Видео

Thank you Spark Church and thank you Jemar! Love to hear you preach it!

Thank you for sharing with us, brother Jemar. I believe that Jesus is alive and empowering the people of the Beloved Community to perform his works of tikkun olam. We are never guaranteed success and we are never told the future that will flow from our works - but we are told do to the things in this world that Jesus did during in incarnate time on this planet. We need to be reminded and encouraged by words such as yours. Thank you for stepping up, speaking up, and holding up.

Thank you Spark Church for posting this. I had been waiting all week for these videos to be posted.

Sprinkle is a dinkle dorf

Smh at blondie ar 17 minutes..good grief

🔥

The polyamory answer was extremely telling of the mental gymnastics Justin has to do to hold his position. How can monogamy be clearly biblical, but homosexuality require a revisit and reimagining?

CRT: Decades ago it was called sensitivity training. Decades before that it was called nazi propaganda. Decades before that it was called Marxist Class Warfare. The more things change; the more they stay the same.

One thing CRTists get right: They are not learning history. If they were; they would recognize CRT for the recycled antisemitic propaganda that it is.

The Eugenics Movement bears a striking resemblance to Critical Race Theory. An academic movement used to justify using violence against honest, peaceful people. The central theme of the justification being the fact that people measure differently from one another. They both cherry pick statistics that support their preformed conclusions. They both ignore real causes of their measurements in favor of their own sophistry. The more things change; the more they stay the same.

The assertion that an entire race is conspiring to oppress and subjugate the victim class is right out of the nazi playbook. The assertion that history is being suppressed is thoroughly debunked by the fact that the history in question is common knowledge, and always has been. "More important, as critical race theorists we adopt a stance that PRESUMES that racism has contributed to ALL contemporary manifestations of group advantage and disadvantage along RACIAL lines, including differences in income, imprisonment,health, housing, education, political representation, and military service. Our history calls for this PRESUMPTION." "Words That Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech, and the First Amendment" by Matsuda, Lawrence III, Delgado, and KIMBERLE' WILLIAMS CRENSHAW Those are their words from their intellectual papers: It is the entire foundation of the premise. CRT promotes the notion that the fact that a group is measurably superior is proof that everybody in that group is guilty; and, that a group being inferior is proof that everybody in that group is a victim. Further: this principle projects through time; asserting that what happened to the long dead projects onto the guilt or victimhood of the living; even if the living never experienced it at all........... CRT uses history and statistics to justify using government force to implement racial discrimination. CRT obviates the need for any thought, word or act of racism as proof of their presumed verdict. All they need is their preferred race measuring less favorably than another. Regardless of the cause: they declare their favored race to be victims of the other. Then they would use real government enforced discrimination in response to their presumed discrimination; altering laws, policies and practices to favor their preferred race. All for the stated purpose of forcibly making the measurements between races identical. The operative question is whether you support using government force to implement racial discrimination. All the rest is academic. My answer is no.

The assertion that an entire race is conspiring to oppress and subjugate the victim class is right out of the nazi playbook. The assertion that history is being suppressed is thoroughly debunked by the fact that the history in question is common knowledge, and always has been. "More important, as critical race theorists we adopt a stance that PRESUMES that racism has contributed to ALL contemporary manifestations of group advantage and disadvantage along RACIAL lines, including differences in income, imprisonment,health, housing, education, political representation, and military service. Our history calls for this PRESUMPTION." "Words That Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech, and the First Amendment" by Matsuda, Lawrence III, Delgado, and KIMBERLE' WILLIAMS CRENSHAW Those are their words from their intellectual papers: It is the entire foundation of the premise. CRT promotes the notion that the fact that a group is measurably superior is proof that everybody in that group is guilty; and, that a group being inferior is proof that everybody in that group is a victim. Further: this principle projects through time; asserting that what happened to the long dead projects onto the guilt or victimhood of the living; even if the living never experienced it at all........... CRT uses history and statistics to justify using government force to implement racial discrimination. CRT obviates the need for any thought, word or act of racism as proof of their presumed verdict. All they need is their preferred race measuring less favorably than another. Regardless of the cause: they declare their favored race to be victims of the other. Then they would use real government enforced discrimination in response to their presumed discrimination; altering laws, policies and practices to favor their preferred race. All for the stated purpose of forcibly making the measurements between races identical. The operative question is whether you support using government force to implement racial discrimination. All the rest is academic. My answer is no.

