@tookie36 His opinion was valid. he literally said "I" explaining that he doesn't spend time alone with other women due to sexual attraction(he is married). He is taking steps to protect his marriage. You are cherry picking anything you can find to try to discredit him. Tbh it's embarrassing
@@teamgab7432 he said “I” after saying men and women are different. This is the standard line from catholic apologists. Pints with aquinas said the same thing. Men and women shouldn’t be friends as “just friends” especially while married. Which is fine for a personal life experience but nonsense when it comes to a theological teaching
You people say the whole point of marriage is to create children through the act of sex, then because you also say gays can't reproduce so they aren't allowed to get married but now you're saying sex is irrelevant. I love the moving goalposts, just admit your opinion of gays is your own and you're just hiding behind religion. You just personally think they're "icky".
Unfortunately, the term, "daddy" can have sexual connotation. Imagine watching home movies of a family where the children call their father "daddy" and arguing that those children were in an innappropriate relationship with their father. Thats what is happening here.
Once, at a party, I had a gay man tell me, after learning I'm Catholic, that the only difference between Catholics and gays is that we say "Father, forgive me" and they say "Daddy, I've been naughty." Then he laughed. I said, "No, the difference between us is that you think you're normal and I know you're a degenerate pervert." He stopped laughing.
This is why I find calling God daddy as some priests do in sermons to help them understand the wording Jesus used during the our father, because Abba is essentially daddy. But that word now has terrible connotations.
That’s one of the reasons I have a hard time listening to some of the audio commentary on the extended editions of the Lord of the rings DVDs, because the actor who is gay, who played the Christ figure Gandalf, was so happy when Sam touched Frodo’s hand. this man is gay, He’s a homosexual that thinks that Sam and Frodo are gay because that’s the way his demented brain works.
"Those who cannot conceive friendship as a substantive love but only as a disguise or elaboration of Eros betray the fact that they have never had a friend." C. S. Lewis Edit: I commented this before finishing the video. I should've known Trent would have noted it!
I completely understand why homosexual people have a hard time imagining 2 men cant love each other deeply without being sexual. It's the same thing as how some men don't think they can have a relationship with a woman without being sexual. It is a lust problem.
@@femaleKCRoyalsFan I'm not a fan of star wars so I really can't understand your example. I'm raised in a society with no homosexuality so I see this phenomena in straight men and women where just normal friendship are viewed in sexual ways
@joshuataylor3550 I'm sorry it's hard for you to swallow that homosexuality is a mortal sin. The Bible doesn't change because of your opinion, Have a great day.
@@Maryismymom2 'Mortal sin' or 'sin' in general means nothing to people who aren't theists.And given that the West is rapidly secularizing every passing day, your words will continue to have less and less impact on people's lives, and this must be hard to come to terms with. How else will insecure people get to satisfy their superiority complexes?
_"...these mental gymnastics..."_ LOL, from someone who literally worship cannibalism and propitiatory human sacrifice based solely on a fictional character.
@@TitusCastiglione1503 Are you denying that the literal worship of propitiatory human sacrifice is the core tenet of Christianity? You know... that cross thing and John 3:16. Paul created Christianity in 48 AD and this is how he put it: "He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all." (Romans 8:32) "Christ our passover is sacrificed for us." (1 Corinthians 5:7) "God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement." (Romans 3:25) "God showed his great love for us by sending Christ to die for us." (Romans 5:8) "We are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ." (Hebrews 10:10)
This reminds me of the argument that Christ himself was gay. Because Saint John was his "beloved" and he left him to care for his mother. They'll latch onto anything.
Adelphopoesis was also practiced by nobles in many other countries, in truth it's mostly was a get out of "supporting the state by leaving your estate witouth an heir" card, by finding someone who is of noble blood and who may sire offspring and thus gift that "brother of yours" in wealth, ofc I'm not of the byzantine rite and I only studied it as a medieval (and pre civil state) law to fix inheritance issues. Buuut if you would have a relationship with your brother in blood you are sick. Also, having a deep and caring friendship, being interpreted as gay is showing how few deep friendships they had.
Oh, this makes a lot of sense. It seems to have started as a way for soldiers to provide for that unmarried sister left back home, or to leave their stuff to a battle buddy if they didn't survive. (And as a Christian version of the pagan blood brotherhood practiced by various steppe tribes.) But obviously it would be valuable for people with a lot more stuff, also.
I'm so grateful that I grew up in a family with cultural roots in Italy. It has always been completely normal for us to greet friends with hugs and kisses on the cheek. Of course it has always left me baffled at this "ermagerd that's gay" mentality that's so common here in the US since that was never part of my experience growing up. It comes across as very insecure about one's sexuality to accuse men of being gay just because they have affection for one another. My best friend and I call each other "brothers" and have always given each other big old hugs and cheek kisses and cried on each others' shoulders when we were going through emotional hardships. Nothing gay about it. It makes me sad for people who don't have these kinds of friendships because it must be very difficult feeling like you can't have that type of relationship to help you get through the troubles in life. Who do such people reach out to when they are suffering? No one? Do they simply suffer alone? It's very sad. Edit: I'd also note that there is a complete double standard here. Women who are friends call each other "girlfriends" and give each other hugs and kisses and will hold hands and go to the bathroom together, etc., and no one bats an eye over it, but if two men do anything even remotely similar they must be gay.
@@TheCounselofTrentactually upon closer inspection those verses describe the fellowship you find yourself in. Who you are authentically is actively being dominated by the ideal you. That's the bad kind of ss relationship the Bible is talking about. Is Jesus your husband? Because you're cheating on him.
@@t.j.armendariz354 people want to be the best. And when they find out what God's best is they become ashamed and try to become like that thing. It's called Falling for unrealistic standards. God gives without measure to those who Trust him. As for those who want God's measure they trust the serpent. The bringer of knowledge
When will they understand that we love them, even if they are gay. We want the best for them, and in spirituality, that means abandoning homosexuality. This is not homophobia, all of us have flaws that must be washed away and repented over. Come, lost lambs, come to the green pastures side by side with our shepard.
You might want to improve your wording, morally there is nothing wrong with experiencing same sex attractions as they are unchosen, the sin and therefore what must be rejected is acting upon ut
@@mcfarvo yes, however sin requires choice, the simple inclination of “I’m attracted to this person” is not a choice, it’s what you do with that choice, otherwise every time you see a woman and are attracted to her, that too would be lust, the key is in are you dwelling on it and fantasizing and desiring, or are you moving past and denying that desire The thing is there is a difference between lust which is a choice and attraction which is an involuntary reaction
@mcfarvo Sin is a choice. To catch yourself looking unconsciously and swiftly correcting yourself hardly counts as a sin. Lust is intentionally looking upon someone despite their obligations or your own.
I am a male suffering SSA and while attending Catholic support groups like desert stream, I noticed some kind of a trend: Male with SSA often (not always) came from a background where the love and affection of a father is absent from their childhood. Hence, this craving of love from a male. Then it got tangled and SSA people tended to sexualise these cravings. But we did not realise that there is always a Father who loves us so much since we were born into this world, our Heavenly Father.
Thank you for sharing your experience, and amen! I hope you're finding all the peace and and encouragement you need in the support groups and local Catholic community. Praying for you, brother :)
Not true. Men just seem to care less about bonding with their children do on average in the older generations because "it's not manly". The "it's not manly because that's the woman's job" is the mentality lots of traditionalists unwittingly support without realizing it.
Correct, it is from 'gaiety', which in turn is from 'gaudete' [to rejoice]. IDK when the meaning changed, although language does evolve. It may have been in the 1970s, my father, at the time ran a small business which sold, among other things, greeting cards. He had to withdraw from sale and destroy some invitation cards which said ''Please come to a Gay Party'' due to the change in meaning. Similarly there used to be a hymn sang in church which contained the line ''May we be in season grave and in season gay''. That certainly can no longer be used, it would no longer fit the tune if the wording was changed.
without understanding the causes of homosexual inclinations, it is hard to know whether they were just as common in the past as they are now. The world today is very different than it was before; industrial revolution exposing to chemicals and pollutants most of humanity didn't deal with before, sedentary lifestyles, diet changes, different roles for men/women, co-ed schooling, common presence of sexualized images in culture, etc., if any of those things are impacting the development of the brain and sexual identity, then it is going to be hard to prove that what we are seeing today with the development of such inclinations in people was still happening in the same way thousands of years ago.
