-year-old first? The illegitimacy of the guy's argument rests in the false notion that because we believe all life is sacred there cannot somehow be a priority in terms of who we would strive hardest to save in such a situation. I believe the life of a 100 year old man is just as sacred as that of a 5 year old boy, and to kill either one is murder. But that doesn't mean it's not more shocking...more of a felt tragedy...when the boy dies. Likewise, in dealing with the fire scenario, it would be only natural and right to rescue the boy...one who readily appears as another person in danger and who can feel great terror, loss, and pain...as opposed to a metal canister full of embryos. The embryos are also sacred life, but order of priority for saving life is not simply dictated by numbers, but rather the totality of the circumstances. In short, the fact that I would feel compelled to save the boy first in no way demonstrates that somehow the embryos are not sacred human life, or that it is hypocritical to believe so.
How about you?
Jesus often answered somebody's questions with a question of his own. I would probably do the same thing.
"How did a five-year-old kid get into a room in a fertility clinic with a thousand embryos in the first place?"
My answer would be whichever one God has ordained me to do in the moment.
I've always read this as how you speak or what kind of answer you give to them 🤷♂️
A wise man once said “Iffy Questions Pose Problems That Don’t Exist “
If someone were to pose the question of saving a child or saving embryos I would simply say to them, "In your world view life has no value. You believe we evolved from slime or fish. You have to borrow from Christianity and my world view for life to have value. What difference does it make to you with your world view, if both the child and the embryos dies?"
Proverbs 19:25 & 29, etc., explains the answer fools understand. Let's not forget.
In Matthew 5:22 Jesus tells us of the danger of casually dismissing those made in God's image as fools.
Discern a foolish idea v. dealing with a fool, and go from there. To do this, we need to know how to universally distinguish folly from wisdom.
Do you know where that dividing line is?
If you want a greater chance with peace of mind...
GET OFF FACEBOOK, TWITTER AND INSTAGRAM.
Never play chess with a pigeon. It will strut around the board, knock over the pieces, and poop on the board...all while thinking it has won the game.
Why is it even debatable that somebody who would seek to Save a Life from destruction be more deplorable then somebody I would rather let them die how much less are actively seek to destroy them?
Good video!!!
I’m disappointed he does not give an example of how he would respond to this person. If the question generated so many likes on Twitter, it seems reasonable you may get asked the question live in the real world. You have a choice whether to engage on social media, but if someone walks right up to you and asks the question, you can’t stand there and pretend he’s invisible and ignore him, you have to say something, so how would he respond in to at scenario.
I'll give my take on it. Embryos being in a burning building by the thousands is humans messing with things they should not be. Embryos should always be inside a female adult, therefore the question then becomes do you save a pregnant woman or a 5 year old? Now that is a hard question to answer.
Just my thought.
Unless you have some place to refreeze or replicate whatever storage method they're using in the burning building you dragging them outside just kills them anyway.
I realize this answer is Kind of a misdirection. The question sets up the idea that you do have a way to actually save them. But I don't think the two are equal it's not the number of babies that you could save but the fact there's a screaming child that's calling for your help in one corner of the room and a refrigerator in the other.
How can you carry 1k frozen embryos? Grab the child bc the child can already feel pain. The embryos while equally important haven't developed the ability to measure and feel pain.
MATTHEW 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
SEVERAL BIBLE VERSES DESCRIBES WHO IS A FOOL AND WHAT IS A FOOL...BUT WARNS CHRISTIANS ABOUT USING CALLING OTHERS NAMES THAT DEMEAN THEM AS A PERSON. FOOLISHNESS DESCRIBES ACTIONS. BUT NAME CALLING....IN WAY THAT DEMEANS A PERSON IN SPIRIT THAT YOU ARE BETTER THAN THEM IS CONSIDERED SIN.
...? Isn't it name-calling to call someone a fool when they're acting foolish? I don't think I understand your comment, because I think it suggests a distinction that doesn't seem to be there (calling someone a fool, vs calling someone a fool... because they're acting like a fool) ... isn't it just that distinction we have about being angry: It's not a sin to be angry, it's a sin to be angry and sin as a result, or it's a sin to be angry without a cause.
Also... when you demean someone in spirit, isn't it actually a sin based on your intentions (pride behind your superiority) rather than that someone else _gets_ offended when you didn't actually do something to offend them? Like Jesus did nothing wrong but the pharisees were triggered.
Also Jesus was better than them, and rightly called out the leaven of the Pharisees. When Jesus said "Woe to You, scribes and pharisees!" He wasn't blessing them no was he? I think it looked like he was judging them or pointing out their flaws in a way that would definitely be humiliating for people who considered themselves compliant with the law to be told things as strongly worded as being told they're children of the devil! (John 8 I think)
Have a nice day! :)
@@silversilk8438 If you say to someone stop acting foolishly vs you are a foo, then yes grammatically you are identifying their behavior NOT calling them as a person. It identifies conduct that is harmful but not demeaning them as a person.
@@minbaroo8476 Thanks so much for your reply!! I really appreciate you taking the time to explain your perspective. So you call someone a fool when they're acting a-fool, because you care about the person and you want them to act right? Did I understand now?
[words]
I still agree with you, but I wonder how you understand your perspective in light of my perspective.
Have a lovely day and God bless you!
@@silversilk8438 NO. DO not put words in my mouth. I have explained it to you twice now. SO you are just trolling. Calling a person a fool is to look down yor nose at them and demean them as a person. Addressing behavior as foolish IS NOT..I REPEAT...IS NOT CALLING THEM A FOOL. RESEARCH ENGLISH GRAMMATICAL RULES.
@@minbaroo8476 I'm legit not trying to troll you. Sorry about that.
Have a nice day. Bye bye
amen
Amen.
Good
Could wearing a Trump T-shirt or a MAGA hat in front of an ANTIFA member with a hard face and laughter and no apology be considered answering a fool according to his folly?
😂😂😂😂
We definitely have to be careful not to lean left or right as Christian's. Jesus wasn't a politician.
@@YoxxSHIxx facts
@@YoxxSHIxx Except that the standpoints of each side will affect the ability to do the Bible. And having opinions about politics isn't sinful or rude, especially when one side leans into sin and the other not .
@@dallasbaldwin6911 the republican party isn't my savior
Separate the fool from his argument. Recall the first GOP debate, 2023. A lot of nobodies showed up and all, except one, were humiliated by one man. He stayed with the facts and ignored the personal insults.