CRT obviates the need for any thought, word or act of racism as proof of their presumed verdict. All they need is their preferred race measuring less favorably than another. Regardless of the cause: they declare their favored race to be victims of the other. Then they would use real government enforced discrimination in response to their presumed discrimination; altering laws, policies and practices to favor their preferred race. All for the stated purpose of forcibly making the measurements between races identical. The operative question is whether you support using government force to implement racial discrimination. All the rest is academic. My answer is no.

CRT: Decades ago it was called sensitivity training. Decades before that it was called nazi propaganda. Decades before that it was called Marxist Class Warfare. The more things change; the more they stay the same.

Who to beleave? Dr. Dobson, Billy Graham, Erwin lutzer or Kristen Du MEZ. The fruit speaks for itself. I understand the history of Christian men and how Dr. Du twisted her book to accommodate a feminist view. Most of the great Christian men i know and its hundreds live biblical masculinity. We respect and love as Jesus commanded. If you need a true view point on this just open your eyes. There are plenty of non political Christian mem standing for Jesus.

Jemar...what you said...YESS!

How can you teach Gods word but at the same time not obey it. The scripture is clear on women being pastors.

CRT. Decades ago; it was called sensitivity training. Decades before that; it was called nazi propaganda. Decades before that; it was called Marxist Class Warfare.

CRT obviates the need for any thought, word or act of racism as proof of their presumed verdict. All they need is their preferred race measuring less favorably than another. Regardless of the cause: they declare their favored race to be victims of the other. Then they would use real government enforced discrimination in response to their presumed discrimination; altering laws, policies and practices to favor their preferred race. All for the stated purpose of forcibly making the measurements between races identical. The operative question is whether you support using government force to implement racial discrimination. All the rest is academic. My answer is no.

It seems to me that it might be helpful to remember just a few decades ago when divorced Christians were shunned from the church, who were considered sinful and therefore not able to be fully apart of Christian community. By and large, the Christian church has moved beyond this black and white way of approaching Christian ethics in the face of millions of lived divorced Christians' experiences. The parallels are not exact. Nobody is born "divorced". But it is an example of getting beyond the need to be judgemental before being in fellowship with other Christian sisters and brothers who don't match our idea of the Christian ideal. In reality, there is no Christian ideal, other than remaining ready -- "My heart is ready." -- to acknowledge with Peter this truth : "You are the Christ. You are the Son of G-d."

To see how far this person has chages look up PCA theology voices from 6 short years ago. Hard to reconcile that person with the bitter person being interviewed no. Total lack of focus on the propitiatiin of Christ's atining work.

I can relate to the point about personal understanding being a "journey." God found me when I was in my mid-20's; but for the next 50 years I continued to believe in evolution because that is what I was taught in college. Then I examined the data for the first time, initially the geologic column, and quickly realized that the evidence for a global flood is overwhelming. So what I formerly believed to be a moral story, became a historical fact. Dan

Name one person who was an effective evangelist who was more progressive in the 50's, 60's and 70's .

Billy Graham was a democrat.

Theology aside, a simple metric for a healthy church is the presence of homeless / disabled etc people in the congregation. Most of those guys would be completely out of place in the evangelical type churches I've seen

💜

I agree with the one guy, I haven’t heard a good reason why it is sinful other than someone’s interpretation of scripture. And I still haven’t. He kind of just said it’s “not holy.” Okay but why? Lol

The time has come to allow ALL to live in the grace of Christ. Christians are not called to cut anyone out of that grace.

I am not a woman. But, this is where I have been for 70 plus years.

Its really fascinating to watch how hard Christians have to struggle to make sense of their bronze age superstitions in a modern context. They 're super concerned about offending audience members by outwardly saying that being homosexual is not allowed, that polyamory should be illegal, or any other things that in a modern context obviously make no sense and in which people should be free to engage in if they want. So they couch their language in friendly banter and jokes and act is if this is just a friendly academic seminar, giving extremely verbose answers to simple questions, all in an attempt to obfuscate the simple truth. That they are openly discriminating against gays, trans people, polyamorous couples, and beyond. Or he pretends that talking to audience members beforehand (29:30) can somehow undo the damage their words will have, as if all you need is a therapy session. I think the audience can see through these obvious attempts at obfuscation. They should have at least been honest, they simply think there is no room for LGBT members in the church. Don't pretend you are accepting them when you're not.