Just the idea you've placed here is a sin because it assumes God can be wrong depending on time as if He isn't all-knowing. A sin is a sin regardless of the time in history we find ourselves in and no excuse will save someone unwilling to repent. If anything the age of information means almost NO ONE can claim ignorance of God's laws as the information is at anyone's fingertips. Each person will have to answer for their life which means none of the excuses you listed will do. Those who contributed to this disgusting lifestyle by creating/compounding the issues with their ideologies (sexual revolution, freemasonry, communism et. al.)/products (birth control, porn, medications, etc.) will have to answer for their individual sins. This is the problem with many people (yourself included), you believe you will be judged as a "group" under the idea of "if and then". "IF I watched porn, but I didn't make the porn myself, THEN God won't punish me for my sin..." as if God will excuse any mortal sin done willingly without repentance. God is unchanging as are His laws, it is OUR obligation to bend to HIS WILL regardless of what point in History we are in and grow in our faith so we aren't deceived into excusing our sinful behavior. To believe we can be released of our sins by some "loophole" means we don't serve God but our own sin-prone will. Please stop making excuses as it will only lead to eternal damnation and educate yourself.
Considering Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece, they were quite common, perhaps even more so, also most schooling was done at home until recently so it was co-ed
@@t.j.armendariz354 Rome and Greece were not gay cultures as the common stereotype wants it. Gay relationships were considered a decadent condition of mind and the sex among two men absolutely a sign of turning them to women.
@@Λουθηρανισμός having spend a fair degree of time studying Ancient Greece and Rome, while much of society makes it out as constant, every day occurrences, men “topping” boys of lower social stature was relatively common in the upper escalóns, along with many other perversions. One Roman emperor found a boy who looked like a wife he had had killed, and so dressed the boy up as a woman and “married” “her”, and as Trent and Michael point out in the longer video they did, at one point debauchery was common enough that one historian wrote of a city that “here they do not yet have s*x in the streets”
@@t.j.armendariz354 none of these practices were considered ''normal'', but decadent practices. I am against the stereotypical thought spread throughout the world that ''romans and, especially, greeks were gays''. This is a myth based on nothing at all, no evidence at all. Anglosaxon world was and is deeply puritanical, i.e. sex-centered with a paranoid way, and created these myths against foreign cultures. This is unacceptable and wrong.
3:13. The insistence on conflating the fight against racism with biblically defined sin is astounding. But I guess it's been stunningly effective so far.
Grasping at straws. More likely the history of male friendship was often one of extemely close bonds which has become less common in modern times. My own opinion. Someone else mentioned Frodo and Sam in LotR. As a child I remember other men and boys mocking their relationship whereas I saw this relationship as something to aspire to. edit: I commented before Trent had concluded his point about friendships. I think it's a great idea
It's scary to think that some unsuspecting kid could hear this guy and think he's an authority on historical matters of any kind, let alone presuming to somehow magically know that the innermost thoughts and feelings of ancient peoples were really just like his own immature and perverse ones
Well you would just be wrong. Comparing modern people to ancient peoples is just wrong. We are similar on a basic sense but the way we live our lives varies greatly for region to region and time to time.
Sergius and Bacchus were the number one and number two commanders of the Scholas Gentilium, who were the imperial bodyguards at the time. If they had been doing each other, that would have been a violation of conduct, and also corrupt dealing. Yet they are portrayed as being excellent soldiers and commanders, to the point that they are compared to shining stars. Their household servants are so loyal that they come with them to try and help. They had several visions of angels encouraging them to persevere and come work for the heavenly court (not to mention Sergius singing psalms as cadence calls while running in shoes with spiked nails inside them). They are praised for being pure, and they tell other people to live morally pure lives as well as ceasing to be pagan. Voices from Heaven praise them publicly, so that even the pagans hear. After all this, there's one scene where Sergius is depressed that his exec Bacchus died first, and Bacchus appears to him to cheer him up. And Sergius does cheer up, and goes to martyrdom cheerfully (with the cadence call), and gets accused of sorcery because he gets miraculously healed after all this miraculous running. It is a bad joke to portray them as gay lovers. They are supposed to be examples of military officers who are enthusiastic Christians (and enthusiastic psalm singers and orators). They are also a warning that sometimes other friends whom one has helped will not return that loyalty, as the imperial governor who tortures and executes them is the same (pagan) friend whom Sergius recommended for the job.
"Beyond merely platonic." That's until when you learn that platonic love is ranked higher than marital love in classical philosophy. Having sexual intercourse with someone does not imply a greater love. The greatest love that there is (which is God) is everything but sexual. There is nothing beyond the divine love, and at a human scale, nothing beyond platonic love.
The image of Paul and Peter just reminds me of how French men greet each other with kisses on the cheek! It’s normal in the Mediterranean world to do this and totally platonic. It’s so gross how American society sexuales everything
All one has to do is look at the bonds of friendship formed by men in the military, especially if they serve in combat together. They are brothers in arms bonded for life in blood and truly love one another, but that doesn’t mean they are sexually attracted to each other.
Love this rebuttal so much! It’s true that one of the casualties of the LGBT movement has been a loss of deeper intimacy in male friendships. We’ve overcorrected so much that we’ve lost the level the brotherhood that the we could have among men. We need to take back what the LGBT perversion has robbed from Christian culture.
You're right Trent, now they're saying Bert and Ernie are gay. 😢 Anything with two men are suddenly gay now with no regard to the original's artist's intent or wishes.
One reason secular people are so obsessed with lgbt is because they think it can be a strong arrow to take down Christianity. Also to try to muddy the waters on the spiritual concept of the family to say anything goes
I visited the local Georgian Orthodox Church where my friend goes and I was struck by how affectionately tactile the Georgian men were with one another without being remotely effeminate. I had recently learned that pride parades are absolutely not tolerated in Georgia, which really added to my existing suspicion that this movement (which I used to support and identify with before Christ illuminated my own confusion) has sexualised natural masculine affection in the minds of modern men. Here were men from a relatively unaffected culture being more affectionate than any I had seen before. I also heard a long time ago that men in Britain were quite affectionate and would even hold hands until Oscar Wilde went to prison and they worried about being mistaken for homosexuals. I haven't fact checked that though.
9/10, if someone doesn't understand deep, meaningful, platonic friendships, he was done dirty by Uncle Bad-Touch, or someone similar. I know this isn't a polite way to say that, but the m-word can get a comment deleted.
I don't think. Very many people fit into that category. But ironically traditionalism made that way of thinking Probably more common in the past than it is today. Since sex before marriage was looked down a pon and everyone married at 18.
@@mason4966 'What If' is speculation without evidence to support it. 'What is' on the other hand, is evidenced by recorded actions. There are no recorded actions of homosexuality in the life of St. John Bosco.
The pictures are being observed through "modern eyes." Those icons are still pictures which are trying to indicate their intense love or friendship for each other in a "moment caught in time." Think about our photos today. Rarely would we photograph two unrelated men embracing. We would be more comfortable with two women doing this, at least we were until the LGBTQ agenda made its mark on our society. But also, reflect on our movies, even now. It is not abnormal to see men who are good friends embrace or even sometimes kiss each other (say on the forehead) in a movie. We are just used to having our "pictures" move so we see the whole context of the moment. This is where those who look back into the ancient past will make mistakes because they are judging with a modern frame of reference.
If someone is truly interested in understanding the earl church practices regarding same sex unions, I would highly recommend John Boswell's book "Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe." This book is well researched by Mr. Boswell who obtained access to very early manuscripts and was able to read them in their original language as he was fluent in 17 languages. He was well respected for his academic credentials and was the chairman of the Yale University history department. Incidentally he received many literary awards for his noted book. It is important when listening to podcasts that the credentials of the podcaster be researched so that his/her opinions can be trusted.
Trent, I ask this as a Lutheran, so there is my background/bias out of the way! I love your content, and I think it would be fascinating to see you compare various Protestant traditions by degree of error in your eyes. While I’m sure you see all these “Departed Brethren” as theologically misguided, I’d find it fascinating to see your unique and wonderful style lay out how much more similar classical Protestants like Lutherans and Anglicans are to your faith than more contemporary Evangelical groups like Baptists, much less fully far-gone groups like Pentecostals and Non-Denominationals that academics should frankly stop labeling as Protestant.
@@dyzmadamachus9842 Honestly, historically Protestant services weren’t much different. Lutheran and Anglican ones were REALLY similar to Catholic Mass, but even Presbyterian, Congregationalist, Methodist, etc. liturgy wasn’t THAT different. Baptists really abandoned all tradition about 30 years ago, and all of the contemporary Evangelicals further abandoned their heritages after that.
I'm Italian by ethnicity. As a child, I frequently kissed my mother's godfather, who was very close to all of us. My relationship with him was entirely nonsexual, yet people like this would assume my relationship with this wonderful man must be somehow sexual. I can only say that this attitude is not only insulting to a wonderful man, but absurdly short-sided.
One big problem today is that love is often reduced to romantic love. When people talk about love, they mostly think about romantic relationships. Another issue is how friendships are portrayed. In movies and shows, when there are two friends of the same sex, fans or society often try to turn it into a romantic relationship, or "ship" it, instead of recognizing and valuing it as a friendship.
The main problem I see is that revisionists don't get rid of their biases before researching a subject! The main purpose of their research is to find something that makes their bias correct! In other words, their purpose is to find something that will make their behavior seem acceptable! They remind of those people that were looking for secret codes in the Bible! The problem was that the codes could also be found on other books! If you're looking for ghosts, you're probably going to find them!
Yeah, all you gotta do is cast doubt on the established tradition of the Church. That's enough to give rise to historical revisionism. Another reason Protestantism is problematic.
Soldiers throughout history that fought together often formed extremely close bonds due to their shared experiences being at risk of death for extended periods of time. The vast, vast majority of these relationships were in no way homosexual.
With regards to Johnathan and King David, that gesture of giving him his robe is like a man giving another man that shirt off his back or at least saying he would; it comes from a place of respect, which we see portrayed in the movie Pearl Harbor. It’s a symbolic gesture which is still expressed verbally today. God can’t simultaneously condemn and condone homosexuality; Christianity cannot serve two masters.
I just had a thought: "Who cares what people wear?" As a representative of the Church simply by being a member of the body of Christ, you should not be thinking of how what you do makes others see you; no, you should care about how people will see you as an extension of the church. Act a fool, the Church looks like it homes fools. Dress a fool, the Church seems less worthy. Its not about you, but it also isn't about "nothing" as everything you do means something to those who have eyes to see what may be wrong with the members of Christ. If you had stereotypes of Christians, wouldn't seeing inadequacy in the members of Christiany reinforce your beliefs to stay away?
Did the medieval Church have gay weddings? I don't know. However, even though Pope Francis may be opposed to gay marriage, he is in favor of the Church recognizing gay civil unions. As the pope said: "What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered." However, Church officials are opposed to homosexual civil unions. The Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith says that "respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions." It adds: "Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean the approval of deviant behavior." Can you imagine that? By the pope's approval of homosexual civil unions, he is approving of *DEVIANT BEHAVIOR?* And to think that delusional Catholics actually believe that Jesus established the Catholic Church.
It must be a very sad existence on this planet to have almost every aspect of one's life and outlook be consumed and formulated by what gets one off sexually. There is SO much more to life than sex.
I'm particularly amused by how he uses his experience being raise in what sounds like a very WASPy tradition as somehow anything relevant to historical Christianity. Throughout souther Europe Eastern Europe, and Latin America you can find societies rife with men being able to form close bonds and lots of touching and hugging. He seems to be using a rather anomalous norther European / Anglo American modern cultural insecurities as if they represent the history of Christian cultures. Maybe I'm misunderstanding. But, sheesh, even in the Anglo WASP world there were fraternities and military societies and other all male social clubs and binding that was part and parcel to the culture. It's only very, very recently in a historical sense that such institutions have been under such attack as exclusively male. And, as Trent notes, our modern peculiarities have us looking back at many of these institutions and seeing them as somehow decidedly "gay," a proclivity capitalized in by these activists trying to push their narrative. Was there homosexual relationships or pursuits back then? No doubt, and the now oft-disparage clear prohibitions against homosexuals in these all male institutions seems to speak specifically to the realization of how certain people were inclined, so as to explicitly keep that out of the picture.
The guy doesn't even know about Emperor Theodosius I, or the Edict of Thessalonica, instead falling to Hislop's "Muh Evil Pagan Catholic Constantine" nvm, you mentioned it
I was listening to this episode yesterday on Spotify. The next episode that Spotify played was a Pro Pride episode from a show I've literally never heard of "Smosh Reads Reddit Stories" episode ". The Algorithm is watching 👁👁
Like literally not one of the many other podcasts I follow as always. NO, it had to be something pro pride bc my opinions are inaccurate and I need to be re-educated, super annoying. I made sure to skip to the end and give the show a 1 star review.
At about 4:17, I would like to point out that in many European and South American cultures, people of all genders greet each other with a kiss. Even people who are not good friends greet each other this way in Argentina. Kissing actually replaces a hand shake.
Well then maybe the answer would be that all men spend all their time with women only. That includes friendships. No male to male contacts whatsoever. We could see if that worked.
Trent hits the nail on the head. Even in modern media, homosexualisation is rampant. Just look at Sci-fi. Kirk and Spock = Gay. Ben and Luke = Gay. C3PO and R2D2 = Gay. Anything to peddle it.
Wasn't it said in the Midrash the reason for the flood was because the world had become wicked and men where entering into " Contracts " with other men?
I think your take is right, but I find it weird how prominent this issue is. It should be as “essential” as one’s views on how literal Genesis is or one’s views on eschatology … aka, maybe important but not anywhere near enough to divide the Body of Christ. People are treating this like it’s as make-or-break as believing in the Trinity.
@@TheCounselofTrent And FTR, I’m DEFINITELY not saying Trent is doing this! It’s just a problem I see a lot. Trent, as always, approaches it with nuance.
1:52 he is probably talking about union og the blood brotherhood , which is old "adoption" ritiual when two men take each other as brothers nothing gay, just they friendship grow to brotherhood not sodomi
“I’m so special and unique I’m going to make fun of *popular thing* and *traditional thing* to show you how I’m just better than you all GIVE ME ATTENTION PLEASE” -basically mullet’s entire video
I cannot stand how and why there's this desire to claim that (like Trent pointed out) "everything is g@y". I recall how during high-school that term was used as an insult for all that was not cool and weirdly there's some truth in that. We need to protect the rite of adelphopoiesis from the perversion of modern ideologies.
I remember first encountering this kind of people when i watched Band of Brothers. I saw many comments about how Winters and Nixon had a gay relationship. These people can't conceive a brotherhood relationship like, it's a very limitating way to see human relations.
So should people who experience SSA just not have friends? If I’m attracted to the SS according to Trent’s logic I shouldn’t be around people who I’m attracted to. However, most people are attracted to the opposite sex so they shouldn’t hangout with me either. So who am I supposed to be friends with and where is my community? Additionally, Trent understands that men and women are different and therefore attracted to each other but can’t seem to grasp that people who experience SSA are different as well. Attraction is more complex than only genitalia.