Passionate, insightful, intelligent... you are humble and very wise, Dr Griffith

Most people give some kind of account to a God calling them to start in church, this gentleman came out and said that he started to church with no acknowledgement called him or directed him to start the church to meet this problematic. I don't know the gentleman at all let that be known, but I would assume that he should acknowledge that God directed him to start the Church. Thank you for sharing this video

33:38 so people dont die anymore? What an explanation. Force fitting ideology . Conformity <> morality

So good, love Dr. Wallace's presentations.

*Promosm*

As an Episcopalian, a member of a church filled with God's "chosen frozen," who nonetheless know God's Church welcomes and learns from EVERYONE, I invite Christians looking for a home and family to come join us.

WHATEVER DOES PRESTON MEAN BY "WRESTLING WITH AN ATTRACTION TO ANOTHER MAN..."? Has he learned nothing about the biology of sex?

People from the begging of Bible stories told around campfires have used the stories to prove cultural norms, intertwining the two. Genesis 2 makes woman UNEQUAL in many patriarchal evangelical churches. It's lovely that Preston now thinks we women are EQUAL! That kind of rethinking, I hope, will also cause a rereading of the challenging "anti-gay" passages in both Leviticus and Paul. (Please remember that the Old Testament does not present an ideal of "marriage between a man and ONE woman.")

Absolutely a waist of time we will not be suppressed our rights without infringement come and take it ✌️

Wrong, we don’t have a gun problem. We have a right to defend ourselves under the law of God. Not only that, our country was founded by fighting against a tyrannical government.

I really wish Justin had responded to Preston about the intersex thing. Because I think Preston has some good points, but I don't think Justin was A. claiming it was common to have ambiguity with these conditions or B. That it was somehow a "third sex" both of these things were in Preston's response but it kinda skirted around everything that Justin said

It's sad to think how both of these men have probably gotten so much crap from each of their camps for doing this and being willing to talk to each other, but I have so much respect for Preston and Justin for understanding the importance of having a civil dialogue on such an critical topic.

The woman talking about marriage had a very warped feminist perception of marriage as set forth by God. Marriage was never about demoralizing women. Men are to love and honor their wife. A man is to love their wife as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her. Nothing more needs needs to be said, there is nothing more beautiful than that. I actually don't feel either of these men gave solid answers to any of the questions. Very watered down Christianity. Lets just tweek the Bible to suit our desires. That's just bad theology.

How ridiculous that these people belive in magic fairy YHWY... sad

Traduzcan pf al español Las enseñanza del doctor Wallace

Hi from Baton Rouge, LA

Allah revealed this to me: "Islam is the fastest imploding religion in the world, as more and more Muslims are realising that Mohammad and others (breakdown given below) fabricated the Quran to persue their own personal agendas. Islam is nothing but 7th century Arabic tribalism. Muslims are much better and bigger than this oppressive ideology. I love all Muslims as people, but dislike the Supremisist Quranic Ideology they follow". 1000% support to all Ex Muslims, from 7 billion of us (includes many Muslims)...Lovers of Truth. Breakdown of Quranic inputs as reaveled to me by Allah... 10% Mohammad 30% Plagerised from Christian, Jewish and Pagan texts. 58% Added on after Mohammad. 1% by Satan ( Mohammad himself reaveled this. He later removed these verses). 1% Eaten by a goat (as reaveled by Muhammad's wife Ayasha...he married her when she was 6years and he was 53years). 0% by Allah. 👍

Allah revealed this to me: "Islam is the fastest imploding religion in the world, as more and more Muslims are realising that Mohammad and others (breakdown given below) fabricated the Quran to persue their own personal agendas. Islam is nothing but 7th century Arabic tribalism. Muslims are much better and bigger than this oppressive ideology. I love all Muslims as people, but dislike the Supremisist Quranic Ideology they follow". 1000% support to all Ex Muslims, from 7 billion of us (includes many Muslims)...Lovers of Truth. Breakdown of Quranic inputs as reaveled to me by Allah... 10% Mohammad 30% Plagerised from Christian, Jewish and Pagan texts. 58% Added on after Mohammad. 1% by Satan ( Mohammad himself reaveled this. He later removed these verses). 1% Eaten by a goat (as reaveled by Muhammad's wife Ayasha...he married her when she was 6years and he was 53years). 0% by Allah. 👍

Gender IS important to God. He created humanity make and female ...and pronounced it good. The effects of sin on God's good creation are many and tragic.