Must get historical facts right! Through out the ancient world of same sex unions were well known, indeed, famously for example in the Greek world they were often encouraged. The Jews rejection of Greek ideals or the many religions that surrounded them is accepted. What is disliked is the casual manners of such relationships as desired. Much of the understanding of the OT god being ..wrongly..identified as NO YOU CAN'T..or ..IT IS FORBIDDEN! poor theology indeed. Constantine, the great....called that for a reason...did more than tolerate the Christians he adopted them as his own religion. The edict of Milan does not mention Jesus but is clearly aimed at reversing Diocletian's great Persecution and allows the return of property and scriptures etc to those that have lost it ..such as the Church. It asks people to pray to their gods for the stability of the empire etc ...this brings to an end the deliberate persecution of groups including the Christians who suffer because of their stated religion. The eastern church later sends appeals to Constantine to intervene and save Christians from persecution in the east. The emperor himself worships every Sunday and personally chastises his own court for its lack of faith and true piety even threatening them with Hell if they do not change. Theodosius on the other hand falls foul to st Ambrose the glorious bishop of Milan and the church is triumphant therefore over the state. Theodosius..also the great... Grants supreme authority back to the church and many other cults are thereby marginalized and later removed completely. The point of History is that our modern thinking on gay sex is in part a result of Victorian morality back lash against earlier norms. Certainly for example many monarchs were both gay and bisexuals and whilst this behaviour was frowned upon by many it was generally permitted...especially amongst the powerful. Akin to monarchs having mistress's etc ... The problem for some ultra Conservatives in the church is they lack historical awareness and theological debate alone is not good enough to present either a charitable or proper version of History and what or how is a good reality!
Awesome attitude. You will notice (even Christians can't deny this) that Christianity has never and will never have anything positive to add or even interject into life. They only know to take away. Love adds to the experience. Christians only seek to subtract. Christianity is hate.
@@skippy675"Christianity has never and will never have anything positive to add or even interject into life" You say that when the church has done so much for the poor. I saw it with my own eyes. It was the church that welcomed my parents when they didn't have a roof to shelter when I was born. This is not positive enough ? My church welcomed and fed migrants. This is not positive enough ? I could go on and on with all the good things Christianity has done in the world. Saying this kind of thing is focusing on the negative and forgetting all the charitable works that the church has done.
@lonelyberg1808 I volunteered at my local Church too. Collecting food and clothing for a shelter. Did "meals on wheels" too because so many elderly feel alone and isolated. I did it because it is the right thing to do. I am as miltantly athiest as it is possible to be. If Jesus is real, he can suck the farts out of my behind and like it! I owe God nothing! Nothing! My fellow man, woman and child however, i do care about. All of this carries on exactly the same with a church or not. Anyone who only helps the needy because they think a God may be watching is a piece of doo doo. Perhaps you fall into that category.
@@skippy675Your comment is as rude as ridiculous. Moreover it doesn't disprove my comment. I show you the fact that Christianity did good things to the world however your response is to say that you did good things because it was the right thing to do and that anyone who only helped the needy because they think god is watching is bad however, who said that Christian people generally only do good things because they believe that God is watching them ? The Church does good things because they think it's the right thing to do. Besides, even if the church was hypocritical and helped the poor not out of love, that would not show that the action did not do good to the world. So, contrary to your initial response, it clearly shows that Christianity has had a positive impact on the world.
@@lonelyberg1808 Islam, Hinduism and Judaism inspire just as much charity per capita as does Christianity. Athiesm is on par as well. Medicine sans frontiers (doctors without borders) is secular. People help other people because we are apes. We have formed social hierarchy, and benefit as a whole b helping each other. I don't draw any inspiration or feel any cleansing or restorative power from the spottless human-divine hybrid virgin zombie's blood as you do. You are free to draw your inspiration from this though. Yes, you appreciated the elegance of that description. You know exactly whom I refer to.
They can't conceive of a relationship that doesn't involve sex. Sad. 😢
Compulsive sexuality
13:20 and yet Trent doesn’t think men and women can be friends alone… bc he can’t think of a relationship that doesn’t involve sex
@tookie36 His opinion was valid. he literally said "I" explaining that he doesn't spend time alone with other women due to sexual attraction(he is married).
He is taking steps to protect his marriage. You are cherry picking anything you can find to try to discredit him.
Tbh it's embarrassing
@@teamgab7432 he said “I” after saying men and women are different. This is the standard line from catholic apologists. Pints with aquinas said the same thing. Men and women shouldn’t be friends as “just friends” especially while married. Which is fine for a personal life experience but nonsense when it comes to a theological teaching
You people say the whole point of marriage is to create children through the act of sex, then because you also say gays can't reproduce so they aren't allowed to get married but now you're saying sex is irrelevant. I love the moving goalposts, just admit your opinion of gays is your own and you're just hiding behind religion. You just personally think they're "icky".
Unfortunately, the term, "daddy" can have sexual connotation.
Imagine watching home movies of a family where the children call their father "daddy" and arguing that those children were in an innappropriate relationship with their father.
Thats what is happening here.
👏👏👏
Once, at a party, I had a gay man tell me, after learning I'm Catholic, that the only difference between Catholics and gays is that we say "Father, forgive me" and they say "Daddy, I've been naughty." Then he laughed. I said, "No, the difference between us is that you think you're normal and I know you're a degenerate pervert." He stopped laughing.
This is why I find calling God daddy as some priests do in sermons to help them understand the wording Jesus used during the our father, because Abba is essentially daddy. But that word now has terrible connotations.
There’s a reason the LGBT movement is twisted and their sexual actions are sinful.
Normal things in LGTV "families" sadly 💀
Every time someone implies Frodo and Sam were more than just friends, an Ainur loses its wings.
That’s one of the reasons I have a hard time listening to some of the audio commentary on the extended editions of the Lord of the rings DVDs, because the actor who is gay, who played the Christ figure Gandalf, was so happy when Sam touched Frodo’s hand. this man is gay, He’s a homosexual that thinks that Sam and Frodo are gay because that’s the way his demented brain works.
You mean they aren't Joe Biden supporters? Oh man, I'm so confused!
It's headshake worthy. Sam fantasizes about Rosie and has children with her, and Frodo (to my knowledge) has no sexual thoughts about anyone.
The singular form is Ainu :) Ainur is plural
@@VanchaMarch2 Okay, nerd! (((THANK YOU.)))
Two of the biggest casualties of the LGBTQ movement are male friendships, and tomboys.
Male Friendship?
I think you meant Femboys or Homosexuality
And children
@@kenzietyaga9035 He's talking about casualties...
@@Quekksilber oh wait yeah, my mistake
And women and girls. Essentially, everyone.
"Those who cannot conceive friendship as a substantive love but only as a disguise or elaboration of Eros betray the fact that they have never had a friend."
C. S. Lewis
Edit: I commented this before finishing the video. I should've known Trent would have noted it!
haha beat you to it! -Vanessa
This rings so true today. I also suspect in today's times, "father" could be substituted for friend in many cases.
@@TheCounselofTrentall sects of Christianity are equally valid, in the sense that none of them have any validity whatsoever.
> sighs < These people are so tiresome.
yes homophobics are
Soooo tiresome.
@@StringofPearls55 thats the homophobic community for u
I completely understand why homosexual people have a hard time imagining 2 men cant love each other deeply without being sexual.
It's the same thing as how some men don't think they can have a relationship with a woman without being sexual. It is a lust problem.
I’m sure there’s some people that think Han Solo and Luke Skywalker can’t be good friends and care about each other
@@femaleKCRoyalsFan I'm not a fan of star wars so I really can't understand your example.
I'm raised in a society with no homosexuality so I see this phenomena in straight men and women where just normal friendship are viewed in sexual ways
lust is a sin but love is not is the difference
Exactly.
@@sandstorm7768 Many gay men love other men non sexually old bean
Hey Trent! Thanks for rebutting the nonsense of the people who attempt to rewrite the history of Christianity. God bless.
Hi Daniel, I'm sorry that reality is so hard to swallow. I hope you find the truth one day.
@@joshuataylor3550I'm perfectly in reality! God bless 😊
@joshuataylor3550 I'm sorry it's hard for you to swallow that homosexuality is a mortal sin. The Bible doesn't change because of your opinion, Have a great day.
@@Maryismymom2 'Mortal sin' or 'sin' in general means nothing to people who aren't theists.And given that the West is rapidly secularizing every passing day, your words will continue to have less and less impact on people's lives, and this must be hard to come to terms with. How else will insecure people get to satisfy their superiority complexes?
@@RationalistMH What does this have to do with anything related to the comment thread or video, lmao
People always use these mental gymnastics to try to justify their sinful ways.
My mom's "I'm not the one who is married so I'm not committing adultery" is my favorite.
Unlike you, of course, the holier than thou Catholic informing us of how depraved those 'people' are.
_"...these mental gymnastics..."_
LOL, from someone who literally worship cannibalism and propitiatory human sacrifice based solely on a fictional character.
@@twitherspoon8954…. are you ok?
@@TitusCastiglione1503
Are you denying that the literal worship of propitiatory human sacrifice is the core tenet of Christianity? You know... that cross thing and John 3:16.
Paul created Christianity in 48 AD and this is how he put it:
"He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all."
(Romans 8:32)
"Christ our passover is sacrificed for us."
(1 Corinthians 5:7)
"God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement."
(Romans 3:25)
"God showed his great love for us by sending Christ to die for us."
(Romans 5:8)
"We are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ."
(Hebrews 10:10)
This reminds me of the argument that Christ himself was gay. Because Saint John was his "beloved" and he left him to care for his mother.
They'll latch onto anything.
As will all people.
Jesus had feelings too
Ugh, Mason Mennenga. Good on you for rebutting his blatant revisionist nonsense Trent
Sheesh I'm familiar with you and the Lutheran anime girl haha
Always nice to see you in random Christian channel
Yet if we were to revise established Gay history, we would be attacked wouldn’t we? The double standard is infuriating
If they didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any
@@bennygohome4576 a double standard is no standard at all, so yeah... they've got no standards
Yes you would be called out for lying. But he isn't lying.
Adelphopoesis was also practiced by nobles in many other countries, in truth it's mostly was a get out of "supporting the state by leaving your estate witouth an heir" card, by finding someone who is of noble blood and who may sire offspring and thus gift that "brother of yours" in wealth, ofc I'm not of the byzantine rite and I only studied it as a medieval (and pre civil state) law to fix inheritance issues.
Buuut if you would have a relationship with your brother in blood you are sick. Also, having a deep and caring friendship, being interpreted as gay is showing how few deep friendships they had.
Oh, this makes a lot of sense. It seems to have started as a way for soldiers to provide for that unmarried sister left back home, or to leave their stuff to a battle buddy if they didn't survive. (And as a Christian version of the pagan blood brotherhood practiced by various steppe tribes.) But obviously it would be valuable for people with a lot more stuff, also.
@@suburbanbansheeI was about to mention, it came as a Christian version of the blood brotherhood ceremonies used to cement treaties etc
I'm so grateful that I grew up in a family with cultural roots in Italy. It has always been completely normal for us to greet friends with hugs and kisses on the cheek. Of course it has always left me baffled at this "ermagerd that's gay" mentality that's so common here in the US since that was never part of my experience growing up. It comes across as very insecure about one's sexuality to accuse men of being gay just because they have affection for one another. My best friend and I call each other "brothers" and have always given each other big old hugs and cheek kisses and cried on each others' shoulders when we were going through emotional hardships. Nothing gay about it. It makes me sad for people who don't have these kinds of friendships because it must be very difficult feeling like you can't have that type of relationship to help you get through the troubles in life. Who do such people reach out to when they are suffering? No one? Do they simply suffer alone? It's very sad.
Edit: I'd also note that there is a complete double standard here. Women who are friends call each other "girlfriends" and give each other hugs and kisses and will hold hands and go to the bathroom together, etc., and no one bats an eye over it, but if two men do anything even remotely similar they must be gay.
I'd also like to point out that even if this had happened, that wouldn't have legitimized it. It's repeatedly condemned in Scripture.
Interesting point! -Vanessa
@@TheCounselofTrentactually upon closer inspection those verses describe the fellowship you find yourself in. Who you are authentically is actively being dominated by the ideal you. That's the bad kind of ss relationship the Bible is talking about. Is Jesus your husband? Because you're cheating on him.
@@ddrsecan you explain your comment because it makes no sense
@@t.j.armendariz354 people want to be the best. And when they find out what God's best is they become ashamed and try to become like that thing. It's called Falling for unrealistic standards. God gives without measure to those who Trust him. As for those who want God's measure they trust the serpent. The bringer of knowledge
@@t.j.armendariz354 who do you think Trent trusts? God.... or the serpent?
When will they understand that we love them, even if they are gay. We want the best for them, and in spirituality, that means abandoning homosexuality. This is not homophobia, all of us have flaws that must be washed away and repented over. Come, lost lambs, come to the green pastures side by side with our shepard.
You might want to improve your wording, morally there is nothing wrong with experiencing same sex attractions as they are unchosen, the sin and therefore what must be rejected is acting upon ut
@@t.j.armendariz354even to look with lust is adultery according to Jesus Christ, so even a mere thought can be sinful, so be wary.
@@mcfarvo yes, however sin requires choice, the simple inclination of “I’m attracted to this person” is not a choice, it’s what you do with that choice, otherwise every time you see a woman and are attracted to her, that too would be lust, the key is in are you dwelling on it and fantasizing and desiring, or are you moving past and denying that desire
The thing is there is a difference between lust which is a choice and attraction which is an involuntary reaction
@@t.j.armendariz354 Thank you for the correction
@mcfarvo Sin is a choice. To catch yourself looking unconsciously and swiftly correcting yourself hardly counts as a sin. Lust is intentionally looking upon someone despite their obligations or your own.
He’s literally the guy in elementary school who called you and your homie gay because he didn’t have any friends
Savage!
I am a male suffering SSA and while attending Catholic support groups like desert stream, I noticed some kind of a trend:
Male with SSA often (not always) came from a background where the love and affection of a father is absent from their childhood. Hence, this craving of love from a male.
Then it got tangled and SSA people tended to sexualise these cravings.
But we did not realise that there is always a Father who loves us so much since we were born into this world, our Heavenly Father.
Thanks for sharing your perspective! -Vanessa
Thank you for sharing your experience, and amen! I hope you're finding all the peace and and encouragement you need in the support groups and local Catholic community. Praying for you, brother :)
dafuq is ssa?
@@kamikuru4014 Same-sex attraction
Not true. Men just seem to care less about bonding with their children do on average in the older generations because "it's not manly". The "it's not manly because that's the woman's job" is the mentality lots of traditionalists unwittingly support without realizing it.
I think in the medieval era the word "gay" meant "cheerful"
Gay meant "happy" as recently as the 50s-60s.
@@RomanDiariesYep, just like the theme song from The Flintstones. “We’ll have a Gay Ole time.”
@@RomanDiaries Correct, it is from 'gaiety', which in turn is from 'gaudete' [to rejoice].
Correct, it is from 'gaiety', which in turn is from 'gaudete' [to rejoice]. IDK when the meaning changed, although language does evolve. It may have been in the 1970s, my father, at the time ran a small business which sold, among other things, greeting cards. He had to withdraw from sale and destroy some invitation cards which said ''Please come to a Gay Party'' due to the change in meaning. Similarly there used to be a hymn sang in church which contained the line ''May we be in season grave and in season gay''. That certainly can no longer be used, it would no longer fit the tune if the wording was changed.
without understanding the causes of homosexual inclinations, it is hard to know whether they were just as common in the past as they are now. The world today is very different than it was before; industrial revolution exposing to chemicals and pollutants most of humanity didn't deal with before, sedentary lifestyles, diet changes, different roles for men/women, co-ed schooling, common presence of sexualized images in culture, etc., if any of those things are impacting the development of the brain and sexual identity, then it is going to be hard to prove that what we are seeing today with the development of such inclinations in people was still happening in the same way thousands of years ago.
Just the idea you've placed here is a sin because it assumes God can be wrong depending on time as if He isn't all-knowing. A sin is a sin regardless of the time in history we find ourselves in and no excuse will save someone unwilling to repent. If anything the age of information means almost NO ONE can claim ignorance of God's laws as the information is at anyone's fingertips.
Each person will have to answer for their life which means none of the excuses you listed will do. Those who contributed to this disgusting lifestyle by creating/compounding the issues with their ideologies (sexual revolution, freemasonry, communism et. al.)/products (birth control, porn, medications, etc.) will have to answer for their individual sins.
This is the problem with many people (yourself included), you believe you will be judged as a "group" under the idea of "if and then". "IF I watched porn, but I didn't make the porn myself, THEN God won't punish me for my sin..." as if God will excuse any mortal sin done willingly without repentance. God is unchanging as are His laws, it is OUR obligation to bend to HIS WILL regardless of what point in History we are in and grow in our faith so we aren't deceived into excusing our sinful behavior. To believe we can be released of our sins by some "loophole" means we don't serve God but our own sin-prone will. Please stop making excuses as it will only lead to eternal damnation and educate yourself.
Considering Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece, they were quite common, perhaps even more so, also most schooling was done at home until recently so it was co-ed
@@t.j.armendariz354 Rome and Greece were not gay cultures as the common stereotype wants it. Gay relationships were considered a decadent condition of mind and the sex among two men absolutely a sign of turning them to women.
@@Λουθηρανισμός having spend a fair degree of time studying Ancient Greece and Rome, while much of society makes it out as constant, every day occurrences, men “topping” boys of lower social stature was relatively common in the upper escalóns, along with many other perversions. One Roman emperor found a boy who looked like a wife he had had killed, and so dressed the boy up as a woman and “married” “her”, and as Trent and Michael point out in the longer video they did, at one point debauchery was common enough that one historian wrote of a city that “here they do not yet have s*x in the streets”
@@t.j.armendariz354 none of these practices were considered ''normal'', but decadent practices. I am against the stereotypical thought spread throughout the world that ''romans and, especially, greeks were gays''. This is a myth based on nothing at all, no evidence at all. Anglosaxon world was and is deeply puritanical, i.e. sex-centered with a paranoid way, and created these myths against foreign cultures. This is unacceptable and wrong.
I'll say what I said after watching your stream with IP on this video.
Skillet is dope, I don't care what the mullet man says.
IP is based. I've learned life changing things from him.
What do you expect from someone who thinks the anus is a sex organ.
Skillet is dope! No argument here, fellow enjoyer.
Christ is King.
😂😂😂
Saw you on InspiringPhilosohy, as someone with homosexual temptations I'm glad you're out here preaching the biblical view
3:13. The insistence on conflating the fight against racism with biblically defined sin is astounding. But I guess it's been stunningly effective so far.
Awesome video! God bless you and your family Trent🙏
We appreciate your support! -Vanessa
@@TheCounselofTrent subscribed
Do these people not realize that if your best friend died you would be pretty sad?
Seriously...
(You get the sense they have no clue what FRIENDSHIP is!)
"People sinned in the past, therefore when we do the same sins now, that means it's not a sin." Pffft 😂
And no evidence that what they cited was even the sin he is trying to justify now anyhow
@@FleurPillager I think Ecclesiastes (Solomon's writings) would throw the idea of "getting rich" out of the window haha
The concept of sin is an entirely made up idea.
Grasping at straws. More likely the history of male friendship was often one of extemely close bonds which has become less common in modern times. My own opinion. Someone else mentioned Frodo and Sam in LotR. As a child I remember other men and boys mocking their relationship whereas I saw this relationship as something to aspire to.
edit: I commented before Trent had concluded his point about friendships. I think it's a great idea
i was just reading Plato's Symposium last night, this guy couldn't be more wrong about history
It's scary to think that some unsuspecting kid could hear this guy and think he's an authority on historical matters of any kind, let alone presuming to somehow magically know that the innermost thoughts and feelings of ancient peoples were really just like his own immature and perverse ones
Well you would just be wrong. Comparing modern people to ancient peoples is just wrong. We are similar on a basic sense but the way we live our lives varies greatly for region to region and time to time.
Sergius and Bacchus were the number one and number two commanders of the Scholas Gentilium, who were the imperial bodyguards at the time. If they had been doing each other, that would have been a violation of conduct, and also corrupt dealing. Yet they are portrayed as being excellent soldiers and commanders, to the point that they are compared to shining stars. Their household servants are so loyal that they come with them to try and help.
They had several visions of angels encouraging them to persevere and come work for the heavenly court (not to mention Sergius singing psalms as cadence calls while running in shoes with spiked nails inside them). They are praised for being pure, and they tell other people to live morally pure lives as well as ceasing to be pagan. Voices from Heaven praise them publicly, so that even the pagans hear. After all this, there's one scene where Sergius is depressed that his exec Bacchus died first, and Bacchus appears to him to cheer him up. And Sergius does cheer up, and goes to martyrdom cheerfully (with the cadence call), and gets accused of sorcery because he gets miraculously healed after all this miraculous running.
It is a bad joke to portray them as gay lovers. They are supposed to be examples of military officers who are enthusiastic Christians (and enthusiastic psalm singers and orators). They are also a warning that sometimes other friends whom one has helped will not return that loyalty, as the imperial governor who tortures and executes them is the same (pagan) friend whom Sergius recommended for the job.
Why do you think it would have been a violation of conduct ? Have you heard of the Sacred Band of Thebes ?
Chronological ethnocentrism twists truth to any conclusion you want.
"Beyond merely platonic." That's until when you learn that platonic love is ranked higher than marital love in classical philosophy. Having sexual intercourse with someone does not imply a greater love. The greatest love that there is (which is God) is everything but sexual. There is nothing beyond the divine love, and at a human scale, nothing beyond platonic love.
Plato taught God everything he now knows!
Man the mental gymnastics the alphabet mob tries to perform can truly astounding....
Alphabet mob xD
Gonna steal that, may come in handy at some point
The image of Paul and Peter just reminds me of how French men greet each other with kisses on the cheek! It’s normal in the Mediterranean world to do this and totally platonic. It’s so gross how American society sexuales everything
All one has to do is look at the bonds of friendship formed by men in the military, especially if they serve in combat together. They are brothers in arms bonded for life in blood and truly love one another, but that doesn’t mean they are sexually attracted to each other.
Love this rebuttal so much! It’s true that one of the casualties of the LGBT movement has been a loss of deeper intimacy in male friendships. We’ve overcorrected so much that we’ve lost the level the brotherhood that the we could have among men. We need to take back what the LGBT perversion has robbed from Christian culture.
Excellent response as always.
Thank you! We appreciate your support! -Vanessa
You're right Trent, now they're saying Bert and Ernie are gay. 😢 Anything with two men are suddenly gay now with no regard to the original's artist's intent or wishes.
You’re very right about that! -Vanessa
One reason secular people are so obsessed with lgbt is because they think it can be a strong arrow to take down Christianity. Also to try to muddy the waters on the spiritual concept of the family to say anything goes
I visited the local Georgian Orthodox Church where my friend goes and I was struck by how affectionately tactile the Georgian men were with one another without being remotely effeminate. I had recently learned that pride parades are absolutely not tolerated in Georgia, which really added to my existing suspicion that this movement (which I used to support and identify with before Christ illuminated my own confusion) has sexualised natural masculine affection in the minds of modern men. Here were men from a relatively unaffected culture being more affectionate than any I had seen before.
I also heard a long time ago that men in Britain were quite affectionate and would even hold hands until Oscar Wilde went to prison and they worried about being mistaken for homosexuals. I haven't fact checked that though.
Whoever is doing the thumbnails is doing a great job 👍🏻
Thank you for the feedback! -Vanessa
Stay tuned Trent May Come out.
9/10, if someone doesn't understand deep, meaningful, platonic friendships, he was done dirty by Uncle Bad-Touch, or someone similar. I know this isn't a polite way to say that, but the m-word can get a comment deleted.
Videos looking slick these days
Not only is he justifying gay relationships, but his arguments could also be used to justify incest.
TLDR; No
When you love somebody because of sex, then you need to re-questioning your “love”.
I don't think.
Very many people fit into that category. But ironically traditionalism made that way of thinking Probably more common in the past than it is today. Since sex before marriage was looked down a pon and everyone married at 18.
This generation never heard of brotherhood
I actually attended a week day mass where a baby-boomer deacon gave a homily trying to saying that St. John Bosco was gay. I was livid.
What if he was gay? 😂
@@mason4966 'What If' is speculation without evidence to support it. 'What is' on the other hand, is evidenced by recorded actions. There are no recorded actions of homosexuality in the life of St. John Bosco.
The pictures are being observed through "modern eyes." Those icons are still pictures which are trying to indicate their intense love or friendship for each other in a "moment caught in time." Think about our photos today. Rarely would we photograph two unrelated men embracing. We would be more comfortable with two women doing this, at least we were until the LGBTQ agenda made its mark on our society. But also, reflect on our movies, even now. It is not abnormal to see men who are good friends embrace or even sometimes kiss each other (say on the forehead) in a movie. We are just used to having our "pictures" move so we see the whole context of the moment. This is where those who look back into the ancient past will make mistakes because they are judging with a modern frame of reference.
Very true! -Vanessa
If someone is truly interested in understanding the earl church practices regarding same sex unions, I would highly recommend John Boswell's book "Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe." This book is well researched by Mr. Boswell who obtained access to very early manuscripts and was able to read them in their original language as he was fluent in 17 languages. He was well respected for his academic credentials and was the chairman of the Yale University history department. Incidentally he received many literary awards for his noted book. It is important when listening to podcasts that the credentials of the podcaster be researched so that his/her opinions can be trusted.
Well done video.
Thank you! -Vanessa
Trent, I ask this as a Lutheran, so there is my background/bias out of the way!
I love your content, and I think it would be fascinating to see you compare various Protestant traditions by degree of error in your eyes. While I’m sure you see all these “Departed Brethren” as theologically misguided, I’d find it fascinating to see your unique and wonderful style lay out how much more similar classical Protestants like Lutherans and Anglicans are to your faith than more contemporary Evangelical groups like Baptists, much less fully far-gone groups like Pentecostals and Non-Denominationals that academics should frankly stop labeling as Protestant.
When I saw how Lutheran and and Catholic liturgical services are similar in their looks (the vestments e.g.) I was astonished.
@@dyzmadamachus9842 Honestly, historically Protestant services weren’t much different. Lutheran and Anglican ones were REALLY similar to Catholic Mass, but even Presbyterian, Congregationalist, Methodist, etc. liturgy wasn’t THAT different. Baptists really abandoned all tradition about 30 years ago, and all of the contemporary Evangelicals further abandoned their heritages after that.
I'm Italian by ethnicity. As a child, I frequently kissed my mother's godfather, who was very close to all of us. My relationship with him was entirely nonsexual, yet people like this would assume my relationship with this wonderful man must be somehow sexual. I can only say that this attitude is not only insulting to a wonderful man, but absurdly short-sided.
One big problem today is that love is often reduced to romantic love. When people talk about love, they mostly think about romantic relationships. Another issue is how friendships are portrayed. In movies and shows, when there are two friends of the same sex, fans or society often try to turn it into a romantic relationship, or "ship" it, instead of recognizing and valuing it as a friendship.
Thank you for your insights! -Vanessa
Say "LBTQ+alphabet" to a medieval Christian and they would have asked "What's that?"
Say the word cisgender, and they be like “what? That word sounds made up.” Which it is by the way because it never existed back in the 80s.
Say that to somebody just 15 years ago and you would get that same response.
Yes medieval people were ignorant on lots of subjects. What's your point?
The main problem I see is that revisionists don't get rid of their biases before researching a subject! The main purpose of their research is to find something that makes their bias correct! In other words, their purpose is to find something that will make their behavior seem acceptable! They remind of those people that were looking for secret codes in the Bible! The problem was that the codes could also be found on other books! If you're looking for ghosts, you're probably going to find them!
Yeah, all you gotta do is cast doubt on the established tradition of the Church. That's enough to give rise to historical revisionism.
Another reason Protestantism is problematic.
@bitter_bidder no, a 6 year old.
@bitter_bidder thanks for noticing. Anything else to add? Or just a question?
Soldiers throughout history that fought together often formed extremely close bonds due to their shared experiences being at risk of death for extended periods of time. The vast, vast majority of these relationships were in no way homosexual.
Very true! Thanks for sharing! -Vanessa
With regards to Johnathan and King David, that gesture of giving him his robe is like a man giving another man that shirt off his back or at least saying he would; it comes from a place of respect, which we see portrayed in the movie Pearl Harbor. It’s a symbolic gesture which is still expressed verbally today.
God can’t simultaneously condemn and condone homosexuality; Christianity cannot serve two masters.
I mean, the dude's facts are way off, but at least he was right about Skillet.
I just had a thought: "Who cares what people wear?"
As a representative of the Church simply by being a member of the body of Christ, you should not be thinking of how what you do makes others see you; no, you should care about how people will see you as an extension of the church. Act a fool, the Church looks like it homes fools. Dress a fool, the Church seems less worthy. Its not about you, but it also isn't about "nothing" as everything you do means something to those who have eyes to see what may be wrong with the members of Christ.
If you had stereotypes of Christians, wouldn't seeing inadequacy in the members of Christiany reinforce your beliefs to stay away?
This was great! Thank you for being firm Trent
Did the medieval Church have gay weddings? I don't know. However, even though Pope Francis may be opposed to gay marriage, he is in favor of the Church recognizing gay civil unions. As the pope said: "What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered."
However, Church officials are opposed to homosexual civil unions. The Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith says that "respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions." It adds: "Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean the approval of deviant behavior."
Can you imagine that? By the pope's approval of homosexual civil unions, he is approving of *DEVIANT BEHAVIOR?* And to think that delusional Catholics actually believe that Jesus established the Catholic Church.
It must be a very sad existence on this planet to have almost every aspect of one's life and outlook be consumed and formulated by what gets one off sexually. There is SO much more to life than sex.
I'm particularly amused by how he uses his experience being raise in what sounds like a very WASPy tradition as somehow anything relevant to historical Christianity. Throughout souther Europe Eastern Europe, and Latin America you can find societies rife with men being able to form close bonds and lots of touching and hugging. He seems to be using a rather anomalous norther European / Anglo American modern cultural insecurities as if they represent the history of Christian cultures. Maybe I'm misunderstanding. But, sheesh, even in the Anglo WASP world there were fraternities and military societies and other all male social clubs and binding that was part and parcel to the culture. It's only very, very recently in a historical sense that such institutions have been under such attack as exclusively male. And, as Trent notes, our modern peculiarities have us looking back at many of these institutions and seeing them as somehow decidedly "gay," a proclivity capitalized in by these activists trying to push their narrative. Was there homosexual relationships or pursuits back then? No doubt, and the now oft-disparage clear prohibitions against homosexuals in these all male institutions seems to speak specifically to the realization of how certain people were inclined, so as to explicitly keep that out of the picture.
Thanks for the comment! -Vanessa
Thank you Trent. Great video, God bless🙏
The miseducation of Gen Z… wow. They will try to argue anything with zero evidence.
The guy doesn't even know about Emperor Theodosius I, or the Edict of Thessalonica, instead falling to Hislop's "Muh Evil Pagan Catholic Constantine" nvm, you mentioned it
Sad how these people can't imagine a close relationship that doesn't involve sleeping together. Its all they think about. Almost a modern religion.
I was listening to this episode yesterday on Spotify. The next episode that Spotify played was a Pro Pride episode from a show I've literally never heard of "Smosh Reads Reddit Stories" episode ". The Algorithm is watching 👁👁
Like literally not one of the many other podcasts I follow as always. NO, it had to be something pro pride bc my opinions are inaccurate and I need to be re-educated, super annoying. I made sure to skip to the end and give the show a 1 star review.
At about 4:17, I would like to point out that in many European and South American cultures, people of all genders greet each other with a kiss. Even people who are not good friends greet each other this way in Argentina. Kissing actually replaces a hand shake.
Short answer: Nope, that's anathema.
LET THEN BE ANATHEMA BOIS
Well then maybe the answer would be that all men spend all their time with women only. That includes friendships. No male to male contacts whatsoever. We could see if that worked.
This poor guy is so confused and sick (I mean the one called "Mason" whom Trent is talking about). Pray for him.
I bet these revisionists have never had a strong male friendship. Very sad.
If my brother died and I grieved bitterly and he showed up to me in a vision, does that make me gay?
Yes.
@@dyzmadamachus9842 Let this be satire.
Yes.
Trent hits the nail on the head. Even in modern media, homosexualisation is rampant. Just look at Sci-fi.
Kirk and Spock = Gay.
Ben and Luke = Gay.
C3PO and R2D2 = Gay.
Anything to peddle it.
Lol gay robots?
@@JohnR.T.B. I'm afraid so according to the Rainbow mafia.
Wasn't it said in the Midrash the reason for the flood was because the world had become wicked and men where entering into " Contracts " with other men?
This is a really good video super obvious but very well articulated
I think your take is right, but I find it weird how prominent this issue is. It should be as “essential” as one’s views on how literal Genesis is or one’s views on eschatology … aka, maybe important but not anywhere near enough to divide the Body of Christ. People are treating this like it’s as make-or-break as believing in the Trinity.
Thanks for your feedback! -Vanessa
@@TheCounselofTrent And FTR, I’m DEFINITELY not saying Trent is doing this! It’s just a problem I see a lot. Trent, as always, approaches it with nuance.
1:52 he is probably talking about union og the blood brotherhood , which is old "adoption" ritiual when two men take each other as brothers nothing gay, just they friendship grow to brotherhood not sodomi
When is Trent going to talk about Pope Joan . She wasnt Pope long because she had a baby and later murdered . Very interesting scandal.
My only question is why does this guy hate Skillet lol, I love there music
Valid question! Haha. -Vanessa
Background looks awesome!
We are glad you like it! -Vanessa
100% with you on this one
Trent, thank you so much for methodically dismantling this dude's false and poisonous narrative.
The answer is "no, they didn't".
This guy thinks Skillet is the worst band of all time? Huh?
“I’m so special and unique I’m going to make fun of *popular thing* and *traditional thing* to show you how I’m just better than you all GIVE ME ATTENTION PLEASE” -basically mullet’s entire video
I cannot stand how and why there's this desire to claim that (like Trent pointed out) "everything is g@y". I recall how during high-school that term was used as an insult for all that was not cool and weirdly there's some truth in that. We need to protect the rite of adelphopoiesis from the perversion of modern ideologies.
Mason's Greek pronunciation made me cringe so hard. Bro really pronounced "adelphopoiesis" as "Adel-po-poyuhsis"
Tell this to St.Theodosius the 2nd who had a eunuch partner. Chrysaphius and him were lovers.
Saints Sergius and Bacchus, holy martyrs for the Lord Jesus, pray for these poor sinners who have perverted your brotherly love.
"What is wrong with you people" RC Sproul
I remember first encountering this kind of people when i watched Band of Brothers. I saw many comments about how Winters and Nixon had a gay relationship. These people can't conceive a brotherhood relationship like, it's a very limitating way to see human relations.
wow! thank you for sharing this! -Vanessa
It seems Trent turned into Spicy Trent when talking about David and Jonathan, lol.
Sin is SIN...however u deny it...some people twisting fact to SAVE their own agenda.
So should people who experience SSA just not have friends? If I’m attracted to the SS according to Trent’s logic I shouldn’t be around people who I’m attracted to. However, most people are attracted to the opposite sex so they shouldn’t hangout with me either. So who am I supposed to be friends with and where is my community?
Additionally, Trent understands that men and women are different and therefore attracted to each other but can’t seem to grasp that people who experience SSA are different as well. Attraction is more complex than only genitalia.
You really think people in the past werent having sex all the time.
Must get historical facts right!
Through out the ancient world of same sex unions were well known, indeed, famously for example in the Greek world they were often encouraged. The Jews rejection of Greek ideals or the many religions that surrounded them is accepted. What is disliked is the casual manners of such relationships as desired. Much of the understanding of the OT god being ..wrongly..identified as NO YOU CAN'T..or ..IT IS FORBIDDEN! poor theology indeed.
Constantine, the great....called that for a reason...did more than tolerate the Christians he adopted them as his own religion. The edict of Milan does not mention Jesus but is clearly aimed at reversing Diocletian's great Persecution and allows the return of property and scriptures etc to those that have lost it ..such as the Church. It asks people to pray to their gods for the stability of the empire etc ...this brings to an end the deliberate persecution of groups including the Christians who suffer because of their stated religion. The eastern church later sends appeals to Constantine to intervene and save Christians from persecution in the east. The emperor himself worships every Sunday and personally chastises his own court for its lack of faith and true piety even threatening them with Hell if they do not change.
Theodosius on the other hand falls foul to st Ambrose the glorious bishop of Milan and the church is triumphant therefore over the state. Theodosius..also the great... Grants supreme authority back to the church and many other cults are thereby marginalized and later removed completely.
The point of History is that our modern thinking on gay sex is in part a result of Victorian morality back lash against earlier norms. Certainly for example many monarchs were both gay and bisexuals and whilst this behaviour was frowned upon by many it was generally permitted...especially amongst the powerful. Akin to monarchs having mistress's etc ...
The problem for some ultra Conservatives in the church is they lack historical awareness and theological debate alone is not good enough to present either a charitable or proper version of History and what or how is a good reality!
The past existence of homosexuality does not validate its practice. This is a false belief. No matter when in history it was; it’s always sinful. ❤️🔥
Awesome attitude. You will notice (even Christians can't deny this) that Christianity has never and will never have anything positive to add or even interject into life. They only know to take away.
Love adds to the experience. Christians only seek to subtract. Christianity is hate.
@@skippy675"Christianity has never and will never have anything positive to add or even interject into life" You say that when the church has done so much for the poor. I saw it with my own eyes. It was the church that welcomed my parents when they didn't have a roof to shelter when I was born. This is not positive enough ? My church welcomed and fed migrants. This is not positive enough ? I could go on and on with all the good things Christianity has done in the world.
Saying this kind of thing is focusing on the negative and forgetting all the charitable works that the church has done.
@lonelyberg1808 I volunteered at my local Church too. Collecting food and clothing for a shelter. Did "meals on wheels" too because so many elderly feel alone and isolated. I did it because it is the right thing to do. I am as miltantly athiest as it is possible to be. If Jesus is real, he can suck the farts out of my behind and like it! I owe God nothing! Nothing!
My fellow man, woman and child however, i do care about. All of this carries on exactly the same with a church or not. Anyone who only helps the needy because they think a God may be watching is a piece of doo doo. Perhaps you fall into that category.
@@skippy675Your comment is as rude as ridiculous. Moreover it doesn't disprove my comment. I show you the fact that Christianity did good things to the world however your response is to say that you did good things because it was the right thing to do and that anyone who only helped the needy because they think god is watching is bad however, who said that Christian people generally only do good things because they believe that God is watching them ? The Church does good things because they think it's the right thing to do.
Besides, even if the church was hypocritical and helped the poor not out of love, that would not show that the action did not do good to the world.
So, contrary to your initial response, it clearly shows that Christianity has had a positive impact on the world.
@@lonelyberg1808 Islam, Hinduism and Judaism inspire just as much charity per capita as does Christianity. Athiesm is on par as well. Medicine sans frontiers (doctors without borders) is secular.
People help other people because we are apes. We have formed social hierarchy, and benefit as a whole b helping each other.
I don't draw any inspiration or feel any cleansing or restorative power from the spottless human-divine hybrid virgin zombie's blood as you do. You are free to draw your inspiration from this though. Yes, you appreciated the elegance of that description. You know exactly whom I refer to.